ArticleEndocrinology2021
The Luteinizing Hormone Receptor Knockout Mouse as a Tool to Probe the In Vivo Actions of Gonadotropic Hormones/Receptors in Females.
Article in Endocrinology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Conditional replacement of the mouse luteinizing hormone receptor with green fluorescent protein, enabling imaging of cell migration during ovulation.Endocrinology · 2026Article
- Conditional replacement of the mouse LH receptor with GFP, enabling imaging of cell migration during ovulation.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Review
- Pharmacogenomic of LH and its receptor: are we ready for clinical practice?Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2025Review
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 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Mouse models with altered gonadotropin functions have provided invaluable insight into the functions of these hormones/receptors. Here we describe the repurposing of the infertile and hypogonadal luteinizing hormone receptor (LHR) knockout mouse model (LuRKO), to address outstanding questions in reproductive physiology. Using crossbreeding strategies and physiological and histological analyses, we first addressed the physiological relevance of forced LHR homomerization in female mice using BAC expression of 2 ligand-binding and signaling deficient mutant LHR, respectively, that have previously shown to undergo functional complementation and rescue the hypogonadal phenotype of male LuRKO mice. In female LuRKO mice, coexpression of signaling and binding deficient LHR mutants failed to rescue the hypogonadal and anovulatory phenotype. This was apparently due to the low-level expression of the 2 mutant LHR and potential lack of luteinizing hormone (LH)/LHR-dependent pleiotropic signaling that has previously been shown at high receptor densities to be essential for ovulation. Next, we utilized a mouse model overexpressing human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) with increased circulating "LH/hCG"-like bioactivity to ~40 fold higher than WT females, to determine if high circulating hCG in the LuRKO background could reveal putative LHR-independent actions. No effects were found, thus, suggesting that LH/hCG mediate their gonadal and non-gonadal effects solely via LHR. Finally, targeted expression of a constitutively active follicle stimulating hormone receptor (FSHR) progressed antral follicles to preovulatory follicles and displayed phenotypic markers of enhanced estrogenic activity but failed to induce ovulation in LuRKO mice. This study highlights the critical importance and precise control of functional LHR and FSHR for mediating ovarian functions and of the potential repurposing of existing genetically modified mouse models in answering outstanding questions in reproductive physiology.
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.