ReviewOpen life sciences2025
Evaluation and application analysis of animal models of PIPNP based on data mining.
Review in Open life sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study is to systematically retrieve, synthesize, and assess methodologies employed in the development of paclitaxel-induced peripheral neuropathic pain (PIPNP) animal models, with the objective of optimizing protocols for model construction and evaluation. A structured search strategy was implemented using the terms "Paclitaxel-induced peripheral neuropathic pain" OR "Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathic pain" AND "animal models" OR "rats" OR "mice" OR "experimental animals" across the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, and VIP databases. Identical search criteria were applied to the PubMed and Web of Science platforms. The literature search covered publications from database inception through December 31, 2024. A total of 128 articles were reviewed, including 18 in Chinese and 110 in English. All studies employed rodent models, including 16 strains and including both sexes, with ages ranging from 5 weeks to 10 months. In rats, 28 distinct modeling protocols were identified: 4 involving continuous paclitaxel injections, 23 employing alternate-day injections, and 1 using a single administration. For mice, 21 methods were recorded, comprising 6 continuous, 13 alternate-day, and 2 single-injection protocols. Upon successful model induction, six behavioral pain alterations were consistently documented, evaluated using 16 different assessment techniques. Current PIPNP models predominantly utilize 6- to 8-week-old male Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats, with paclitaxel administered at 2 mg/kg on either days 0, 2, 4, and 6 or days 1, 3, 5, and 7. Based on data mining and comparative evaluation of modeling approaches, the use of 6- to 8-week-old male SD rats or 8- to 10-week-old male C57BL/6J mice with paclitaxel administered at 2 mg/kg on days 1, 3, 5, and 7 is recommended for establishing PIPNP models. The translational alignment between PIPNP models and clinical phenotypes remains insufficient and requires further refinement.
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.