SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Rodent Models of Alzheimer's Disease: Past Misconceptions and Future Prospects.

Int J Mol Sci · 2024-06-05

DOI: 10.3390/ijms25116222PMID: 38892408

Open accessreview-article; Review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disease with no effective treatments, not least due to the lack of authentic animal models. Typically, rodent models recapitulate the effects but not causes of AD, such as cholinergic neuron loss: lesioning of cholinergic neurons mimics the cognitive decline reminiscent of AD but not its neuropathology. Alternative models rely on the overexpression of genes associated with familial AD, such as amyloid precursor protein, or have genetically amplified expression of mutant tau. Yet transgenic rodent models poorly replicate the neuropathogenesis and protein overexpression patterns of sporadic AD. Seeding rodents with amyloid or tau facilitates the formation of these pathologies but cannot account for their initial accumulation. Intracerebral infusion of proinflammatory agents offer an alternative model, but these fail to replicate the cause of AD. A novel model is therefore needed, perhaps similar to those used for Parkinson's disease, namely adult wildtype rodents with neuron-specific (dopaminergic) lesions within the same vulnerable brainstem nuclei, 'the isodendritic core', which are the first to degenerate in AD. Site-selective targeting of these nuclei in adult rodents may recapitulate the initial neurodegenerative processes in AD to faithfully mimic its pathogenesis and progression, ultimately leading to presymptomatic biomarkers and preventative therapies.

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.