In-Life versus Lab-Based Experiments (and the Advantages of Blending Both Approaches)
In the world of medical research, understanding the complexities of how treatments affect living organisms is crucial. This is where in vivo studies come into play, providing insights into how treatments impact whole organisms, helping evaluate side effects, bioavailability, and disease progression. However, these studies are more realistic, but also expensive, time-consuming, and complex [1].
On the other hand, in vitro tests offer a more controlled environment for investigating medical knowledge at a cellular level. These tests are ideal for studying microorganisms, isolated cells, or tissues, and are cost-effective and scalable. They help us understand how tissues respond to certain chemicals or how a disease spreads between cells [2].
One significant application of in vitro tests is in the field of In Vitro Fertilization (IVF), where fertilization occurs outside the body, with resulting embryos implanted in the uterus [3].
The gold standard for understanding the full picture of how a drug or treatment works is a dual approach that combines in vitro and in vivo methods. This approach, from the test tube to the intact organism and finally to human clinical trials, offers a comprehensive understanding of how a drug or treatment interacts with living organisms [4].
Recently, a research cooperation, including the European Center for Dispersion Technology (EZD) in Selb and other partners, conducted a combined application of in vitro and in vivo methods within the project "KoDeKa-Plast." The focus was on automation and high-throughput analysis systems with precise bacterial detection methods to improve hygiene control and public health safety. The results emphasized increased detection accuracy and system innovation, although the in vivo findings were not detailed explicitly [5].
In vitro models are also used for studying disease progression, identifying effective drugs, and testing biological molecules without involving whole organisms [6]. In vivo studies, on the other hand, are necessary for understanding complex interactions that occur only in an intact organism, such as immune responses or drug metabolism [7].
Researchers often integrate both in vitro and in vivo methods, with in vitro tests serving as the foundation and in vivo studies validating results in a natural environment. This integrated approach provides a more holistic understanding of how treatments affect living organisms, paving the way for more effective and safe medical advancements.
References: 1. In vivo studies: essential for evaluating side effects, bioavailability, and disease progression, but are more realistic, expensive, and time-consuming. 2. In vitro tests are useful for investigating medical knowledge at the cellular level, including how tissues respond to certain chemicals or how a disease spreads between cells. 3. In vitro fertilization (IVF) involves fertilization outside the body, with resulting embryos implanted in the uterus. 4. The dual approach of combining in vitro and in vivo methods is the gold standard for understanding the full picture of how a drug or treatment works, from the test tube to the intact organism to human clinical trials. 5. The recent combined application of in vitro and in vivo methods was conducted by a research cooperation including the European Center for Dispersion Technology (EZD) in Selb and other partners within the project "KoDeKa-Plast," focusing on automation and high-throughput analysis systems with precise bacterial detection methods to improve hygiene control and public health safety. 6. In vitro models are used for studying disease progression, identifying effective drugs, and testing biological molecules without involving whole organisms. 7. In vivo studies are necessary for understanding complex interactions that occur only in an intact organism, such as immune responses or drug metabolism.
){kind=link}