Improving animal welfare and reducing animal use for human vaccine potency testing: state of the science and future directions
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
NICEATM and ICCVAM convened an international workshop to review the state of the science of human and veterinary vaccine potency and safety testing methods and to identify opportunities to advance new and improved methods that can further reduce, refine, and replace animal use. Topics were addressed in detail by speakers and workshop participants and are reported in a series of six reports. This workshop report, the third in the series, addresses methods and strategies for human vaccine potency testing that can refine animal use to lessen pain and distress, improve animal welfare, and reduce animal use. Workshop participants agreed that the following potency tests for human vaccines should have the highest priority for development of reduction and/or refinement methods: (1) potency tests for vaccines that are most commonly used, (2) potency tests that require the largest number of animals, (3) potency tests that cause severe animal pain and distress, (4) tests where the knowledge base of each antigen is advanced, and (5) potency tests for which alternative methods already exist or are in development. Based on these criteria, the highest-priority human vaccines were identified as diphtheria and tetanus vaccines, pertussis vaccines (whole cell and acellular), rabies vaccine, anthrax vaccine, and complex combination vaccines (containing diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis together with other antigens such as IPV, Hib, and HepB). For successful implementation of reduction and refinement alternatives, further research is required into the development and broader use of humane endpoints, serological potency methods, and approaches that would reduce the number of animals used in currently approved potency assays. Because the workshop focused on both human and veterinary vaccines, workshop participants also recommended that human vaccine potency testing methods for rabies and tetanus be reviewed for their potential application to the corresponding veterinary vaccines. Participants agreed that achieving broader acceptance and use of alternative methods, requires that the general principles and procedures for the validation of alternative methods for vaccines be standardized/harmonized internationally. The research, development, validation, and harmonization activities recommended at this workshop are expected to lead to new reduction and/or refinement of animal use in human vaccine potency testing methods and more widespread adoption of existing methods that can reduce animal use and improve animal welfare while ensuring the continued safety and efficacy of human vaccines.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».