SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

More than a number: Incorporating the aged phenotype to improve in vitro and in vivo modeling of neurodegenerative disease.

Brain Behav Immun · 2024-04-23

DOI: 10.1016/j.bbi.2024.04.023PMID: 38663775

Check source for accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; Review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Age is the number one risk factor for developing a neurodegenerative disease (ND), such as Alzheimer's disease (AD) or Parkinson's disease (PD). With our rapidly ageing world population, there will be an increased burden of ND and need for disease-modifying treatments. Currently, however, translation of research from bench to bedside in NDs is poor. This may be due, at least in part, to the failure to account for the potential effect of ageing in preclinical modelling of NDs. While ageing can impact upon physiological response in multiple ways, only a limited number of preclinical studies of ND have incorporated ageing as a factor of interest. Here, we evaluate the aged phenotype and highlight the critical, but unmet, need to incorporate aspects of this phenotype into both the in vitro and in vivo models used in ND research. Given technological advances in the field over the past several years, we discuss how these could be harnessed to create novel models of ND that more readily incorporate aspects of the aged phenotype. This includes a recently described in vitro panel of ageing markers, which could help lead to more standardised models and improve reproducibility across studies. Importantly, we cannot assume that young cells or animals yield the same responses as seen in the context of ageing; thus, an improved understanding of the biology of ageing, and how to appropriately incorporate this into the modelling of ND, will ensure the best chance for successful translation of new therapies to the aged patient.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.