ReviewBiology2026
Murine and Humanized Mouse Models in Autoimmune Disease Research and Therapeutics Development.
Review in Biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Autoimmune diseases arise from a breakdown of immune tolerance and complex interplay of genetic susceptibility, environmental triggers, tissue-specific immune responses, microbiota, and regulatory pathways. Mouse models remain essential for dissecting these mechanisms, but no single model fully reproduces the heterogeneity, chronicity, and immune complexity of autoimmune disease in humans. This review summarizes classical murine and humanized mouse models used to study inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), multiple sclerosis (MS), type-1 diabetes (T1D), and rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We also highlight disease-specific scoring systems, including clinical indices, histopathology, imaging, cytokine profiling, autoantibody assessment, and human immune-cell readouts, as essential tools for standardized interpretation. Conventional murine models provide experimental control and mechanistic clarity, whereas humanized models improve assessment of human immune responses, patient-specific biology, and therapeutic translation. However, humanized systems remain limited by incomplete immune reconstitution, graft-versus-host disease, donor variability, cost, and incomplete tissue architecture. By providing a comparative framework spanning both conventional and humanized models, this review aims to guide informed model selection tailored to specific research questions in autoimmune disease biology and translational therapeutic development.
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.