ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2024
Rodent Models of Alzheimer's Disease: Past Misconceptions and Future Prospects.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neurodegenerative diseases and immune system: From pathogenic mechanism to therapy.Neural regeneration research · 2026Article
- Recapitulation of plaque formation, tau pathology, and neurodegeneration in a human 3D matrix model of Alzheimer's disease.Cell reports methods · 2026Article
- Increase in BACE1 Phosphorylation in the Rat Hippocampus and Phytosphingosine in Plasma After Chronic Administration of Scopolamine.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- From pathology to network failure: a Question-Model-Outcome framework for interpreting animal models of AD-related and dementia-relevant mechanisms.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2026Review
- Modulation of AβActa biochimica et biophysica Sinica · 2025Article
- Blood-brain barrier disruption: a pervasive driver and mechanistic link between traumatic brain injury and Alzheimer's disease.Translational neurodegeneration · 2025Review
- Advancement in modeling of Alzheimer's disease: a comprehensive review of preclinical screening platforms.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disease with no effective treatments, not least due to the lack of authentic animal models. Typically, rodent models recapitulate the effects but not causes of AD, such as cholinergic neuron loss: lesioning of cholinergic neurons mimics the cognitive decline reminiscent of AD but not its neuropathology. Alternative models rely on the overexpression of genes associated with familial AD, such as amyloid precursor protein, or have genetically amplified expression of mutant tau. Yet transgenic rodent models poorly replicate the neuropathogenesis and protein overexpression patterns of sporadic AD. Seeding rodents with amyloid or tau facilitates the formation of these pathologies but cannot account for their initial accumulation. Intracerebral infusion of proinflammatory agents offer an alternative model, but these fail to replicate the cause of AD. A novel model is therefore needed, perhaps similar to those used for Parkinson's disease, namely adult wildtype rodents with neuron-specific (dopaminergic) lesions within the same vulnerable brainstem nuclei, 'the isodendritic core', which are the first to degenerate in AD. Site-selective targeting of these nuclei in adult rodents may recapitulate the initial neurodegenerative processes in AD to faithfully mimic its pathogenesis and progression, ultimately leading to presymptomatic biomarkers and preventative therapies.
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.