Canadian Council On Animal Care Research Articles

Breaking barriers to ethical research: An analysis of the effectiveness of nonhuman animal research approval in Canada

ABSTRACTIn Canada, all institutions that conduct publicly funded, animal-based research are expected to comply with the standards of the Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC). The CCAC promotes the use of animal alternatives, and uses the “3Rs” principles of Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement as a guiding ethical framework. To ensure these standards are strictly enforced, internal ethics committees at each institution are tasked with creating “Animal Use Protocol” (AUP) forms to be filled out by researchers and evaluated by the committees.In this paper, we assess AUP forms from Canada’s top research universities to identify the extent to which they conform to, or advance, the 3Rs framework. Our results show various deficiencies that call into question the quality of information elicited by these forms. To remedy this, we recommend that the CCAC assume responsibility for creating a standardized 3Rs section to be used on all AUP forms. In addition, proposal forms and experimental results for all research at CCAC-certified institutions should be digitized and uploaded into a national database. We argue that this would offer higher quality information for researchers at the experimental design stage, while strengthening the CCAC’s mandate to be accountable to the Canadian public.

Intensive Supportive Care Alone Does Not Impact Survival in a Lethal Non-Human Primate Model of Ebola Virus Disease

Introduction: There are currently no licensed treatments for Ebola Virus Disease, making supportive care the only viable option. While there is anecdotal evidence that this is effective, the paucity of experimental data to demonstrate the role of supportive care in EVD has limited its use. We hypothesized that supportive care would enhance survival in a non-human primate (NHP) model of EVD. Methods: Three NHPs were infected with Ebola virus strain Makona and provided continuous bedside supportive care, including ventilatory support, fluid resuscitation, vasoactive medications, blood transfusion and hydrocortisone as needed to treat cardiovascular compromise. Findings: All three NHPs developed EVD and demonstrated a very similar clinical course and ultimately reached a terminal endpoint at an average time of 160 ± 8·7 hours post infection, which is similar to caged animals (144-192 hours). Fluid administration may have temporarily blunted a rise in lactate but the effect was short lived. Vasoactive medications, blood transfusion and hydrocortisone did not appear to have an impact. Interpretation: Supportive care did not impact survival length in a high stringency NHP EVD disease model. Our findings help support the need for the development and use of specific anti-Ebola therapies. Funding Statement: Funding was provided by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Government of Canada. Declaration of Interests: None of the authors had a conflict of interest with regard to this study. Ethics Approval Statement: The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the institutional Animal Care Committee, in accordance with Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC) guidelines.

Human-Animal Governance and University Practice in Canada: A Problematizing Redescription

AbstractEach year through the practices of Canada's universities, vast numbers of nonhuman animals are caught, bought or bred, narrowly confined, manipulated and killed. These university−animal relations are governed by a state-based regime, the Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC). Through the lens of critical public philosophy, I clarify the power that has constituted this governance regime and now sustains it, examining the regime's justifying claims, its practices that authorize universities and scholars as legally compliant and the related effects of its power. The resulting critical redescription reveals fundamental problems with the political legitimacy of CCAC governance and thus with the university−animal relations that it sanctions.

Survey of Canadian Animal-Based Researchers' Views on the Three Rs: Replacement, Reduction and Refinement

The ‘Three Rs’ tenet (replacement, reduction, refinement) is a widely accepted cornerstone of Canadian and international policies on animal-based science. The Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC) initiated this web-based survey to obtain greater understanding of ‘principal investigators’ and ‘other researchers’ (i.e. graduate students, post-doctoral researchers etc.) views on the Three Rs, and to identify obstacles and opportunities for continued implementation of the Three Rs in Canada. Responses from 414 participants indicate that researchers currently do not view the goal of replacement as achievable. Researchers prefer to use enough animals to ensure quality data is obtained rather than using the minimum and potentially waste those animals if a problem occurs during the study. Many feel that they already reduce animal numbers as much as possible and have concerns that further reduction may compromise research. Most participants were ambivalent about re-use, but expressed concern that the practice could compromise experimental outcomes. In considering refinement, many researchers feel there are situations where animals should not receive pain relieving drugs because it may compromise scientific outcomes, although there was strong support for the Three Rs strategy of conducting animal welfare-related pilot studies, which were viewed as useful for both animal welfare and experimental design. Participants were not opposed to being offered “assistance” to implement the Three Rs, so long as the input is provided in a collegial manner, and from individuals who are perceived as experts. It may be useful for animal use policymakers to consider what steps are needed to make replacement a more feasible goal. In addition, initiatives that offer researchers greater practical and logistical support with Three Rs implementation may be useful. Encouragement and financial support for Three Rs initiatives may result in valuable contributions to Three Rs knowledge and improve welfare for animals used in science.

