[
1. List of Currently Incurable Diseases. Disabled World Available from: https://www.disabled-world.com/definitions/lists/incurable.php.2020. Accessed February 28, 2022.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
2. Beckers J, Wurst W, de Angelis MH. Towards better mouse models: enhanced genotypes, systemic phenotyping and envirotype modelling. Nat Rev Genet 2009;10:371–380.10.1038/nrg257819434078
]Search in Google Scholar
[
3. Dawson TM, Golde TE, Lagier-Tourenne C. Animal models of neurodegenerative diseases. Nat Neurosci 2018;21:1370–1379.10.1038/s41593-018-0236-8661503930250265
]Search in Google Scholar
[
4. Gitler AD, Dhillon P, Shorter J. Neurodegenerative disease: models, mechanisms, and a new hope. Dis Model Mech 2017;10:499–502.10.1242/dmm.030205545117728468935
]Search in Google Scholar
[
5. Onaciu A, Munteanu R, Munteanu VC, et al. Spontaneous and Induced Animal Models for Cancer Research. Diagn Basel Switz 2020;10:E660.10.3390/diagnostics10090660755504432878340
]Search in Google Scholar
[
6. Riehle C, Bauersachs J. Small animal models of heart failure. Cardiovasc Res 2019;115:1838–1849.10.1093/cvr/cvz161680381531243437
]Search in Google Scholar
[
7. Tsuneyama K, Nishitsuji K, Matsumoto M, et al. Animal models for analyzing metabolic syndrome-associated liver diseases. Pathol Int 2017;67:539–546.10.1111/pin.1260029027308
]Search in Google Scholar
[
8. Vaquer G, Rivière F, Mavris M, et al. Animal models for metabolic, neuromuscular and ophthalmological rare diseases. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2013;12:287–305.10.1038/nrd383123493083
]Search in Google Scholar
[
9. Flora A. The Versatile Mouse Model for Rare Disease Research. The Jackson Laboratory Available from: https://www.jax.org/news-and-insights/jax-blog/2019/may/the-versatile-mouse-model-for-rare-disease-research. Accessed April 3, 2022.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
10. Moore M. A new world of opportunity in rare diseases. The Jackson Laboratory Available from: https://www.jax.org/news-and-insights/2018/october/a-new-world-of-opportunity-in-rare-diseases. Accessed April 3, 2022.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
11. Cacheiro P, Haendel MA, Smedley D, et al. New models for human disease from the International Mouse Phenotyping Consortium. Mamm Genome Off J Int Mamm Genome Soc 2019;30:143–150.10.1007/s00335-019-09804-5660666431127358
]Search in Google Scholar
[
12. Brommage R, Ohlsson C. High Fidelity of Mouse Models Mimicking Human Genetic Skeletal Disorders. Front Endocrinol;10 Available from: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fendo.2019.00934. 2020. Accessed April 3, 2022.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
13. Sztretye M, Szabó L, Dobrosi N, et al. From Mice to Humans: An Overview of the Potentials and Limitations of Current Transgenic Mouse Models of Major Muscular Dystrophies and Congenital Myopathies. Int J Mol Sci 2020;21:8935.10.3390/ijms21238935772813833255644
]Search in Google Scholar
[
14. Deshpande O, Lara RZ, Zhang OR, et al. ZNF423 patient variants, truncations, and in-frame deletions in mice define an allele-dependent range of midline brain abnormalities. PLOS Genet 2020;16:e1009017.10.1371/journal.pgen.1009017751520132925911
]Search in Google Scholar
[
15. Nair RR, Corrochano S, Gasco S, et al. Uses for humanised mouse models in precision medicine for neurodegenerative disease. Mamm Genome Off J Int Mamm Genome Soc 2019;30:173–191.10.1007/s00335-019-09807-2
]Search in Google Scholar
[
16. Murillo-Cuesta S, Artuch R, Asensio F, et al. The Value of Mouse Models of Rare Diseases: A Spanish Experience. Front Genet 2020;11:583932.10.3389/fgene.2020.583932
]Search in Google Scholar
[
17. Zárybnický T, Heikkinen A, Kangas SM, et al. Modeling Rare Human Disorders in Mice: The Finnish Disease Heritage. Cells 2021;10:3158.10.3390/cells10113158
]Search in Google Scholar
[
18. Wojczynski MK, Tiwari HK. Definition of phenotype. Adv Genet 2008;60:75–105.10.1016/S0065-2660(07)00404-X
]Search in Google Scholar
[
19. Brown SDM. Advances in mouse genetics for the study of human disease. Hum Mol Genet 2021;30:R274–R284.10.1093/hmg/ddab153849001434089057
]Search in Google Scholar
[
20. Adhikary PP, Ul Ain Q, Hocke AC, et al. COVID-19 highlights the model dilemma in biomedical research. Nat Rev Mater 2021;6:374–376.10.1038/s41578-021-00305-z796777833747552
]Search in Google Scholar
[
21. Flores-Santin J, Burggren WW. Beyond the Chicken: Alternative Avian Models for Developmental Physiological Research. Front Physiol 2021;12:712633.10.3389/fphys.2021.712633856688434744759
]Search in Google Scholar
[
22. Howland D, Ellederova Z, Aronin N, et al. Large Animal Models of Huntington’s Disease: What We Have Learned and Where We Need to Go Next. J Huntingt Dis 2020;9:201–216.10.3233/JHD-200425759737132925082
]Search in Google Scholar
[
23. Leong X-F, Ng C-Y, Jaarin K. Animal Models in Cardiovascular Research: Hypertension and Atherosclerosis. BioMed Res Int 2015;2015:528757.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
24. Obeid M, Khabbaz RC, Garcia KD, et al. Translational Animal Models for Liver Cancer. Am J Interv Radiol;2. Epub ahead of print February 24, 2018. DOI: 10.25259/AJIR-11-2017.10.25259/AJIR-11-2017
]Search in Google Scholar
[
25. Vandamme TF. Use of rodents as models of human diseases. J Pharm Bioallied Sci 2014;6:2–9.10.4103/0975-7406.124301389528924459397
]Search in Google Scholar
[
26. Homberg JR, Adan RAH, Alenina N, et al. The continued need for animals to advance brain research. Neuron 2021;109:2374–2379.10.1016/j.neuron.2021.07.01534352213
]Search in Google Scholar
[
27. Ma X, Aravind A, Pfister BJ, et al. Animal Models of Traumatic Brain Injury and Assessment of Injury Severity. Mol Neurobiol 2019;56:5332–5345.10.1007/s12035-018-1454-530603958
]Search in Google Scholar
[
28. Yee NS, Ignatenko N, Finnberg N, et al. Animal Models of Cancer Biology. Cancer Growth Metastasis 2015;8s1:CGM.S37907.10.4137/CGM.S37907467643326688665
]Search in Google Scholar
[
29. Procaccini C, De Rosa V, Pucino V, et al. Animal models of Multiple Sclerosis. Eur J Pharmacol 2015;759:182–191.10.1016/j.ejphar.2015.03.042709466125823807
]Search in Google Scholar
[
30. Wagar LE, DiFazio RM, Davis MM. Advanced model systems and tools for basic and translational human immunology. Genome Med 2018;10:73.10.1186/s13073-018-0584-8616294330266097
]Search in Google Scholar
[
31. Yu X, Petersen F. A methodological review of induced animal models of autoimmune diseases. Autoimmun Rev 2018;17:473–479.10.1016/j.autrev.2018.03.00129526631
]Search in Google Scholar
[
32. Zaragoza C, Gomez-Guerrero C, Martin-Ventura JL, et al. Animal models of cardiovascular diseases. J Biomed Biotechnol 2011;2011:497841.10.1155/2011/497841304266721403831
]Search in Google Scholar
[
33. Harris JC. Animal models of neurodevelopmental disorders with behavioral phenotypes. Curr Opin Psychiatry 2021;34:87–93.10.1097/YCO.000000000000067533395099
]Search in Google Scholar
[
34. Chadman KK. Animal models for autism in 2017 and the consequential implications to drug discovery. Expert Opin Drug Discov 2017;12:1187–1194.10.1080/17460441.2017.138398228971687
]Search in Google Scholar
[
35. Varghese M, Keshav N, Jacot-Descombes S, et al. Autism spectrum disorder: neuropathology and animal models. Acta Neuropathol (Berl) 2017;134:537–566.10.1007/s00401-017-1736-4569371828584888
]Search in Google Scholar
[
36. Sontag TA, Tucha O, Walitza S, et al. Animal models of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): a critical review. Atten Deficit Hyperact Disord 2010;2:1–20.10.1007/s12402-010-0019-x21432586
]Search in Google Scholar
[
37. de la Peña JB, Dela Peña IJ, Custodio RJ, et al. Exploring the Validity of Proposed Transgenic Animal Models of Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Mol Neurobiol 2018;55:3739–3754.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
38. Winship IR, Dursun SM, Baker GB, et al. An Overview of Animal Models Related to Schizophrenia. Can J Psychiatry Rev Can Psychiatr 2019;64:5–17.10.1177/0706743718773728636413929742910
]Search in Google Scholar
[
39. Götz J, Bodea L-G, Goedert M. Rodent models for Alzheimer disease. Nat Rev Neurosci 2018;19:583–598.10.1038/s41583-018-0054-830194347
]Search in Google Scholar
[
40. Mullane K, Williams M. Preclinical Models of Alzheimer’s Disease: Relevance and Translational Validity. Curr Protoc Pharmacol 2019;84:e57.10.1002/cpph.5730802363
]Search in Google Scholar
[
41. Scearce-Levie K, Sanchez PE, Lewcock JW. Leveraging preclinical models for the development of Alzheimer disease therapeutics. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2020;19:447–462.10.1038/s41573-020-0065-932612262
]Search in Google Scholar
[
42. Barker RA, Björklund A. Animal Models of Parkinson’s Disease: Are They Useful or Not? J Park Dis 2020;10:1335–1342.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
43. Farshim PP, Bates GP. Mouse Models of Huntington’s Disease. In: Precious SV, Rosser AE, Dunnett SB (eds) Huntington’s Disease. New York, NY: Springer:97–120.10.1007/978-1-4939-7825-0_629856016
]Search in Google Scholar
[
44. Menalled L, Brunner D. Animal models of Huntington’s disease for translation to the clinic: best practices. Mov Disord Off J Mov Disord Soc 2014;29:1375–1390.10.1002/mds.2600625216369
]Search in Google Scholar
[
45. Lutz C. Mouse models of ALS: Past, present and future. Brain Res 2018;1693:1–10.10.1016/j.brainres.2018.03.02429577886
]Search in Google Scholar
[
46. Kin K, Yasuhara T, Kameda M, et al. Animal Models for Parkinson’s Disease Research: Trends in the 2000s. Int J Mol Sci 2019;20:E5402.10.3390/ijms20215402686202331671557
]Search in Google Scholar
[
47. Pingale T, Gupta GL. Classic and evolving animal models in Parkinson’s disease. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 2020;199:173060.10.1016/j.pbb.2020.17306033091373
]Search in Google Scholar
[
48. Abboud C, Duveau A, Bouali-Benazzouz R, et al. Animal models of pain: Diversity and benefits. J Neurosci Methods 2021;348:108997.10.1016/j.jneumeth.2020.10899733188801
]Search in Google Scholar
[
49. Brum ES, Becker G, Fialho MFP, et al. Animal models of fibromyalgia: What is the best choice? Pharmacol Ther 2022;230:107959.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
50. Brookes E, Shi Y. Diverse epigenetic mechanisms of human disease. Annu Rev Genet 2014;48:237–268.10.1146/annurev-genet-120213-09251825195505
