Malmfors T, Teiling A
Acta Pharmacol Toxicol (Copenh). 1983;52 Suppl 2:229-46. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0773.1983.tb02692.x.
Does the pharmaceutical industry perform LD50-determinations in animals just because it is required by the authorities or are there any scientific benefits from counting dead animals and calculating and index of lethal toxicity? This is an important question when discussing LD50 and possible alternatives. We will try to answer this question by presenting data and some views collected during almost ten years at a Swedish pharmaceutical company. We will describe how we have made use of the LD50-values in the safety evaluation process. We will compare LD50-values with the dose levels used in longterm toxicity both after single or repeated administration and with therapeutical dose levels in man for different classes of drugs. These data will enable us to demonstrate the value of the LD50-determinations. As we are of the opinion that the LD50-value itself has a limited value for the total safety evaluation of drugs we will look into the possibility of replacing the LD50-determination with something else as an indication of lethal toxicity. In order to minimize the number of animals used and the number of animals dying because of dosing in studies on lethal toxicity we will try to support a proposal to use the maximal nonlethal dose (MNLD) as an indication of lethal toxicity in small animals.
制药行业进行动物半数致死量测定,仅仅是因为当局的要求,还是说统计死亡动物数量、计算致死毒性指数有什么科学益处呢?在讨论半数致死量及可能的替代方法时,这是个重要问题。我们将通过展示在一家瑞典制药公司近十年间收集的数据和一些观点来尝试回答这个问题。我们将描述在安全评估过程中如何利用半数致死量值。我们将把半数致死量值与单次或重复给药后的长期毒性试验中所用剂量水平以及不同类别药物在人体中的治疗剂量水平进行比较。这些数据将使我们能够证明半数致死量测定的价值。由于我们认为半数致死量值本身对药物的全面安全评估价值有限,所以我们将探讨用其他方法替代半数致死量测定以作为致死毒性指标的可能性。为了在致死毒性研究中尽量减少所用动物数量以及因给药而死亡的动物数量,我们将尝试支持一项提议,即使用最大非致死剂量(MNLD)作为小动物致死毒性的指标。