Search

Abstract Scientific, financial, and ethical drivers have led to unprecedented interest in implementing human-relevant, mechanistic in vitro and in silico testing approaches. Further, as non-animal approaches are being developed and validated, researchers are interested in strategies that can immediately reduce the use of animals in toxicology testing. Here, we aim to outline a testing strategy for assessing genotoxicity beginning with standard in vitro methods, such as the bacterial reverse mutation test and the in vitro micronucleus test, followed by a second tier of in vitro assays including those using advanced 3D tissue models. Where regulatory agencies require in vivo testing, one demonstrated strategy is to combine genotoxicity studies traditionally conducted separately into a single test or to integrate genotoxicity studies into other toxicity studies. Standard setting organisations and regulatory agencies have encouraged such strategies, and examples of their use can be found in the scientific literature. Employing approaches outlined here will reduce animal use as well as study time and costs.

Antibodies are used in a range of research, diagnostic, and regulatory applications. Traditional methods for producing such reagents involve the immunization of animals, which introduces variability into the methods that use them and is not aligned with efforts to replace and reduce animal use. Experts from academia, biotechnology, government, and animal protection organizations met December 3, 2019, at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, MD, USA to discuss the status of development and use of animal-free recombinant antibodies and their potential to replace antibodies derived from animals. This paper summarizes the discussion and the actions that resulted to facilitate increased production and use of animal-free recombinant antibodies.

Millions of animals are used in research and toxicity testing, including in drug, medical device, chemical, cosmetic, personal care, household, and other product sectors, but the environmental consequences are yet to be adequately addressed. Evidence suggests that their use and disposal, and the associated use of chemicals and supplies, contribute to pollution as well as adverse impacts on biodiversity and public health. The objective of this review is to examine such evidence. The review includes examinations of (1) resources used in animal research; (2) waste production in laboratories; (3) sources of pollution; (4) impacts on laboratory workers’ health; and (5) biodiversity impacts. The clear conclusion from the review is that the environmental implications of animal testing must be acknowledged, reported, and taken into account as another factor in addition to ethical and scientific reasons weighing heavily in favor of moving away from allowing and requiring animal use in research and testing.