ArticleLaboratory animal research2016
Comparison of the response using ICR mice derived from three different sources to ethanol/hydrochloric acid-induced gastric injury.
Article in Laboratory animal research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of intrinsic exercise capacity and response to acute exercise in ICR (Institute of Cancer Research) mice derived from three different lineages.Laboratory animal research · 2021Article
- Comparative analysis of basal locomotor activity-related metabolic phenotypes between C57BL/6 mice and ICR mice substrains derived from three different sources.Laboratory animal research · 2017Article
- Annual tendency of research papers used ICR mice as experimental animals in biomedical research fields.Laboratory animal research · 2017Article
- Comparison of therapeutic responses to an anticancer drug in three stocks of ICR mice derived from three different sources.Laboratory animal research · 2017Article
- Comparison of commonly used ICR stocks and the characterization of Korl:ICR.Laboratory animal research · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Animal models for gastric ulcers produced by physical, pharmacological and surgical methods have been widely employed to evaluate therapeutic drugs and investigate the mechanism of action of this disease. ICR mice were selected to produce this model, even though several mice and rats have been widely used in studies of gastric ulcers. To compare the responses of ICR mice obtained from three different sources to gastric ulcer inducers, alterations in gastric injury, histopathological structure, and inflammation were measured in Korl:ICR (Korea NIFDS source), A:ICR (USA source) and B:ICR (Japan source) treated with three concentrations of ethanol (EtOH) (50, 70, and 90%) in 150 mM hydrochloric acid (HCl) solution. Firstly, the stomach lesion index gradually increased as the EtOH concentration increased in three ICR groups. Moreover, a significant increase in the level of mucosal injury, edema and the number of inflammatory cells was similarly detected in the EtOH/HCl treated group compared with the vehicle treated group in three ICR groups. Furthermore, the number of infiltrated mast cells and IL-1β expression were very similar in the ICR group derived from three different sources, although some differences in IL-1β expression were detected. Especially, the level of IL-1β mRNA in 50 and 90EtOH/HCl treated group was higher in Korl:ICR and A:ICR than B:ICR. Overall, the results of this study suggest that Korl:ICR, A:ICR and B:ICR derived from different sources have an overall similar response to gastric ulcer induced by EtOH/HCl administration, although there were some differences in the magnitude of their responses.
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.