]Search in Google Scholar
[
51. Heindel JJ. The developmental basis of disease: Update on environmental exposures and animal models. Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol 2019;125 Suppl 3:5–13.10.1111/bcpt.1311830265444
]Search in Google Scholar
[
52. Ong M-L, Lin X, Holbrook JD. Measuring epigenetics as the mediator of gene/environment interactions in DOHaD. J Dev Orig Health Dis 2015;6:10–16.10.1017/S204017441400050625315715
]Search in Google Scholar
[
53. Phillips NLH, Roth TL. Animal Models and Their Contribution to Our Understanding of the Relationship Between Environments, Epigenetic Modifications, and Behavior. Genes 2019;10:E47.10.3390/genes10010047635718330650619
]Search in Google Scholar
[
54. Heegaard PMH, Sturek M, Alloosh M, et al. Animal Models for COVID-19: More to the Picture Than ACE2, Rodents, Ferrets, and Non-human Primates. A Case for Porcine Respiratory Coronavirus and the Obese Ossabaw Pig. Front Microbiol 2020;11:573756.10.3389/fmicb.2020.573756754590433101246
]Search in Google Scholar
[
55. Muñoz-Fontela C, Dowling WE, Funnell SGP, et al. Animal models for COVID-19. Nature 2020;586:509–515.10.1038/s41586-020-2787-6813686232967005
]Search in Google Scholar
[
56. Pandey K, Acharya A, Mohan M, et al. Animal models for SARS-CoV-2 research: A comprehensive literature review. Transbound Emerg Dis 2021;68:1868–1885.10.1111/tbed.13907808518633128861
]Search in Google Scholar
[
57. Singh A, Singh RS, Sarma P, et al. A Comprehensive Review of Animal Models for Coronaviruses: SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV, and MERS-CoV. Virol Sin 2020;35:290–304.10.1007/s12250-020-00252-z732448532607866
]Search in Google Scholar
[
58. Genzel L, Adan R, Berns A, et al. How the COVID-19 pandemic highlights the necessity of animal research. Curr Biol CB 2020;30:R1014–R1018.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
59. Pechanova O. Why We Still Need Reliable Animal Models. Pathophysiology 2020;27:44–45.10.3390/pathophysiology27010006883046235366255
]Search in Google Scholar
[
60. Walker A, Pottinger G, Scott A, et al. Anosmia and loss of smell in the era of covid-19. BMJ 2020;370:m2808.10.1136/bmj.m280832694187
]Search in Google Scholar
[
61. Paolo G. Does COVID-19 cause permanent damage to olfactory and gustatory function? Med Hypotheses 2020;143:110086.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
62. Jafari Z, Kolb BE, Mohajerani MH. Hearing Loss, Tinnitus, and Dizziness in COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Can J Neurol Sci 2022; 49(2): 184–195.10.1017/cjn.2021.63826734333843530
]Search in Google Scholar
[
63. Wu Y, Xu X, Chen Z, et al. Nervous system involvement after infection with COVID-19 and other coronaviruses. Brain Behav Immun 2020;87:18–22.10.1016/j.bbi.2020.03.031714668932240762
]Search in Google Scholar
[
64. Fotuhi M, Mian A, Meysami S, et al. Neurobiology of COVID-19. J Alzheimers Dis JAD 2020;76:3–19.10.3233/JAD-200581766099032538857
]Search in Google Scholar
[
65. Iadecola C, Anrather J, Kamel H. Effects of COVID-19 on the Nervous System. Cell 2020;183:16-27.e1.10.1016/j.cell.2020.08.028743750132882182
]Search in Google Scholar
[
66. Ghazavi A, Ganji A, Keshavarzian N, et al. Cytokine profile and disease severity in patients with COVID-19. Cytokine 2021;137:155323.10.1016/j.cyto.2020.155323752470833045526
]Search in Google Scholar
[
67. Schultze JL, Aschenbrenner AC. COVID-19 and the human innate immune system. Cell 2021;184:1671–1692.10.1016/j.cell.2021.02.029788562633743212
]Search in Google Scholar
[
68. Somasundaram NP, Ranathunga I, Ratnasamy V, et al. The Impact of SARS-Cov-2 Virus Infection on the Endocrine System. J Endocr Soc 2020;4:bvaa082.10.1210/jendso/bvaa082733783932728654
]Search in Google Scholar
[
69. Raony Í, de Figueiredo CS, Pandolfo P, et al. Psycho-Neuroendocrine-Immune Interactions in COVID-19: Potential Impacts on Mental Health. Front Immunol 2020;11:1170.10.3389/fimmu.2020.01170726702532574266
]Search in Google Scholar
[
70. Gurumurthy CB, Quadros RM, Richardson GP, et al. Genetically modified mouse models to help fight COVID-19. Nat Protoc 2020;15:3777–3787.10.1038/s41596-020-00403-2770493833106680
]Search in Google Scholar
[
71. Ye W, Chen Q. Potential Applications and Perspectives of Humanized Mouse Models. Annu Rev Anim Biosci 2022;10:395–417.10.1146/annurev-animal-020420-03302934758273
]Search in Google Scholar
[
72. Veenhuis RT, Zeiss CJ. Animal Models of COVID-19 II. Comparative Immunology. ILAR J 2021;ilab010.10.1093/ilar/ilab010813534033914873
]Search in Google Scholar
[
73. Taft RA, Davisson M, Wiles MV. Know thy mouse. Trends Genet TIG 2006;22:649–653.10.1016/j.tig.2006.09.01017007958
]Search in Google Scholar
[
74. Blake JA, Baldarelli R, Kadin JA, et al. Mouse Genome Database (MGD): Knowledgebase for mouse–human comparative biology. Nucleic Acids Res 2021;49:D981–D987.10.1093/nar/gkaa1083777903033231642
]Search in Google Scholar
[
75. Bult CJ, Blake JA, Smith CL, et al. Mouse Genome Database (MGD) 2019. Nucleic Acids Res 2019;47:D801–D806.10.1093/nar/gky1056632392330407599
]Search in Google Scholar
[
76. Ringwald M, Richardson JE, Baldarelli RM, et al. Mouse Genome Informatics (MGI): latest news from MGD and GXD. Mamm Genome 2022;33:4–18.10.1007/s00335-021-09921-0891353034698891
]Search in Google Scholar
[
77. Bogue MA, Philip VM, Walton DO, et al. Mouse Phenome Database: a data repository and analysis suite for curated primary mouse phenotype data. Nucleic Acids Res 2020;48:D716–D723.10.1093/nar/gkz1032714561231696236
]Search in Google Scholar
[
78. Chia R, Achilli F, Festing MFW, et al. The origins and uses of mouse outbred stocks. Nat Genet 2005;37:1181–1186.10.1038/ng166516254564
]Search in Google Scholar
[
79. Tuttle AH, Philip VM, Chesler EJ, et al. Comparing phenotypic variation between inbred and outbred mice. Nat Methods 2018;15:994–996.10.1038/s41592-018-0224-7651839630504873
]Search in Google Scholar
[
80. Tuttle AH, Philip VM, Chesler EJ, et al. Author Correction: Comparing phenotypic variation between inbred and outbred mice. Nat Methods 2019;16:206.10.1038/s41592-018-0298-230584248
]Search in Google Scholar
[
81. Tuttle AH, Philip VM, Chesler EJ, et al. Author Correction: Comparing phenotypic variation between inbred and outbred mice. Nat Methods 2020;17:947.10.1038/s41592-020-0932-732728193
]Search in Google Scholar
[
82. Saul MC, Philip VM, Reinholdt LG, et al. High-Diversity Mouse Populations for Complex Traits. Trends Genet 2019;35:501–514.10.1016/j.tig.2019.04.003657103131133439
]Search in Google Scholar
[
83. Beck JA, Lloyd S, Hafezparast M, et al. Genealogies of mouse inbred strains. Nat Genet 2000;24:23–25.10.1038/7164110615122
]Search in Google Scholar
[
84. Casellas J. Inbred mouse strains and genetic stability: a review. Anim Int J Anim Biosci 2011;5:1–7.10.1017/S175173111000166722440695
]Search in Google Scholar
[
85. Simpson EM, Linder CC, Sargent EE, et al. Genetic variation among 129 substrains and its importance for targeted mutagenesis in mice. Nat Genet 1997;16:19–27.10.1038/ng0597-199140391
]Search in Google Scholar
[
86. Threadgill DW, Yee D, Matin A, et al. Genealogy of the 129 inbred strains: 129/SvJ is a contaminated inbred strain. Mamm Genome Off J Int Mamm Genome Soc 1997;8:390–393.10.1007/s0033599004539166580
]Search in Google Scholar
[
87. Mekada K, Yoshiki A. Substrains matter in phenotyping of C57BL/6 mice. Exp Anim 2021;70:145–160.10.1538/expanim.20-0158815024033441510
]Search in Google Scholar
[
88. Fertan E, Wong AA, Purdon MK, et al. The effect of background strain on the behavioral phenotypes of the MDGA2+/- mouse model of autism spectrum disorder. Genes Brain Behav 2021;20:e12696.10.1111/gbb.1269632808443
]Search in Google Scholar
[
89. Tam WY, Cheung K-K. Phenotypic characteristics of commonly used inbred mouse strains. J Mol Med 2020;98:1215–1234.10.1007/s00109-020-01953-432712726
]Search in Google Scholar
[
90. Flaherty L, Bolivar V. Congenic and Consomic Strains. In: Byron C. Jones and Pierre Mormede (editors). Neurobehavioral Genetics: Methods and Applications, second edition. Boca Raton: CRC Press: 2006; 115-128.10.1201/9781420003567.ch8
]Search in Google Scholar
[
91. Farkas C, Fuentes-Villalobos F, Rebolledo-Jaramillo B, et al. Streamlined computational pipeline for genetic background characterization of genetically engineered mice based on next generation sequencing data. BMC Genomics 2019;20:131.10.1186/s12864-019-5504-9637308230755158
]Search in Google Scholar
[
92. Schellinck HM, Cyr DP, Brown RE. Chapter 7 - How Many Ways Can Mouse Behavioral Experiments Go Wrong? Confounding Variables in Mouse Models of Neurodegenerative Diseases and How to Control Them. In: Brockmann HJ, Roper TJ, Naguib M, et al. (eds) Advances in the Study of Behavior. Academic Press: 2010;41: 255–366.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
93. Vanden Berghe T, Hulpiau P, Martens L, et al. Passenger Mutations Confound Interpretation of All Genetically Modified Congenic Mice. Immunity 2015;43:200–209.10.1016/j.immuni.2015.06.011480081126163370
]Search in Google Scholar
[
94. Gurumurthy CB, Lloyd KCK. Generating mouse models for biomedical research: technological advances. Dis Model Mech 2019;12:dmm029462.10.1242/dmm.029462636115730626588
]Search in Google Scholar
[
95. Fujiwara S. Humanized mice: A brief overview on their diverse applications in biomedical research. J Cell Physiol 2018;233:2889–2901.10.1002/jcp.2602228543438
]Search in Google Scholar
[
96. Acevedo-Arozena A, Wells S, Potter P, et al. ENU mutagenesis, a way forward to understand gene function. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet 2008;9:49–69.10.1146/annurev.genom.9.081307.16422418949851
]Search in Google Scholar
[
97. Simon MM, Moresco EMY, Bull KR, et al. Current strategies for mutation detection in phenotype-driven screens utilising next generation sequencing. Mamm Genome Off J Int Mamm Genome Soc 2015;26:486–500.10.1007/s00335-015-9603-x460206026449678
]Search in Google Scholar
[
98. Fuchs H, Gailus-Durner V, Adler T, et al. Mouse phenotyping. Methods 2011;53:120–135.10.1016/j.ymeth.2010.08.00620708688
]Search in Google Scholar
[
99. Lalonde R, Filali M, Strazielle C. SHIRPA as a Neurological Screening Battery in Mice. Curr Protoc 2021;1:e135.10.1002/cpz1.13534000103
]Search in Google Scholar
[
