Implementation of the 3Rs Concept in Quality Control of Biologicals: Status and Prospects (Review)

INTRODUCTION. Many countries are implementing an increasing number of alternatives to animal testing in the research, development, and quality control of medicines under the concept of 3Rs (replacement, reduction, and refinement). However, the implementation of in vitro alternatives to in vivo methods into batch release testing of biologicals, primarily vaccines, is a challenging process. The introduction of the 3Rs principles into regulatory and industry standards requires a comprehensive analysis, including, among other things, a study of specific considerations for national frameworks.
AIM. This study aimed to analyse the degree of global integration of the 3Rs principles in the quality control of biological medicinal products and to assess existing challenges and opportunities for a successful transition to non-animal quality control methods in the Russian Federation.
DISCUSSION. The key advantages of in vitro biological methods over in vivo approaches for quality control of medicinal products include reduced variability, higher specificity, and shorter testing timelines. Analysis of assessments by regulatory authorities and pharmaceutical manufacturers regarding the opportunities and challenges in implementing the 3Rs principles has identified the following main arguments for replacing in vivo methods: ethical considerations, relevance of reducing testing time, decreased variability. The integration of in vitro methods is hindered by insufficient information on alternative approaches and the lack of harmonised regulatory frameworks for adopting 3Rs principles. For instance, the European Pharmacopoeia has eliminated all general safety testing of biological medicinal products in animals as part of its 3Rs implementation. Furthermore, the World Health Organization has developed guidelines for the phased discontinuation of animal testing in the quality control of biological products.
CONCLUSIONS. The main challenges associated with 3Rs implementation include the difficulty of confirming the in vitro – in vivo correlation (particularly, by comparing in vivo and in vitro methods), the lack of regulatory harmonisation, and the insufficient regulatory support for manufacturers in adopting alternative methods. The international harmonisation of regulatory requirements is necessary to effectively address these issues and successfully implement the 3Rs principles in the quality control procedures for biologicals released in different countries, including the Russian Federation.

1. Poh WT, Stanslas J. The new paradigm in animal testing — “3Rs alternatives”. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2024;153:105705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yrtph.2024.105705

2. Russell WMS, Burch RL, Hume CW. The principles of humane experimental technique. London: Methuen & Co Ltd.; 1959.

3. Tannenbaum J, Bennett BT. Russell and Burch’s 3Rs then and now: The need for clarity in definition and purpose. J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci. 2015;54(2):120–32. PMID: 25836957

4. Halder M. Three Rs potential in the development and quality control of immunobiologicals. ALTEX. 2001;18(Suppl.1):13–47. PMID: 11854853

5. Grimm H, Biller-Andorno N, Buch T, Dahlhoff M, Davies G, Cederroth CR, et al. Advancing the 3Rs: Innovation, implementation, ethics and society. Front Vet Sci. 2023;10:1185706. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2023.1185706

6. Hoefnagel MHN, Stickings P, Smith D, Jungbäck C, Van Molle W, Tesolin L. Rational arguments for regulatory acceptance of consistency testing: Benefits of non-animal testing over in vivo release testing of vaccines. Expert Rev Vaccine. 2023;22(1):369–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/14760584.2023.2198601

7. Schutte K, Szczepanska A, Halder M, Cussler K, Sauer UG, Stirling C, et al. Modern science for better quality control of medicinal products “Towards global harmonization of 3Rs in biologicals”: The report of an EPAA workshop. Biologicals. 2017;48:55–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2017.05.006

8. Uhlrich S, Coppens E, Moysan F, Nelson S, Nougarede N. 3Rs in quality control of human vaccines: Opportunities and barriers. In: Kojima H, Seidle T, Spielmann H. Alternatives to animal testing: Proceedings of Asian Congress. Springer Singapore; 2019. P. 76–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2447-5_10

9. Bruysters MW, Schiffelers MJ, Hoonakker M, Jungbaeck C, Ragan I, Rommel E, et al. Drivers and barriers in the consistency approach for vaccine batch release testing: Report of an international workshop. Biologicals. 2017;48:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2017.06.006

10. Akkermans A, Chapsal JM, Coccia EM, Depraetere H, Dierick J-F, Duangkhae P, et al. Animal testing for vaccines. Implementing replacement, reduction and refinement: Challenges and priorities. Biologicals. 2020;68:92–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2020.07.010

11. van den Biggelaar RH, Hoefnagel MH, Vandebriel RJ, Sloots A, Hendriksen CF, van Eden W, et al. Overcoming scientific barriers in the transition from in vivo to non-animal batch testing of human and veterinary vaccines. Expert Rev Vaccines. 2021;20(10):1221–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/14760584.2021.1977628

12. Hendriksen CF, Garthoff B, Aggerbeck H, Bruckner L, Castle P, Cussler K, et al. Alternatives to animal testing in the quality control of immunobiologicals: Current status and future prospects. The report and recommendations of ECVAM Workshop 4. Altern Lab Anim. 1994;22(6):420–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/026119299402200606

13. Ohno Y. ICH guidelines — implementation of the 3Rs (refinement, reduction, and replacement): Incorporating best scientific practices into the regulatory process. ILAR J. 2002;43(Suppl):95–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar.43.suppl_1.s95

14. Beken S, Kasper P, van der Laan JW. Regulatory acceptance of alternative methods in the development and approval of pharmaceuticals. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2016;856:33–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33826-2_3

