ReviewTransgenic research2005
Studying human pathogens in animal models: fine tuning the humanized mouse.
Review in Transgenic research, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vaxar: A Web-Based Database of Laboratory Animal Responses to Vaccinations and Its Application in the Meta-Analysis of Different Animal Responses to Tuberculosis Vaccinations.Comparative medicine · 2016Article
- Strategies for Human Tumor Virus Discoveries: From Microscopic Observation to Digital Transcriptome Subtraction.Frontiers in microbiology · 2016Review
- Barriers of hepatitis C virus interspecies transmission.Virology · 2013Review
- Towards a small animal model for hepatitis C.EMBO reports · 2009Review
- Human coronaviruses 229E and NL63: close yet still so far.Journal of the Formosan Medical Association = Taiwan yi zhi · 2009Review
- Animal models: an important tool in mycology.Medical mycology · 2007Review
- Influenza virus mRNA translation revisited: is the eIF4E cap-binding factor required for viral mRNA translation?Journal of virology · 2007Article
- Virus discovery by sequence-independent genome amplification.Reviews in medical virologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Humanized mice are crucial tools for studying human pathogens in systemic situations. An animal model of human coronavirus infectious disease has been generated by gene transfer of the human receptor for virus-cell interaction (aminopeptidase N, APN, CD13) into mice. We showed that in vitro and in vivo infections across the species barrier differ in their requirements. Transgenic cells were susceptible to human coronavirus HCoV-229E infection demonstrating the requirement of hAPN for viral cell entry. Transgenic mice, however, could not be infected suggesting additional requirements for in vivo virus susceptibility. Crossing hAPN transgenic mice with interferon unresponsive Stat1(-/- )mice resulted in markedly enhanced virus replication in vitro but did not result in detectable virus replication in vivo. Adaptation of the human virus to murine cells led to successful infection of the humanized transgenic mice. Future genetic engineering approaches are suggested to provide animal models for the better understanding of human infectious diseases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.