Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32363250›Full record

ArticleJACC. Basic to translational science2020

Limitations of Animal Studies for Predicting Toxicity in Clinical Trials: Part 2: Potential Alternatives to the Use of Animals in Preclinical Trials.

Gail A Van Norman

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in JACC. Basic to translational science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 85 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
85citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

85 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Acupoint Sensitivity in Health and Disease: A Systematic Review.Journal of integrative and complementary medicine · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

25 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Gail A Van NormanDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dramatically rising costs in drug development are in large part because of the high failure rates in clinical phase trials. The poor correlation of animal studies to human toxicity and efficacy have led many developers to question the value of requiring animal studies in determining which drugs should enter in-human trials. Part 1 of this 2-part series examined some of the data regarding the lack of concordance between animal toxicity studies and human trials, as well as some of the potential reasons behind it. This second part of the series focuses on some alternatives to animal trials (hereafter referred to as animal research) as well as current regulatory discussions and developments regarding such alternatives.

Indexed as

3D, 3-dimensionalanimal researchBC, body-on-chipBM, bone marrowCV, cardiovasculardrug developmentFDA, Food and Drug AdministrationNIH, National Institutes of HealthOC, organ-on-chipTE, tissue engineeringtoxicitytranslational research

Identifiers

PMID32363250
PMCPMC7185927

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.