Establishing a Three Rs Programme at the Canadian Council on Animal Care

The anniversary of the Fund for the Replacement of Animals in Medical Experiments (FRAME) provides an opportunity to celebrate the Charity's achievements over the past 40 years, and in particular, its contribution to the international acceptance of the Three Rs as the basis of an ethic for animal experimentation, and its role as a leader in the implementation of the Three Rs in the life sciences. The Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC) has based its work on the Three Rs, especially since the establishment of its fundamental CCAC Policy Statement on the Ethics of Animal Investigation (1989). Following recommendations from the evaluation of its programmes by external committees established by the national granting agencies, the CCAC recently launched a Three Rs Program. This programme will build on the work of FRAME and other similar Three Rs organisations, to further the promotion and implementation of the Three Rs in Canadian science.

Guidelines development and scientific uncertainty: use of previous case studies to promote efficient production of guidelines on the care and use of fish in research, teaching and testing

AbstractThe Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC) develops guidelines on issues of current and emerging concern in response to the needs of the scientific community, advances in animal care, and the needs of the CCAC Assessment Program. Guidelines are developed by subcommittees of experts, and are based on sound scientific evidence. However, the process of guidelines' development can involve consideration of areas where there is little scientific certainty or where scientific evidence needs to be tempered by other ethical considerations. Often these are areas where recommendations to the community are most needed, to provide assistance to both investigators and animal care committees on how best to balance the well-being of experimental animals and the goals of scientific research. The process for drafting the CCAC guidelines on: the care and use of fish in research, teaching and testing (in preparation) will be used as an example of the development of guidelines in the face of uncertain science, alongside a discussion of the CCAC guidelines on: transgenic animals (1997), as an example of the employment of a precautionary approach. Fish are now one of the most commonly used laboratory animals in Canada. However, what constitutes well-being for fish is an emerging field with often conflicting scientific data, and this presents unique challenges in guidelines' development.

Overview and Analysis of Animal Use in North America

The Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC) publishes data on over 25 species of animals used in science, and the US Department of Agriculture publishes data on six of those species. Between 1980 and 1999, the reduction in animal use was found to be correlated between Canada and the USA for dogs (r = 0.944, p < 0.001), cats (r = 0.839, p < 0.001), rabbits (r = 0.852, p < 0.001) and hamsters (r = 0.716, p < 0.01), with no significant correlation found for non-human primates and guinea-pigs. On the basis of the four species where correlation between the two countries was found for reduction in use, the mean ratio of the number of animals used in the USA compared to the number used in Canada was 17.0 +/- 7.5. The CCAC data for these six US-regulated species were used in an analysis of regression with multiple predictors to test whether they could be used to predict the total number of animals used. No significant correlation was found. However, using the same analysis, rats, mice, fish and birds were found to be highly correlated with the total number of animals used (r2 = 0.9835, p < 0.005). The regression equation developed by using Canadian data was validated using UK animal use numbers. An almost perfect fit between the estimated values provided the evidence that total animal use in Canada and the UK decreased at about the same pace during the 1990s. Animal use data can be a useful tool to monitor the implementation of reduction measures. However, their use for the monitoring of refinement measures requires care and analysis. For example, the sustained downward trend in the number of experiments causing severe pain in unanaesthetised animals (category of invasiveness [CI] E) observed in Canada and the USA between 1996 and 1999 is indicative of effective refinement, but it would be misleading to interpret the increase in the number of animals used in Canada under CI D in 1997 as an indication of greater pain and distress. In fact, the larger number of animals in CI D resulted at least in part from the implementation of new CCAC guidelines designed to ensure better monitoring of transgenic animal care and use.

