Brock A J, Goody S M G, Mead A N, Sudwarts A, Parker M O, Brennan C H
School of Biological and Chemical Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom (A.J.B., A.S., C.H.B.); Global Safety Pharmacology, Drug Safety Research and Development, Pfizer Worldwide Research and Development, Groton, Connecticut (S.M.G.G., A.N.M.); and School of Health Sciences and Social Work, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, United Kingdom (M.O.P.).
School of Biological and Chemical Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom (A.J.B., A.S., C.H.B.); Global Safety Pharmacology, Drug Safety Research and Development, Pfizer Worldwide Research and Development, Groton, Connecticut (S.M.G.G., A.N.M.); and School of Health Sciences and Social Work, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, United Kingdom (M.O.P.)
J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2017 Oct;363(1):66-79. doi: 10.1124/jpet.117.242628. Epub 2017 Aug 8.
Regulatory agencies recommend that centrally active drugs are tested for abuse potential before approval. Standard preclinical assessments are conducted in rats or non-human primates (NHPs). This study evaluated the ability of the zebrafish conditioned place preference (CPP) model to predict human abuse outcomes. Twenty-seven compounds from a variety of pharmacological classes were tested in zebrafish CPP, categorized as positive or negative, and analyzed using standard diagnostic tests of binary classification to determine the likelihood that zebrafish correctly predict robust positive signals in human subjective effects studies (+HSE) and/or Drug Enforcement Administration drug scheduling. Results were then compared with those generated for rat self-administration and CPP, as well as NHP self-administration, using this same set of compounds. The findings reveal that zebrafish concordance and sensitivity values were not significantly different from chance for both +HSE and scheduling. Although significant improvements in specificity and negative predictive values were observed for zebrafish relative to +HSE, specificity without sensitivity provides limited predictive value. Moreover, assessments in zebrafish provided no added value for predicting scheduling. By contrast, rat and NHP models generally possessed significantly improved concordance, sensitivity, and positive predictive values for both clinical measures. Although there may be predictive value with compounds from specific pharmacological classes (e.g., -opioid receptor agonists, psychostimulants) for zebrafish CPP, altogether these data highlight that using the current methodology, the zebrafish CPP model does not add value to the preclinical assessment of abuse potential.
监管机构建议,在批准之前,对具有中枢活性的药物进行滥用潜力测试。标准的临床前评估在大鼠或非人类灵长类动物(NHP)中进行。本研究评估了斑马鱼条件性位置偏爱(CPP)模型预测人类滥用结果的能力。对来自多种药理类别的27种化合物进行了斑马鱼CPP测试,将其分类为阳性或阴性,并使用二元分类的标准诊断测试进行分析,以确定斑马鱼在人类主观效应研究(+HSE)和/或药物管制局药物调度中正确预测强烈阳性信号的可能性。然后使用同一组化合物,将结果与大鼠自我给药和CPP以及NHP自我给药所产生的结果进行比较。研究结果表明,对于+HSE和调度而言,斑马鱼的一致性和敏感性值与随机情况没有显著差异。尽管相对于+HSE,斑马鱼的特异性和阴性预测值有显著提高,但只有特异性而没有敏感性提供的预测价值有限。此外,斑马鱼评估在预测调度方面没有提供额外价值。相比之下,大鼠和NHP模型在这两种临床测量中通常具有显著提高的一致性、敏感性和阳性预测值。尽管斑马鱼CPP模型对于特定药理类别的化合物(例如,阿片受体激动剂、精神兴奋剂)可能有预测价值,但总体而言,这些数据表明,使用当前方法,斑马鱼CPP模型在滥用潜力的临床前评估中没有增加价值。