New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) Complement but Cannot Replace Animal Models in Critical Care Medicine Research
Clicks: 5
ID: 323659
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
1.2
/100
5 views
0 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
EmergingRanked #25 of 88 articles by views in journal of leukocyte biology
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Critical care research focuses on life-threatening conditions such as sepsis, trauma, hemorrhage, and burn injury, which account for millions of hospitalizations and hundreds of thousands of deaths annually in the United States alone. Recent policy initiatives by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) have promoted New Approach Methodologies (NAMs), including organoids, organ-on-chip platforms, and computational models, as alternatives to animal research. While NAMs offer valuable tools for mechanistic investigation and screening applications, this review examines whether current NAM technologies can adequately replace animal models in critical care research. Critical illness involves the whole organism, including dynamic organ-organ interactions, immune-microbiome crosstalk, and adaptive systemic feedback loops. By examining major domains in critical care research and targeted organ injuries, it becomes clear that while NAMs excel at interrogating isolated subsystems, they cannot currently replicate integrated physiological responses. Animal models remain essential for questions requiring assessment of multi-organ dysfunction, therapeutic safety evaluation, and clinically relevant disease trajectories. Premature policy shifts away from animal research will impede advances in critical care medicine. This review proposes a "methodological pluralism" approach that integrates NAMs with appropriately designed animal studies through harmonized endpoints and reverse-translation frameworks. Recommendations include continued refinement of animal models to better represent the heterogeneity of human populations, adoption of quality standards for preclinical research, and strategic deployment of both NAMs and animal models based on fit-for-purpose criteria. We believe this approach will satisfy ethical considerations, scientific rigor, and public health needs in critical care research.
| Reference Key |
openalex_W7172406135
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Marlene E. Starr, Matthew Taylor, Longxiang Su, Atsushi Murao, Steven J. Schwulst, James A Lederer, Max Brenner |
| Journal | journal of leukocyte biology |
| Year | 2026 |
| DOI |
10.1093/jleuko/qiag108
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.