Abstract:Many scientific discussions, especially in the past 8 yr, have focused on definition of criteria for the optimal assessment of the preclinical toxicity of pharmaceuticals. With the current overlap of responsibility among centers within the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), uniformity of testing standards, when appropriate, would be desirable. These discussions have extended beyond the boundaries of the FDA and have culminated in the acceptance of formalized, internationally recognized guidances. The work of the International Committee on Harmonisation (ICH) and the initiatives developed by the FDA are important because they (a) represent a consensus scientific opinion, (b) promote consistency, (c) improve the quality of the studies performed, (d) assist the public sector in determining what may be generally acceptable to prepare product development plans, and (e) provide guidance for the sponsors in the design of preclinical toxicity studies. Disadvantages associated with such initiatives include (a) the establishment of a historical database that is difficult to relinquish, (b) the promotion of a check-the-box approach, i.e., a tendancy to perform only the minimum evaluation required by the guidelines, (c) the creation of a disincentive for industry to develop and validate new models, and (d) the creation of state-of-the-art guidances that may not allow for appropriate evaluation of novel therapies. The introduction of biotechnology-derived pharmaceuticals for clinical use has often required the application of unique approaches to assessing their safety in preclinical studies. There is much diversity among these products, which include the gene and cellular therapies, monoclonal antibodies, human-derived recombinant regulatory proteins, blood products, and vaccines. For many of the biological therapies, there will be unique product issues that may require specific modifications to protocol design and may raise additional safety concerns (e.g., immunogenicity). Guidances concerning the design of preclinical studies for such therapies are generally based on the clinical indication. Risk versus benefit decisions are made with an understanding of the nature of the patient population, the severity of disease, and the availability of alternative therapies. Key components of protocol design for preclinical studies addressing the risks of these agents include (a) a safe starting dose in humans, (b) identification of potential target organs, (c) identification of clinical parameters that should be monitored in humans, and (d) identification of at-risk populations. One of the distinct aspects of the safety evaluation of biotechnology-derived pharmaceuticals is the use of relevant and often nontraditional species and the use of animal models of disease in preclinical safety evaluation. Extensive contributions were made by the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research to the ICH document on the safety of biotherapeutics, which is intended to provide worldwide guidance for a framework approach to the design and review of preclinical programs. Rational, scientifically sound study design and early identification of the potential safety concerns that may be anticipated in the clinical trial can result in preclinical data that facilitate use of these novel therapies for use in humans without duplication of effort or the unnecessary use of animals.

Analysis of animal-to-human translation shows that only 5% of animal-tested therapeutic interventions obtain regulatory approval for human applications

Poor Translatability of Biomedical Research Using Animals — A Narrative Review

Animal to human translation: a systematic scoping review of reported concordance rates

Synthesizing regulatory guidance for demonstrating preclinical efficacy and translating promising cell therapies to early phase clinical trials: a scoping review

Translating clinical trials from human to veterinary oncology and back

A decade plus of translation: what do we understand?

A review of animal models utilized in preclinical studies of approved gene therapy products: trends and insights

Translating Pharmacogenetics and Pharmacogenomics to the Clinic: Progress in Human and Veterinary Medicine

They See a Rat, We Seek a Cure for Diseases: The Current Status of Animal Experimentation in Medical Practice

Dogs and monkeys in preclinical drug development: the challenge of reducing and replacing

Leveraging biomarkers and translational medicine for preclinical safety - Lessons for advancing the validation of alternatives to animal testing

Taking central nervous system regenerative therapies to the clinic: curing rodents versus nonhuman primates versus humans

Making the Leap: the Translation of Innovative Surgical Devices From the Laboratory to the Operating Room.

Safety Assessment of Biotechnology-Derived Pharmaceuticals: ICH and Beyond

Digitalization of toxicology: improving preclinical to clinical translation

Translatability scoring in prospective and retrospective COVID drug development cases

Translational Research in Spinal Cord Injury: A Survey of Opinion from the SCI Community

Clinical Trials in Veterinary Medicine: A New Era Brings New Challenges

'High hopes for treatment': Australian stakeholder perspectives of the clinical translation of advanced neurotherapeutics for rare neurological diseases

Mitigating animal methods bias to reduce animal use and improve biomedical translation

Endeavours made by trade associations, pharmaceutical companies and regulators in the replacement, reduction and refinement of animal experimentation in safety testing of pharmaceuticals