4.4 Review

Animal models of depression: pros and cons

Journal

CELL AND TISSUE RESEARCH
Volume 377, Issue 1, Pages 5-20

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00441-018-2973-0

Keywords

Depression; Animal models; Neurobiology; Vulnerability; Sex

Categories

Funding

  1. Estonian Ministry of Education and Research [IUT20-40]
  2. Hope for Depression Research Foundation
  3. Institute for the Study of Affective Neuroscience
  4. EU Framework 6 Integrated Project NEWMOOD [LSHM-CT-2004-503474]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Animal models of depression are certainly needed but the question in the title has been raised owing to the controversies in the interpretation of the readout in a number of tests, to the perceived lack of progress in the development of novel treatments and to the expressed doubts in whether animal models can offer anything to make a true breakthrough in understanding the neurobiology of depression and producing novel drugs against depression. Herewith, it is argued that if anything is wrong with animal models, including those for depression, it is not about the principle of modelling complex human disorder in animals but in the way the tests are selected, conducted and interpreted. Further progress in the study of depression and in developing new treatments, will be supported by animal models of depression if these were more critically targeted to drug screening vs. studies of underlying neurobiology, clearly stratified to vulnerability and pathogenetic models, focused on well-defined endophenotypes and validated for each setting while bearing the existing limits to validation in mind. Animal models of depression need not to rely merely on behavioural readouts but increasingly incorporate neurobiological measures as the understanding of depression as human brain disorder advances. Further developments would be fostered by cross-fertilizinga translational approach that is bidirectional, research on humans making more use of neurobiological findings in animals.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available