AccScience Publishing / IJB / Online First / DOI: 10.36922/IJB026230239
Cite this article
1
Download
25
Views
Related Info Links
Journal Browser
Volume | Year
Issue
Search
News and Announcements
View All
PERSPECTIVE ARTICLE
Early Access

New approach methodologies (NAMs): The enabling role of bioprinting

Christoph Meinert1,2 Silvia Cometta3,4 Peter Levett1 Jacqui McGovern2,3,5,6,7 Terrance Thiel8 Anjali Jaiprakash1,9 Ross Burdis10 Travis Klein2,3,4,7 Gail Risbridger7,11,12,13,14 Molly M. Stevens10,15* Dietmar W. Hutmacher3,4,5,7,16*
Show Less
1 Gelomics Pty Ltd, 60 Musk Avenue, Kelvin Grove, Queensland 4059 , Australia
2 Centre for Biomedical Technologies, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, Queensland , Australia
3 Max Planck Queensland Centre for the Materials Science of Extracellular Matrices, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland , Australia
4 School of Mechanical, Medical and Process Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, Queensland , Australia
5 School of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, Queensland , Australia
6 Translational Research Institute (TRI), Woolloongabba, Queensland , Australia
7 ARC Training Centre for Cell and Tissue Engineering Technologies, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, Queensland , Australia
8 TMT Consulting Australia, Umina Beach, NSW 2257 , Australia
9 Faculty of Engineering, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland , Australia
10 Department of Materials, Department of Bioengineering, Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Imperial College London, London, SW7 2AZ , United Kingdom
11 Melbourne Urological Research Alliance, Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria , Australia
12 Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria , Australia
13 Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Victoria , Australia
14 Cabrini Institute, Cabrini Health, Malvern, Victoria , Australia
15 Department of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics, Department of Engineering Science, Kavli Institute for Nanoscience Discovery, University of Oxford, Oxford , United Kingdom
16 Australian Research Council (ARC) Training Centre for Multiscale 3D Imaging, Modelling, and Manufacturing (M3D Innovation), Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland , Australia
Received: 5 June 2026 | Revised: 1 September 2026 | Accepted: 4 September 2026 | Published online: 4 September 2026
© 2026 by the Author(s). This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ )
Abstract

Animal-based preclinical testing is increasingly misaligned with the biological and regulatory demands of modern drug development. Persistent failure of drug candidates underscores the limitations of using animal models for human drug development. In oncology and neurodegeneration, where disease mechanisms and therapeutic responses are largely human-specific, clinical success remains low despite decades of refinement of rodent and xenograft models. Meanwhile, the regulatory framework for human-relevant New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) has become significantly more defined. In addition to the U. S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Modernization Act 2.0 and 3.0 and the FDA's 2025 roadmap, the FDA has issued draft guidance on the general use of NAMs in drug development and on streamlined nonclinical programmes for monoclonal antibodies, while the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) have each signalled more formal entry points for non-animal data. Here, we synthesise the emerging NAM ecosystem - engineered 3D cultures, patient-derived organoids, microphysiological systems (organ-on-a-chip), bioprinting, and AI-enabled in silico modelling - and evaluate each platform's position within the drug development pipeline. We argue that bioprinting should be viewed not as a standalone model class but as an enabling biofabrication strategy that can improve the reproducibility, architectural control, and manufacturability of organoids and organ-on-chip systems. Critically, we frame adoption as an engineering-regulatory translation problem: scalable manufacturing, assay robustness, defined biomaterials, and cross-site reproducibility must advance in parallel with biological fidelity. We propose a practical readiness framework and a tiered deployment strategy that enable immediate reductions in animal use in high-impact domains, notably safety testing and oncology triage, while building toward replacing more complex and longitudinal endpoints through integrated multi-organ and computational approaches.

Share
Back to top
International Journal of Bioprinting, Electronic ISSN: 2424-8002 Print ISSN: 2424-7723, Published by AccScience Publishing