Author Osuchowski, Marcin F. Google Scholar
Remick, Daniel G. Google Scholar
Lederer, James A. Google Scholar
Lang, Charles H. Google Scholar
Aasen, Ansgar O. Google Scholar
Aibiki, Mayuki Google Scholar
Azevedo, Luciano C. Google Scholar
Bahrami, Soheyl Google Scholar
Boros, Mihaly Google Scholar
Cooney, Robert Google Scholar
Cuzzocrea, Salvatore Google Scholar
Jiang, Yong Google Scholar
Junger, Wolfgang G. Google Scholar
Hirasawa, Hiroyuki Google Scholar
Hotchkiss, Richard S. Google Scholar
Li, Xiang-An Google Scholar
Radermacher, Peter Google Scholar
Redl, Heinz Google Scholar
Salomao, Reinaldo Autor UNIFESP Google Scholar
Soebandrio, Amin Google Scholar
Thiemermann, Christoph Google Scholar
Vincent, Jean-Louis Google Scholar
Ward, Peter Google Scholar
Yao, Yong-Ming Google Scholar
Yu, Huang-Ping Google Scholar
Zingarelli, Basilia Google Scholar
Chaudry, Irshad H. Google Scholar
Institution AUVA Res Ctr
Boston Univ
Brigham & Womens Hosp
Harvard Univ
Penn State Coll Med
Oslo Univ Hosp
Ehime Univ
Hosp Sirio Libanes
Univ Szeged
SUNY Upstate Med Univ
Univ Messina
Southern Med Univ Guangzhou
Beth Israel Deaconess Med Ctr
Chiba Univ
Washington Univ
Univ Kentucky
Ulm Med Univ Clin
Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
Univ Indonesia
Queen Mary Univ London
Univ Brussels
Univ Michigan
Chinese Peoples Liberat Army Gen Hosp
Chang Gung Mem Hosp
Cincinnati Childrens Hosp Med Ctr
Univ Alabama Birmingham
Abstract Many preclinical studies in critical care medicine and related disciplines rely on hypothesis-driven research in mice. the underlying premise posits that mice sufficiently emulate numerous pathophysiologic alterations produced by trauma/sepsis and can serve as an experimental platform for answering clinically relevant questions. Recently, the lay press severely criticized the translational relevance of mouse models in critical care medicine. A series of provocative editorials were elicited by a highly publicized research report in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS; February 2013), which identified an unrecognized gene expression profile mismatch between human and murine leukocytes following burn/trauma/endotoxemia. Based on their data, the authors concluded that mouse models of trauma/inflammation are unsuitable for studying corresponding human conditions. We believe this conclusion was not justified. in conjunction with resulting negative commentary in the popular press, it can seriously jeopardize future basic research in critical care medicine. We will address some limitations of that PNAS report to provide a framework for discussing its conclusions and attempt to present a balanced summary of strengths/weaknesses of use of mouse models. While many investigators agree that animal research is a central component for improved patient outcomes, it is important to acknowledge known limitations in clinical translation from mouse to man. the scientific community is responsible to discuss valid limitations without overinterpretation. Hopefully, a balanced view of the strengths/weaknesses of using animals for trauma/endotoxemia/critical care research will not result in hasty discount of the clear need for using animals to advance treatment of critically ill patients.
Keywords Mouse models of critical illness
Language English
Date 2014-06-01
Published in Shock. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, v. 41, n. 6, p. 463-475, 2014.
ISSN 1073-2322 (Sherpa/Romeo, impact factor)
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Extent 463-475
Origin http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/SHK.0000000000000153
Access rights Open access Open Access
Type Article
Web of Science ID WOS:000336217900002
URI http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/37793

Show full item record


File Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)




My Account