Cited by 46Animal testing and alternativesBiomedical Ethics and RegulationHealthcare Regulation

FDA Modernization Act 2.0 Paves the Way to Computational Biology and Clinical Trials in a Dish

Open access
Ahmed, Syed Mukhtar, Shivnaraine, Rabindra V., Wu, Joseph C.·2023·Circulation

Abstract

The evaluation of drug safety and efficacy is an expensive, time-consuming process with a high failure rate.Animal testing was the only non-human testing method to assess drug safety and efficacy before clinical trials for nearly a century.The tragic incidents of mass poisoning that occurred when sulfanilamide was formulated into an elixir spurred the enactment in 1938 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act that mandated all drugs must be tested for toxicity in animals and truthfully labeled 1 .In 1961, following the thalidomide disaster in other countries, the FDA enforced its own requirement for clinical trials and the need for preclinical validations of toxicity in animal studies.Since then, drug testing in animals has been the only standard recognized by the FDA before drugs are approved for human subject clinical trials.Following these guidelines, the success rate over the last 25 years of all drugs that entered Phase I clinical trials to reach FDA approval is only 9.6% 2 .Implicit in this failure rate is the inherent poor correlation between animal efficacy and toxicity data and how that adversely affected the success of drug approval in humans.This high failure rate necessitates the need for alternate methods to be instituted as part of the FDA approval process for clinical trials.On September 29, 2022, the U.S. Senate unanimously passed Bill S. 5002, which was subsequently approved by the U.S. House on December 23, 2022, giving rise to what is known as the "FDA Modernization Act 2.0".This landmark act is an attempt to update the 1938 mandate by allowing regulators to consider using new approach methods (NAMs) as a legitimate option to establish drug safety and efficacy instead of using animals.This bill allows the FDA to consider information other than animal studies, shining a spotlight on significant advancements in biology and technology over the past several decades.Some of these include cell-based approaches, such as human induced pluripotent

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/circulationaha.123.065585

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • This focus aligns with broader regulatory developments, as reflected in the FDA Modernization Act 2.0 and 3.0, which promote the adoption of Organ-On-Chip (OOC) platforms and other New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) as alternatives to traditional animal testing.

    “This focus aligns with broader regulatory developments, as reflected in the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Modernization Act 2.0 and 3.0, which promote the adoption of Organ-On-Chip (OOC) platforms and other New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) as alternatives to traditional animal testing (Carratt et al., 2024; Zushin et al., 2023; Ahmed et al., 2023).”

    From Mini-hearts for disease modeling and drug testing – process optimization versus biological functionality (2026) · cites this paper as Ahmed et al., 2023

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The FDA Modernization Act 2.0 ends the long-standing animal mandate and promotes the use of validated in vitro human alternatives for next-generation drug development.

    “Indeed, the recently passed FDA Modernization Act 2.0 ends the long-standing animal mandate and promotes the use of validated in vitro human alternatives for next-generation drug development.21”

    From Reversal of contractile defects by mediating calcium homeostasis in human mini-heart models of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) leads to first-in-human gene therapy clinical trial (2024) · cites this paper as [21]

    In the paper’s discussion of the FDA Modernization Act 2.0 (page not specified), the authors say the act updates the animal-testing mandate by allowing regulators to consider alternatives, including human cell-based methods. The passage supports the shift toward in vitro methods for drug development, but does not say those alternatives have been validated. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ahmed, S. M., Shivnaraine, R. V., & Wu, J. C.
Affiliations
  • Stanford Cardiovascular Institute (US)
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
Venue
Circulation
Published
2023-07-25
Volume
148
Issue
4
Pages
309-311
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W4385216125
Cited by
46
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 3
FWCI
14.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Circulation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R44HL170756)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal testing and alternatives
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Biomedical Ethics and Regulation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Regulation
Keywords
new approach methodologies, alternatives to animal testing, drug safety assessment, computational biology, human induced pluripotent stem cells, drug approval, Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review