100. Rogers DC, Fisher EM, Brown SD, et al. Behavioral and functional analysis of mouse phenotype: SHIRPA, a proposed protocol for comprehensive phenotype assessment. Mamm Genome Off J Int Mamm Genome Soc 1997;8:711–713.10.1007/s0033599005519321461
]Search in Google Scholar
[
101. Crawley JN. What’s wrong with my mouse?: behavioral phenotyping of transgenic and knockout mice. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley-Interscience Available from: http://www.123library.org/book_details/?id=15036. 2007. Accessed March 8, 2022.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
102. Garcia-Gomes MSA, Zanatto DA, Yamamoto PK, et al. A Simple and Fast Battery Test for Phenotypic Characterization of Mice. Bio-Protoc 2020;10:e3568.10.21769/BioProtoc.3568784262833659538
]Search in Google Scholar
[
103. van der Staay FJ, Steckler T. Behavioural phenotyping of mouse mutants. Behav Brain Res 2001;125:3–12.10.1016/S0166-4328(01)00278-9
]Search in Google Scholar
[
104. Wahlsten D. Mouse behavioral testing: how to use mice in behavioral neuroscience. 1st ed. London; Burlington, VT: Academic, 2011.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
105. Jaisser F. Inducible gene expression and gene modification in transgenic mice. J Am Soc Nephrol JASN 2000;11 Suppl 16:S95–S100.10.1681/ASN.V11suppl_2s95
]Search in Google Scholar
[
106. Si-Hoe SL, Wells S, Murphy D. Production of transgenic rodents by the microinjection of cloned DNA into fertilized one-cell eggs. Mol Biotechnol 2001;17:151–182.10.1385/MB:17:2:151
]Search in Google Scholar
[
107. Doyle A, McGarry MP, Lee NA, et al. The construction of transgenic and gene knockout/knockin mouse models of human disease. Transgenic Res 2012;21:327–349.10.1007/s11248-011-9537-3
]Search in Google Scholar
[
108. Hall B, Limaye A, Kulkarni AB. Overview: Generation of Gene Knockout Mice. Curr Protoc Cell Biol 2009;44:19.12.1-19.12.17.10.1002/0471143030.cb1912s44
]Search in Google Scholar
[
109. Hamilton SM, Spencer CM, Harrison WR, et al. Multiple autism-like behaviors in a novel transgenic mouse model. Behav Brain Res 2011;218:29–41.10.1016/j.bbr.2010.11.026
]Search in Google Scholar
[
110. Jacquot S, Chartoire N, Piguet F, et al. Optimizing PCR for Mouse Genotyping: Recommendations for Reliable, Rapid, Cost Effective, Robust and Adaptable to High-Throughput Genotyping Protocol for Any Type of Mutation. Curr Protoc Mouse Biol 2019;9:e65.10.1002/cpmo.65
]Search in Google Scholar
[
111. Panneer SK, Arindkar SK, Nagarajan P. Mouse Genetics and Breeding. In: Nagarajan P, Gudde R, Srinivasan R (eds) Essentials of Laboratory Animal Science: Principles and Practices. Singapore: Springer: 2021;343–371.10.1007/978-981-16-0987-9_15
]Search in Google Scholar
[
112. Vaisman BL. Genotyping of Transgenic Animals by Real-Time Quantitative PCR with TaqMan Probes. In: Freeman LA (ed) Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Disease: Methods and Protocols. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press:233–251.10.1007/978-1-60327-369-5_11
]Search in Google Scholar
[
113. Delic S, Streif S, Deussing JM, et al. Genetic mouse models for behavioral analysis through transgenic RNAi technology. Genes Brain Behav 2008;7:821–830.10.1111/j.1601-183X.2008.00412.x
]Search in Google Scholar
[
114. Mittal V. Improving the efficiency of RNA interference in mammals. Nat Rev Genet 2004;5:355–365.10.1038/nrg132315143318
]Search in Google Scholar
[
115. Du P, Lou C, Zhao X, et al. CRISPR-Based Genetic Switches and Other Complex Circuits: Research and Application. Life 2021;11:1255.10.3390/life11111255862132134833131
]Search in Google Scholar
[
116. Horii T, Arai Y, Yamazaki M, et al. Validation of microinjection methods for generating knockout mice by CRISPR/Cas-mediated genome engineering. Sci Rep 2014;4:4513.10.1038/srep04513538011024675426
]Search in Google Scholar
[
117. Lanigan TM, Kopera HC, Saunders TL. Principles of Genetic Engineering. Genes 2020;11:291.10.3390/genes11030291714080832164255
]Search in Google Scholar
[
118. Nakajima K, Kazuno A-A, Kelsoe J, et al. Exome sequencing in the knockin mice generated using the CRISPR/Cas system. Sci Rep 2016;6:34703.10.1038/srep34703504815027698470
]Search in Google Scholar
[
119. Brehm MA, Shultz LD, Greiner DL. Humanized mouse models to study human diseases. Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes 2010;17:120–125.10.1097/MED.0b013e328337282f289228420150806
]Search in Google Scholar
[
120. Tian H, Lyu Y, Yang Y-G, et al. Humanized Rodent Models for Cancer Research. Front Oncol 2020;10:1696.10.3389/fonc.2020.01696751801533042811
]Search in Google Scholar
[
121. Dash PK, Gorantla S, Poluektova L, et al. Humanized Mice for Infectious and Neurodegenerative disorders. Retrovirology 2021;18:13.10.1186/s12977-021-00557-1817971234090462
]Search in Google Scholar
[
122. Devoy A, Bunton-Stasyshyn RKA, Tybulewicz VLJ, et al. Genomically humanized mice: technologies and promises. Nat Rev Genet 2012;13:14–20.10.1038/nrg3116478221722179716
]Search in Google Scholar
[
123. Buffalo EA, Movshon JA, Wurtz RH. From basic brain research to treating human brain disorders. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2019;201919895.10.1073/pnas.1919895116693668431871205
]Search in Google Scholar
[
124. Molnár Z, Clowry G. Cerebral cortical development in rodents and primates. Prog Brain Res 2012;195:45–70.10.1016/B978-0-444-53860-4.00003-922230622
]Search in Google Scholar
[
125. Savolainen SM, Foley JF, Elmore SA. Histology atlas of the developing mouse heart with emphasis on E11.5 to E18.5. Toxicol Pathol 2009;37:395–414.10.1177/0192623309335060277344619359541
]Search in Google Scholar
[
126. Gensollen T, Iyer SS, Kasper DL, et al. How colonization by microbiota in early life shapes the immune system. Science 2016;352:539–544.10.1126/science.aad9378505052427126036
]Search in Google Scholar
[
127. Ackert-Bicknell CL, Anderson LC, Sheehan S, et al. Aging Research Using Mouse Models. Curr Protoc Mouse Biol 2015;5:95–133.10.1002/9780470942390.mo140195459077526069080
]Search in Google Scholar
[
128. Vanhooren V, Libert C. The mouse as a model organism in aging research: usefulness, pitfalls and possibilities. Ageing Res Rev 2013;12:8–21.10.1016/j.arr.2012.03.01022543101
]Search in Google Scholar
[
129. Ximerakis M, Lipnick SL, Innes BT, et al. Single-cell transcriptomic profiling of the aging mouse brain. Nat Neurosci 2019;22:1696–1708.10.1038/s41593-019-0491-331551601
]Search in Google Scholar
[
130. Shimada A, Hasegawa-Ishii S. Senescence-accelerated Mice (SAMs) as a Model for Brain Aging and Immunosenescence. Aging Dis 2011;2:414–435.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
131. Shirakabe A, Ikeda Y, Sciarretta S, et al. Aging and Autophagy in the Heart. Circ Res 2016;118:1563–1576.10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.116.307474486999927174950
]Search in Google Scholar
[
132. Kaushal A, Wani WY, Anand R, et al. Spontaneous and induced nontransgenic animal models of AD: modeling AD using combinatorial approach. Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen 2013;28:318–326.10.1177/153331751348891423687185
]Search in Google Scholar
[
133. Partridge B, Rossmeisl JH. Companion animal models of neurological disease. J Neurosci Methods 2020;331:108484.10.1016/j.jneumeth.2019.108484694221131733285
]Search in Google Scholar
[
134. Cekanova M, Rathore K. Animal models and therapeutic molecular targets of cancer: utility and limitations. Drug Des Devel Ther 2014;8:1911–1921.10.2147/DDDT.S49584420619925342884
]Search in Google Scholar
[
135. Vail DM, MacEwen EG. Spontaneously occurring tumors of companion animals as models for human cancer. Cancer Invest 2000;18:781–792.10.3109/0735790000901221011107448
]Search in Google Scholar
[
136. Jackson JG, Lozano G. The mutant p53 mouse as a pre-clinical model. Oncogene 2013;32:4325–4330.10.1038/onc.2012.61023318424
]Search in Google Scholar
[
137. Lampreht Tratar U, Horvat S, Cemazar M. Transgenic Mouse Models in Cancer Research. Front Oncol;2018;8.10.3389/fonc.2018.00268606259330079312
]Search in Google Scholar
[
138. Reza Khorramizadeh M, Saadat F. Chapter 8 - Animal models for human disease. In: Verma AS, Singh A (eds) Animal Biotechnology (Second Edition). Boston: Academic Press:2020;153–171.10.1016/B978-0-12-811710-1.00008-2
]Search in Google Scholar
[
139. Ruggeri BA, Camp F, Miknyoczki S. Animal models of disease: pre-clinical animal models of cancer and their applications and utility in drug discovery. Biochem Pharmacol 2014;87:150–161.10.1016/j.bcp.2013.06.02023817077
]Search in Google Scholar
[
140. Rapoport B, Banuelos B, Aliesky HA, et al. Critical Differences between Induced and Spontaneous Mouse Models of Graves’ Disease with Implications for Antigen-Specific Immunotherapy in Humans. J Immunol 2016; 197(12): 4560–4568.10.4049/jimmunol.1601393513784127913646
]Search in Google Scholar
[
141. Animals Behind Top Drugs. Foundation for Biomedical Research Available from: https://fbresearch.org/medical-advances/animal-research-achievements/animal-research-top-drugs/. 2021. Accessed February 28, 2022.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
142. Mohs RC, Greig NH. Drug discovery and development: Role of basic biological research. Alzheimers Dement Transl Res Clin Interv 2017;3:651–657.10.1016/j.trci.2017.10.005572528429255791
]Search in Google Scholar
[
143. Ireson CR, Alavijeh MS, Palmer AM, et al. The role of mouse tumour models in the discovery and development of anticancer drugs. Br J Cancer 2019;121:101–108.10.1038/s41416-019-0495-5673803731231121
]Search in Google Scholar
[
144. Wege AK. Humanized Mouse Models for the Preclinical Assessment of Cancer Immunotherapy. BioDrugs Clin Immunother Biopharm Gene Ther 2018;32:245–266.10.1007/s40259-018-0275-429589229
]Search in Google Scholar
[
145. Berry-Kravis EM, Lindemann L, Jønch AE, et al. Drug development for neurodevelopmental disorders: lessons learned from fragile X syndrome. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2018;17:280–299.10.1038/nrd.2017.221690422529217836
]Search in Google Scholar
[
146. Chadman KK, Fernandes S, DiLiberto E, et al. Do animal models hold value in Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) drug discovery? Expert Opin Drug Discov 2019;14:727–734.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
147. Díaz-Caneja CM, State MW, Hagerman RJ, et al. A white paper on a neurodevelopmental framework for drug discovery in autism and other neurodevelopmental disorders. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol J Eur Coll Neuropsychopharmacol 2021;48:49–88.10.1016/j.euroneuro.2021.02.02033781629
