Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28790193›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of pharmacology and experimental therapeutics2017

Assessing the Value of the Zebrafish Conditioned Place Preference Model for Predicting Human Abuse Potential.

A J Brock, S M G Goody, A N Mead, A Sudwarts, M O Parker, C H Brennan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of pharmacology and experimental therapeutics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Identification ofeLife · 2020
    Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

A J BrockSchool of Biological and Chemical Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom (A.J.B., A.S., C.H.B.); Global Safety Pharmacology, Drug Safety Research and Development, Pfizer Worldwide Research and Development, Groton, Connecticut (S.M.G.G., A.N.M.); and School of Health Sciences and Social Work, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, United Kingdom (M.O.P.).ORCID 0000-0002-5890-9394
S M G GoodySchool of Biological and Chemical Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom (A.J.B., A.S., C.H.B.); Global Safety Pharmacology, Drug Safety Research and Development, Pfizer Worldwide Research and Development, Groton, Connecticut (S.M.G.G., A.N.M.); and School of Health Sciences and Social Work, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, United Kingdom (M.O.P.).
A N MeadSchool of Biological and Chemical Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom (A.J.B., A.S., C.H.B.); Global Safety Pharmacology, Drug Safety Research and Development, Pfizer Worldwide Research and Development, Groton, Connecticut (S.M.G.G., A.N.M.); and School of Health Sciences and Social Work, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, United Kingdom (M.O.P.).
A SudwartsSchool of Biological and Chemical Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom (A.J.B., A.S., C.H.B.); Global Safety Pharmacology, Drug Safety Research and Development, Pfizer Worldwide Research and Development, Groton, Connecticut (S.M.G.G., A.N.M.); and School of Health Sciences and Social Work, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, United Kingdom (M.O.P.).
M O ParkerSchool of Biological and Chemical Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom (A.J.B., A.S., C.H.B.); Global Safety Pharmacology, Drug Safety Research and Development, Pfizer Worldwide Research and Development, Groton, Connecticut (S.M.G.G., A.N.M.); and School of Health Sciences and Social Work, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, United Kingdom (M.O.P.).
C H BrennanSchool of Biological and Chemical Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom (A.J.B., A.S., C.H.B.); Global Safety Pharmacology, Drug Safety Research and Development, Pfizer Worldwide Research and Development, Groton, Connecticut (S.M.G.G., A.N.M.); and School of Health Sciences and Social Work, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, United Kingdom (M.O.P.) c.h.brennan@qmul.ac.uk.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BBM007863/1Medical Research Council G1000403National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research G1000053/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Regulatory agencies recommend that centrally active drugs are tested for abuse potential before approval. Standard preclinical assessments are conducted in rats or non-human primates (NHPs). This study evaluated the ability of the zebrafish conditioned place preference (CPP) model to predict human abuse outcomes. Twenty-seven compounds from a variety of pharmacological classes were tested in zebrafish CPP, categorized as positive or negative, and analyzed using standard diagnostic tests of binary classification to determine the likelihood that zebrafish correctly predict robust positive signals in human subjective effects studies (+HSE) and/or Drug Enforcement Administration drug scheduling. Results were then compared with those generated for rat self-administration and CPP, as well as NHP self-administration, using this same set of compounds. The findings reveal that zebrafish concordance and sensitivity values were not significantly different from chance for both +HSE and scheduling. Although significant improvements in specificity and negative predictive values were observed for zebrafish relative to +HSE, specificity without sensitivity provides limited predictive value. Moreover, assessments in zebrafish provided no added value for predicting scheduling. By contrast, rat and NHP models generally possessed significantly improved concordance, sensitivity, and positive predictive values for both clinical measures. Although there may be predictive value with compounds from specific pharmacological classes (e.g.,

Indexed as

Conditioning, PsychologicalZebrafishAnimalsCentral Nervous System StimulantsHumansLocomotionSelf AdministrationSpatial BehaviorSubstance-Related DisordersCentral Nervous System Stimulants

Identifiers

PMID28790193
PMCPMC5602714

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.