Hartung Thomas
Biochemical Pharmacology, Steinbeis-Technology-Transfer-Center for In-vitro Pharmacology and Toxicology (STZ InPuT), University of Konstanz, D-78457 Konstanz, Germany.
ALTEX. 2001;18 Suppl 1:3-13.
The intention of a pharmaceutical company is to develop new, efficient products quick and with a minimum of costs. Compared to in vitro methods, animal experiments in general consume much more time and resources (costs as well as time to the market) than in vitro methods. Therefore, the use of whole animal models depends primarily on the judgement of their efficacy in the screening process, but the willingness to incorporate in vitro methods in general is high and is furthered by new developments such as high-throughput screening. Nevertheless, in vitro tests might be politically promoted by increasing their costs (quality controls, requested housing conditions) and duration (time to start of an experiment, sequential performance). Which models are favoured by industry to include them in a screening process: They have to be based on our most recent understanding of the respective disease, well characterised to allow interpretation of results and require only limited development time. All these aspects argue in favour of collaboration between industry and academia, where our understanding of pathophysiology is generated and mechanism based models are developed and characterised. However, technology transfer towards industry represents a bottle-neck for industrial use of these new in vitro models. New platforms to promote this transfer should be developed in order to bring together developer and user of novel in vitro systems and promote demonstration projects. Financing of such collaborations is not the key problem (the development of a single drug makes up to 500 million $) but the dilemma of publication of results: The development advantage compared to competitors depends on the exclusive use of novel models. The protection of intellectual property rights and the public interest in spreading alternatives to animal experiments must be balanced, e.g. by delayed but indispensable publication or advantages for companies employing alternatives in the regulatory approval process for a new drug. Quality control of therapeutic drugs (except hormones and blood products) represents a minor field of animal consumption with the exception of pyrogenicity testing. Despite considerable progress due to the introduction of the Limulus assay which represents the most successful in vitro alternative in use so far. However, some limitations of this in vitro test might be overcome in the near future by the currently validated human whole blood assay. During the last few years considerable progress has been made in the replacement (and deletion) of animal tests required for the potency and safety testing of hormones. This has been made possible by biotechnical production methods, by better-defined products, and because physico-chemical methods can be used for the potency testing of these products. In general, the better defined a drug is, the easier chemical, physical or in vitro techniques can be used for batch control. Control authorities should therefore urge the use of highly standardised components.
制药公司的意图是快速且以最低成本开发新的高效产品。与体外方法相比,一般来说动物实验比体外方法消耗更多的时间和资源(成本以及上市时间)。因此,全动物模型的使用主要取决于其在筛选过程中的功效判断,但总体而言采用体外方法的意愿很高,并且高通量筛选等新进展进一步推动了这种意愿。然而,体外试验可能会因成本增加(质量控制、所需的饲养条件)和时间延长(实验开始时间、连续进行时间)而在政策上得到推动。行业青睐哪些模型将其纳入筛选过程:这些模型必须基于我们对相应疾病的最新认识,具有良好的特征以便解释结果,并且只需要有限的开发时间。所有这些方面都表明行业与学术界之间需要合作,在学术界我们能够产生对病理生理学的认识,并开发和表征基于机制的模型。然而,向行业的技术转移是这些新体外模型在工业应用中的一个瓶颈。应该开发新的平台来促进这种转移,以便将新型体外系统的开发者和使用者聚集在一起,并推动示范项目。这种合作的资金不是关键问题(一种药物的研发成本高达5亿美元),而是结果发表的困境:与竞争对手相比的开发优势取决于新型模型的独家使用。必须平衡知识产权保护和推广动物实验替代方法的公共利益,例如通过延迟但必不可少的发表,或者在新药监管审批过程中对采用替代方法的公司给予优势。治疗药物(激素和血液制品除外)的质量控制是动物使用的一个小领域,热原性检测除外。尽管由于引入鲎试剂检测取得了相当大的进展,鲎试剂检测是目前使用的最成功的体外替代方法。然而,这种体外检测的一些局限性可能在不久的将来通过目前已验证的人全血检测得到克服。在过去几年中,在激素效力和安全性检测所需的动物试验的替代(和淘汰)方面取得了相当大的进展。这得益于生物技术生产方法、定义更明确的产品,以及因为物理化学方法可用于这些产品的效力检测。一般来说,药物定义越明确,就越容易使用化学、物理或体外技术进行批次控制。因此,监管当局应敦促使用高度标准化的成分。