A Commentary on Fasting of Nonclinical Research Animals.

This commentary discusses the implementation of fasting in nonclinical animal experimental subjects. The short-term removal of food from cages of experimental animals is in all respects innocuous. The term "stress" is ill-defined and the statutes and regulations governing animal research laboratories that exert their authority in the performance of their operations do so without substantive grounds to base compliance. The legislative and administrative history of the implementation of the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) has evolved into the development of laboratory management strategies that focus on the reduction of the biological cost of stress to the animals and the determination of when subclinical stress (eustress) becomes distress. Animal welfare is based on the tenet that in laboratories conducting animal research in compliance with Good Laboratory Practices (Title 21 USC, Chapter 13,§58), it is the study protocol and the study director that establish procedures and processes that are approved by each Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee to ensure the humane care and use of animals in research, teaching, and testing and to ensure compliance with guidelines and regulations. This approval process establishes the justification of eustress in the environment that do not rise to the threshold of distress under the AWA.

Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emission Test is Not the Test to Use in Nonclinical Safety Assessment.

Ototoxicity and ocular toxicity screening are but two examples of specialty product lines that are often employed as Tier II or III nonclinical safety/hazard screening assessments. Compared to the regulatory guidelines that govern over standard toxicology or neurotoxicology programs, there is a paucity of regulatory strategies to address these specialized product lines. With respect to ototoxicity testing, we argue for the inclusion of the "least burdensome principles" adopted by the US FDA in providing the most pragmatic, efficient, and directed identification of potential harm to auditory function in the nonclinical safety arena. We argue for the exclusive use of the auditory brainstem response and the exclusion of the distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) in these Tiered II safety assessment programs. The inclusion of both are a burden on operational staff and, due to the extended episodes of anesthesia required to conduct both assays, this strategy poses a health and welfare concern for the selected animal species to be used. The DPOAE does not provide any sufficiently valid or reliable data above and beyond the gold standard ABR data, followed by complete oto-histopathology and cytocochleogram combination designs.

Abuse liability assessment of hydrocodone under current draft regulatory guidelines.

INTRODUCTION: The abuse liability of hydrocodone was assessed in male Sprague-Dawley rats under the European Medicines Agency, the International Commission on Harmonisation, and the U.S. Food & Drug Administration draft guidelines for the non-clinical investigation of the dependence potential of medicinal products. METHODS: Self-administration, drug discrimination, and repeat-dose two week dependence liability studies were conducted to compare hydrocodone to the prototypical opiates, morphine and oxycodone. RESULTS: Hydrocodone was self-administered, produced an opiate-like subjective discriminative generalization profile and produced a significant discontinuation syndrome following abrupt treatment cessation that was quantitatively and qualitatively similar to morphine and/or oxycodone. CONCLUSION: Hydrocodone has abuse liability more similar to Schedule II opiates than other Schedule III compounds currently controlled under the U.S. Controlled Substance Act.