4.7 Article

Meeting report of the annual workshop on Principles and Techniques for Improving Preclinical to Clinical Translation in Alzheimer's Disease research

Journal

ALZHEIMERS & DEMENTIA
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/alz.13093

Keywords

Alzheimer's disease; best practices; mouse models; preclinical translation; rigor and reproducibility; training

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The second annual workshop on improving preclinical to clinical translation in Alzheimer's Disease Research provided participants with skills and knowledge to perform preclinical experiments and improve translational studies for AD. The workshop included lectures, hands-on training, and participants from various research stages and regions.
Introduction: The second annual 5-day workshop on Principles and Techniques for Improving Preclinical to Clinical Translation in Alzheimer's Disease Research was held October 7-11, 2019, at The Jackson Laboratory in Bar Harbor, Maine, USA, and included didactic lectures and hands-on training. Participants represented a broad range of research across the Alzheimer's disease (AD) field, and varied in career stages from trainees and early stage investigators to established faculty, with attendance from the United States, Europe, and Asia.Methods: In line with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) initiative on rigor and reproducibility, the workshop aimed to address training gaps in preclinical drug screening by providing participants with the skills and knowledge required to perform pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamics, and preclinical efficacy experiments.Results: This innovative and comprehensive workshop provided training in fundamental skill sets for executing in vivo preclinical translational studies.Discussion: The success of this workship is expected to translate into practical skills that will enable the goals of improving preclinical to clinical translational studies for AD.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available