The ICLAS/CCAC International Symposium on Regulatory Testing and Animal Welfare

The first International Symposium on Regulatory Testing and Animal Welfare (ISRTAW), held 21-23 June 2001, in Quebec City, Canada, brought together 160 experts from 22 countries from North and South America, Europe and Asia. The experts included representatives from national research and regulatory agencies, universities, and industry involved in chemicals, pesticides and drug safety testing. Representatives from European, Canadian and US animal welfare groups also participated in the discussions. The Symposium was organised by the International Council for Laboratory Animal Science (ICLAS) and the Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC), with the support and assistance of many sponsors and advisors. ICLAS is a worldwide organisation whose purpose is to foster the international harmonisation of animal care and use practices. CCAC is the national agency responsible for overseeing the ethical use of animals in Canadian science. Both organisations are committed to fostering an environment in which global efforts to harmonise testing procedures using animals in a more-humane manner can be realised.

Animal Care Courses: Helping Fulfill the Mandate of Animal Care Committees in Canada

Animal Care Committees (ACCs) at Canadian universities and research centers operate under the aegis of the Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC) and its guidelines for the humane care and treatment of animals in teaching, research, and testing. All Canadian universities have at least one active committee. The committees are expected to assume an educative role beyond the provision of information concerning housing, maintenance, and appropriate conditions for the treatment of animals in research. This includes critical examination of the serious ethical issues involved in animal research within the context of the principles and practices endorsed by the CCAC. One-day animal care courses provided by ACCs at three Canadian universities are described. Comparisons are made between the content and structure of curricula and the ways these relate to the teaching and research mandate in each institution, focusing particularly on the teaching of ethics in each course. The implications for heightening awareness of ethical issues in animal research and improving the effectiveness of these courses are discussed.

Canadian Council on Animal Care: Its Role

Every year in Canada about 2,000,000 animals are used in research (85.5 percent), mandatory testing (9.5 percent), and education (4.7 percent). Ninety percent of these are rats, mice, fish, and fowl. Surveillance over the use of experimental animals, including wild vertebrates and invertebrates such as octopi and squid, is the responsibility of the Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC), a national, voluntary peer-review organization, founded in Ottawa in 1968. Funded by Canada's two major granting agencies, the Medical Research Council (MRC) and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC), the CCAC comprises 20 member organizations from academia, government, industry, laboratory animal science, and the animal welfare movement. Assessment Visits Both scientists and animal welfare advocates are included on CCAC panels, which assess every three years (or more often if needed) Canada's universities and community colleges, government laboratories, and commercial laboratories. The evaluations are based on CCAC's Guide to the Care and Use of Experimental Animals, volumes 1 and 2 (1980, 1984), and supporting monographs. Institutions that continue to fail to comply with CCAC requirements face loss of funding from the MRC and NSERC. Since this policy was published in 1985, those found in noncompliance have actively addressed CCAC's concerns, and it has not yet been necessary to withdraw grants. The imposition of Noncompliance Status is the responsibility of the CCAC as a whole, acting on the recommendations of the assessment panels. It should be noted that where the health of the animals is involved, an assessment panel has the authority to order the animals immediately relocated and to close the facility until it can be brought up to CCAC standards. This rather drastic measure has been necessary only a handful of times. There has been, however, a difficulty in perception on the part of some in the animal welfare movement who have asked: If this institution has been declared in Con

The status of animal experimentation in Canada.

Abstract Experimental animal use in Canada involves slightly over 2 million animals annually. Of these 85.8% are utilized in research, 9.5% in mandatory testing and 4.7% in teaching. Approximately 90% of these animals are rodents. Animal use data are compiled by the Ottawa-based Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC) through its Animal Resources Protocol Management System (ARFMS) computer program. The CCAC's main responsibility is surveillance of animal use in universities, government laboratories and commercial enterprises. The Council was established in 1968 in response to concerns of the public and scientific community regarding the housing and management of laboratory animals. Founded as a committee of the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada (AUCC), CCAC was incorporated in 1983.

The voluntary control program of the Canadian Council on Animal Care.

The Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC), founded in 1968, monitors and influences the care and use of animals utilized for experimentation in that country. Its program is one of voluntary peer review stressing control from within the institution exercised by the local animal care committee (ACC). Council's assessment panels evaluate and make recommendations regarding facilities and the effectiveness of the ACC.