Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36093359›Full record

ArticleEngineering in life sciences2022

A worldwide survey on the use of animal-derived materials and reagents in scientific experimentation.

Manuela Cassotta, Joanna Julia Bartnicka, Francesca Pistollato, Surat Parvatam, Tilo Weber, Vito D'Alessandro, Luisa Ferreira Bastos, Sandra Coecke

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Engineering in life sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Manuela CassottaOltre la Sperimentazione Animale (OSA) Segrate Milan Italy.
Joanna Julia BartnickaEuropean Commission Joint Research Centre (JRC) Ispra Italy.
Francesca PistollatoEuropean Commission Joint Research Centre (JRC) Ispra Italy.
Surat ParvatamCentre for Predictive Human Model Systems Atal Incubation Centre-Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology (AIC-CCMB) Hyderabad India.
Tilo WeberDepartment for Alternatives to the Use of Animals in Research, Testing and Education Animal Welfare Academy of the German Animal Welfare Federation Neubiberg Germany.
Vito D'AlessandroOltre la Sperimentazione Animale (OSA) Segrate Milan Italy.
Luisa Ferreira BastosEurogroup for Animals Brussels Belgium.
Sandra CoeckeEuropean Commission Joint Research Centre (JRC) Ispra Italy.
Joint Research Centre · ITCentre for Cellular and Molecular Biology · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of cell and tissue-based methods in basic, applied and regulatory science has been increasing exponentially. Animal-derived components, including serum, coating materials, growth factors and antibodies are routinely used in cell/tissue cultures and in general laboratory practices. In addition to ethical issues, the use and production of animal-derived materials and reagents raises many scientific concerns, generally associated with presence of undefined components and batch-to-batch variability, which may compromise experimental reproducibility. On the other hand, non-animal materials and reagents, such as human cells, alternatives to animal sera or non-animal recombinant antibodies, are becoming increasingly available, and their use is encouraged by the EU Directive 2010/63 and the Guidance Document on Good In vitro Method Practices (GIVIMP), published by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). In an effort to map the current state of use of animal-derived reagents across different sectors and to identify the obstacles possibly hampering the implementation of non-animal derived alternatives, a global online survey addressed to scientists working on in vivo, in vitro, in silico methods, in academia as well as pharmaceutical or cosmetic companies, was conducted with the goal to understand: 1) the most commonly used animal-derived materials and reagents, 2) the main issues associated with the production and use of animal-derived materials and reagents, 3) the current level of knowledge on available non-animal alternative materials and reagents, and 4) what educational and information sources could be most useful or impactful to disseminate knowledge on non-animal alternatives. This paper provides an overview of the survey replies and discusses possible proposals to increase awareness, acceptance and use of non-animal ingredients.

Indexed as

antibodiesFBSfetal bovine serumGIVIMPGuidance Document on Good In vitro Method Practicesin vitroreproducibility

Identifiers

PMID36093359
PMCPMC9444711
OpenAlexW4285802720

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.