4.6 Article

Improving Preclinical Development of Novel Interventions to Treat Pain: Insanity Is Doing the Same Thing Over and Over and Expecting Different Results

期刊

ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA
卷 135, 期 6, 页码 1128-1136

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000006249

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [GM37-48085]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Preclinical pain research has made progress over the past 40 years, but the range of drugs available for chronic pain treatment is still limited. To enhance pain treatment, it is important to use clinically relevant animal models and outcome measures that reflect the clinical characteristics of chronic pain syndromes, and to ensure high levels of internal validity, rigor, and reproducibility in experiments. Changing the research culture to prioritize scientific rigor and replication is crucial.
Preclinical pain research has applied state-of-the-art methods over the past 40 years to describe, characterize, and image molecules, cells, and circuits in rodents to understand the pathophysiology of chronic pain. Despite generating a plethora of novel analgesic targets, pharmaceuticals for chronic pain treatment remain largely limited to the same 6 drug classes as present 40 years ago. It is possible that 40 years of effort has brought us to the verge of a paradigm shift and an explosion of novel analgesic drug classes with remarkable safety, efficacy, and tolerability. We think it more likely that advances will not occur until we follow the description of exciting discoveries with hypothesis testing using clinically relevant preclinical animal models and ethologically relevant outcome measures, which better reflect the clinical characteristics of chronic pain syndromes. Furthermore, to be valuable, experiments using such models must be conducted to the highest levels of internal validity, rigor, and reproducibility. Efforts by funders, most recently the Helping End Addiction Long-Term by the National Institutes of Health, aim to address some of these challenges and enhance communication and collaboration between preclinical and clinical investigators. However, the greater problem is a culture that emphasizes novelty and number of publications over scientific rigor and robust replication leading to a high likelihood of false-positive results. A path forward is provided by the evolution of clinical research beginning 50 years ago that resulted in methods to reduce bias and enhance transparency and ethics of reporting, moving from case reports to randomized controlled trials to innovative study designs with a focus on rigor, generalizability, and reproducibility. We argue that culture changed in clinical science in part because powerful forces outside the peer review system, especially from federal regulators that approve new drugs and human studies committees that addressed ethical failures of earlier research, mandated change in studies within their purview. Whether an external force will affect change in peclinical pain research is unclear.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据