Preclinical models of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease
Open accessAbstract
Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) can manifest as non-alcoholic fatty liver (NAFL) or non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). NASH is often associated with progressive fibrosis which can lead to cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). NASH is increasing as an aetiology for end-stage liver disease as well as HCC. There are currently no approved therapies for NASH. A major barrier to development of therapeutics for NASH is the lack of preclinical models of disease that are appropriately validated to represent the biology and outcomes of human disease. Many in vitro and animal models have been developed. In vitro models do not fully capture the hepatic and extrahepatic milieu of human NASH and large animal models are expensive and logistically difficult to use. Therefore, there is considerable interest in the development and validation of mouse models for NAFLD, including NASH. Several models based on varying genetic or dietary manipulations have been developed. However, the majority do not recreate steatohepatitis, strictly defined as the presence of hepatocellular ballooning with or without Mallory-Denk bodies, accompanied by inflammation in the presence of macrovesicular steatosis. Others lack validation against human disease. Herein, we describe the best practices in development of mouse models of NASH. We further review existing models and the literature supporting their use as a surrogate for human disease. Finally, data on models to evaluate protective genes are discussed. It is hoped that this review will provide guidance for the interpretation of data derived from mouse models and also for the development and validation of newer models.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Induction of MASLD in vitro using FFAs leads to pronounced and quantitatively measurable lipid accumulation in cell lines within 24-72 h, contrasting with animal models where HFD induces steatosis in 8-16 weeks, steatohepatitis in 16-36 weeks, and fibrosis/cirrhosis in 24-52 weeks or more.
“Induction of MASLD in vitro using free fatty acids leads to a pronounced and quantitatively measurable accumulation of lipids in cell lines within 24–72 h [29].”
From The HepG2 Cell Line as a Model for Studying Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease (2026) · cites this paper as [24]
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 1 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredBulk RNA-seq liver gene signatures from whole liver, isolated hepatocytes, non-parenchymal cells, or plasma correlate with disease features and sometimes predict transition from MASLD to MASH.
“Through the use of bulk RNA-seq, liver gene signatures were derived from whole liver, isolated hepatocytes, isolated non-parenchymal cells, or plasma that correlated with various disease features and, in some cases, predicted the transition from MASLD to MASH (44, 116-122).”
From Found in translation—Fibrosis in metabolic dysfunction–associated steatohepatitis (MASH) (2023) · cites this paper as [118]
Rodent models of MASH comprise three broad categories: diet-based, genetic, and mixed.
“Rodent models of MASH have been extensively reviewed and comprise 3 broad categories: 1) diet-based; 2) genetic; or 3) mixed, which refers to combined diet, genetic, or chemical perturbations (118, 210-213).”
From Found in translation—Fibrosis in metabolic dysfunction–associated steatohepatitis (MASH) (2023) · cites this paper as [118]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 73 · Cited by 380
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [56]Lau JK Zhang X Yu J Animal models of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: current perspectives and recent advances J Pathol 2017 1 241 1 36 44 27757953 PMC5215469
- Authors
- Santhekadur, P. K., Kumar, D. P., & Sanyal, A. J.
- Affiliations
- Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Sanyal, Arun J.
- Venue
- Journal of Hepatology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-02
- Volume
- 68
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 230-237
- ISSN
- 0168-8278 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5775040
- OpenAlex
- W2767233119
- Cited by
- 380
- References
- 73
- Citations by year
- 2026: 28 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 54 · 2022: 72 · 2021: 43 · 2020: 44 · 2019: 42 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 4.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Journal of Hepatology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (RO1 DK081450, T3207150-40)
- Gilead Sciences
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Liver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Hepatology › Liver physiology and pathology
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diet, Metabolism, and Disease
- Keywords
- non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, mouse model, preclinical models, model validation, hepatocyte ballooning, Mallory-Denk bodies, liver fibrosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, protective genes
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Disease Models, Animal, Drug Evaluation, Preclinical, Humans, Disease Progression, Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review