Reproducibility of preclinical animal research improves with heterogeneity of study samples

Single-laboratory studies conducted under highly standardized conditions are the gold standard in preclinical animal research. Using simulations based on 440 preclinical studies across 13 different interventions in animal models of stroke, myocardial infarction, and breast cancer, we compared the accuracy of effect size estimates between single-laboratory and multi-laboratory study designs. Single-laboratory studies generally failed to predict effect size accurately, and larger sample sizes rendered effect size estimates even less accurate. By contrast, multi-laboratory designs including as few as 2 to 4 laboratories increased coverage probability by up to 42 percentage points without a need for larger sample sizes. These findings demonstrate that within-study standardization is a major cause of poor reproducibility. More representative study samples are required to improve the external validity and reproducibility of preclinical animal research and to prevent wasting animals and resources for inconclusive research

Some salt with your statin, professor?

We know that clinical trials sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry are likely to exaggerate benefit and minimise harms. But do these biases extend to their sponsorship of non-human animal research? Using systematic review and meta-analysis Bero and colleagues show that, in the case of statins, things are a little more complicated. While the conclusions of industry-sponsored studies were indeed more enthusiastic than warranted by their data, the data themselves painted a picture more conservative than was seen in non-industry-sponsored studies. This behaviour is consistent with maximising the return on investment, seeking robust data before embarking on a clinical trial, and, once that investment has been made, making every effort to “prove” that the drug is safe and effective if this is at all credible. The findings suggest that there is something different about industry-sponsored non-human animal research, perhaps reflecting higher standards than is the case elsewhere. Perhaps the academic community can learn something from our colleagues in the commercial sector

General Principles of Preclinical Study Design

Publisher PD

A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research

The US National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke convened major stakeholders in June 2012 to discuss how to improve the methodological reporting of animal studies in grant applications and publications. The main workshop recommendation is that at a minimum studies should report on sample-size estimation, whether and how animals were randomized, whether investigators were blind to the treatment, and the handling of data. We recognize that achieving a meaningful improvement in the quality of reporting will require a concerted effort by investigators, reviewers, funding agencies and journal editors. Requiring better reporting of animal studies will raise awareness of the importance of rigorous study design to accelerate scientific progress

Improving our understanding of the in vivo modelling of psychotic disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Psychotic disorders represent a severe category of mental disorders affecting about one percent of the population. Individuals experience a loss or distortion of contact with reality alongside other symptoms, many of which are still not adequately managed using existing treatments. While animal models of these disorders could offer insights into these disorders and potential new treatments, translation of this knowledge has so far been poor in terms of informing clinical trials and practice. The aim of this project was to improve our understanding of these pre-clinical studies and identify potential weaknesses underlying translational failure. I carried out a systematic search of the literature to provide an unbiased summary of publications reporting animal models of schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders. From these publications, data were extracted to quantify aspects of the field including reported quality of studies, study characteristics and behavioural outcome data. The latter of these data were then used to calculate estimates of efficacy using random-effects meta-analysis. Having identified 3847 publications of relevance, including 852 different methods used to induce the model, over 359 different outcomes tested in them and almost 946 different treatments reported to be administered. I show that a large proportion of studies use simple pharmacological interventions to induce their models of these disorders, despite the availability of models using other interventions that are arguably of higher translational relevance. I also show that the reported quality of these studies is low, and only 22% of studies report taking measures to reduce the risk of biases such as randomisation and blinding, which has been shown to affect the reliability of results drawn. Through this work it becomes apparent that the literature is incredibly vast for studies looking at animal models of psychotic disorders and that some of the relevant work potentially overlaps with studies describing other conditions. This means that drawing reliable conclusions from these data is affected by what is made available in the literature, how it is reported and identified in a search and the time that it takes to reach these conclusions. I introduce the idea of using computer-assisted tools to overcome one of these problems in the long term. Translation of results from studies looking at animals modelling uniquely-human psychotic disorders to clinical successes might be improved by better reporting of studies including publishing of all work carried out, labelling of studies more uniformly so that it is identifiable, better reporting of study design including improving on reporting of measures taken to reduce the risk of bias and focusing on models with greater validity to the human condition

Evaluation of Excess Significance Bias in Animal Studies of Neurological Diseases

Animal studies generate valuable hypotheses that lead to the conduct of preventive or therapeutic clinical trials. We assessed whether there is evidence for excess statistical significance in results of animal studies on neurological disorders, suggesting biases. We used data from meta-analyses of interventions deposited in Collaborative Approach to Meta-Analysis and Review of Animal Data in Experimental Studies (CAMARADES). The number of observed studies with statistically significant results (O) was compared with the expected number (E), based on the statistical power of each study under different assumptions for the plausible effect size. We assessed 4,445 datasets synthesized in 160 meta-analyses on Alzheimer disease (n = 2), experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (n = 34), focal ischemia (n = 16), intracerebral hemorrhage (n = 61), Parkinson disease (n = 45), and spinal cord injury (n = 2). 112 meta-analyses (70%) found nominally (p≤0.05) statistically significant summary fixed effects. Assuming the effect size in the most precise study to be a plausible effect, 919 out of 4,445 nominally significant results were expected versus 1,719 observed (p<10-9). Excess significance was present across all neurological disorders, in all subgroups defined by methodological characteristics, and also according to alternative plausible effects. Asymmetry tests also showed evidence of small-study effects in 74 (46%) meta-analyses. Significantly effective interventions with more than 500 animals, and no hints of bias were seen in eight (5%) meta-analyses. Overall, there are too many animal studies with statistically significant results in the literature of neurological disorders. This observation suggests strong biases, with selective analysis and outcome reporting biases being plausible explanations, and provides novel evidence on how these biases might influence the whole research domain of neurological animal literature. © 2013 Tsilidis et al

Toward a synergetic model of postural coordination dynamics

In the present study the authors develop a double inverted-pendulum intrapersonal model for posture in the Sagittal plane. A novel synergetic approach is taken to successfully reproduce qualitative features of experimental data. The HKB model is investigated and modified into a more general type of ”excitator” to create suitable dynamics for this application. Bifurcation analysis of HKB couplings revealed regimes where appropriate asymmetries exist in the fixed points. The findings suggest that this approach produces an innovative and viable solution for postural coordination dynamics