Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26954670›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

The mdx Mutation in the 129/Sv Background Results in a Milder Phenotype: Transcriptome Comparative Analysis Searching for the Protective Factors.

Priscila Clara Calyjur, Camila de Freitas Almeida, Danielle Ayub-Guerrieri, Antonio Fernando Ribeiro, Stephanie de Alcântara Fernandes, Renata Ishiba, Andre Luis Fernandes Dos Santos, Paula Onofre-Oliveira, Mariz Vainzof

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Skeletal muscle stem cells in comfort and stress.NPJ Regenerative medicine · 2018
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Outside in: The matrix as a modifier of muscular dystrophy.Biochimica et biophysica acta. Molecular cell research · 2017
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Priscila Clara CalyjurLaboratory of Muscle Proteins and Comparative Histopathology, Human Genome and Stem-cell Research Center, Biosciences Institute, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Camila de Freitas AlmeidaLaboratory of Muscle Proteins and Comparative Histopathology, Human Genome and Stem-cell Research Center, Biosciences Institute, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Danielle Ayub-GuerrieriLaboratory of Muscle Proteins and Comparative Histopathology, Human Genome and Stem-cell Research Center, Biosciences Institute, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Antonio Fernando RibeiroLaboratory of Muscle Proteins and Comparative Histopathology, Human Genome and Stem-cell Research Center, Biosciences Institute, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Stephanie de Alcântara FernandesLaboratory of Muscle Proteins and Comparative Histopathology, Human Genome and Stem-cell Research Center, Biosciences Institute, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Renata IshibaLaboratory of Muscle Proteins and Comparative Histopathology, Human Genome and Stem-cell Research Center, Biosciences Institute, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Andre Luis Fernandes Dos SantosLaboratory of Muscle Proteins and Comparative Histopathology, Human Genome and Stem-cell Research Center, Biosciences Institute, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Paula Onofre-OliveiraLaboratory of Muscle Proteins and Comparative Histopathology, Human Genome and Stem-cell Research Center, Biosciences Institute, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Mariz VainzofLaboratory of Muscle Proteins and Comparative Histopathology, Human Genome and Stem-cell Research Center, Biosciences Institute, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Universidade de São Paulo · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The mdx mouse is a good genetic and molecular murine model for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD), a progressive and devastating muscle disease. However, this model is inappropriate for testing new therapies due to its mild phenotype. Here, we transferred the mdx mutation to the 129/Sv strain with the aim to create a more severe model for DMD. Unexpectedly, functional analysis of the first three generations of mdx129 showed a progressive amelioration of the phenotype, associated to less connective tissue replacement, and more regeneration than the original mdxC57BL. Transcriptome comparative analysis was performed to identify what is protecting this new model from the dystrophic characteristics. The mdxC57BL presents three times more differentially expressed genes (DEGs) than the mdx129 (371 and 137 DEGs respectively). However, both models present more overexpressed genes than underexpressed, indicating that the dystrophic and regenerative alterations are associated with the activation rather than repression of genes. As to functional categories, the DEGs of both mdx models showed a predominance of immune system genes. Excluding this category, the mdx129 model showed a decreased participation of the endo/exocytic pathway and homeostasis categories, and an increased participation of the extracellular matrix and enzymatic activity categories. Spp1 gene overexpression was the most significant DEG exclusively expressed in the mdx129 strain. This was confirmed through relative mRNA analysis and osteopontin protein quantification. The amount of the 66 kDa band of the protein, representing the post-translational product of the gene, was about 4,8 times higher on western blotting. Spp1 is a known DMD prognostic biomarker, and our data indicate that its upregulation can benefit phenotype. Modeling the expression of the DEGs involved in the mdx mutation with a benign course should be tested as a possible therapeutic target for the dystrophic process.

Indexed as

Mice, 129 StrainMice, Inbred mdxMutationPhenotypeAnimalsDisease Models, AnimalFemaleGene Expression ProfilingMaleMiceMuscle, SkeletalMuscular Dystrophy, DuchenneProtective FactorsTranscriptome

Identifiers

PMID26954670
PMCPMC4783004
OpenAlexW2301316655

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.