Other ACC Info

Animal Care Committee   Death as an Endpoint

Back to FAQ

It is imperative to understand what "Death as an Endpoint" is.  It is the natural death of the animals as a direct result of the experimental procedures that are performed on them and considered to be necessary to meet the scientific objectives of the experiment.  Euthanasia of animals is NOT a death as an endpoint activity.

The use of death as an endpoint has been regarded as essential in some investigations but rapid developments are being made in this field and it is an area where both investigators and the ACC should make particular efforts to keep abreast of the current literature. The usual reason for selecting death as an endpoint is the difficulty of reliably differentiating animals that will die from those which will recover, despite them showing severe clinical signs of illness or toxicity. When clinical signs include subjectively distressing changes, such as convulsions or severe dyspnea, then there is particular pressure to euthanize an animal rather than allow further deterioration of its condition.

Several constructive suggestions have been put forward to reduce the need for death as an endpoint in studies. In some circumstances, simple clinical indices, such as the development of profound hypothermia, can be used to reliably predict death. The use of death as an endpoint must be scientifically justified and approved by the ACC during protocol review.  In these circumstances, the ACC must carefully assess whether criteria can be developed during the progress of the project under consideration. In many instances, failure to develop criteria may be due to infrequent observation of the animals, or critical events may occur at times of the day when personnel are not usually available, thereby precluding detailed observation. Animal care and use protocols that propose the use of moribundity or death as an endpoint must include the following information:

1. The scientific rationale for death or moribundity as an endpoint
2. Considerations of alternative endpoints
3. Why pain/distress relieving medications and/or treatments cannot be utilized
4. Number of animals to be used and why this is the minimum number of animals required
5. Plan that details the parameters to be monitored, the timetable and frequency of monitoring, and the personnel responsible for making recorded observations
6. Whether animals will be euthanized when moribund and, if not, what information is to be gained in the interval between moribundity and death.

There seems no doubt that progress in refining endpoints has only occurred as a result of investigators carefully evaluating their own particular models. It may be that even after careful assessment, no progress is made and animals must be allowed to die if the aims of the study are not to be compromised. Under no circumstances may the use of death as an endpoint be applied simply because it is an unambiguous and easy criterion to apply.