]Search in Google Scholar
[
148. Howe JR, Bear MF, Golshani P, et al. The mouse as a model for neuropsychiatric drug development. Curr Biol CB 2018;28:R909–R914.10.1016/j.cub.2018.07.046816302230205056
]Search in Google Scholar
[
149. Tricklebank MD, Robbins TW, Simmons C, et al. Time to re-engage psychiatric drug discovery by strengthening confidence in preclinical psychopharmacology. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2021;238:1417–1436.10.1007/s00213-021-05787-x794597033694032
]Search in Google Scholar
[
150. Cacabelos R, Carrera I, Martínez-Iglesias O, et al. What is the gold standard model for Alzheimer’s disease drug discovery and development? Expert Opin Drug Discov 2021;16:1415–1440.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
151. Koprich JB, Kalia LV, Brotchie JM. Animal models of α-synucleinopathy for Parkinson disease drug development. Nat Rev Neurosci 2017;18:515–529.10.1038/nrn.2017.7528747776
]Search in Google Scholar
[
152. Vitek MP, Araujo JA, Fossel M, et al. Translational animal models for Alzheimer’s disease: An Alzheimer’s Association Business Consortium Think Tank. Alzheimers Dement N Y N 2020;6:e12114.10.1002/trc2.12114779831033457489
]Search in Google Scholar
[
153. Sun W, Zheng W, Simeonov A. Drug discovery and development for rare genetic disorders. Am J Med Genet A 2017;173:2307–2322.10.1002/ajmg.a.38326566212928731526
]Search in Google Scholar
[
154. Singh VK, Seed TM. How necessary are animal models for modern drug discovery? Expert Opin Drug Discov 2021;16:1391–1397.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
155. Jellinger KA. Towards a Biological Definition of Alzheimer Disease. Int J Neurol Neurother 2020; 7(1): 095.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
156. Jellinger KA. Recent update on the heterogeneity of the Alzheimer’s disease spectrum. J Neural Transm 2022;129:1–24.10.1007/s00702-021-02449-234919190
]Search in Google Scholar
[
157. Fereshtehnejad S-M, Postuma RB. Subtypes of Parkinson’s Disease: What Do They Tell Us About Disease Progression? Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 2017;17:34.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
158. Qian E, Huang Y. Subtyping of Parkinson’s Disease - Where Are We Up To? Aging Dis 2019;10:1130.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
159. Agelink van Rentergem JA, Deserno MK, Geurts HM. Validation strategies for subtypes in psychiatry: A systematic review of research on autism spectrum disorder. Clin Psychol Rev 2021;87:102033.10.1016/j.cpr.2021.10203333962352
]Search in Google Scholar
[
160. Easson AK, Fatima Z, McIntosh AR. Functional connectivity-based subtypes of individuals with and without autism spectrum disorder. Netw Neurosci 2019;3:344–362.10.1162/netn_a_00067637047430793086
]Search in Google Scholar
[
161. Drummond E, Wisniewski T. Alzheimer’s disease: experimental models and reality. Acta Neuropathol (Berl) 2017;133:155–175.10.1007/s00401-016-1662-x525310928025715
]Search in Google Scholar
[
162. Gurdon B, Kaczorowski C. Pursuit of precision medicine: Systems biology approaches in Alzheimer’s disease mouse models. Neurobiol Dis 2021;161:105558.10.1016/j.nbd.2021.10555834767943
]Search in Google Scholar
[
163. Devi G, Scheltens P. Heterogeneity of Alzheimer’s disease: consequence for drug trials? Alzheimers Res Ther 2018;10:122.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
164. Marras C, Chaudhuri KR, Titova N, et al. Therapy of Parkinson’s Disease Subtypes. Neurotherapeutics 2020;17:1366–1377.10.1007/s13311-020-00894-7785125332749651
]Search in Google Scholar
[
165. Ringman JM, Goate A, Masters CL, et al. Genetic heterogeneity in Alzheimer disease and implications for treatment strategies. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 2014;14:499.10.1007/s11910-014-0499-8416298725217249
]Search in Google Scholar
[
166. Forloni G. Alzheimer’s disease: from basic science to precision medicine approach. BMJ Neurol Open 2020;2:e000079.10.1136/bmjno-2020-000079790316833681801
]Search in Google Scholar
[
167. Galvin JE. Advancing personalized treatment of Alzheimer’s disease: a call for the N-of-1 trial design. Future Neurol 2018;13:151–160.10.2217/fnl-2018-0004
]Search in Google Scholar
[
168. Ryden LE, Lewis SJG. Parkinson’s Disease in the Era of Personalised Medicine: One Size Does Not Fit All. Drugs Aging 2019;36:103–113.10.1007/s40266-018-0624-530556112
]Search in Google Scholar
[
169. Bhardwaj S, Kesari KK, Rachamalla M, et al. CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing: New hope for Alzheimer’s disease therapeutics. J Adv Res. 2021.10.1016/j.jare.2021.07.001
]Search in Google Scholar
[
170. Cring MR, Sheffield VC. Gene therapy and gene correction: targets, progress, and challenges for treating human diseases. Gene Ther 2022;29:3–12.10.1038/s41434-020-00197-833037407
]Search in Google Scholar
[
171. Dunbar CE, High KA, Joung JK, et al. Gene therapy comes of age. Science 2018;359:eaan4672.10.1126/science.aan467229326244
]Search in Google Scholar
[
172. Carrillo MA, Zhen A, Kitchen SG. The Use of the Humanized Mouse Model in Gene Therapy and Immunotherapy for HIV and Cancer. Front Immunol 2018;9:746.10.3389/fimmu.2018.00746593240029755454
]Search in Google Scholar
[
173. Gopinath C, Nathar TJ, Ghosh A, et al. Contemporary Animal Models For Human Gene Therapy Applications. Curr Gene Ther 2015;15:531–540.10.2174/1566523215666150929110424770957126415576
]Search in Google Scholar
[
174. Ingusci S, Verlengia G, Soukupova M, et al. Gene Therapy Tools for Brain Diseases. Front Pharmacol 2019;10:724.10.3389/fphar.2019.00724661349631312139
]Search in Google Scholar
[
175. Park H, Oh J, Shim G, et al. In vivo neuronal gene editing via CRISPR–Cas9 amphiphilic nanocomplexes alleviates deficits in mouse models of Alzheimer’s disease. Nat Neurosci 2019;22:524–528.10.1038/s41593-019-0352-030858603
]Search in Google Scholar
[
176. Stepanichev M. Gene Editing and Alzheimer’s Disease: Is There Light at the End of the Tunnel? Front Genome Ed 2020;2:4.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
177. Yoo TJ. Anti-Inflammatory Gene Therapy Improves Spatial Memory Performance in a Mouse Model of Alzheimer’s Disease. J Alzheimers Dis 2022; 85(3): 1001–1008.10.3233/JAD-215270892511834897091
]Search in Google Scholar
[
178. Van Laar AD, Van Laar VS, San Sebastian W, et al. An Update on Gene Therapy Approaches for Parkinson’s Disease: Restoration of Dopaminergic Function. J Park Dis 2021;11:S173–S182.10.3233/JPD-212724854324334366374
]Search in Google Scholar
[
179. Wu Z, Parry M, Hou X-Y, et al. Gene therapy conversion of striatal astrocytes into GABAergic neurons in mouse models of Huntington’s disease. Nat Commun 2020;11:1105.10.1038/s41467-020-14855-3704661332107381
]Search in Google Scholar
[
180. Yang S, Chang R, Yang H, et al. CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing ameliorates neurotoxicity in mouse model of Huntington’s disease. J Clin Invest 2017;127:2719–2724.10.1172/JCI92087549074128628038
]Search in Google Scholar
[
181. Davidsohn N, Pezone M, Vernet A, et al. A single combination gene therapy treats multiple age-related diseases. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2019;116:23505–23511.10.1073/pnas.1910073116687621831685628
]Search in Google Scholar
[
182. Blusztajn JK, Slack BE, Mellott TJ. Neuroprotective Actions of Dietary Choline. Nutrients 2017;9:E815.10.3390/nu9080815557960928788094
]Search in Google Scholar
[
183. Zilkha N, Kuperman Y, Kimchi T. High-fat diet exacerbates cognitive rigidity and social deficiency in the BTBR mouse model of autism. Neuroscience 2017;345:142–154.10.1016/j.neuroscience.2016.01.07026855190
]Search in Google Scholar
[
184. Lilamand M, Porte B, Cognat E, et al. Are ketogenic diets promising for Alzheimer’s disease? A translational review. Alzheimers Res Ther 2020;12:42.10.1186/s13195-020-00615-4715813532290868
]Search in Google Scholar
[
185. Lin K-H, Chiu C-H, Kuo W-W, et al. The preventive effects of edible folic acid on cardiomyocyte apoptosis and survival in early onset triple-transgenic Alzheimer’s disease model mice. Environ Toxicol 2018;33:83–92.10.1002/tox.2249829068127
]Search in Google Scholar
[
186. Gao X, Sanderson SM, Dai Z, et al. Dietary methionine influences therapy in mouse cancer models and alters human metabolism. Nature 2019;572:397–401.10.1038/s41586-019-1437-3695102331367041
]Search in Google Scholar
[
187. Abid MA, Abid MB. Commentary: Dietary methionine influences therapy in mouse cancer models and alters human metabolism. Front Oncol 2020; 10. 2020. Accessed April 3, 2022.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
188. Wanders D, Hobson K, Ji X. Methionine Restriction and Cancer Biology. Nutrients 2020;12:684.10.3390/nu12030684714658932138282
]Search in Google Scholar
[
189. Xu Y, Jiang C, Wu J, et al. Ketogenic diet ameliorates cognitive impairment and neuroinflammation in a mouse model of Alzheimer’s disease. CNS Neurosci Ther 2022;28:580–592.10.1111/cns.13779892892034889516
]Search in Google Scholar
[
190. Brady M, Beltramini A, Vaughan G, et al. Benefits of a ketogenic diet on repetitive motor behavior in mice. Behav Brain Res 2022;422:113748.10.1016/j.bbr.2022.11374835038463
]Search in Google Scholar
[
191. Norwitz NG, Dalai SS, Palmer CM. Ketogenic diet as a metabolic treatment for mental illness. Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes 2020;27:269–274.10.1097/MED.000000000000056432773571
]Search in Google Scholar
[
192. Wu J, de Theije CGM, da Silva SL, et al. Dietary interventions that reduce mTOR activity rescue autistic-like behavioral deficits in mice. Brain Behav Immun 2017;59:273–287.10.1016/j.bbi.2016.09.01627640900
]Search in Google Scholar
[
193. Chin EWM, Lim WM, Ma D, et al. Choline Rescues Behavioural Deficits in a Mouse Model of Rett Syndrome by Modulating Neuronal Plasticity. Mol Neurobiol 2019;56:3882–3896.10.1007/s12035-018-1345-9650551530220058
]Search in Google Scholar
[
194. Vuillermot S, Luan W, Meyer U, et al. Vitamin D treatment during pregnancy prevents autism-related phenotypes in a mouse model of maternal immune activation. Mol Autism 2017;8:9.10.1186/s13229-017-0125-0535121228316773
]Search in Google Scholar
[
195. Ribeiro MC, MacDonald JL. Vitamin D modulates cortical transcriptome and behavioral phenotypes in an Mecp2 heterozygous Rett syndrome mouse model. Neurobiol Dis 2022;165:105636.10.1016/j.nbd.2022.105636
