A self-assessment survey of the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee, Part 1: animal welfare and protocol compliance

Evaluating IACUCs: Previous Research and Future Directions

IACUCs serve a critical role in animal care and use programs, ensuring that institutions which use animals in research and teaching do so responsibly and humanely. This role is defined in part by federal regulations, policies, and guidelines that prescribe the establishment and function of these committees. Often, IACUC administrators are expected to evaluate IACUC performance to ensure that committees execute these functions effectively, and in a manner that is suitable to the institution. However, methods for IACUC performance evaluation have not been well described in the peer-reviewed literature. To address this deficit, we conducted a systematic review using MEDLINE to identify methods that have been used to assess IACUCs. The scope of this review was intentionally broad to capture evaluation methods used by other institutional committees with similar responsibilities in overseeing research conduct, including animal ethics committees (AECs), institutional biosafety committees (IBCs), and institutional review boards (IRBs). Over 100 publications that included empirical evaluation methods were identified, although only 17 evaluated IACUCs in the United States. A substantial number of the studies used qualitative methods, such as surveys or questionnaires, interviews, and observations. The IACUC functions and characteristics most often assessed in the 17 publications included components of the protocol review processes and committee membership. We compiled this information to offer IACUC administrators a source of methodologies that can be incorporated into quality improvement and IACUC performance evaluation efforts. We also suggest ways in which organizations may evaluate IACUCs using methods described in the literature for other types of committees.

The role of the IACUC in ensuring research reproducibility

There is a "village" of people impacting research reproducibility, such as funding panels, the IACUC and its support staff, institutional leaders, investigators, veterinarians, animal facilities, and professional journals. IACUCs can contribute to research reproducibility by ensuring that reviews of animal use requests, program self-assessments and post-approval monitoring programs are sufficiently thorough, the animal model is appropriate for testing the hypothesis, animal care and use is conducted in a manner that is compliant with external and institutional requirements, and extraneous variables are minimized. The persons comprising the village also must have a shared vision that guards against reproducibility problems while simultaneously avoids being viewed as a burden to research. This review analyzes and discusses aspects of the IACUC's "must do" and "can do" activities that impact the ability of a study to be reproduced. We believe that the IACUC, with support from and when working synergistically with other entities in the village, can contribute to minimizing unintended research variables and strengthen research reproducibility.

Assessing the satisfaction and burden within an academic animal care and use program

Although animal research requires adherence to various regulations and standards, the manner in which compliance is maintained and the degree of additional constraints varies between institutions. Regulatory burden, particularly if institutionally imposed, has become a concern for institutions as increased regulatory expectations result in decreased resources available for research efforts. Faculty, research staff, and support staff engaged in animal research were surveyed to determine what institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC) processes were considered burdensome, the perceived value of some suggested modifications, and satisfaction with the IACUC administrative office and the animal resource unit. Although the results revealed overwhelming satisfaction with the IACUC administrative office and the animal resource unit, several IACUC processes were deemed burdensome, and therefore there would be value in modifying IACUC processes. When comparing the value of modifying IACUC processes, different groups within the animal care and use program (ACUP) tended to have different responses on many of the topics. This survey identified several perceived burdensome IACUC processes that would likely benefit individuals if modified. In today's environment of shrinking budgets for biomedical research, minimizing regulatory burden-particularly unnecessary, self-imposed burden-in the ACUP is particularly important to ensure that costs, time, and effort are appropriate to achieve animal welfare and quality of research endeavors.-Norton, J. N., Reynolds, R. P., Chan, C., Valdivia, R. H., Staats, H. F. Assessing the satisfaction and burden within an academic animal care and use program.

IL-25 Promotes Th2 Immunity Responses in Asthmatic Mice via Nuocytes Activation

BACKGROUND

Interleukin-25 (IL-25) is a potent activator of type-2 immune responses, and is responsible for airway inflammation in asthma. Previous reports have shown that IL-25 expressed hyper-reactivity in an experimental mouse-model of asthma. In addition, the production of IL-13/IL-5 promoted by nuocytes induced airway inflammation. Thus, it has been questioned whether blocking IL-25 against its receptor IL-17BR could inhibit the expression of IL-13 and IL-5 via nuocytes, and further protect against inflammation in ovalbumin (OVA) induced mouse-model of asthma.

METHODS

In this study, in order to investigate the correlation among IL-25, IL-5, IL-13 and nuocyte activities, we used OVA-sensitization and -challenging to induce the mouse model of asthma. The murine asthmatic model was validated by histology. The expressions of IL-5, IL-13 and IL-25 were detected by ELISA, quantitative real-time PCR, and western blotting of the lung tissue. Nuocyte activation was identified by the levels of ICOS (clone C398.4A) and T1/ST2 (cloneDJ8) (acting as nuocytes surface markers) in the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF). This, in turn, was done by means of flow cytometry. The expressions of IL-25, IL-5 and IL-13 in our murine model were detected in the BALF.

