Chat with us, powered by LiveChat UK NAMs | Lhasa Limited

UK NAMs

UK Replacing Animals in Science Strategy

UK NAMs

How to align with the UK’s replacing animals in science strategy, launched November 2025, and navigate the shift to predictive toxicology and data-driven safety.

UK release a funded roadmap and 'replace animals in science strategy' which requires immediate action from pharmaceutical organisations globally, November 2025

NAMs Updates

Navigate the NAMs landscape
with expert knowledge, and credible solutions using Lhasa Limited.

Stay connected with organisations tackling
the same landscape challenges as you.

Sign up to be the first to receive exclusive NAMs updates from Lhasa:

Stay in the know

The challenge you're facing

The UK Government’s “Replacing Animals in Science” strategy marks a structural shift for life sciences. Backed by significant national funding, the strategy moves the UK beyond simple assay replacements and instead targets a systemic transition toward predictive toxicology, AI pipelines, multi-organ human models, and data-sharing frameworks.

What do you need to do?

You will need to know how to leverage expansive data and predictive computational models to prove safety for diverse endpoints across the drug discovery pipeline and deploy in a timeframe that derisks regulatory submissions.

The UK Roadmap now demands that organisations integrate multiple evidence streams into predictive safety assessments.

Meet UK NAMs requirements in three steps​:

Predict

1. Build in silico workflows

Identify potential safety risks before experimental testing using modern in silico approaches.

QSAR

Predictive toxicology is becoming a core capability for modern safety assessment. (Q)SAR helps identify potential hazards earlier in development, enabling more informed decisions before experimental studies are undertaken.

Mechanistic integration

The UK roadmap places greater emphasis on understanding why adverse effects occur. Integrating mechanistic evidence strengthens confidence in predictions and helps build more robust, human-relevant safety assessments.

Read across

With predictive toxicology comes read-across, which enables organisations to infer the safety of new compounds using scientifically justified similarities, supporting earlier hazard identification while reducing the need for experimental testing.

Leverage

2. Use existing evidence first

Start every safety assessment by leveraging existing data before generating new experimental evidence.

Datasets

The UK roadmap encourages organisations to treat existing knowledge as the starting point for safety assessment. Making better use of available data can reduce duplication, accelerate decision-making and improve confidence in outcomes.

Weight of evidence / Context of use

Future safety assessments will increasingly rely on combining multiple evidence sources rather than a single test result. Understanding how to build and justify integrated evidence packages is becoming a core regulatory capability.

Data integration & collaboration

The ability to connect data across systems, organisations and disciplines is becoming essential for modern safety science. Better integration enables more informed decisions and supports the adoption of predictive, evidence-led workflows.

Characterise

3. Advance analytical safety protocols

Build deeper analytical insight across compounds, impurities and degradation mechanisms to influence safety.

Impurity control

Organisations need faster and more effective ways to understand impurities and their potential impact on patient safety. Strengthening impurity assessment supports more informed risk management throughout development.

High throughput

Modern analytical workflows need to generate more information in less time. High-throughput approaches help organisations evaluate compounds more efficiently while supporting the transition to more predictive safety assessments.

Product characterisation

A deeper understanding of compounds, degradation pathways and product quality is becoming increasingly important as regulators encourage more mechanistic, science-led approaches to safety assessment.

Regulatory Requirements

Mechanistic Human Relevance:
Expectations from the MHRA

The MHRA is encouraging and supporting the use of mechanistically informed, human-relevant evidence. Their focus on mechanistic human relevance reflects the landscape transition away from relying solely on traditional animal models. 

Organisations that can explain why an adverse effect occurs, demonstrate its relevance to human biology and integrate multiple evidence sources, will be better positioned to meet the evolving NAMs requirements now and in the next 10 years. 

Mechanistic human relevance isn’t achieved through a single technology—it’s built by combining three core capabilities: predict, leverage, characterise. 

Meeting MHRA guidance:

Combine computational, experimental and existing evidence using Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessment (IATA) and Weight of Evidence principles.

Define the boundaries of your non-animal methods and establish human relevance by mapping to Adverse Outcome Pathways (AOPs) under the rationale for clear Context of Use.

Present your predictive, human-relevant data structure before formal submission to align regulatory expectations early and removes bottlenecks from your approval timelines.

The MHRA’s vision puts mechanistic human relevance at the centre of modern safety assessments. Rather than relying on a single test or model, pharmaceutical organisations are expected to build integrated, scientifically justified evidence packages.

Offshoring & Global Readiness

Securing regulatory acceptance
across the EU & US supply chains

The UK is not evolving in isolation. Regulatory agencies across Europe and the United States are increasingly recognising the value of predictive, human-relevant safety assessment. Discover the EU Roadmap and US Strategy. 

As the MHRA, FDA and EMA continue to advance the use of New Approach Methodologies (NAMs), organisations should develop safety strategies that are adaptable across multiple regulatory jurisdictions. 

By integrating chemical databases, computational modelling and mechanistic human biology into a single evidence package, organisations can build submissions which align closely with regulatory expectations across global development programmes.

Navigating global supply:

A well-integrated evidence package is easier to adapt across different regulatory jurisdictions than isolated datasets.

A clearly articulated Context of Use improves confidence during regulatory review.

Internationally accepted methodologies are more likely to support global development programmes.

The organisations that will benefit most from the transition to NAMs are likely to be those that build globally reusable, mechanistically informed evidence packages that can support regulatory decision-making across multiple jurisdictions, rather than those that simply replace animal tests.