ACNP/BRAD RESEARCH SPOTLIGHT
As a part of her BRAD Fellowship project, Dr. Lindsey Galbo-Thomma is spotlighting ACNP members to highlight the value in collaboration between preclinical and clinical/human subjects researchers in their research endeavors, and, importantly, in advocating for animal research together.
Dr. Michael Taffe
Member, ACNP
Dr. Galbo-Thomma’s most recent interview features Dr. Michael Taffe, a Member of the ACNP and Professor of Psychiatry at the University of California San Diego. Mike has worked with a variety of laboratory animal species. During graduate school and partway through his independent career he worked with behavioral models in nonhuman primates, but he has since transitioned to utilizing behavioral models in rats. Though they are not the primary model species used in his laboratory, his laboratory has also published two studies involving decapod crustaceans (crayfish and lobsters).
When asked how his prior or current research might have influenced clinical or human subjects research, Mike was transparent in saying he wasn’t sure, as “…we can only very rarely draw a straight line between one of our published papers and direct influence on other research”.
When asked how his prior or current research might have influenced clinical or human subjects research, Mike was transparent in saying he wasn’t sure, as “…we can only very rarely draw a straight line between one of our published papers and direct influence on other research”. Instead, Mike stated “these [animal] studies are vital to discover new treatment avenues, to evaluate risks and benefits and to ultimately support the approval of medicines”. For these reasons, we may not always be able to identify specific and direct influences on human research. Regardless, “anybody involved in biomedical research or the clinical care of humans ought to be robust advocates for the values of animal research”. This is especially important because there is great opposition to the use of animals to find new treatments and cures, which has gained a lot of traction with the general public and amongst political figures. Mike emphasized that doctors and researchers should work together to outvoice those trying to end a necessary contributor [animal research] to the advancement of science.
He believes the most effective way biomedical researchers can be successful advocates for the use of animals in research is with an “all-hands-on-deck” approach. High profile efforts are important, but “…small conversations, regular posts on social media and similar types of consistent outreach have a high value for relatively limited effort”. Mike offered excellent advice and actionable items for us all: have conversations about animal research with friends and family. Point out where animals contributed to the latest amazing paper or scientific or medical breakthrough. Answer questions about science topics by including a reference to the animal work involved. Lastly, Mike reminded us:
“…it is imperative to point out what a highly regulated activity this is and that scientists are not at liberty to use research animals under whatever fancy strikes them on a given day”.
To emphasize Mike’s advice, some of us will have opportunities to advocate for animal research to high profile people or in large, formal venues, but all of us can integrate advocacy into our daily conversations and activities.
Dr. Zoé McElligott
Associate Member, ACNP
Dr. Galbo-Thomma spoke with Dr. Zoé McElligott, an Associate Member of the ACNP, Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Pharmacology at University of North Carolina (UNC) School of Medicine and member of the Bowles Center for Alcohol Research. Zoé has worked with rodent models most of her career, allowing her to investigate processes that are impossible to study via other methods.
Zoé described two projects in her laboratory highlighting how her research with rodent models could have a significant clinical impact, ultimately contributing to the alleviation of human suffering. At last year’s ACNP meeting, Zoé participated in a mini-panel with Drs. Gina Leinninger and Michael Becksted, presenting work conducted by a senior graduate student,
Graydon Gereau, which showed that a neurotensin-targeting compound reduced alcohol drinking and other alcohol related behavioral and physiological adaptations in rodents without disrupting “mood” or cognition. This indicates the neurotensin system could be a pharmacologic target for new medications for reducing alcohol drinking.
Additionally, another senior graduate student in Zoé’s laboratory, Madigan Bedad, brought to Zoé’s attention last year that xylazine, typically thought to be an adrenergic agonist used as an anesthetic in veterinary medicine, had infiltrated the unregulated opioid supply. Zoé was immediately intrigued as she has been investigating adrenergic and opioid systems since her postdoctoral studies. When investigating whether xylazine might potentiate fentanyl withdrawal, she was surprised to find that naloxone (commercially known as Narcan®) precipitated xylazine withdrawal. They collaborated with Dr. Bryan Roth, Director of the National Institute of Mental Health Psychoactive Drug Screening Program, to screen xylazine and found it could act as a full agonist at the kappa opioid receptor. To extend these findings, Zoé has teamed up with public health researcher Dr. Nabarun Dasgupta, a member of the Injury Prevention Research Center at the UNC Gillings School of Public Health, and additional preclinical researchers at UNC to examine the effects of xylazine on clinically relevant physiological and behavioral mechanisms in rodents.