RESULTS

The mice sensitized and challenged with OVA showed a high expression of IL-25 in both the mRNA and protein levels in lungs. The expressions of ICOS and T1/ST2 in BALF were increased. A significant correlation between IL-25 mRNA, protein, and other Th2-cell producing cytokines (such as IL-5 and IL-13) moreover were identified. Furthermore, when the asthmatic mice were treated with anti-IL-25, both the inflammatory cells' infiltration and the inflammatory cytokines' secretion were significantly decreased. The present findings indicate that IL-25 might be involved in a series of asthmatic immune responses, playing an important role in the increase of nuocytes, and that its activation is necessary in maintaining Th2 central memory and sustaining asthmatic inflammation.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that IL-25 promoted the accumulation of ICOS and T1/ST2 on nuocytes, further induced the pro-inflammatory Th2 cells, and promoted Th2 cytokine responses in OVA-induced airway inflammation.

IL-25 promotes Th2 immunity responses in airway inflammation of asthmatic mice via activation of dendritic cells

Allergic asthma occurs as a consequence of inappropriate immunologic inflammation to allergens and characterized by Th2 adaptive immune response. Recent studies indicated that interleukin (IL)-25, a member of the IL-17 cytokine family, had been implicated in inducing Th2 cell-dependent inflammation in airway epithelium and IL-25-deficient mice exhibit impaired Th2 immunity responses; however, how these cytokines influence innate immune responses remains poorly understood. In this study, we used ovalbumin (OVA) sensitization and challenge to induce the murine asthmatic model and confirmed by histological analysis of lung tissues and serum levels of total and OVA-specific immunoglobulin (Ig)-E. The expression of IL-25 was detected by quantitative real-time PCR and immunohistochemistry, respectively, and the dendritic cells (DCs) activation was detected by levels of CD80 and CD86 in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) by flow cytometry. The mice sensitized and challenged with OVA showed high expression of IL-25 in both mRNA and protein levels in lungs. We detected the expression of CD80 and CD86 in BALF was also increased. A tight correlation between IL-25 mRNA and other Th2 cells producing cytokines such as IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13 in BALF was identified. Furthermore, when the asthmatic mice were treated with inhaled corticosteroids, the inflammatory cells infiltration and the inflammatory cytokines secretion were significantly decreased. In this study, we show that IL-25 promoted the accumulation of co-stimulatory molecules of CD80 and CD86 on DCs and then induced the differentiation of prime naive CD4(+) T cells to become proinflammatory Th2 cells and promoted Th2 cytokine responses in OVA-induced airway inflammation. The ability of IL-25 to promote the activation and differentiation of DCs population was identified as a link between the IL-17 cytokine family and the innate immune response and suggested a previously unrecognized innate immune pathway that promotes Th2 cytokine responses in asthmatic airway inflammation. Inhaled corticosteroids might be capable of inhibiting the promotion of IL-25 and present a promising strategy for the treatment of asthma.

Critical Analysis of Assessment Studies of the Animal Ethics Review Process

In many countries the approval of animal research projects depends on the decisions of Animal Ethics Committees (AEC's), which review the projects. An animal ethics review is performed as part of the authorization process and therefore performed routinely, but comprehensive information about how well the review system works is not available. This paper reviews studies that assess the performance of animal ethics committees by using Donabedian's structure-process-outcome model. The paper points out that it is well recognised that AECs differ in structure, in their decision-making methods, in the time they take to review proposals and that they also make inconsistent decisions. On the other hand, we know little about the quality of outcomes, and to what extent decisions have been incorporated into daily scientific activity, and we know almost nothing about how well AECs work from the animal protection point of view. In order to emphasise this viewpoint in the assessment of AECs, the paper provides an example of measures for outcome assessment. The animal suffering is considered as a potential measure for outcome assessment of the ethics review. Although this approach has limitations, outcome assessment would significantly increase our understanding of the performance of AECs.

A self-assessment survey of the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee, part 2: structure and organizational functions

Support for Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUCs) varies among those in animal use-related professions. The authors designed and carried out an anonymous survey to solicit opinions on the structure and organizational functions of IACUCs. They found that most respondents believed a single, institution-based IACUC was an appropriate venue for institutional approval of animal care and use, that their IACUCs represented their institutions' constituencies and that the unaffiliated IACUC members adequately represented their surrounding communities. Respondents believed that members came prepared for IACUC meetings, and a majority agreed that full committee reviews were more thorough than designated member reviews. The quality of veterinary care for animals was deemed to be very good. Participants reported that the status of the person submitting an animal use protocol, the perceived monetary value of a grant associated with a protocol and pressure for a rapid protocol review did not alter the quality of the protocol review. On many of the survey items, opinions of IACUC members differently significantly from those of non-members, and opinions of non-member IACUC administrators differed from those of IACUC chairpersons, perhaps owing to differences in responsibilities and perceived status.