Generally no. They will usually go with whatever route is expected to be used for the final drug. That depends on things like oral bioavailability (if you swallow it, does it actually reach the bloodstream), and is it most likely to be used in a hospital setting or by patients themselves. Generally, oral is preferred where possible, because it has higher patient compliance levels, but if that’s not suitable (you need something shorter or longer lasting, say, or it breaks down in the gut to something useless), you’d probably do some in vitro and in vivo DMPK to figure out what route would be better. Early DMPK testing will give an idea on which route is to be used. Thereafter, the testing is done by that particular route, plus some IV injections here and there for Pharmacokinetic comparisons.

It is being more and more discouraged in the EU and UK to use NHPs. In preclinical pharma research in the UK, you now have to provide justification for why you can’t use another non-rodent species in order to use them. Dogs are also starting to go the same way in the UK (you now need to prove you can’t use pigs), in large part due to the recent uptick in protests relating to “camp beagle”.