Zoé found her laboratory’s collaboration with Dr. Dasgupta’s to be incredibly enriching and fruitful, and that by keeping dialogue with clinical researchers helps her to advocate for the important preclinical studies her laboratory is conducting. Zoé also thinks it is important for clinical/human subjects and preclinical researchers to work together to advocate for animal research, Zoé replied, “In the public sphere, many misconceptions remain about how computers can model biological processes..computers can only know what human programmers train them to know, and we still lack so much information about how the body, and especially the brain, works”. She added that preclinical researchers have the unique ability to probe the physiology and pharmacology that computers cannot, or that we cannot ethically study in humans. Zoé noted the importance of preclinical researchers being in constant communication with their clinical colleagues to better refine their preclinical models, allowing preclinical researchers to answer questions they cannot investigate in human subjects.
Lastly, Zoé offered some insight for clinical/human subjects researchers regarding how to advocate for animal research:
“When clinical researchers talk about the work they do, I encourage them to make a nod towards what we can discover in preclinical research. Even just a sentence could have a strong impact.”
She added that asking preclinical research partners what to say, and discussing how to integrate preclinical findings with those of clinical researchers, could even spur new collaborations.
Dr. Zoe Donaldson
Chair, ACNP Animal Research Committee
Dr. Galbo-Thomma spoke with Dr. Zoe Donaldson, an Associate Member of the ACNP, the current Chair of their Animal Research Committee and an Associate Professor of Neuroscience at University of Colorado Boulder, which houses the Donaldson Laboratory. Dr. Donaldson has worked with many different species throughout her career, first with insects and later with birds, mice and uniquely, with prairie voles, which are the primary animal model utilized in the Donaldson Laboratory. Specifically, they work with two species of voles, which are small rodents about twice the size of a mouse. One species is monogamous and another promiscuous, allowing for comparative studies.
When asked how her current animal research has influenced clinical/human subjects research, Dr. Donaldson explained how her laboratory has developed a vole model for studying facets of prolonged grief disorder, a recently added Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) diagnosis. Her work has been informed extensively by research on grieving humans, but these studies face many challenges, such as recruiting bereaved subjects. By studying loss in monogamous prairie voles, the Donaldson Laboratory has developed a new line of research on the biology of loss adaption that allows for functional manipulation of this adaptive process to identify biological factors critical for grief integration. Her research provides a unique and potentially powerful way to gain new insights, and her discoveries are paving the way to move back into human subjects research in the future.
Dr. Donaldson was also asked why she thinks it is valuable for clinical/human subjects researchers to use their unique voice and perspective to advocate for animal research alongside preclinical researchers. Dr. Donaldson provided an excellent scenario:
“I took a science journalism class where the instructor pointed out that the weatherperson is often the only one with a science-related background in the newsroom. They become the de-facto expert on all things science. This scenario extends into everyday life where, for most people, the only clinical/biomedical expert they know is their doctor, whom they often trust and respect. Clinical/human researchers are a de-facto extension of the respected physician in many people’s lives. As a result, the advice and opinions of these researchers carry weight; if they articulate the importance of animal research, their views will be taken seriously.”
Dr. Donaldson also believes we, as researchers, need to leverage every opportunity and advantage we can to creatively identify new ways to improve health and wellbeing. This includes studying humans for the things that make them excellent research subjects, such as verbalizing emotions and their genetic information, and animals to gain insight into aspects of biology we cannot access in human subjects. Dr. Donaldson suggests, “…the best thing that clinical/human subjects researchers can do is articulate what we can and cannot achieve via different types of research. If people can directly link animal research to advances that improve their lives or saved their loved ones, this can be incredibly powerful”. To support this, she pointed out that there has been a general increase in positive public perception of animal research throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, because of animals’ critical role in vaccine development.
Dr. Donaldson’s work has been featured in Newsweek and mentioned in other media publications, and she co-authored a publication in Scientific American.
If you are an ACNP member conducting animal or human subjects research and are passionate about animal research advocacy and interested in being spotlighted in future publications, please contact Dr. Galbo-Thomma (galbothomma@uthscsa.edu).