]Search in Google Scholar
[
196. Lu W-T, Sun S-Q, Li Y, et al. Curcumin Ameliorates Memory Deficits by Enhancing Lactate Content and MCT2 Expression in APP/PS1 Transgenic Mouse Model of Alzheimer’s Disease. Anat Rec 2019;302:332–338.10.1002/ar.23969
]Search in Google Scholar
[
197. Reddy PH, Manczak M, Yin X, et al. Protective Effects of Indian Spice Curcumin Against Amyloid-β in Alzheimer’s Disease. J Alzheimers Dis 2018;61:843–866.10.3233/JAD-170512
]Search in Google Scholar
[
198. De Filippis F, Vitaglione P, Cuomo R, et al. Dietary Interventions to Modulate the Gut Microbiome—How Far Away Are We From Precision Medicine. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2018;24:2142–2154.10.1093/ibd/izy080
]Search in Google Scholar
[
199. Newell C, Bomhof MR, Reimer RA, et al. Ketogenic diet modifies the gut microbiota in a murine model of autism spectrum disorder. Mol Autism 2016;7:37.10.1186/s13229-016-0099-3
]Search in Google Scholar
[
200. Cryan JF, O’Riordan KJ, Sandhu K, et al. The gut microbiome in neurological disorders. Lancet Neurol 2020;19:179–194.10.1016/S1474-4422(19)30356-4
]Search in Google Scholar
[
201. Kraeuter A-K, Phillips R, Sarnyai Z. Ketogenic therapy in neurodegenerative and psychiatric disorders: From mice to men. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry 2020;101:109913.10.1016/j.pnpbp.2020.10991332151695
]Search in Google Scholar
[
202. Zhang C, Franklin CL, Ericsson AC. Consideration of Gut Microbiome in Murine Models of Diseases. Microorganisms 2021;9:1062.10.3390/microorganisms9051062815671434068994
]Search in Google Scholar
[
203. Rogers J, Renoir T, Hannan AJ. Gene-environment interactions informing therapeutic approaches to cognitive and affective disorders. Neuropharmacology 2019;145:37–48.10.1016/j.neuropharm.2017.12.03829277490
]Search in Google Scholar
[
204. Eisinger BE, Zhao X. Identifying molecular mediators of environmentally enhanced neurogenesis. Cell Tissue Res 2018;371:7–21.10.1007/s00441-017-2718-5582658729127518
]Search in Google Scholar
[
205. Garthe A, Roeder I, Kempermann G. Mice in an enriched environment learn more flexibly because of adult hippocampal neurogenesis. Hippocampus 2016;26:261–271.10.1002/hipo.22520504965426311488
]Search in Google Scholar
[
206. Grońska-Pęski M, Gonçalves JT, Hébert JM. Enriched Environment Promotes Adult Hippocampal Neurogenesis through FGFRs. J Neurosci Off J Soc Neurosci 2021;41:2899–2910.10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2286-20.2021801888233637561
]Search in Google Scholar
[
207. De Sousa RAL, Rodrigues CM, Mendes BF, et al. Physical exercise protocols in animal models of Alzheimer’s disease: a systematic review. Metab Brain Dis 2021;36:85–95.10.1007/s11011-020-00633-z33095371
]Search in Google Scholar
[
208. da Silva WAB, Ferreira Oliveira K, Caroline Vitorino L, et al. Physical exercise increases the production of tyrosine hydroxylase and CDNF in the spinal cord of a Parkinson’s disease mouse model. Neurosci Lett 2021;760:136089.10.1016/j.neulet.2021.13608934182056
]Search in Google Scholar
[
209. Houdebine L, Gallelli CA, Rastelli M, et al. Effect of physical exercise on brain and lipid metabolism in mouse models of multiple sclerosis. Chem Phys Lipids 2017;207:127–134.10.1016/j.chemphyslip.2017.06.00228606714
]Search in Google Scholar
[
210. Forbes TA, Goldstein EZ, Dupree JL, et al. Environmental enrichment ameliorates perinatal brain injury and promotes functional white matter recovery. Nat Commun 2020;11:964.10.1038/s41467-020-14762-7703123732075970
]Search in Google Scholar
[
211. Livingston-Thomas J, Nelson P, Karthikeyan S, et al. Exercise and Environmental Enrichment as Enablers of Task-Specific Neuroplasticity and Stroke Recovery. Neurother J Am Soc Exp Neurother 2016;13:395–402.10.1007/s13311-016-0423-9482401626868018
]Search in Google Scholar
[
212. Huang Y, Jiang H, Zheng Q, et al. Environmental enrichment or selective activation of parvalbumin-expressing interneurons ameliorates synaptic and behavioral deficits in animal models with schizophrenia-like behaviors during adolescence. Mol Psychiatry 2021;26:2533–2552.10.1038/s41380-020-01005-w33473150
]Search in Google Scholar
[
213. Robison LS, Francis N, Popescu DL, et al. Environmental Enrichment: Disentangling the Influence of Novelty, Social, and Physical Activity on Cerebral Amyloid Angiopathy in a Transgenic Mouse Model. Int J Mol Sci 2020;21:E843.10.3390/ijms21030843703818832012921
]Search in Google Scholar
[
214. Gerdts V, Littel-van den Hurk S van D, Griebel PJ, et al. Use of animal models in the development of human vaccines. Future Microbiol 2007;2:667–675.10.2217/17460913.2.6.66718041907
]Search in Google Scholar
[
215. Kiros TG, Levast B, Auray G, et al. The Importance of Animal Models in the Development of Vaccines. Innov Vaccinol 2012;251–264.10.1007/978-94-007-4543-8_11
]Search in Google Scholar
[
216. Atlante S, Mongelli A, Barbi V, et al. The epigenetic implication in coronavirus infection and therapy. Clin Epigenetics 2020;12:156.10.1186/s13148-020-00946-x757697533087172
]Search in Google Scholar
[
217. Nehme Z, Pasquereau S, Herbein G. Control of viral infections by epigenetic-targeted therapy. Clin Epigenetics 2019;11:55.10.1186/s13148-019-0654-9643795330917875
]Search in Google Scholar
[
218. Hwang J-R, Park S-G. Mouse models for hepatitis B virus research. Lab Anim Res 2018;34:85–91.10.5625/lar.2018.34.3.85617022330310404
]Search in Google Scholar
[
219. Krishnakumar V, Durairajan SSK, Alagarasu K, et al. Recent Updates on Mouse Models for Human Immunodeficiency, Influenza, and Dengue Viral Infections. Viruses 2019;11:252.10.3390/v11030252646616430871179
]Search in Google Scholar
[
220. Sarkar S, Heise MT. Mouse Models as Resources for Studying Infectious Diseases. Clin Ther 2019;41:1912–1922.10.1016/j.clinthera.2019.08.010711255231540729
]Search in Google Scholar
[
221. Ji W, Gong B, Jin H, et al. Recent Progress Towards Vaccines and Antibody-based Therapies Against Alzheimer’s Disease. Mini-Rev Med Chem 2021; 21(19): 3062–3072.10.2174/138955752166621080511092034353254
]Search in Google Scholar
[
222. Carrera I, Etcheverría I, Fernández-Novoa L, et al. Vaccine Development to Treat Alzheimer’s Disease Neuropathology in APP/PS1 Transgenic Mice. Int J Alzheimers Dis 2012; 2012e376138.10.1155/2012/376138345767023024882
]Search in Google Scholar
[
223. Cossu D, Ruberto S, Yokoyama K, et al. Efficacy of BCG vaccine in animal models of neurological disorders. Vaccine 2022;40:432–436.10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.12.00534906393
]Search in Google Scholar
[
224. Herline K, Drummond E, Wisniewski T. Recent advancements toward therapeutic vaccines against Alzheimer’s disease. Expert Rev Vaccines 2018;17:707–721.10.1080/14760584.2018.150090530005578
]Search in Google Scholar
[
225. Banik A, Brown RE, Bamburg J, et al. Translation of Pre-Clinical Studies into Successful Clinical Trials for Alzheimer’s Disease: What are the Roadblocks and How Can They Be Overcome? J Alzheimers Dis 2015; 47(4): 815–843.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
226. Homberg JR, Kyzar EJ, Stewart AM, et al. Improving treatment of neurodevelopmental disorders: recommendations based on preclinical studies. Expert Opin Drug Discov 2016;11:11–25.10.1517/17460441.2016.111583426558752
]Search in Google Scholar
[
227. Bockamp E, Maringer M, Spangenberg C, et al. Of mice and models: improved animal models for biomedical research. Physiol Genomics 2002;11:115–132.10.1152/physiolgenomics.00067.200212464688
]Search in Google Scholar
[
228. Cibelli J, Emborg ME, Prockop DJ, et al. Strategies for improving animal models for regenerative medicine. Cell Stem Cell 2013;12:271–274.10.1016/j.stem.2013.01.004438328023472868
]Search in Google Scholar
[
229. Stewart AM, Kalueff AV. Developing better and more valid animal models of brain disorders. Behav Brain Res 2015;276:28–31.10.1016/j.bbr.2013.12.02424384129
]Search in Google Scholar
[
230. Lama J, Buhidma Y, Fletcher EJR, et al. Animal models of Parkinson’s disease: a guide to selecting the optimal model for your research. Neuronal Signal 2021;5:NS20210026.10.1042/NS20210026866150734956652
]Search in Google Scholar
[
231. Reardon S. Frustrated Alzheimer’s researchers seek better lab mice. Nature 2018;563:611–612.10.1038/d41586-018-07484-w30482928
]Search in Google Scholar
[
232. Li C, Briner A, Götz J. The search for improved animal models of Alzheimer’s disease and novel strategies for therapeutic intervention. Future Med Chem 2019;11:1853–1857.10.4155/fmc-2019-015031517531
]Search in Google Scholar
[
233. Veening-Griffioen DH, Ferreira GS, van Meer PJK, et al. Are some animal models more equal than others? A case study on the translational value of animal models of efficacy for Alzheimer’s disease. Eur J Pharmacol 2019;859:172524.10.1016/j.ejphar.2019.17252431291566
]Search in Google Scholar
[
234. Tai LM, Maldonado Weng J, LaDu MJ, et al. Chapter One - Relevance of transgenic mouse models for Alzheimer’s disease. In: Teplow DB (ed) Progress in Molecular Biology and Translational Science. 2021;177: 1–48.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
235. Nadeau JH, Auwerx J. The virtuous cycle of human genetics and mouse models in drug discovery. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2019;18:255–272.10.1038/s41573-018-0009-930679805
]Search in Google Scholar
[
236. Mckean NE, Handley RR, Snell RG. A Review of the Current Mammalian Models of Alzheimer’s Disease and Challenges That Need to Be Overcome. Int J Mol Sci 2021;22:13168.10.3390/ijms222313168865812334884970
]Search in Google Scholar
[
237. Rahi V, Kumar P. Animal models of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Int J Dev Neurosci Off J Int Soc Dev Neurosci 2021;81:107–124.10.1002/jdn.1008933428802
]Search in Google Scholar
[
238. Espíndola SL, Damianich A, Alvarez RJ, et al. Modulation of Tau Isoforms Imbalance Precludes Tau Pathology and Cognitive Decline in a Mouse Model of Tauopathy. Cell Rep 2018;23:709–715.10.1016/j.celrep.2018.03.07929669277
]Search in Google Scholar
[
239. Fung CW, Guo J, Fu H, et al. Atrophy associated with tau pathology precedes overt cell death in a mouse model of progressive tauopathy. Sci Adv 2020;6:eabc8098.10.1126/sciadv.abc8098756758433067235
]Search in Google Scholar
[
