Editorial

Do we need non-human primate research?

Beat M Riederer
Editor-in-Chief Email: Beat.Riederer@unil.ch DOI: 10.1258/la.2012.012046

This is a provocative question. Trends are rather against non-human primate (NHP) research. Therefore, it seems appropriate to discuss why Laboratory Animals is publishing two original articles in the current issue that deal with primate research. Both studies underline the importance of knowing the animal model and to control parameters that inuence a specic experiment or inuence the physical condition of an animal. Given the debate on research on NHPs, it becomes essential how to value such research. In this issue two original articles are published. The work of Bauer and colleagues ( pp 193 199) has a closer look at causes for obesity in captive cynomolgus macaques and investigates different inuences and factors on behaviours around feeding. It seems obvious that before feeding animals may be more nervous just imagine waiting in a queue and somebody tries to sneak in. Another interesting point is that care-givers had an inuence on feeding. It seems essential to go more in-depth since many factors may be involved that inuence the relationship between animals and between animals and their care-givers. Many examples show that the mental state has a considerable effect on feeding behaviours or behaviour in general. An extended control of parameters seems essential. Each caregiver and each animal has its own personality and therefore different reactions have to be expected. The current mood of an animal or its care-giver may also play a role. Odour cues such as transpiration, the use of deodorants or perfumes could also have an inuence. The second work by Graham et al. (pp 178192) investigates the side-effects after streptozotocin chemotherapy, used for an induction of diabetes in NHPs. In six case studies that involve intense clinical care, extensive observations and measurements, the authors provide a owchart of procedures to respect and give recommendations for the management of adverse effects related to cytotoxicity. This allows an early detection and management of such effects. Furthermore, this study documents the importance of retrospective evaluation and underlines a need to identify risk factors. Although, the number of animals was limited, a thorough analysis gives a wealth of information and allows the identication of specic parameters that apply. Clinical trials still depend on NHP data and it is essential to know the animal model at its best. There will always be a need for renement of the model system in order to allow a

correct interpretation of results. For the rst study it is evident that care-givers may play a crucial role in behaviour-related feeding. While the second work highlights that a retrospective analysis of trials may help in the early detection of risks related to cytotoxicity and may improve wellbeing of animals with a reduction of morbidity and mortality. Both manuscripts fullled the ethical guidelines by local authorities and of our journal; both manuscripts also went through an extensive peer review. To add another point to the debate is whether basic research on NHP is of value, since it does not help to cure diseases. It is essential to realize that basic research cannot foresee an ulterior application. Yet, the better you know the model system, the better you can analyse data. In 2009, the Swiss Federal Court banned work on macaque brains at the University and Federal Technical High School (ETH) of Zurich (ruling of 7 October 2009 [T 0/2] 2C_422/2008). The court based its decision on an extreme interpretation of the law, which demands immediate benets. However, this is not compatible with any form of basic research. Finding out how brain circuitry works in normal as well as disease conditions is fundamental if new therapies are to be developed for neurological disorders.1 For basic research, the major goal is to conduct research by highest standards and weigh interest of gain of knowledge and to consider whether the animal model is appropriate, whether the number of animals is adequate, estimate the pain level, the pertinence of the scientic question or consider the possibility of using alternatives. However, there is no room for misconduct and neglect of animals. This applies to all types of animal research and is regardless of the used species. In conclusion, given the different legislations in place and requirements to evaluate clinical validity, NHP research is still necessary. Yet, primate models should be used only when other animal models will not work. It is still essential to study the model system and provide data for an optimal interpretation of results. Therefore, Laboratory Animals will continue to publish data on primate models in basic and applied research.
REFERENCE 1 Abbot A. Swiss court bans work on macaque brains. Nature 2008;453:833

Laboratory Animals 2012; 46: 177