Explore the vast range of titles available.

The influence of protocol standardization between laboratories on their replicability of preclinical results has not been addressed in a systematic way. While standardization is considered good research practice as a means to control for undesired external noise (i.e., highly variable results), some reports suggest that standardized protocols may lead to idiosyncratic results, thus undermining replicability. Through the EQIPD consortium, a multi-lab collaboration between academic and industry partners, we aimed to elucidate parameters that impact the replicability of preclinical animal studies. To this end, 3 experimental protocols were implemented across 7 laboratories. The replicability of results was determined using the distance travelled in an open field after administration of pharmacological compounds known to modulate locomotor activity (MK-801, diazepam, and clozapine) in C57BL/6 mice as a worked example. The goal was to determine whether harmonization of study protocols across laboratories improves the replicability of the results and whether replicability can be further improved by systematic variation (heterogenization) of 2 environmental factors (time of testing and light intensity during testing) within laboratories. Protocols were tested in 3 consecutive stages and differed in the extent of harmonization across laboratories and standardization within laboratories: stage 1, minimally aligned across sites (local protocol); stage 2, fully aligned across sites (harmonized protocol) with and without systematic variation (standardized and heterogenized cohort); and stage 3, fully aligned across sites (standardized protocol) with a different compound. All protocols resulted in consistent treatment effects across laboratories, which were also replicated within laboratories across the different stages. Harmonization of protocols across laboratories reduced between-lab variability substantially compared to each lab using their local protocol. In contrast, the environmental factors chosen to introduce systematic variation within laboratories did not affect the behavioral outcome. Therefore, heterogenization did not reduce between-lab variability further compared to the harmonization of the standardized protocol. Altogether, these findings demonstrate that subtle variations between lab-specific study protocols may introduce variation across independent replicate studies even after protocol harmonization and that systematic heterogenization of environmental factors may not be sufficient to account for such between-lab variation. Differences in replicability of results within and between laboratories highlight the ubiquity of study-specific variation due to between-lab variability, the importance of transparent and fine-grained reporting of methodologies and research protocols, and the importance of independent study replication.

Inconsistent findings between laboratories are hampering scientific progress and are of increasing public concern. Differences in laboratory environment is a known factor contributing to poor reproducibility of findings between research sites, and well-controlled multisite efforts are an important next step to identify the relevant factors needed to reduce variation in study outcome between laboratories. Through harmonization of apparatus, test protocol, and aligned and non-aligned environmental variables, the present study shows that behavioral pharmacological responses in Shank2 knockout (KO) rats, a model of synaptic dysfunction relevant to autism spectrum disorders, were highly replicable across three research centers. All three sites reliably observed a hyperactive and repetitive behavioral phenotype in KO rats compared to their wild-type littermates as well as a dose-dependent phenotype attenuation following acute injections of a selective mGluR1 antagonist. These results show that reproducibility in preclinical studies can be obtained and emphasizes the need for high quality and rigorous methodologies in scientific research. Considering the observed external validity, the present study also suggests mGluR1 as potential target for the treatment of autism spectrum disorders.

Successful translation of promising preclinical findings into clinical application remains challenging. To address the rising concerns of failing clinical trials and the resulting economic, social, and ethical consequences, preclinical confirmatory studies have been proposed to generate sufficiently robust evidence for guiding the decision-making process. In a unique funding call, 17 studies in Germany aimed to confirm exploratory findings across various biomedical research fields in a rigorously planned and executed multi-laboratory set-up. Alongside these preclinical research projects, a meta-research project was funded to provide methodological support and collectively investigate confirmatory study design and experimental outcomes. After the first four-year funding period, an in-person workshop brought together representatives from the preclinical confirmatory studies to discuss lessons learned. We summarize the outcomes of these stakeholder discussions, highlight common pitfalls, and propose optimization strategies for experimental set-up and project coordination. As a result, we advocate for new roles—such as preclinical research coordinators—and improved rules and regulations in preclinical research to facilitate large-scale academic research projects. Moreover, we highlight that diverse stakeholders must collaborate to effectively integrate confirmatory multi-laboratory studies into the preclinical research ecosystem.

Inconsistent findings between laboratories are hampering scientific progress and are of increasing public concern. Differences in laboratory environment is a known factor contributing to poor reproducibility of findings between research sites, and well-controlled multisite efforts are an important next step to identify the relevant factors needed to reduce variation in study outcome between laboratories. Through harmonization of apparatus, test protocol, and aligned and non-aligned environmental variables, the present study shows that behavioral pharmacological responses in Shank2 knockout (KO) rats, a model of synaptic dysfunction relevant to autism spectrum disorders, were highly replicable across three research centers. All three sites reliably observed a hyperactive and repetitive behavioral phenotype in KO rats compared to their wild-type littermates as well as a dose-dependent phenotype attenuation following acute injections of a selective mGluR1 antagonist. These results show that reproducibility in preclinical studies can be obtained and emphasizes the need for high quality and rigorous methodologies in scientific research. Considering the observed external validity, the present study also suggests mGluR1 as potential target for the treatment of autism spectrum disorders.

Organisms are constantly extracting information from the temporal structure of the environment, which allows them to select appropriate actions and predict impending changes. Several lines of research have suggested that interval timing is modulated by the dopaminergic system. It has been proposed that higher levels of dopamine cause an internal clock to speed up, whereas less dopamine causes a deceleration of the clock. In most experiments the subjects are first trained to perform a timing task while drug free. Consequently, most of what is known about the influence of dopaminergic modulation of timing is on well-established timing performance. In the current study the impact of altered DA on the acquisition of temporal control was the focal question. Thirty male Sprague-Dawley rats were distributed randomly into three different groups (haloperidol, d-amphetamine or vehicle). Each animal received an injection 15 min prior to the start of every session from the beginning of interval training. The subjects were trained in a Fixed Interval (FI) 16s schedule followed by training on a peak procedure in which 64s non-reinforced peak trials were intermixed with FI trials. In a final test session all subjects were given vehicle injections and 10 consecutive non-reinforced peak trials to see if training under drug conditions altered the encoding of time. The current study suggests that administration of drugs that modulate dopamine do not alter the encoding temporal durations but do acutely affect the initiation of responding.