Review Article
Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism (2009) 29, 1–9; doi:10.1038/jcbfm.2008.98; published online 27 August 2008
The role of animal models in evaluating reasonable safety and efficacy for human trials of cell-based interventions for neurologic conditions
Alan Regenberg1, Debra JH Mathews1, David M Blass2,3, Hilary Bok1, Joseph T Coyle4, Patrick Duggan1, Ruth Faden1, Julia Finkel1, John D Gearhart5, Argye Hillis6, Ahmet Hoke6, Richard Johnson7, Michael Johnston8, Jeffrey Kahn9, Douglas Kerr10, Patricia King11, Joanne Kurtzberg12, S Matthew Liao1,13, John W McDonald14, Guy McKhann15, Karin B Nelson16, Mahendra Rao16, Andrew W Siegel1, Kirby Smith17, Davor Solter18, Hongjun Song5, Jeremy Sugarman1, Angelo Vescovi19, Wise Young20, Henry T Greely21 and Richard J Traystman22
- 1Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
- 2Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
- 3Abarbanel Mental Health Center, Bat Yam, Israel, affiliated with the Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
- 4Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Belmont, Massachusetts, USA
- 5Institute for Cell Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
- 6Department of Neurology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
- 7Department of Molecular Microbiology and Immunology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
- 8Division of Neurology and Developmental Medicine, Kennedy Krieger Institute, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
- 9Center for Bioethics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
- 10Johns Hopkins Transverse Myelopathy Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
- 11Georgetown University Law School, Georgetown University, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
- 12Division of Pediatric Blood and Marrow Transplantation, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA
- 13Faculty of Philosophy, Oxford University, Oxford, UK
- 14International Center for Spinal Cord Injury, Kennedy Krieger Institute, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
- 15Zanvyl/Krieger Mind Brain Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
- 16National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
- 17Invitrogen Corporation, Carlsbad, California, USA
- 18Institute of Medical Biology, A*STAR, National University of Singapore, Singapore
- 19Department of Biological Sciences and Biotechnology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
- 20WM Keck Center for Collaborative Neuroscience, Rutgers University, Piscataway, New Jersey, USA
- 21Stanford Law School, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA
- 22University of Colorado at Denver, Denver, Colorado, USA
Correspondence: A Regenberg, Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics, Johns Hopkins University, 100 N. Charles Street, Suite 740, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA. E-mail: aregenbe@jhsph.edu
Received 21 March 2008; Revised 30 June 2008; Accepted 5 August 2008; Published online 27 August 2008.
Abstract
Progress in regenerative medicine seems likely to produce new treatments for neurologic conditions that use human cells as therapeutic agents; at least one trial for such an intervention is already under way. The development of cell-based interventions for neurologic conditions (CBI-NCs) will likely include preclinical studies using animals as models for humans with conditions of interest. This paper explores predictive validity challenges and the proper role for animal models in developing CBI-NCs. In spite of limitations, animal models are and will remain an essential tool for gathering data in advance of first-in-human clinical trials. The goal of this paper is to provide a realistic lens for viewing the role of animal models in the context of CBI-NCs and to provide recommendations for moving forward through this challenging terrain.
Keywords:
clinical trials, modeling, neurologic conditions, stem and progenitor cells

