Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37180099›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in immunology2023

Mouse models of pemphigus: valuable tools to investigate pathomechanisms and novel therapeutic interventions.

Shirin Emtenani, Michael Hertl, Enno Schmidt, Christoph Hudemann

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in immunology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Meeting Report on "10th Anniversary Symposium on Inflammatory Skin Disease".JID innovations : skin science from molecules to population health · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Shirin EmtenaniLübeck Institute of Experimental Dermatology (LIED), University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
Michael HertlDepartment of Dermatology and Allergology, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Enno SchmidtLübeck Institute of Experimental Dermatology (LIED), University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
Christoph HudemannDepartment of Dermatology and Allergology, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Philipps University of Marburg · DEUniversity of Lübeck · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Autoimmune blistering diseases (AIBD) are paradigms of autoantibody-mediated organ-specific autoimmune disorders that involve skin and/or mucous membranes. Compared to other autoimmune diseases, the pathogenicity of autoantibodies in AIBD is relatively well described. Pemphigus is a potentially lethal autoantibody driven autoimmune disorder with a strong HLA class II association. It is mainly characterized by IgG against the desmosomal adhesion molecules desmoglein 3 (Dsg3) and Dsg1. Several murine pemphigus models were developed subsequently, each allowing the analysis of a characteristic feature, such as pathogenic IgG or Dsg3-specific T or B cells. Thus, the models can be employed to preclinically evaluate potentially novel therapies. We here thoroughly summarize past and recent efforts in developing and utilizing pemphigus mouse models for pathomechanistic investigation and therapeutic interventions.

Indexed as

Autoimmune DiseasesPemphigusAnimalsAutoantibodiesBlisterDisease Models, AnimalImmunoglobulin GMiceSkinAutoantibodiesImmunoglobulin Gautoantibodyautoimme diseasesdesmogleinmouse modelpemphigus

Identifiers

PMID37180099
PMCPMC10172572
OpenAlexW4367292902

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.