A safe bet? Inter-laboratory variability in behaviour-based severity assessment

被引:10
|
作者
Jirkof, Paulin [1 ,2 ]
Abdelrahman, Ahmed [5 ]
Bleich, Andre [3 ]
Durst, Mattea [1 ]
Keubler, Lydia [3 ]
Potschka, Heidrun [4 ]
Struve, Birgitta [3 ]
Talbot, Steven R. [3 ]
Vollmar, Brigitte [5 ]
Zechner, Dietmar [5 ]
Haeger, Christine [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hosp Zurich, Div Surg Res, Zurich, Switzerland
[2] Univ Zurich, Dept Anim Welf & 3Rs, Zurich, Switzerland
[3] Hannover Med Sch, Inst Lab Anim Sci & Cent Anim Facil, Hannover, Germany
[4] Ludwig Maximilians Univ Munchen, Inst Pharmacol Toxicol & Pharm, Munich, Germany
[5] Rostock Univ, Rudolf Zenker Inst Expt Surg, Med Ctr, Rostock, Germany
关键词
Severity assessment; behaviour; multi-centre study; burrowing; mouse grimace scale; tramadol; PAIN; ENVIRONMENT; REPRODUCIBILITY; TRAMADOL;
D O I
10.1177/0023677219881481
中图分类号
S85 [动物医学(兽医学)];
学科分类号
0906 ;
摘要
Evidence-based severity assessment is essential as a basis for ethical evaluation in animal experimentation to ensure animal welfare, legal compliance and scientific quality. To fulfil these tasks scientists, animal care and veterinary personnel need assessment tools that provide species-relevant measurements of the animals' physical and affective state. In a three-centre study inter-laboratory robustness of body weight monitoring, mouse grimace scale (MGS) and burrowing test were evaluated. The parameters were assessed in naive and tramadol treated female C57BL/6J mice. During tramadol treatment a body weight loss followed by an increase, when treatment was terminated, was observed in all laboratories. Tramadol treatment did not affect the MGS or burrowing performance. Results were qualitatively comparable between the laboratories, but quantitatively significantly different (inter-laboratory analysis). Burrowing behaviour seems to be highly sensitive to inter-laboratory differences in testing protocol. All locations obtained comparable information regarding the qualitative effect of tramadol treatment in C57BL/6J mice, however, datasets differed as a result of differences in test and housing conditions. In conclusion, our study confirms that results of behavioural testing can be affected by many factors and may differ between laboratories. Nevertheless, the evaluated parameters appeared relatively robust even when conditions were not harmonized extensively and present useful tools for severity assessment. However, analgesia-related side effects on parameters have to be considered carefully.
引用
收藏
页码:73 / 82
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Transferability and inter-laboratory variability assessment of the in vitro bovine oocyte maturation (IVM) test within ReProTect
    Luciano, Alberto M.
    Franciosi, Federica
    Lodde, Valentina
    Corbani, Davide
    Lazzari, Giovanna
    Crotti, Gabriella
    Galli, Cesare
    Pellizzer, Cristian
    Bremer, Susanne
    Weimer, Marc
    Modina, Silvia C.
    REPRODUCTIVE TOXICOLOGY, 2010, 30 (01) : 81 - 88
  • [22] Assessment of Inter-Laboratory Variability for Flow Cytometric Crossmatch Testing: Lessons Learned from Proficiency Surveys
    Philogene, Mary Carmelle
    Timofeeva, Olga A.
    Gimferrer, Idoia
    Hod-Dvorai, Reut
    HUMAN IMMUNOLOGY, 2025, 85 (01)
  • [23] INTER-LABORATORY VARIABILITY IN PTH MEASUREMENT AND ATTAINMENT OF ANALTIC PERFORMANCE GOALS
    Sarabia, Sam
    Collier, Christine
    Holden, Rachel
    Turner, Mandy
    White, Christine
    NEPHROLOGY DIALYSIS TRANSPLANTATION, 2018, 33 : 163 - 163
  • [24] RE-APPRAISAL OF INTER-LABORATORY VARIABILITY IN ANTIEPILEPTIC DRUG DETERMINATIONS
    PIPPENGER, CE
    PARISKUTT, H
    PENRY, JK
    CLINICAL CHEMISTRY, 1978, 24 (06) : 1050 - 1050
  • [25] Inter-laboratory comparison of the assessment approaches for the zebrafish embryotoxicity assay
    Wilhelmi, P.
    Teixido, E.
    Birk, B.
    Landsiedel, R.
    van Ravenzwaay, B.
    Funkt-Weyer, D.
    Flick, B.
    NAUNYN-SCHMIEDEBERGS ARCHIVES OF PHARMACOLOGY, 2022, 395 (SUPPL 1) : S30 - S30
  • [26] Inter-laboratory assessment of cryomilling sample preparation for residue analysis
    Lynn, Kari J.
    Buchholz, Lisa M.
    Riter, Leah S.
    ABSTRACTS OF PAPERS OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY, 2014, 248
  • [27] Inter-laboratory comparisons of assessment of the allergenic potential of proteins in mice
    Herouet-Guicheney, C.
    Aldemir, H.
    Bars, R.
    de Barbeyrac, D.
    Kennel, P.
    Rouquie, D.
    Stahl, B. U.
    Kimber, I.
    Dearman, R. J.
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED TOXICOLOGY, 2009, 29 (02) : 141 - 148
  • [28] Inter-laboratory assessment of a harmonized zebrafish developmental toxicology assay
    Gustafson, Anne-Lee
    Stedman, Donald B.
    Ball, Jonathan
    Hillegass, Jedd M.
    Flood, Annette
    Zhang, Cindy X.
    Panzica-Kelly, Julie
    Coburn, Aleasha
    Enright, Brian P.
    Tornesi, Belen M.
    Hetheridge, Malcolm
    Augustine-Rauch, Karen A.
    TOXICOLOGY LETTERS, 2012, 211 : S189 - S189
  • [29] Inter-laboratory consistency and variability in the buccal micronucleus cytome assay depends on biomarker scored and laboratory experience: results from the HUMNxl international inter-laboratory scoring exercise
    Bolognesi, Claudia
    Knasmueller, Siegfried
    Nersesyan, Armen
    Roggieri, Paola
    Ceppi, Marcello
    Bruzzone, Marco
    Blaszczyk, Ewa
    Mielzynska-Svach, Danuta
    Milic, Mirta
    Bonassi, Stefano
    Benedetti, Danieli
    Da Silva, Juliana
    Toledo, Raphael
    Favero Salvadori, Daisy Maria
    Groot de Restrepo, Helena
    Filipic, Metka
    Hercog, Klara
    Aktas, Ayca
    Burgaz, Sema
    Kundi, Michael
    Grummt, Tamara
    Thomas, Philip
    Hor, Maryam
    Escudero-Fung, Maria
    Holland, Nina
    Fenech, Michael
    MUTAGENESIS, 2017, 32 (02) : 257 - 266
  • [30] MODEL BASED UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS IN INTER-LABORATORY STUDIES
    Toman, Blaza
    Possolo, Antonio
    ADVANCED MATHEMATICAL AND COMPUTATIONAL TOOLS IN METROLOGY AND TESTING VIII, 2009, 78 : 330 - 343