Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Protocol Review
  • Published:

Response to Protocol Review Scenario: Stitching together multiple protocols creates confusion

Lab Animal volume 45, pages 210–211 (2016)Cite this article

This is a thought-provoking scenario with a number of underlying issues and questions that need to be addressed. Does Rosen have IACUC approval to use the animals—in this case rabbits—on her approved protocol? Does Chen have the authority to allow Rosen to 'borrow' two of his animals to conduct her research? Although the procedures described are parts of different approved protocols, ultimately the answer to both of these questions is 'no'.

Chen and Rosen should not be permitted to continue their research without additional IACUC approvals. At any point during the experimental process there can be a need to amend or revise a protocol to reflect changes in the intended research plan, such as a change in species1. In this instance, Rosen determined that she needed to use a larger animal model than that for which she was currently approved, in order to satisfy the requirements of a proof-of-concept study.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Gaertner, D.J. & Moody, K.D. In The IACUC Handbook 2nd edn (eds. Silverman, J., Suckow, M. & Murthy, S.) 139–148. (Taylor and Francis, Boca Raton, 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Public Health Service. Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (US Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC, 1986; amended 2002).

  3. Animal Welfare Act regulations. CFR 9. Chapter 1, Subchapter A, Part 2, Subpart C.

  4. Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare. Guidance on Prompt Reporting to OLAW under the PHS Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. Notice NOT-OD-05-034. (National Institutes of Health, Washington, DC, 24 February 2005, updated 21 February 2013). http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not-od-05-034.html

  5. Garnett, N.L. & C.A. Gipson . A mouse isn't a rat, but what's the big deal? Lab Anim (NY). 32, 19 (2003).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Institute for Laboratory Animal Research. Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals 8th edn. (National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2011).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Veterinary Resources, Stewart is the Associate Director, University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL.,

    Laike St. A. Stewart

  2. Lang is the Gnotobiotic Facility Manager, University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL.,

    Jessica K. Lang

Authors
  1. Laike St. A. Stewart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jessica K. Lang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Stewart, L., Lang, J. Response to Protocol Review Scenario: Stitching together multiple protocols creates confusion. Lab Anim 45, 210–211 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/laban.1022

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/laban.1022

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing