Emma Vale was new to the IACUC Office of Great Eastern University and had what she thought was a simple question: “After three years of research, when an IACUC protocol is submitted for full review as a renewing protocol, how should I handle any animals that are left on the expiring protocol?” Larry Covelli, the IACUC chairman, asked her to explain what she meant. “Well,” she said, “should I transfer the remaining animals from the old protocol onto the new protocol, and if so, should I decrease the number of animals approved on the new protocol? I'm concerned because if I don't do anything, then the PI [Principal Investigator] will have animals remaining from the expiring protocol in addition to the animals that the IACUC has approved for the new protocol. Or should I tell the investigators to euthanize the animals that are left and then buy or breed more animals for the new protocol? Or is there something else I'm supposed to do?”

Covelli's first thought was to tell her to transfer the animals from the expiring protocol onto the new one and decrease the newly approved number, just like she would do if the animals had been purchased instead of transferred. Then he began to see the consequences. For example, if the IACUC approved 500 mice for new experiments, but the PI already had 50 in the animal facility, then the PI could order only 450 more mice for the new set of experiments. Simply transferring animals from an expiring protocol to a renewed one would not be useful if the transferred animals were of the wrong strain, genotype, age or sex. Also, as a scientist himself, Covelli knew that PIs might have ongoing experiments to complete on the expiring protocol, but he wasn't sure whether the PIs included full descriptions of those ongoing studies on their newly submitted protocols. He suspected that they did not. So Covelli had a problem. Not only was there a need to address third-year renewing protocols that were funded through the Public Health Service, but he wasn't sure how to approach those protocols that required annual review under the US Department of Agriculture regulations. Covelli wasn't sure how the issue had been handled in the past, but he knew that the IACUC had to make it right in the future.

What would you suggest that Covelli and the Great Eastern IACUC should do to resolve this problem?

Response to Protocol Review Scenario: Transferring animals responsibly

Response to Protocol Review Scenario: Plan ahead

Response to Protocol Review Scenario: No 'ongoing' work