ReviewBone2023
Perspective: The current state of Cre driver mouse lines in skeletal research: Challenges and opportunities.
Review in Bone, 2023. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Generation and characterization of a novel inducible Sost_P2A_CreERT2 mouse model with high specificity for osteocytes.JBMR plus · 2026Article
- Osteocytic Lipocalin-2 regulates bone formation locally through iron-dependent ferroptosis and Wnt suppression.Cell death discovery · 2026Article
- Aebp1 loss in osteoprogenitors leads to skeletal defects resembling Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome by diminishing Wnt/β-catenin signaling.JCI insight · 2026Article
- From Chaos to Opportunity: Decoding Cancer Heterogeneity for Enhanced Treatment Strategies.Biology · 2023Review
- Animal models for musculoskeletal research.Bone · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The Cre/Lox system has revolutionized the ability of biomedical researchers to ask very specific questions about the function of individual genes in specific cell types at specific times during development and/or disease progression in a variety of animal models. This is true in the skeletal biology field, and numerous Cre driver lines have been created to foster conditional gene manipulation in specific subpopulations of bone cells. However, as our ability to scrutinize these models increases, an increasing number of issues have been identified with most driver lines. All existing skeletal Cre mouse models exhibit problems in one or more of the following three areas: (1) cell type specificity-avoiding Cre expression in unintended cell types; (2) Cre inducibility-improving the dynamic range for Cre in inducible models (negligible Cre activity before induction and high Cre activity after induction); and (3) Cre toxicity-reducing the unwanted biological effects of Cre (beyond loxP recombination) on cellular processes and tissue health. These issues are hampering progress in understanding the biology of skeletal disease and aging, and consequently, identification of reliable therapeutic opportunities. Skeletal Cre models have not advanced technologically in decades despite the availability of improved tools, including multi-promoter-driven expression of permissive or fragmented recombinases, new dimerization systems, and alternative forms of recombinases and DNA sequence targets. We review the current state of skeletal Cre driver lines, and highlight some of the successes, failures, and opportunities to improve fidelity in the skeleton, based on successes pioneered in other areas of biomedical science.
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.