15. Lilley E, Isbrucker R, Ragan I, Holmes A. Integrating 3Rs approaches in WHO guidelines for the batch release testing of biological. Biologicals. 2021;74:24–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2021.10.002

16. Zhang X, Wu X, He Q, Wang J, Mao Q, Liang Zh, Xu M. Research progress on substitution of in vivo method(s) by in vitro method(s) for human vaccine potency assays. Expert Rev Vaccines. 2023;22(1):270–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/14760584.2023.2178421

17. Stalpers CA, Retmana IA, Pennings JL, Vandebriel RJ, Hendriksen CF, Akkermans AM, Hoefnagel MH. Variability of in vivo potency tests of Diphtheria, Tetanus and acellular Pertussis (DTaP) vaccines. Vaccine. 2021;39(18):2506–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.03.078

18. Stalpers CA, Retmana IA, Pennings JL, Vandebriel RJ, Hendriksen CF, Akkermans AM, Hoefnagel MH. Corrigendum to “Variability of in vivo p otency t ests o f D iphtheria, Tetanus a nd a cellular P ertussis (DTaP) vaccines” [Vaccine. 2021;39(18):2506–16]. Vaccine. 2022;40(23):3272–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.04.047

19. Chabaud-Riou M, Moreno N, Guinchard F, Nicolai MC, Niogret-Siohan E, Sève N, et al. G-protein based ELISA as a potency test for rabies vaccines. Biologicals. 2017;46:124–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2017.02.002

20. Gombold J, Karakasidis St, Niksa P, Podczasy J, Neumann K, Richardson J, et al. Systematic evaluation of in vitro and in vivo adventitious virus assays for the detection of viral contamination of cell banks and biological products. Vaccine. 2014;32(24):2916–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.02.021

21. Charlebois RL, Sathiamoorthy S, Logvinoff C, Gisonni-Lex L, Mallet L, Ng SH. Sensitivity and breadth of detection of high-throughput sequencing for adventitious virus detection. NPJ Vaccines. 2020;5(1):61. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41541-020-0207-4

22. Barone PW, Keumurian FJ, Neufeld C, Koenigsberg A, Kiss R, Leung J, et al. Historical evaluation of the in vivo adventitious virus test and its potential for replacement with next generation sequencing (NGS). Biologicals. 2023;81:101661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2022.11.003

23. Lilley E, Bruysters M, Das P, Gill S, Isbrucker R, Jones D, Holmes A. Integrating 3Rs approaches in WHO guidelines for the batch release testing of biologicals: Responses from a survey of National Control Laboratories and National Regulatory Authorities. Biologicals. 2023;84:101721. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2023.101721

24. Lilley E, Coppens E, Das P, Galaway F, Isbrucker R, Sheridan S, et al. Integrating 3Rs approaches in WHO guidelines for the batch release testing of biologicals: Responses from a survey of vaccines and biological therapeutics manufacturers. Biologicals. 2023;81:101660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2022.11.002

25. Viviani L, Halder M, Gruber M, Bruckner L, Cussler K, Sanyal G, et al. Global harmonization of vaccine testing requirements: Making elimination of the ATT and TABST a concrete global achievement. Biologicals. 2020;63:101–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2019.10.007

26. Stirling C. Consistency as tool to support in vitro batch potency testing in GMP production. Dev Biol (Basel). 2012;134:115–8. PMID: 22888603

27. De Mattia F, Chapsal JM, Descamps J, Halder M, Jarrett N, Kross I, et al. The consistency approach for quality control of vaccines — a strategy to improve quality control and implement 3Rs. Biologicals. 2011;39(1):59–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2010.12.001

28. Lilley E, Isbrucker R, Holmes A. Integrating 3Rs approaches in WHO guidelines for the batch release testing of biologicals: Reports from a series of NC3Rs stakeholder workshops. Biologicals. 2025;89:101777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2024.101777

29. Lilley E, Isbrucker R, Holmes A. Integrating 3Rs approaches in WHO guidelines for the batch release testing of biologicals: Summary of NC3Rs final report to WHO Expert Committee for Biological Standardisation. Biologicals. 2025;89:101778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2024.101778

30. Lei D, Schmidt H, Knezevic I, Zhou T, Kang HN, Kopp S. Removal of the innocuity test from The International Pharmacopoeia and WHO recommendations for vaccines and biological products. Biologicals. 2020;66:17–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2020.05.003

31. Lang C, Kolaj-Robin O, Cirefice G, Taconet L, Pel E, Jouette S, Charton E. Replacement, Reduction, Refinement — Animal welfare progress in European Pharmacopoeia monographs: Activities of the European Pharmacopoeia Commission from 2007 to 2017. Pharmeur Bio Sci Notes. 2018;2018:12–36. PMID: 29845933

32. Viviani L, Reid K, Gastineau T, Milne C, Smith D, Levis R, et al. Accelerating Global Deletion of the Abnormal Toxicity Test for vaccines and biologicals. Planning common next steps. A workshop Report. Biologicals. 2022;78:17–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biologicals.2022.06.003

33. Bratos M, Kolaj-Robin O, Antoni M, Charton E. Ph. Eur. testing for histamine and depressor substances using guinea-pigs and cats: The end of an era. Strategy for removal of animal tests for histamine and depressor substances and their vestiges from the Ph. Eur. Pharmeur Bio Sci Notes. 2024;2024:12–26. PMID: 38533690

34. Bayne K, Turner PV. Animal welfare standards and international collaborations. ILAR J. 2019;60(1):86–94. https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar/ily024