Is it Time for Reviewer 3 to Request Human Organ Chip Experiments Instead of Animal Validation Studies?
Abstract For the past century, experimental data obtained from animal studies have been required by reviewers of scientific articles and grant applications to validate the physiological relevance of in vitro results. At the same time, pharmaceutical researchers and regulatory agencies recognize that...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2020-11-01
|
| Series: | Advanced Science |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.202002030 |
| _version_ | 1828833298854445056 |
|---|---|
| author | Donald E. Ingber |
| author_facet | Donald E. Ingber |
| author_sort | Donald E. Ingber |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract For the past century, experimental data obtained from animal studies have been required by reviewers of scientific articles and grant applications to validate the physiological relevance of in vitro results. At the same time, pharmaceutical researchers and regulatory agencies recognize that results from preclinical animal models frequently fail to predict drug responses in humans. This Progress Report reviews recent advances in human organ‐on‐a‐chip (Organ Chip) microfluidic culture technology, both with single Organ Chips and fluidically coupled human “Body‐on‐Chips” platforms, which demonstrate their ability to recapitulate human physiology and disease states, as well as human patient responses to clinically relevant drug pharmacokinetic exposures, with higher fidelity than other in vitro models or animal studies. These findings raise the question of whether continuing to require results of animal testing for publication or grant funding still makes scientific or ethical sense, and if more physiologically relevant human Organ Chip models might better serve this purpose. This issue is addressed in this article in context of the history of the field, and advantages and disadvantages of Organ Chip approaches versus animal models are discussed that should be considered by the wider research community. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-12T17:15:06Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-8ae87f146cfe46228feb4a7b07c9574e |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2198-3844 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-12T17:15:06Z |
| publishDate | 2020-11-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Advanced Science |
| spelling | doaj.art-8ae87f146cfe46228feb4a7b07c9574e2022-12-22T00:17:48ZengWileyAdvanced Science2198-38442020-11-01722n/an/a10.1002/advs.202002030Is it Time for Reviewer 3 to Request Human Organ Chip Experiments Instead of Animal Validation Studies?Donald E. Ingber0Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering at Harvard University Boston MA 02115 USAAbstract For the past century, experimental data obtained from animal studies have been required by reviewers of scientific articles and grant applications to validate the physiological relevance of in vitro results. At the same time, pharmaceutical researchers and regulatory agencies recognize that results from preclinical animal models frequently fail to predict drug responses in humans. This Progress Report reviews recent advances in human organ‐on‐a‐chip (Organ Chip) microfluidic culture technology, both with single Organ Chips and fluidically coupled human “Body‐on‐Chips” platforms, which demonstrate their ability to recapitulate human physiology and disease states, as well as human patient responses to clinically relevant drug pharmacokinetic exposures, with higher fidelity than other in vitro models or animal studies. These findings raise the question of whether continuing to require results of animal testing for publication or grant funding still makes scientific or ethical sense, and if more physiologically relevant human Organ Chip models might better serve this purpose. This issue is addressed in this article in context of the history of the field, and advantages and disadvantages of Organ Chip approaches versus animal models are discussed that should be considered by the wider research community.https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.202002030microfluidicsmicrophysiological systemsorganoidsorgan‐on‐a‐chippreclinical studies |
| spellingShingle | Donald E. Ingber Is it Time for Reviewer 3 to Request Human Organ Chip Experiments Instead of Animal Validation Studies? Advanced Science microfluidics microphysiological systems organoids organ‐on‐a‐chip preclinical studies |
| title | Is it Time for Reviewer 3 to Request Human Organ Chip Experiments Instead of Animal Validation Studies? |
| title_full | Is it Time for Reviewer 3 to Request Human Organ Chip Experiments Instead of Animal Validation Studies? |
| title_fullStr | Is it Time for Reviewer 3 to Request Human Organ Chip Experiments Instead of Animal Validation Studies? |
| title_full_unstemmed | Is it Time for Reviewer 3 to Request Human Organ Chip Experiments Instead of Animal Validation Studies? |
| title_short | Is it Time for Reviewer 3 to Request Human Organ Chip Experiments Instead of Animal Validation Studies? |
| title_sort | is it time for reviewer 3 to request human organ chip experiments instead of animal validation studies |
| topic | microfluidics microphysiological systems organoids organ‐on‐a‐chip preclinical studies |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.202002030 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT donaldeingber isittimeforreviewer3torequesthumanorganchipexperimentsinsteadofanimalvalidationstudies |