The mouse as a model for neuropsychiatric drug development

James R. Howe, Mark F. Bear, Peyman Golshani, Eric Klann, Stuart A. Lipton, Lennart Mucke, Mustafa Sahin, Alcino J. Silva

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

Abstract

Much has been written about the validity of mice as a preclinical model for brain disorders. Critics cite numerous examples of apparently effective treatments in mouse models that failed in human clinical trials, raising the possibility that the two species’ neurobiological differences could explain the high translational failure rate in psychiatry and neurology (neuropsychiatry). However, every stage of translation is plagued by complex problems unrelated to neurobiological conservation. Therefore, although these case studies are intriguing, they cannot alone determine whether these differences observed account for translation failures. Our analysis of the literature indicates that most neuropsychiatric treatments used in humans are at least partially effective in mouse models, suggesting that neurobiological differences are unlikely to be the main cause of neuropsychiatric translation failures. The failure to develop many effective drugs to treat neuropsychiatric diseases has been blamed in part on the inadequacy of the mouse model. In this essay, using a back-translational approach to provide evidence, Howe et al argue that the mouse should continue to serve an important role in neuropsychiatric drug development.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)R909-R914
JournalCurrent Biology
Volume28
Issue number17
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 10 2018

Fingerprint

animal models
drugs
mice
Pharmaceutical Preparations
interspecific variation
clinical trials
Neuropsychiatry
Neurology
case studies
brain
Brain Diseases
Conservation
Brain
Psychiatry
Clinical Trials

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)

Cite this

Howe, J. R., Bear, M. F., Golshani, P., Klann, E., Lipton, S. A., Mucke, L., ... Silva, A. J. (2018). The mouse as a model for neuropsychiatric drug development. Current Biology, 28(17), R909-R914. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2018.07.046

The mouse as a model for neuropsychiatric drug development. / Howe, James R.; Bear, Mark F.; Golshani, Peyman; Klann, Eric; Lipton, Stuart A.; Mucke, Lennart; Sahin, Mustafa; Silva, Alcino J.

In: Current Biology, Vol. 28, No. 17, 10.09.2018, p. R909-R914.

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

Howe, JR, Bear, MF, Golshani, P, Klann, E, Lipton, SA, Mucke, L, Sahin, M & Silva, AJ 2018, 'The mouse as a model for neuropsychiatric drug development', Current Biology, vol. 28, no. 17, pp. R909-R914. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2018.07.046
Howe JR, Bear MF, Golshani P, Klann E, Lipton SA, Mucke L et al. The mouse as a model for neuropsychiatric drug development. Current Biology. 2018 Sep 10;28(17):R909-R914. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2018.07.046
Howe, James R. ; Bear, Mark F. ; Golshani, Peyman ; Klann, Eric ; Lipton, Stuart A. ; Mucke, Lennart ; Sahin, Mustafa ; Silva, Alcino J. / The mouse as a model for neuropsychiatric drug development. In: Current Biology. 2018 ; Vol. 28, No. 17. pp. R909-R914.
@article{2161ce11b09b4bdaa165d96108bef6c1,
title = "The mouse as a model for neuropsychiatric drug development",
abstract = "Much has been written about the validity of mice as a preclinical model for brain disorders. Critics cite numerous examples of apparently effective treatments in mouse models that failed in human clinical trials, raising the possibility that the two species’ neurobiological differences could explain the high translational failure rate in psychiatry and neurology (neuropsychiatry). However, every stage of translation is plagued by complex problems unrelated to neurobiological conservation. Therefore, although these case studies are intriguing, they cannot alone determine whether these differences observed account for translation failures. Our analysis of the literature indicates that most neuropsychiatric treatments used in humans are at least partially effective in mouse models, suggesting that neurobiological differences are unlikely to be the main cause of neuropsychiatric translation failures. The failure to develop many effective drugs to treat neuropsychiatric diseases has been blamed in part on the inadequacy of the mouse model. In this essay, using a back-translational approach to provide evidence, Howe et al argue that the mouse should continue to serve an important role in neuropsychiatric drug development.",
author = "Howe, {James R.} and Bear, {Mark F.} and Peyman Golshani and Eric Klann and Lipton, {Stuart A.} and Lennart Mucke and Mustafa Sahin and Silva, {Alcino J.}",
year = "2018",
month = "9",
day = "10",
doi = "10.1016/j.cub.2018.07.046",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "28",
pages = "R909--R914",
journal = "Current Biology",
issn = "0960-9822",
publisher = "Cell Press",
number = "17",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The mouse as a model for neuropsychiatric drug development

AU - Howe, James R.

AU - Bear, Mark F.

AU - Golshani, Peyman

AU - Klann, Eric

AU - Lipton, Stuart A.

AU - Mucke, Lennart

AU - Sahin, Mustafa

AU - Silva, Alcino J.

PY - 2018/9/10

Y1 - 2018/9/10

N2 - Much has been written about the validity of mice as a preclinical model for brain disorders. Critics cite numerous examples of apparently effective treatments in mouse models that failed in human clinical trials, raising the possibility that the two species’ neurobiological differences could explain the high translational failure rate in psychiatry and neurology (neuropsychiatry). However, every stage of translation is plagued by complex problems unrelated to neurobiological conservation. Therefore, although these case studies are intriguing, they cannot alone determine whether these differences observed account for translation failures. Our analysis of the literature indicates that most neuropsychiatric treatments used in humans are at least partially effective in mouse models, suggesting that neurobiological differences are unlikely to be the main cause of neuropsychiatric translation failures. The failure to develop many effective drugs to treat neuropsychiatric diseases has been blamed in part on the inadequacy of the mouse model. In this essay, using a back-translational approach to provide evidence, Howe et al argue that the mouse should continue to serve an important role in neuropsychiatric drug development.

AB - Much has been written about the validity of mice as a preclinical model for brain disorders. Critics cite numerous examples of apparently effective treatments in mouse models that failed in human clinical trials, raising the possibility that the two species’ neurobiological differences could explain the high translational failure rate in psychiatry and neurology (neuropsychiatry). However, every stage of translation is plagued by complex problems unrelated to neurobiological conservation. Therefore, although these case studies are intriguing, they cannot alone determine whether these differences observed account for translation failures. Our analysis of the literature indicates that most neuropsychiatric treatments used in humans are at least partially effective in mouse models, suggesting that neurobiological differences are unlikely to be the main cause of neuropsychiatric translation failures. The failure to develop many effective drugs to treat neuropsychiatric diseases has been blamed in part on the inadequacy of the mouse model. In this essay, using a back-translational approach to provide evidence, Howe et al argue that the mouse should continue to serve an important role in neuropsychiatric drug development.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85052902787&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85052902787&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.cub.2018.07.046

DO - 10.1016/j.cub.2018.07.046

M3 - Comment/debate

VL - 28

SP - R909-R914

JO - Current Biology

JF - Current Biology

SN - 0960-9822

IS - 17

ER -