4.5 Review

Nonhuman primates as models for the discovery and development of ebolavirus therapeutics

期刊

EXPERT OPINION ON DRUG DISCOVERY
卷 6, 期 3, 页码 233-250

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1517/17460441.2011.554815

关键词

animal model; antiviral; cynomolgus; ebolavirus; FDA Animal Efficacy rule; filoviruses; hemorrhagic fever; in vivo; nonhuman primate; prophylaxis; rhesus; therapeutics; therapy; treatment

资金

  1. US Defense Threat Reduction Agency [1.1C003_08_RD_B]
  2. Transformational Medical Technologies [TMTIO048_09_RD_T]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: Ebolaviruses are human pathogenic Category A priority pathogens for which no vaccines or therapeutics are currently licensed; however, several therapeutic agents have shown promising efficacy in nonhuman primate models of infection and are potential candidates for use in humans. Demonstration of efficacy in nonhuman primate models of ebolavirus infection will probably be central to the development and eventual licensure of ebolavirus medical countermeasures given the ethical and feasibility constraints of human efficacy assessments. Areas covered: The authors describe ebolavirus hemorrhagic fever (EHF), with an emphasis on comparing human and nonhuman primate pathophysiology. Published data examining human and animal clinical disease parameters, histopathological findings, and immune responses in fatal and nonfatal cases are synthesized and evaluated. Importantly, the authors also introduce and describe the FDA Animal Efficacy Rule as well as recent advances in antiviral drug development strategies for the treatment of EHF. Expert opinion: Well-characterized models of ebolavirus infection are currently under development and scrutiny as to their accuracy and utility for modeling fatal infection in humans. The advanced development and eventual licensure of therapeutic agents will require demonstration that mechanisms conferring protection in nonhuman primate models of infection are predictive of protective responses in humans.

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

4.5
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