<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>');
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://www.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=undefined&type=result"></script>');
-->
</script>
Sepsis remains a common, serious, and heterogeneous clinical entity that is difficult to define adequately. Despite its importance as a public health problem, efforts to develop and gain regulatory approval for a specific therapeutic agent for the adjuvant treatment of sepsis have been remarkably unsuccessful. One step in the critical pathway for the development of a new agent for adjuvant treatment of sepsis is evaluation in an appropriate animal model of the human condition. Unfortunately, the animal models that have been used for this purpose have often yielded misleading findings. It is likely that there are multiple reasons for the discrepancies between the results obtained in tests of pharmacological agents in animal models of sepsis and the outcomes of human clinical trials. One of important reason may be that the changes in gene expression, which are triggered by trauma or infection, are different in mice, a commonly used species for preclinical testing, and humans. Additionally, many species, including mice and baboons, are remarkably resistant to the toxic effects of bacterial lipopolysaccharide, whereas humans are exquisitely sensitive. New approaches toward the use of animals for sepsis research are being investigated. But, at present, results from preclinical studies of new therapeutic agents for sepsis must be viewed with a degree of skepticism.
Lipopolysaccharides, Sheep, Monkey Diseases, Sheep Diseases, Review, Disease Models, Animal, Mice, Sepsis, Animals, Humans, Papio
Lipopolysaccharides, Sheep, Monkey Diseases, Sheep Diseases, Review, Disease Models, Animal, Mice, Sepsis, Animals, Humans, Papio
citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 327 | |
popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 1% | |
impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% |