Abstract
Promising therapies for cartilage repair are translated through large animal models toward human application. To guide this work, regulatory agencies publish recommendations ("guidance documents") to direct pivotal large animal studies. These are meant to aid in study design, outline metrics for judging efficacy, and facilitate comparisons between studies. To determine the penetrance of these ...
Abstract
Promising therapies for cartilage repair are translated through large animal models toward human application. To guide this work, regulatory agencies publish recommendations ("guidance documents") to direct pivotal large animal studies. These are meant to aid in study design, outline metrics for judging efficacy, and facilitate comparisons between studies. To determine the penetrance of these documents in the field, we synthesized the recommendations of the American Society for Testing and Materials, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and European Medicines Agency into a scoring system and performed a systematic review of the past 20 years of preclinical cartilage repair studies. Our hypothesis was that the guidance documents would have a significant impact on how large animal cartilage repair studies were performed. A total of 114 publications meeting our inclusion criteria were reviewed for adherence to 24 categories extracted from the guidance documents, including 11 related to study design and description and 13 related to study outcomes. Overall, a weak positive trend was observed over time (P = 0.004, R-2 = 0.07, slope = 0.63%/year), with overall adherence (the sum of study descriptors and outcomes) ranging from 32 +/- 16% to 58 +/- 14% in any individual year. There was no impact of the publication of the guidance documents on adherence (P = 0.264 to 0.50). Given that improved adherence would expedite translation, we discuss the reasons for poor adherence and outline approaches to increase and promote their more widespread adoption.
Altmetric