ArticleAnimal models and experimental medicine2023
Depilatory double-disc mouse model for evaluation of vesicant dermal injury pharmacotherapy countermeasures.
Article in Animal models and experimental medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimizing Nanosuspension Drug Release and Wound Healing Using a Design of Experiments Approach: Improving the Drug Delivery Potential of NDH-4338 for Treating Chemical Burns.Pharmaceutics · 2024Article
- Depilatory double-disc mouse model for evaluation of vesicant dermal injury pharmacotherapy countermeasures.Animal models and experimental medicine · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSulfur mustard (SM) is a chemical warfare vesicant that severely injures exposed eyes, lungs, and skin. Mechlorethamine hydrochloride (NM) is widely used as an SM surrogate. This study aimed to develop a depilatory double-disc (DDD) NM skin burn model for investigating vesicant pharmacotherapy countermeasures.
methodsHair removal method (clipping only versus clipping followed by a depilatory), the effect of acetone in the vesicant administration vehicle, NM dose (0.5-20 μmol), vehicle volume (5-20 μl), and time course (0.5-21 days) were investigated using male and female CD-1 mice. Edema, an indicator of burn response, was assessed by biopsy skin weight. The ideal NM dose to induce partial-thickness burns was assessed by edema and histopathologic evaluation. The optimized DDD model was validated using an established reagent, NDH-4338, a cyclooxygenase, inducible nitric oxide synthase, and acetylcholinesterase inhibitor prodrug.
resultsClipping/depilatory resulted in a 5-fold higher skin edematous response and was highly reproducible (18-fold lower %CV) compared to clipping alone. Acetone did not affect edema formation. Peak edema occurred 24-48 h after NM administration using optimized dosing methods and volume. Ideal partial-thickness burns were achieved with 5 μmol of NM and responded to treatment with NDH-4338. No differences in burn edematous responses were observed between males and females.
conclusionA highly reproducible and sensitive partial-thickness skin burn model was developed for assessing vesicant pharmacotherapy countermeasures. This model provides clinically relevant wound severity and eliminates the need for organic solvents that induce changes to the skin barrier function.
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.