240. Jankowsky JL, Zheng H. Practical considerations for choosing a mouse model of Alzheimer’s disease. Mol Neurodegener 2017;12:89.10.1186/s13024-017-0231-7574195629273078
]Search in Google Scholar
[
241. Kaye J, Reisine T, Finkbeiner S. Huntington’s disease mouse models: unraveling the pathology caused by CAG repeat expansion. Fac Rev 2021; 10(77).10.12703/r/10-77854659834746930
]Search in Google Scholar
[
242. Gunn RK, Huentelman MJ, Brown RE. Are Sema5a mutant mice a good model of autism? A behavioral analysis of sensory systems, emotionality and cognition. Behav Brain Res 2011;225:142–150.10.1016/j.bbr.2011.07.008317044121777623
]Search in Google Scholar
[
243. Verma V, Paul A, Amrapali Vishwanath A, et al. Understanding intellectual disability and autism spectrum disorders from common mouse models: synapses to behaviour. Open Biol 2019;9:180265.10.1098/rsob.180265659775731185809
]Search in Google Scholar
[
244. Cortés N, Andrade V, Maccioni RB. Behavioral and Neuropsychiatric Disorders in Alzheimer’s Disease. J Alzheimers Dis JAD 2018;63:899–910.10.3233/JAD-18000529710717
]Search in Google Scholar
[
245. Locci A, Orellana H, Rodriguez G, et al. Comparison of memory, affective behavior, and neuropathology in APPNLGF knock-in mice to 5xFAD and APP/PS1 mice. Behav Brain Res 2021;404:113192.10.1016/j.bbr.2021.113192798013133607163
]Search in Google Scholar
[
246. Seo N-Y, Kim GH, Noh JE, et al. Selective Regional Loss of Cortical Synapses Lacking Presynaptic Mitochondria in the 5xFAD Mouse Model. Front Neuroanat 2021;15:690168.10.3389/fnana.2021.690168826706134248509
]Search in Google Scholar
[
247. Whitesell JD, Buckley AR, Knox JE, et al. Whole brain imaging reveals distinct spatial patterns of amyloid beta deposition in three mouse models of Alzheimer’s disease. J Comp Neurol 2019;527:2122–2145.10.1002/cne.24555
]Search in Google Scholar
[
248. Brown RE, Bolivar S. The importance of behavioural bioassays in neuroscience. J Neurosci Methods 2018;300:68–76.10.1016/j.jneumeth.2017.05.022
]Search in Google Scholar
[
249. Puzzo D, Lee L, Palmeri A, et al. Behavioral assays with mouse models of Alzheimer’s disease: practical considerations and guidelines. Biochem Pharmacol 2014;88:450–467.10.1016/j.bcp.2014.01.011
]Search in Google Scholar
[
250. Ameen-Ali KE, Wharton SB, Simpson JE, et al. Review: Neuropathology and behavioural features of transgenic murine models of Alzheimer’s disease. Neuropathol Appl Neurobiol 2017;43:553–570.10.1111/nan.12440
]Search in Google Scholar
[
251. Belyaev ND, Kellett KAB, Beckett C, et al. The transcriptionally active amyloid precursor protein (APP) intracellular domain is preferentially produced from the 695 isosform of APP in a {beta}-secretase-dependent pathway. J Biol Chem 2010;285:41443–41454.10.1074/jbc.M110.141390
]Search in Google Scholar
[
252. Andrä K, Abramowski D, Duke M, et al. Expression of APP in transgenic mice: a comparison of neuron-specific promoters. Neurobiol Aging 1996;17:183–190.10.1016/0197-4580(95)02066-7
]Search in Google Scholar
[
253. Fontaine DA, Davis DB. Attention to Background Strain Is Essential for Metabolic Research: C57BL/6 and the International Knockout Mouse Consortium. Diabetes 2016;65:25–33.10.2337/db15-0982468694926696638
]Search in Google Scholar
[
254. Bryant CD, Zhang NN, Sokoloff G, et al. Behavioral differences among C57BL/6 substrains: implications for transgenic and knockout studies. J Neurogenet 2008;22:315–331.10.1080/01677060802357388369782719085272
]Search in Google Scholar
[
255. Doetschman T. Influence of genetic background on genetically engineered mouse phenotypes. Methods Mol Biol Clifton NJ 2009;530:423–433.10.1007/978-1-59745-471-1_23280584819266333
]Search in Google Scholar
[
256. Reilly KM. The Effects of Genetic Background of Mouse Models of Cancer: Friend or Foe? Cold Spring Harb Protoc 2016;2016:pdb.top076273.10.1101/pdb.top076273670315626933251
]Search in Google Scholar
[
257. Wong AA, Brown RE. Visual detection, pattern discrimination and visual acuity in 14 strains of mice. Genes Brain Behav 2006;5:389–403.10.1111/j.1601-183X.2005.00173.x16879633
]Search in Google Scholar
[
258. Rae EA, Brown RE. The problem of genotype and sex differences in life expectancy in transgenic AD mice. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2015;57:238–251.10.1016/j.neubiorev.2015.09.00226348702
]Search in Google Scholar
[
259. O’Leary TP, Mantolino HM, Stover KR, et al. Age-related deterioration of motor function in male and female 5xFAD mice from 3 to 16 months of age. Genes Brain Behav 2020;19:e12538.10.1111/gbb.1253830426678
]Search in Google Scholar
[
260. O’Leary TP, Brown RE. Visuo-spatial learning and memory impairments in the 5xFAD mouse model of Alzheimer’s disease: Effects of age, sex, albinism, and motor impairments. Genes Brain Behav 2022;e12794.10.1111/gbb.1279435238473
]Search in Google Scholar
[
261. Stevens LM, Brown RE. Reference and working memory deficits in the 3xTg-AD mouse between 2 and 15-months of age: a cross-sectional study. Behav Brain Res 2015;278:496–505.10.1016/j.bbr.2014.10.03325446812
]Search in Google Scholar
[
262. Lau JC, Lerch JP, Sled JG, et al. Longitudinal neuroanatomical changes determined by deformation-based morphometry in a mouse model of Alzheimer’s disease. NeuroImage 2008;42:19–27.10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.04.25218547819
]Search in Google Scholar
[
263. Foidl BM, Humpel C. Can mouse models mimic sporadic Alzheimer’s disease? Neural Regen Res 2020;15:401–406.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
264. Maciejewska K, Czarnecka K, Szymański P. A review of the mechanisms underlying selected comorbidities in Alzheimer’s disease. Pharmacol Rep PR 2021;73:1565–1581.10.1007/s43440-021-00293-5859932034121170
]Search in Google Scholar
[
265. Martini AC, Forner S, Trujillo-Estrada L, et al. Past to Future: What Animal Models Have Taught Us About Alzheimer’s Disease. J Alzheimers Dis 2018; 64(s1): S365–S378.10.3233/JAD-17991729504540
]Search in Google Scholar
[
266. Wong AA, Brown RE. Prevention of vision loss protects against age-related impairment in learning and memory performance in DBA/2J mice. Front Aging Neurosci 2013;5:52.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
267. Fakhoury M. Microglia and Astrocytes in Alzheimer’s Disease: Implications for Therapy. Curr Neuropharmacol 2018;16:508–518.10.2174/1570159X15666170720095240599786228730967
]Search in Google Scholar
[
268. Li H, Wei C, Zhou R, et al. Mouse models in modeling aging and cancer. Exp Gerontol 2019;120:88–94.10.1016/j.exger.2019.03.00230876950
]Search in Google Scholar
[
269. Bilkei-Gorzo A. Genetic mouse models of brain ageing and Alzheimer’s disease. Pharmacol Ther 2014;142:244–257.10.1016/j.pharmthera.2013.12.00924362083
]Search in Google Scholar
[
270. Boche D, Gordon MN. Diversity of transcriptomic microglial phenotypes in aging and Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement 2022;18:360–376.10.1002/alz.1238934223696
]Search in Google Scholar
[
271. O’Leary TimothyP, Shin S, Fertan E, et al. Reduced acoustic startle response and peripheral hearing loss in the 5xFAD mouse model of Alzheimer’s disease. Genes Brain Behav 2017;16:554–563.10.1111/gbb.1237028133939
]Search in Google Scholar
[
272. Blaney CE, Gunn RK, Stover KR, et al. Maternal genotype influences behavioral development of 3×Tg-AD mouse pups. Behav Brain Res 2013;252:40–48.10.1016/j.bbr.2013.05.03323711927
]Search in Google Scholar
[
273. Weaver ICG, Cervoni N, Champagne FA, et al. Epigenetic programming by maternal behavior. Nat Neurosci 2004;7:847–854.10.1038/nn127615220929
]Search in Google Scholar
[
274. Agarwal D, Kumari R, Ilyas A, et al. Crosstalk between epigenetics and mTOR as a gateway to new insights in pathophysiology and treatment of Alzheimer’s disease. Int J Biol Macromol 2021;192:895–903.10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2021.10.02634662652
]Search in Google Scholar
[
275. Griñán-Ferré C, Izquierdo V, Otero E, et al. Environmental Enrichment Improves Cognitive Deficits, AD Hallmarks and Epigenetic Alterations Presented in 5xFAD Mouse Model. Front Cell Neurosci 2018;12:224.10.3389/fncel.2018.00224610416430158856
]Search in Google Scholar
[
276. Zhang X, Hong R, Chen W, et al. The role of long noncoding RNA in major human disease. Bioorganic Chem 2019;92:103214.10.1016/j.bioorg.2019.10321431499258
]Search in Google Scholar
[
277. Jakovcevski M, Akbarian S. Epigenetic mechanisms in neurological disease. Nat Med 2012;18:1194–1204.10.1038/nm.2828359687622869198
]Search in Google Scholar
[
278. Cholewa-Waclaw J, Bird A, Schimmelmann M von, et al. The Role of Epigenetic Mechanisms in the Regulation of Gene Expression in the Nervous System. J Neurosci 2016;36:11427–11434.10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2492-16.2016512521027911745
]Search in Google Scholar
[
279. Banik A, Kandilya D, Ramya S, et al. Maternal Factors that Induce Epigenetic Changes Contribute to Neurological Disorders in Offspring. Genes 2017;8:E150.10.3390/genes8060150548551428538662
]Search in Google Scholar
[
280. Bale TL. Epigenetic and transgenerational reprogramming of brain development. Nat Rev Neurosci 2015;16:332–344.10.1038/nrn3818706415525921815
]Search in Google Scholar
[
281. Darwiche N. Epigenetic mechanisms and the hallmarks of cancer: an intimate affair. Am J Cancer Res 2020;10:1954–1978.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
282. Herceg Z, Vaissière T. Epigenetic mechanisms and cancer: an interface between the environment and the genome. Epigenetics 2011;6:804–819.10.4161/epi.6.7.1626221758002
]Search in Google Scholar
[
283. Zhang Q, Cao X. Epigenetic regulation of the innate immune response to infection. Nat Rev Immunol 2019;19:417–432.10.1038/s41577-019-0151-630918351
]Search in Google Scholar
[
284. Lim TB, Foo SYR, Chen CK. The Role of Epigenetics in Congenital Heart Disease. Genes 2021;12:390.10.3390/genes12030390799856133803261
]Search in Google Scholar
[
285. Saul D, Kosinsky RL. Epigenetics of Aging and Aging-Associated Diseases. Int J Mol Sci 2021;22:401.10.3390/ijms22010401779492633401659
]Search in Google Scholar
[
286. Bertogliat MJ, Morris-Blanco KC, Vemuganti R. Epigenetic mechanisms of neurodegenerative diseases and acute brain injury. Neurochem Int 2020;133:104642.10.1016/j.neuint.2019.104642807440131838024
]Search in Google Scholar
[
287. Deegan DF, Nigam P, Engel N. Sexual Dimorphism of the Heart: Genetics, Epigenetics, and Development. Front Cardiovasc Med 2021;8:668252.10.3389/fcvm.2021.668252818917634124200
