Using the mouse to model human disease: increasing validity and reproducibility

ABSTRACT Experiments that use the mouse as a model for disease have recently come under scrutiny because of the repeated failure of data, particularly derived from preclinical studies, to be replicated or translated to humans. The usefulness of mouse models has been questioned because of irreproducibility and poor recapitulation of human conditions. Newer studies, however, point to bias in reporting results and improper data analysis as key factors that limit reproducibility and validity of preclinical mouse research. Inaccurate and incomplete descriptions of experimental conditions also contribute. Here, we provide guidance on best practice in mouse experimentation, focusing on appropriate selection and validation of the model, sources of variation and their influence on phenotypic outcomes, minimum requirements for control sets, and the importance of rigorous statistics. Our goal is to raise the standards in mouse disease modeling to enhance reproducibility, reliability and clinical translation of findings. Summary: Raising standards for carrying out and reporting mouse model studies will improve reproducibility and relevance to human disease research.

[1]  Crystal Davis,et al.  C57BL/6J congenic Prp-TDP43A315T mice develop progressive neurodegeneration in the myenteric plexus of the colon without exhibiting key features of ALS , 2014, Brain Research.

[2]  S. Perrin.  Preclinical research: Make mouse studies work , 2014, Nature.

[3]  F. Collins,et al.  Policy: NIH plans to enhance reproducibility , 2014, Nature.

[4]  T. Miyakawa,et al.  Genomic responses in mouse models poorly mimic human inflammatory diseases , 2013 .

[5]  Jeroen Raes,et al.  How informative is the mouse for human gut microbiota research? , 2015, Disease Models & Mechanisms.

[6]  N. Cairns,et al.  TDP-43 mutant transgenic mice develop features of ALS and frontotemporal lobar degeneration , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[7]  I. Cuthill,et al.  Reporting : The ARRIVE Guidelines for Reporting Animal Research , 2010 .

[8]  Keizo Takao,et al.  Genomic responses in mouse models greatly mimic human inflammatory diseases , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[9]  Sangita Choudhury,et al.  Moderate and high amounts of tamoxifen in αMHC-MerCreMer mice induce a DNA damage response, leading to heart failure and death , 2013, Disease Models & Mechanisms.

[10]  Michael J. Yetman,et al.  Strain Background Influences Neurotoxicity and Behavioral Abnormalities in Mice Expressing the Tetracycline Transactivator , 2012, Journal of Neuroscience.

[11]  Henrik Westerberg,et al.  A comparative phenotypic and genomic analysis of C57BL/6J and C57BL/6N mouse strains , 2013, Genome Biology.

[12]  Nicole Fenwick,et al.  The welfare of animals used in science: how the "Three Rs" ethic guides improvements. , 2009, The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne.

[13]  Padmini Sarathchandra,et al.  Cardiac fibrosis in mice expressing an inducible myocardial-specific Cre driver , 2013, Disease Models & Mechanisms.

[14]  Steve D. M. Brown,et al.  The mouse ascending: perspectives for human-disease models , 2007, Nature Cell Biology.

[15]  Henrik Westerberg,et al.  A comparative phenotypic and genomic analysis of C57BL/6J and C57BL/6N mouse strains , 2013, Genome Biology.

[16]  R. Gamelli,et al.  Genomic responses in mouse models poorly mimic human inflammatory diseases , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[17]  Muriel T. Davisson,et al.  Genetic variation among 129 substrains and its importance for targeted mutagenesis in mice , 1997, Nature Genetics.

[18]  R. Browne,et al.  A comparative. , 1950, The British journal of ophthalmology.