A patient advocating for transparent science in rare disease research

Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2023 Jan 19;18(1):14. doi: 10.1186/s13023-022-02557-6.

Abstract

300 million people live with at least one of 6,000 rare diseases worldwide. However, rare disease research is not always reviewed with scrutiny, making it susceptible to what the author refers to as nontransparent science. Nontransparent science can obscure animal model flaws, misguide medicine regulators and drug developers, delay or frustrate orphan drug development, or waste limited resources for rare disease research. Flawed animal models not only lack pharmacologic relevance, but also give rise to issue of clinical translatability. Sadly, these consequences and risks are grossly overlooked. Nontransparency in science can take many forms, such as premature publication of animal models without clinically significant data, not providing corrections when flaws to the model are discovered, lack of warning of critical study limitations, missing critical control data, questionable data quality, surprising results without a sound explanation, failure to rule out potential factors which may affect study conclusions, lack of sufficient detail for others to replicate the study, dubious authorship and study accountability. Science has no boarders, neither does nontransparent science. Nontransparent science can happen irrespective of the researcher's senority, institutional affiliation or country. As a patient-turned researcher suffering from Bietti crystalline dystrophy (BCD), I use BCD as an example to analyze various forms of nontransparent science in rare disease research. This article analyzes three papers published by different research groups on Cyp4v3-/-, high-fat diet (HFD)-Cyp4v3-/-, and Exon1-Cyp4v3-/- mouse models of BCD. As the discussion probes various forms of nontransparent science, the flaws of these knockout mouse models are uncovered. These mouse models do not mimic BCD in humans nor do they address the lack of Cyp4v3 (murine ortholog of human CYP4V2) expression in wild type (WT) mouse retina which is markedly different from CYP4V2 expression in human retina. Further, this article discusses the impact of nontransparent science on drug development which can lead to significant delays ultimately affecting the patients. Lessons from BCD research can be helpful to all those suffering from rare diseases. As a patient, I call for transparent science in rare disease research.

Keywords: Animal model flaws; Bietti Crystalline Dystrophy; Cyp4v3 knockout mouse; Genetic background; Interspecies differences; Orphan Drug Development; Patient perspective; Rare Disease Research; Transparent science.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Animals
  • Biomedical Research* / standards
  • Cytochrome P450 Family 4 / genetics
  • Cytochrome P450 Family 4 / metabolism
  • DNA Mutational Analysis
  • Humans
  • Mice
  • Mutation
  • Pedigree
  • Rare Diseases*

Substances

  • Cytochrome P450 Family 4

Supplementary concepts

  • Bietti Crystalline Dystrophy