]Search in Google Scholar
[
288. McCarthy MM, Nugent BM. Epigenetic Contributions to Hormonally-Mediated Sexual Differentiation of the Brain. J Neuroendocrinol 2013;25:1133–1140.10.1111/jne.12072533067323919286
]Search in Google Scholar
[
289. Yu YE, Xing Z, Do C, et al. Chapter 1 - Genetic and epigenetic pathways in Down syndrome: Insights to the brain and immune system from humans and mouse models. In: Dierssen M (ed) Progress in Brain Research. 2020;251:1–28.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
290. Berdasco M, Esteller M. Genetic syndromes caused by mutations in epigenetic genes. Hum Genet 2013;132:359–383.10.1007/s00439-013-1271-x23370504
]Search in Google Scholar
[
291. Jaenisch R, Bird A. Epigenetic regulation of gene expression: how the genome integrates intrinsic and environmental signals. Nat Genet 2003;33 Suppl:245–254.10.1038/ng108912610534
]Search in Google Scholar
[
292. Zapata-Martín Del Campo CM, Martínez-Rosas M, Guarner-Lans V. Epigenetic Programming of Synthesis, Release, and/or Receptor Expression of Common Mediators Participating in the Risk/Resilience for Comorbid Stress-Related Disorders and Coronary Artery Disease. Int J Mol Sci 2018;19:E1224.10.3390/ijms19041224597950029670001
]Search in Google Scholar
[
293. Zhang T-Y, Meaney MJ. Epigenetics and the Environmental Regulation of the Genome and Its Function. Annu Rev Psychol 2010;61:439–466.10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.16362519958180
]Search in Google Scholar
[
294. Linnér A, Almgren M. Epigenetic programming-The important first 1000 days. Acta Paediatr Oslo Nor 1992 2020;109:443–452.10.1111/apa.1505031603247
]Search in Google Scholar
[
295. Blewitt M, Whitelaw E. The Use of Mouse Models to Study Epigenetics. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 2013;5:a017939.10.1101/cshperspect.a017939380957924186070
]Search in Google Scholar
[
296. Seki Y, Williams L, Vuguin PM, et al. Minireview: Epigenetic programming of diabetes and obesity: animal models. Endocrinology 2012;153:1031–1038.10.1210/en.2011-1805328153422253432
]Search in Google Scholar
[
297. Bianco-Miotto T, Craig JM, Gasser YP, et al. Epigenetics and DOHaD: from basics to birth and beyond. J Dev Orig Health Dis 2017;8:513–519.10.1017/S204017441700073328889823
]Search in Google Scholar
[
298. Kubota T, Miyake K, Hariya N, et al. Understanding the epigenetics of neurodevelopmental disorders and DOHaD. J Dev Orig Health Dis 2015;6:96–104.10.1017/S204017441500005725708304
]Search in Google Scholar
[
299. Simeoni U, Armengaud J-B, Siddeek B, et al. Perinatal Origins of Adult Disease. Neonatology 2018;113:393–399.10.1159/00048761829852488
]Search in Google Scholar
[
300. Bernstein BE, Meissner A, Lander ES. The mammalian epigenome. Cell 2007;128:669–681.10.1016/j.cell.2007.01.03317320505
]Search in Google Scholar
[
301. Borrelli E, Nestler EJ, Allis CD, et al. Decoding the epigenetic language of neuronal plasticity. Neuron 2008;60:961–974.10.1016/j.neuron.2008.10.012273747319109904
]Search in Google Scholar
[
302. Bonifer C, Cockerill PN. Chromatin priming of genes in development: Concepts, mechanisms and consequences. Exp Hematol 2017;49:1–8.10.1016/j.exphem.2017.01.00328185904
]Search in Google Scholar
[
303. Ernst C, Jefri M. Epigenetic priming in neurodevelopmental disorders. Trends Mol Med 2021;27:1106–1114.10.1016/j.molmed.2021.09.00534690045
]Search in Google Scholar
[
304. Mastrototaro G, Zaghi M, Sessa A. Epigenetic Mistakes in Neurodevelopmental Disorders. J Mol Neurosci MN 2017;61:590–602.10.1007/s12031-017-0900-628255957
]Search in Google Scholar
[
305. Gore AC, Krishnan K, Reilly MP. Endocrine-disrupting chemicals: Effects on neuroendocrine systems and the neurobiology of social behavior. Horm Behav 2019;111:7–22.10.1016/j.yhbeh.2018.11.006652747230476496
]Search in Google Scholar
[
306. León-Olea M, Martyniuk CJ, Orlando EF, et al. Current concepts in neuroendocrine disruption. Gen Comp Endocrinol 2014;203:158–173.10.1016/j.ygcen.2014.02.005413333724530523
]Search in Google Scholar
[
307. Patisaul HB, Fenton SE, Aylor D. Animal models of endocrine disruption. Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab 2018;32:283–297.10.1016/j.beem.2018.03.011602971029779582
]Search in Google Scholar
[
308. Vicente-Dueñas C, Hauer J, Cobaleda C, et al. Epigenetic Priming in Cancer Initiation. Trends Cancer 2018;4:408–417.10.1016/j.trecan.2018.04.00729860985
]Search in Google Scholar
[
309. Berson A, Nativio R, Berger SL, et al. Epigenetic Regulation in Neurodegenerative Diseases. Trends Neurosci 2018;41:587–598.10.1016/j.tins.2018.05.005617453229885742
]Search in Google Scholar
[
310. Burns AM, Gräff J. Cognitive epigenetic priming: leveraging histone acetylation for memory amelioration. Curr Opin Neurobiol 2021;67:75–84.10.1016/j.conb.2020.08.01133120188
]Search in Google Scholar
[
311. Qureshi IA, Mehler MF. Chapter 5 - Epigenetic mechanisms underlying nervous system diseases. In: Geschwind DH, Paulson HL, Klein C (eds) Handbook of Clinical Neurology. Elsevier:2018;43–58.10.1016/B978-0-444-63233-3.00005-1682239129325627
]Search in Google Scholar
[
312. Takeshima H, Ushijima T. Accumulation of genetic and epigenetic alterations in normal cells and cancer risk. Npj Precis Oncol 2019;3:1–8.10.1038/s41698-019-0079-0640333930854468
]Search in Google Scholar
[
313. Hoeijmakers L, Heinen Y, van Dam A-M, et al. Microglial Priming and Alzheimer’s Disease: A Possible Role for (Early) Immune Challenges and Epigenetics? Front Hum Neurosci 2016;10:398.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
314. Martins-Ferreira R, Leal B, Costa PP, et al. Microglial innate memory and epigenetic reprogramming in neurological disorders. Prog Neurobiol 2021;200:101971.10.1016/j.pneurobio.2020.10197133309803
]Search in Google Scholar
[
315. Perry VH, Holmes C. Microglial priming in neurodegenerative disease. Nat Rev Neurol 2014;10:217–224.10.1038/nrneurol.2014.3824638131
]Search in Google Scholar
[
316. Ganesan A, Arimondo PB, Rots MG, et al. The timeline of epigenetic drug discovery: from reality to dreams. Clin Epigenetics 2019;11:174.10.1186/s13148-019-0776-0688892131791394
]Search in Google Scholar
[
317. Good KV, Vincent JB, Ausió J. MeCP2: The Genetic Driver of Rett Syndrome Epigenetics. Front Genet 2021;12:620859.10.3389/fgene.2021.620859785952433552148
]Search in Google Scholar
[
318. Vashi N, Justice MJ. Treating Rett syndrome: from mouse models to human therapies. Mamm Genome Off J Int Mamm Genome Soc 2019;30:90–110.10.1007/s00335-019-09793-5660666530820643
]Search in Google Scholar
[
319. Mossink B, Negwer M, Schubert D, et al. The emerging role of chromatin remodelers in neurodevelopmental disorders: a developmental perspective. Cell Mol Life Sci CMLS 2021;78:2517–2563.10.1007/s00018-020-03714-5800449433263776
]Search in Google Scholar
[
320. Bustos FJ, Ampuero E, Jury N, et al. Epigenetic editing of the Dlg4/PSD95 gene improves cognition in aged and Alzheimer’s disease mice. Brain J Neurol 2017;140:3252–3268.10.1093/brain/awx272584103529155979
]Search in Google Scholar
[
321. Coppedè F. Epigenetic regulation in Alzheimer’s disease: is it a potential therapeutic target? Expert Opin Ther Targets 2021;25:283–298.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
322. Ricq EL, Hooker JM, Haggarty SJ. Toward development of epigenetic drugs for central nervous system disorders: Modulating neuroplasticity via H3K4 methylation. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 2016;70:536–550.10.1111/pcn.12426576416427485392
]Search in Google Scholar
[
323. Hogg SJ, Beavis PA, Dawson MA, et al. Targeting the epigenetic regulation of antitumour immunity. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2020;19:776–800.10.1038/s41573-020-0077-532929243
]Search in Google Scholar
[
324. Rugo HS, Jacobs I, Sharma S, et al. The Promise for Histone Methyltransferase Inhibitors for Epigenetic Therapy in Clinical Oncology: A Narrative Review. Adv Ther 2020;37:3059–3082.10.1007/s12325-020-01379-x746740932445185
]Search in Google Scholar
[
325. Chen Z, Li S, Subramaniam S, et al. Epigenetic Regulation: A New Frontier for Biomedical Engineers. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 2017;19:195–219.10.1146/annurev-bioeng-071516-04472028301736
]Search in Google Scholar
[
326. Horii T, Morita S, Hino S, et al. Successful generation of epigenetic disease model mice by targeted demethylation of the epigenome. Genome Biol 2020;21:77.10.1186/s13059-020-01991-8711079332234052
]Search in Google Scholar
[
327. Pajovic S, Siddaway R, Bridge T, et al. Epigenetic activation of a RAS/MYC axis in H3.3K27M-driven cancer. Nat Commun 2020;11:6216.10.1038/s41467-020-19972-7771827633277484
]Search in Google Scholar
[
328. Lardenoije R, van den Hove DLA, Havermans M, et al. Age-related epigenetic changes in hippocampal subregions of four animal models of Alzheimer’s disease. Mol Cell Neurosci 2018;86:1–15.10.1016/j.mcn.2017.11.002686335529113959
]Search in Google Scholar
[
329. Momoi T, Fujita E, Senoo H, et al. Genetic factors and epigenetic factors for autism: endoplasmic reticulum stress and impaired synaptic function. Cell Biol Int 2009;34:13–19.10.1042/CBI20090250
]Search in Google Scholar
[
330. Schepici G, Cavalli E, Bramanti P, et al. Autism Spectrum Disorder and miRNA: An Overview of Experimental Models. Brain Sci 2019;9:E265.10.3390/brainsci9100265682702031623367
]Search in Google Scholar
[
331. Schmitz RL, Weissbach J, Kleilein J, et al. Targeting HDACs in Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor Models. Cells 2021;10:1408.10.3390/cells10061408822803334204116
]Search in Google Scholar
[
332. Grayson DR, Guidotti A. DNA Methylation in Animal Models of Psychosis. Prog Mol Biol Transl Sci 2018;157:105–132.10.1016/bs.pmbts.2017.12.012793913029933947
]Search in Google Scholar
[
333. Monacelli F, Acquarone E, Giannotti C, et al. Vitamin C, Aging and Alzheimer’s Disease. Nutrients 2017;9:E670.10.3390/nu9070670553778528654021
]Search in Google Scholar
[
334. Horsburgh S, Robson-Ansley P, Adams R, et al. Exercise and inflammation-related epigenetic modifications: focus on DNA methylation. Exerc Immunol Rev 2015;21:26–41.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
335. Cabezudo D, Baekelandt V, Lobbestael E. Multiple-Hit Hypothesis in Parkinson’s Disease: LRRK2 and Inflammation. Front Neurosci 2020;14:376.10.3389/fnins.2020.00376719938432410948
]Search in Google Scholar
