Haploinsufficiency of Euchromatin histone methyltransferase 1 (EHMT1), a chromatin modifying enzyme, is the cause of Kleefstra syndrome (KS). KS is an intellectual disability (ID) syndrome, with general developmental delay, hypotonia, and craniofacial dysmorphisms as additional core features. Recent studies have been focused on the role of EHMT1 in learning and memory, linked to the ID phenotype of KS patients. In this study we used the Ehmt1(+/-) mouse model, and investigated whether the core features of KS were mimicked in these mice. When comparing Ehmt1(+/-) mice to wildtype littermates we observed delayed postnatal growth, eye opening, ear opening, and upper incisor eruption, indicating a delayed postnatal development. Furthermore, tests for muscular strength and motor coordination showed features of hypotonia in young Ehmt1(+/-) mice. Lastly, we found that Ehmt1(+/-) mice showed brachycephalic crania, a shorter or bent nose, and hypertelorism, reminiscent of the craniofacial dysmorphisms seen in KS. In addition, gene expression analysis revealed a significant upregulation of the mRNA levels of Runx2 and several other bone tissue related genes in P28 Ehmt1(+/-) mice. Runx2 immunostaining also appeared to be increased. The mRNA upregulation was associated with decreased histone H3 lysine 9 dimethylation (H3K9me2) levels, the epigenetic mark deposited by Ehmt1, in the promoter region of these genes. Together, Ehmt1(+/-) mice indeed recapitulate KS core features and can be used as an animal model for Kleefstra syndrome. The increased expression of bone developmental genes in the Ehmt1(+/-) mice likely contributes to their cranial dysmorphisms and might be explained by diminished Ehmt1-induced H3K9 dimethylation.

BackgroundThe methodological quality of animal studies is an important factor hampering the translation of results from animal studies to a clinical setting. Systematic reviews of animal studies may provide a suitable method to assess and thereby improve their methodological quality.ObjectivesThe aims of this study were: 1) to evaluate the risk of bias assessment in animal-based systematic reviews, and 2) to study the internal validity of the primary animal studies included in these systematic reviews.Data SourcesWe systematically searched Pubmed and Embase for SRs of preclinical animal studies published between 2005 and 2012.ResultsA total of 91 systematic reviews met our inclusion criteria. The risk of bias was assessed in 48 (52.7%) of these 91 systematic reviews. Thirty-three (36.3%) SRs provided sufficient information to evaluate the internal validity of the included studies. Of the evaluated primary studies, 24.6% was randomized, 14.6% reported blinding of the investigator/caretaker, 23.9% blinded the outcome assessment, and 23.1% reported drop-outs.ConclusionsTo improve the translation of animal data to clinical practice, systematic reviews of animal studies are worthwhile, but the internal validity of primary animal studies needs to be improved. