Neil S. Lipman, VMD Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center Weill Cornell Medical College

Transcription

1 Neil S. Lipman, VMD Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center Weill Cornell Medical College

2 Program Overview Pros and Cons: Engineering vs. Performance Standards Intra-program Standard Development Examples Conflicting Standards Looking Forward

3 No typical academic program Bi-Institutional Mouse-centric Harmonized Laboratory support Postdoctoral trainees

4 Ensures a minimal standard the floor Necessary Standardization Consistency Ideally based on objective data Implementation easier (B and W) less costly (+/-) Can be empirical anthropomorphic political influence Problematic if based on poor data If tightly defined restricts process retards new knowledge Difficult to change/inflexible Can result in unnecessary costs Lack of transparency

5 Greater flexibility Not static Alignment with science Improve animal welfare and care Tailorable Can result in the refinement and improvement of engineering standards Cost/time of developing Subjectivity Differing views on desired outcome Difficult to determine what to measure Challenging for programs that are resource limited

6 Reframe: Evidence based or outcome driven decision making and problem solving Management approach/style Engineering standards while recognized not emphasized Hypothesis and data driven when possible Bias recognized & managed Objective vs. subjective process Transparent Outcome sharing = publication

7 animal health/welfare customer service science

8 Limited methods available to reliably and permanently identify pre-weanling mice Toe-clipping used at MSKCC/WCMC in preweanling mice following institutional guidelines Toe-clipping: strong anthropomorphic views expressed BVAAWF/FRAME/RSPCA/UFAW Joint Working Group on Refinement and Production of GEM (2003): should not be routinely used assumed to cause pain & impact animals ability to grip last resort method performed under local anesthesia

9 Limited objective published information evaluating effects prior to 2010 Guide 7 th ed Toe-clipping, as a method of identification of small rodents, should be performed when no other individual identification method is feasible and should be performed only on altricial neonates. Guide 8 th ed Toe-clipping should only be used when no other individual identification method is feasible. It may be the preferred method for neonatal mice up to 7 days of age as it appears to have few adverse effects on behavior and well-being at this age,.(refs)

10 Desired Outcomes Minimize pain and distress Limit short and long-term physiologic and behavioral effects Safe for animal and operator Fast and easy Permanent Unique number to be assigned to a large number of mice Option of simultaneous tail biopsy Low cost

11 4 groups evaluated at PND 7 and toe-clip: no anesthesia 2. toe-clip: topical vapocoolant 3. sham: no anesthesia 4. sham: topical vapocoolant C57BL/6 pups Experienced technician Sharp, microsurgery scissors, wiped 2 toes clipped at level of the proximal phalange: digit 3 on right forepaw digit 3 on left hindpaw Pups observed for immediate reaction 1, 3, 5, and 12 h

12

13 Daily handling Open Field Test Elevated Plus Maze Modified SHIRPA & grip test Beam Test Three 60s trials/day X3 days Rotarod Euthanasia by CO 2 Harvest of toes for histology Week 7 Week 8 Week 9 Week 10

14

15 Toe-clipping Vapocoolant + Toeclipping Vapocoolant Signs of distress PND 7: ~60% vocalized, d activity PND 17: little reaction PND 7: dragging of sprayed limb post-clip PND 17: vocalization, urination, limb withdrawal Bleeding PND 7 & 17: immediate clotting PND 7 & 17: Delayed profuse bleeding N/A Ease of procedure PND 7: Difficult to clip small toe size PND 7 & 17: VC causes toes to stick together hard to isolate toe clipping difficult Post-procedural observations No maternal rejection PND7: swelling of HP 12 h No maternal rejection PND 7 & 17: swelling of paws 12 h No maternal rejection PND 7: swelling of paws 5 h PND 17: no abnormalities PND 17: swelling of paws 12 h

16 No developmental PND 7 differences No behavioral differences No differences in weight gain Digit fully innervated at PND 7 Sig. diaphyseal ossification by PND 7 PND 7

17 Outcome Revised institutional guidelines Deleted recommendation for vapocoolant topical anesthesia Extended recommended ages < PND 17 Limit to 1 digit per paw for ID using recm d numbering system Toe-clip site distal 1/3 rd of 1 st phalanx PND 14-17: toe-clip and tail biopsy when both necessary Paluch et al (2014) JAALAS 53:

18 Circa 2000 Large numbers of mice of incorrect genotype require euthanasia Labor intensive Few and imperfect systems and solutions commercial home grown

19 Achieve rapid unconsciousness and death Avoid excitement Minimizes fear, distress, anxiety Reliable Simple to administer Reproducible As specified by the AVMA, ACLAM and FELASA Desired Outcomes Safe for the operator Aesthetically acceptable to the operator Minimize changes in the animal s environment Remain in home cage Visualization Ensures death vs narcosis Minimize labor/efficient large #s simultaneously low cost

20 Outcome Automated, logic controlled system Based on individually ventilated caging system Fully validated and tested Videography behavioral assessment Up to 80 cages per cycle Operate 15 systems > 9 years McIntyre et al (2007) JAALAS 46:65-73

21 AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals: 2013 Edition CO 2 General recommendations: a displacement rate from 10 30% of the chamber volume/min is recommended. Small Laboratory and Wild-Caught Rodents (CO 2 ): An optimal flow rate for CO 2 euthanasia systems should displace 10% to 30% of the chamber or cage volume/min.

22 Resources ($$$) Extramural funding essential Consortia Multi-Site Example: space and cage size

23