[
336. Patrick KL, Bell SL, Weindel CG, et al. Exploring the “Multiple-Hit Hypothesis” of Neurodegenerative Disease: Bacterial Infection Comes Up to Bat. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2019;9:138.10.3389/fcimb.2019.00138654688531192157
]Search in Google Scholar
[
337. Persico AM, Bourgeron T. Searching for ways out of the autism maze: genetic, epigenetic and environmental clues. Trends Neurosci 2006;29:349–358.10.1016/j.tins.2006.05.01016808981
]Search in Google Scholar
[
338. Arnold AP, Chen X. What does the “four core genotypes” mouse model tell us about sex differences in the brain and other tissues? Front Neuroendocrinol 2009;30:1–9.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
339. Arnold AP, McCarthy MM. Sexual Differentiation of the Brain and Behavior: A Primer. In: Pfaff DW, Volkow ND (eds) Neuroscience in the 21st Century: From Basic to Clinical. New York, NY: Springer:2016;2139–2168.10.1007/978-1-4939-3474-4_141
]Search in Google Scholar
[
340. Walker DM, Gore AC. Epigenetic impacts of endocrine disruptors in the brain. Front Neuroendocrinol 2017;44:1–26.10.1016/j.yfrne.2016.09.002542981927663243
]Search in Google Scholar
[
341. Schug TT, Blawas AM, Gray K, et al. Elucidating the Links Between Endocrine Disruptors and Neurodevelopment. Endocrinology 2015;156:1941–1951.10.1210/en.2014-1734539334025714811
]Search in Google Scholar
[
342. Kuehner JN, Bruggeman EC, Wen Z, et al. Epigenetic Regulations in Neuropsychiatric Disorders. Front Genet 2019;10:268.10.3389/fgene.2019.00268645825131019524
]Search in Google Scholar
[
343. Repouskou A, Papadopoulou A-K, Panagiotidou E, et al. Long term transcriptional and behavioral effects in mice developmentally exposed to a mixture of endocrine disruptors associated with delayed human neurodevelopment. Sci Rep 2020;10:9367.10.1038/s41598-020-66379-x728333132518293
]Search in Google Scholar
[
344. Tan Q, Zoghbi HY. Mouse models as a tool for discovering new neurological diseases. Neurobiol Learn Mem 2019;165:106902.10.1016/j.nlm.2018.07.00630030131
]Search in Google Scholar
[
345. Armstrong RA. What causes alzheimer’s disease? Folia Neuropathol 2013;51:169–188.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
346. Armstrong RA. Risk factors for Alzheimer’s disease. Folia Neuropathol 2019;57:87–105.10.5114/fn.2019.8592931556570
]Search in Google Scholar
[
347. Adams JD. Probable Causes of Alzheimer’s Disease. Sci 2021;3:16.10.3390/sci3010016
]Search in Google Scholar
[
348. Fertan E, Stover KRJ, Brant MG, et al. Effects of the Novel IDO Inhibitor DWG-1036 on the Behavior of Male and Female 3xTg-AD Mice. Front Pharmacol 2019;10:1044.10.3389/fphar.2019.01044677397931607909
]Search in Google Scholar
[
349. Sorgdrager FJH, Vermeiren Y, Van Faassen M, et al. Age- and disease-specific changes of the kynurenine pathway in Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s disease. J Neurochem 2019;151:656–668.10.1111/jnc.14843689986231376341
]Search in Google Scholar
[
350. Willette AA, Pappas C, Hoth N, et al. Inflammation, negative affect, and amyloid burden in Alzheimer’s disease: Insights from the kynurenine pathway. Brain Behav Immun 2021;95:216–225.10.1016/j.bbi.2021.03.019818728333775832
]Search in Google Scholar
[
351. Sharma VK, Singh TG, Prabhakar NK, et al. Kynurenine Metabolism and Alzheimer’s Disease: The Potential Targets and Approaches. Neurochem Res. Epub ahead of print February 8, 2022. DOI: 10.1007/s11064-022-03546-8.10.1007/s11064-022-03546-835133568
]Search in Google Scholar
[
352. Breijyeh Z, Karaman R. Comprehensive Review on Alzheimer’s Disease: Causes and Treatment. Mol Basel Switz 2020;25:E5789.10.3390/molecules25245789776410633302541
]Search in Google Scholar
[
353. Fertan E, Rodrigues GJ, Wheeler RV, et al. Cognitive Decline, Cerebral-Spleen Tryptophan Metabolism, Oxidative Stress, Cytokine Production, and Regulation of the Txnip Gene in a Triple Transgenic Mouse Model of Alzheimer Disease. Am J Pathol 2019;189:1435–1450.10.1016/j.ajpath.2019.03.00630980800
]Search in Google Scholar
[
354. Tsubaki H, Tooyama I, Walker DG. Thioredoxin-Interacting Protein (TXNIP) with Focus on Brain and Neurodegenerative Diseases. Int J Mol Sci 2020;21:E9357.10.3390/ijms21249357776458033302545
]Search in Google Scholar
[
355. Oblak AL, Forner S, Territo PR, et al. Model organism development and evaluation for late-onset Alzheimer’s disease: MODEL-AD. Alzheimers Dement N Y N 2020;6:e12110.10.1002/trc2.12110768395833283040
]Search in Google Scholar
[
356. Baglietto-Vargas D, Forner S, Cai L, et al. Generation of a humanized Aβ expressing mouse demonstrating aspects of Alzheimer’s disease-like pathology. Nat Commun 2021;12:2421.10.1038/s41467-021-22624-z806516233893290
]Search in Google Scholar
[
357. Kotredes KP, Oblak A, Pandey RS, et al. APOEe4.Trem2*R47H Mice Show Changes in Alzheimer’s Disease-Relevant Processes in the Absence of Amyloid Plaques. 2021; DOI:10.21203/rs.3.rs-580913/v1.10.21203/rs.3.rs-580913/v1
]Search in Google Scholar
[
358. Mehder RH, Bennett BM, Andrew RD. Morphometric Analysis of Hippocampal and Neocortical Pyramidal Neurons in a Mouse Model of Late Onset Alzheimer’s Disease. J Alzheimers Dis JAD 2020;74:1069–1083.10.3233/JAD-191067724283832144984
]Search in Google Scholar
[
359. Ochiishi T, Kaku M, Kiyosue K, et al. New Alzheimer’s disease model mouse specialized for analyzing the function and toxicity of intraneuronal Amyloid β oligomers. Sci Rep 2019;9:17368.10.1038/s41598-019-53415-8687455631757975
]Search in Google Scholar
[
360. Wong P, Ho WY, Yen Y-C, et al. The vulnerability of motor and frontal cortex-dependent behaviors in mice expressing ALS-linked mutation in TDP-43. Neurobiol Aging 2020;92:43–60.10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2020.03.01932422502
]Search in Google Scholar
[
361. Murava AL, Meadows S, Palaguachi F, et al. Dementia-linked TDP-43 dysregulation in astrocytes impairs memory, antiviral signaling, and chemokine-mediated astrocytic-neuronal interactions. Alzheimers Dement 2021;17:e058562.10.1002/alz.058562
]Search in Google Scholar
[
362. Nackenoff AG, Hohman TJ, Neuner SM, et al. PLD3 is a neuronal lysosomal phospholipase D associated with β-amyloid plaques and cognitive function in Alzheimer’s disease. PLoS Genet 2021;17:e1009406.10.1371/journal.pgen.1009406803139633830999
]Search in Google Scholar
[
363. Rosene MJ, Hsu S, Martinez R, et al. Defining the role of PLD3 in Alzheimer’s disease pathology. Alzheimers Dement 2021;17:e058730.10.1002/alz.058730
]Search in Google Scholar
[
364. Nagu P, Parashar A, Behl T, et al. Gut Microbiota Composition and Epigenetic Molecular Changes Connected to the Pathogenesis of Alzheimer’s Disease. J Mol Neurosci 2021;71:1436–1455.10.1007/s12031-021-01829-333829390
]Search in Google Scholar
[
365. Shen G, Hu S, Zhao Z, et al. Antenatal Hypoxia Accelerates the Onset of Alzheimer’s Disease Pathology in 5xFAD Mouse Model. Front Aging Neurosci 2020;12:251.10.3389/fnagi.2020.00251747263932973487
]Search in Google Scholar
[
366. Wang M, Lv J, Huang X, et al. High-fat diet-induced atherosclerosis promotes neurodegeneration in the triple transgenic (3 × Tg) mouse model of Alzheimer’s disease associated with chronic platelet activation. Alzheimers Res Ther 2021;13:144.10.1186/s13195-021-00890-9840341834454596
]Search in Google Scholar
[
367. Peterman JL, White JD, Calcagno A, et al. Prolonged isolation stress accelerates the onset of Alzheimer’s disease-related pathology in 5xFAD mice despite running wheels and environmental enrichment. Behav Brain Res 2020;379:112366.10.1016/j.bbr.2019.11236631743728
]Search in Google Scholar
[
368. Liang F, Yang S, Zhang Y, et al. Social housing promotes cognitive function through enhancing synaptic plasticity in APP/PS1 mice. Behav Brain Res 2019;368:111910.10.1016/j.bbr.2019.11191031034995
]Search in Google Scholar
[
369. Zhu X, Lee H, Perry G, et al. Alzheimer disease, the two-hit hypothesis: an update. Biochim Biophys Acta 2007;1772:494–502.10.1016/j.bbadis.2006.10.01417142016
]Search in Google Scholar
[
370. Hawkes CH, Del Tredici K, Braak H. Parkinson’s disease: a dual-hit hypothesis. Neuropathol Appl Neurobiol 2007;33:599–614.10.1111/j.1365-2990.2007.00874.x719430817961138
]Search in Google Scholar
[
371. Feigenson KA, Kusnecov AW, Silverstein SM. Inflammation and the two-hit hypothesis of schizophrenia. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2014;38:72–93.10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.11.006389692224247023
]Search in Google Scholar
[
372. Fang Y-L, Chen H, Wang C-L, et al. Pathogenesis of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in children and adolescence: From “two hit theory” to “multiple hit model.” World J Gastroenterol 2018;24:2974–2983.10.3748/wjg.v24.i27.2974605495030038464
]Search in Google Scholar
[
373. Bouayed J, Bohn T. The link between microglia and the severity of COVID-19: The “two-hit” hypothesis. J Med Virol 2021;93:4111–4113.10.1002/jmv.26984825088633788265
]Search in Google Scholar
[
374. Baranov SV, Jauhari A, Carlisle DL, et al. Two hit mitochondrial-driven model of synapse loss in neurodegeneration. Neurobiol Dis 2021;158:105451.10.1016/j.nbd.2021.10545134298088
]Search in Google Scholar
[
375. Möller M, Swanepoel T, Harvey BH. Neurodevelopmental Animal Models Reveal the Convergent Role of Neurotransmitter Systems, Inflammation, and Oxidative Stress as Biomarkers of Schizophrenia: Implications for Novel Drug Development. ACS Chem Neurosci 2015;6:987–1016.10.1021/cn500336825794269
]Search in Google Scholar
[
376. Bouet V, Percelay S, Leroux E, et al. A new 3-hit mouse model of schizophrenia built on genetic, early and late factors. Schizophr Res 2021;228:519–528.10.1016/j.schres.2020.11.04333298334
]Search in Google Scholar
[
377. Hansen J, Baum A, Pascal KE, et al. Studies in humanized mice and convalescent humans yield a SARS-CoV-2 antibody cocktail. Science 2020;369:1010–1014.10.1126/science.abd0827729928432540901
]Search in Google Scholar
[
378. Netland J, Meyerholz DK, Moore S, et al. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection causes neuronal death in the absence of encephalitis in mice transgenic for human ACE2. J Virol 2008;82:7264–7275.10.1128/JVI.00737-08249332618495771
]Search in Google Scholar
[
379. Sefik E, Israelow B, Mirza H, et al. A humanized mouse model of chronic COVID-19. Nat Biotechnol 2021;1–15.10.1038/s41587-021-01155-434921308
]Search in Google Scholar
