Cited by 390Animal testing and alternativesAnimal Genetics and ReproductionXenotransplantation and immune response

Use of rodents as models of human diseases

Open access
Vandamme, ThierryF·2014·Journal of Pharmacy And Bioallied Sciences

Abstract

Advances in molecular biology have significantly increased the understanding of the biology of different diseases. However, these discoveries have not yet been fully translated into improved treatments for patients with diseases such as cancers. One of the factors limiting the translation of knowledge from preclinical studies to the clinic has been the limitations of in vivo diseases models. In this brief review, we will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of rodent models that have been developed to simulate human pathologies, focusing in models that employ xenografts and genetic modification. Within the framework of genetically engineered mouse (GEM) models, we will review some of the current genetic strategies for modeling diseases in the mouse and the preclinical studies that have already been undertaken. We will also discuss how recent improvements in imaging technologies may increase the information derived from using these GEMs during early assessments of potential therapeutic pathways. Furthermore, it is interesting to note that one of the values of using a mouse model is the very rapid turnover rate of the animal, going through the process of birth to death in a very short timeframe relative to that of larger mammalian species.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4103/0975-7406.124301

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Rodents are valuable for evaluating survival and function of reseeded cells, thrombogenicity, and immunogenicity of the bioengineered liver, and are preferred over large animals because they are easy to breed, maintain, less costly, and ethically acceptable.

    “Rodents are valuable for evaluating the survival and function of reseeded cells, thrombogenicity, and immunogenicity of the bioengineered liver, and are preferred over large animals as they are easy to breed, maintain, less costly, and ethically acceptable [257].”

    From Liver tissue engineering using decellularized scaffolds: Current progress, challenges, and opportunities (2024) · cites this paper as [257]

    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 measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 58 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [42]European Commission. Of mice and men – Are mice relevant models for human disease? Outcomes of the European Commission workshop “Are mice relevant models for human disease?” held in London, UK, on May 2010

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vandamme, T.
Affiliations
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Corresponding author
Vandamme, ThierryF
Venue
Journal of Pharmacy And Bioallied Sciences
Published
2014
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
2
ISSN
0975-7406 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1981333258
Cited by
389
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 49 · 2023: 49 · 2022: 40 · 2021: 50 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 3
FWCI
3.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-sa
Locations
  • Journal of Pharmacy And Bioallied Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal testing and alternatives
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Animal Genetics and Reproduction
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Xenotransplantation and immune response
Keywords
genetically engineered mouse models, xenograft models, genetic modification, preclinical to clinical translation, tumor models, in vivo disease models, imaging modalities

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