Is it possible to overcome issues of external validity in preclinical animal research? Why most animal models are bound to fail

Abstract Background The pharmaceutical industry is in the midst of a productivity crisis and rates of translation from bench to bedside are dismal. Patients are being let down by the current system of drug discovery; of the several 1000 diseases that affect humans, only a minority have any approved...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Pandora Pound, Merel Ritskes-Hoitinga
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2018-11-01
Series:Journal of Translational Medicine
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12967-018-1678-1
_version_ 1828486037845835776
author Pandora Pound
Merel Ritskes-Hoitinga
author_facet Pandora Pound
Merel Ritskes-Hoitinga
author_sort Pandora Pound
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Background The pharmaceutical industry is in the midst of a productivity crisis and rates of translation from bench to bedside are dismal. Patients are being let down by the current system of drug discovery; of the several 1000 diseases that affect humans, only a minority have any approved treatments and many of these cause adverse reactions in humans. A predominant reason for the poor rate of translation from bench to bedside is generally held to be the failure of preclinical animal models to predict clinical efficacy and safety. Attempts to explain this failure have focused on problems of internal validity in preclinical animal studies (e.g. poor study design, lack of measures to control bias). However there has been less discussion of another key factor that influences translation, namely the external validity of preclinical animal models. Review of problems of external validity External validity is the extent to which research findings derived in one setting, population or species can be reliably applied to other settings, populations and species. This paper argues that the reliable translation of findings from animals to humans will only occur if preclinical animal studies are both internally and externally valid. We review several key aspects that impact external validity in preclinical animal research, including unrepresentative animal samples, the inability of animal models to mimic the complexity of human conditions, the poor applicability of animal models to clinical settings and animal–human species differences. We suggest that while some problems of external validity can be overcome by improving animal models, the problem of species differences can never be overcome and will always undermine external validity and the reliable translation of preclinical findings to humans. Conclusion We conclude that preclinical animal models can never be fully valid due to the uncertainties introduced by species differences. We suggest that even if the next several decades were spent improving the internal and external validity of animal models, the clinical relevance of those models would, in the end, only improve to some extent. This is because species differences would continue to make extrapolation from animals to humans unreliable. We suggest that to improve clinical translation and ultimately benefit patients, research should focus instead on human-relevant research methods and technologies.
first_indexed 2024-12-11T09:26:01Z
format Article
id doaj.art-39bf78de9e1948e7b95d7a5e9159d631
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1479-5876
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-11T09:26:01Z
publishDate 2018-11-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series Journal of Translational Medicine
spelling doaj.art-39bf78de9e1948e7b95d7a5e9159d6312022-12-22T01:13:08ZengBMCJournal of Translational Medicine1479-58762018-11-011611810.1186/s12967-018-1678-1Is it possible to overcome issues of external validity in preclinical animal research? Why most animal models are bound to failPandora Pound0Merel Ritskes-Hoitinga1Safer Medicines TrustSYRCLE, Department for Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical CenterAbstract Background The pharmaceutical industry is in the midst of a productivity crisis and rates of translation from bench to bedside are dismal. Patients are being let down by the current system of drug discovery; of the several 1000 diseases that affect humans, only a minority have any approved treatments and many of these cause adverse reactions in humans. A predominant reason for the poor rate of translation from bench to bedside is generally held to be the failure of preclinical animal models to predict clinical efficacy and safety. Attempts to explain this failure have focused on problems of internal validity in preclinical animal studies (e.g. poor study design, lack of measures to control bias). However there has been less discussion of another key factor that influences translation, namely the external validity of preclinical animal models. Review of problems of external validity External validity is the extent to which research findings derived in one setting, population or species can be reliably applied to other settings, populations and species. This paper argues that the reliable translation of findings from animals to humans will only occur if preclinical animal studies are both internally and externally valid. We review several key aspects that impact external validity in preclinical animal research, including unrepresentative animal samples, the inability of animal models to mimic the complexity of human conditions, the poor applicability of animal models to clinical settings and animal–human species differences. We suggest that while some problems of external validity can be overcome by improving animal models, the problem of species differences can never be overcome and will always undermine external validity and the reliable translation of preclinical findings to humans. Conclusion We conclude that preclinical animal models can never be fully valid due to the uncertainties introduced by species differences. We suggest that even if the next several decades were spent improving the internal and external validity of animal models, the clinical relevance of those models would, in the end, only improve to some extent. This is because species differences would continue to make extrapolation from animals to humans unreliable. We suggest that to improve clinical translation and ultimately benefit patients, research should focus instead on human-relevant research methods and technologies.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12967-018-1678-1External validityPreclinical animal modelsTranslationHuman-relevant methods
spellingShingle Pandora Pound
Merel Ritskes-Hoitinga
Is it possible to overcome issues of external validity in preclinical animal research? Why most animal models are bound to fail
Journal of Translational Medicine
External validity
Preclinical animal models
Translation
Human-relevant methods
title Is it possible to overcome issues of external validity in preclinical animal research? Why most animal models are bound to fail
title_full Is it possible to overcome issues of external validity in preclinical animal research? Why most animal models are bound to fail
title_fullStr Is it possible to overcome issues of external validity in preclinical animal research? Why most animal models are bound to fail
title_full_unstemmed Is it possible to overcome issues of external validity in preclinical animal research? Why most animal models are bound to fail
title_short Is it possible to overcome issues of external validity in preclinical animal research? Why most animal models are bound to fail
title_sort is it possible to overcome issues of external validity in preclinical animal research why most animal models are bound to fail
topic External validity
Preclinical animal models
Translation
Human-relevant methods
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12967-018-1678-1
work_keys_str_mv AT pandorapound isitpossibletoovercomeissuesofexternalvalidityinpreclinicalanimalresearchwhymostanimalmodelsareboundtofail
AT merelritskeshoitinga isitpossibletoovercomeissuesofexternalvalidityinpreclinicalanimalresearchwhymostanimalmodelsareboundtofail