ReviewThe Journal of clinical investigation2025
Friend or foe: assessing the value of animal models for facilitating clinical breakthroughs in complement research.
Review in The Journal of clinical investigation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in Complement Research: from Pathophysiology to Precision Medicine.Physiology (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026Review
- The Biochemical and Genetic Architecture of Geographic Atrophy: The Role of the FHL-1/CFH Axis and the Paradigm of RNA Interference Therapeutics.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Smart nanoparticle vaccines integrate nanotechnology artificial intelligence and immunoengineering for precision immunization.Discover nano · 2026Review
- Prediction and mechanistic insights into drug-induced reproductive toxicity through integrated machine learning, FAERS-based signal comparison, and network toxicology analyses.Molecular diversity · 2026Article
- The 5% Problem: How the Biomedical Community Responded to the Animal-to-Human Translation Crisis, and the Case for Non-Animal Methods.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Review
- The evolving landscape of complement therapeutics in rheumatology.Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2026Review
- Quo Vadis translational neuroscience?Translational neuroscience · 2026Review
- The secret life of complement: challenges and opportunities in exploring functions of the complosome in disease.The Journal of clinical investigation · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Animal experiments have long been a cornerstone of advancements in biomedical research, particularly in developing novel therapeutic strategies for inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. However, these historically important approaches are now facing growing scrutiny for ethical reasons, concerns about translational limitations to human biology, and the rising availability of animal-free research methods. This shift raises a critical question: How relevant and effective are animal models for driving future advancements in today's research landscape? This Review aims to explore this question within the field of biomedical research on the complement system, critically evaluating the contribution of animal models to the recent advancements and clinical successes of complement-targeted therapies. Specifically, we assess areas where animal studies have been indispensable for elucidating disease mechanisms and conducting preclinical evaluations, alongside instances where findings from animal models failed to translate successfully to human trials. Furthermore, we discuss similarities and differences in the complement system between animals and humans and explore innovations in animal research designed to improve translatability to human biology. By assessing the contributions of animal studies to complement therapeutics, this Review aims to provide insights into animal models' strengths, limitations, and evolving role in complement research.
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.