Your data on MRCVSonline
The nature of the services provided by Vision Media means that we might obtain certain information about you.
Please read our Data Protection and Privacy Policy for details.

In addition, (with your consent) some parts of our website may store a 'cookie' in your browser for the purposes of
functionality or performance monitoring.
Click here to manage your settings.
If you would like to forward this story on to a friend, simply fill in the form below and click send.

Your friend's email:
Your email:
Your name:
 
 
Send Cancel

Computer algorithms ‘could replace animal testing’
Animal testing is unpopular with the public for moral reasons, and among manufacturers due to the high costs and uncertainties about results.
Study finds new method gives more accurate results 

Computer algorithms could replace toxicology testing on animals, scientists say, after new research found such methods are better at predicting toxicity.

Scientists from John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health mined a large database of known chemicals, to map the relationships between chemical structures and toxic properties.

Findings published in the journal Toxicological Sciences shows the map can be used to automatically predict the toxic properties of a chemical compound more accurately than a single animal test.

Principal investigator Thomas Hartung said: “These results are a real eye opener - they suggest that we can replace many animal tests with computer-based prediction and get more reliable results.”

The most advanced tool they developed was, on average, 87 per cent accurate in reproducing the consensus results of animal tests. This was done across nine tests which represent 57 per cent of the world’s animal toxicology testing. By comparison, the repetition of the same animal tests in the database was only 81 per cent accurate on average.

Each year millions of animals such as mice, rabbits, guinea pigs and dogs are used for chemical toxicity tests in laboratories around the world. Whilst this is often required by law to protect consumers, the practice is unpopular with the public for moral reasons, and among manufacturers due to the high costs and uncertainties about results.

According to Hartung, a new pesticide may require 30 separate animal tests, costing the sponsoring company around $20 million. The study found that the same chemical in the database had often been tested dozens of times in the same way.

“Our automated approach clearly outperformed the animal test, in a very solid assessment using data on thousands of different chemicals and tests,” he added. “So it’s big news for toxicology.”

Become a member or log in to add this story to your CPD history

Practices urged to audit neutering data

News Story 1
 RCVS Knowledge has called on vet practices to audit their post-operative neutering outcomes.

It follows the release of the 2024 NASAN benchmarking report, which collates data from neutering procedures performed on dogs, cats and rabbits.

The benchmarking report enables practices in the UK and Ireland to compare their post-operative outcomes to the national average. This includes the rate of patients lost to follow-up, which in 2024 increased to 23 per cent.

Anyone from the practice can submit the data using a free template. The deadline for next report is February 2026.

Visit the RCVS Knowledge website to complete an audit. 

Click here for more...
News Shorts
New guidance for antibiotic use in rabbits

New best practice guidance on the responsible use of antibiotics in rabbits has been published by the BSAVA in collaboration with the Rabbit Welfare Association & Fund (RWA&F).

The guidance is free and has been produced to help veterinary practitioners select the most appropriate antibiotic for rabbits. It covers active substance, dose and route of administration all of which are crucial factors when treating rabbits owing to the risk of enterotoxaemia.

For more information and to access the guide, visit the BSAVALibrary.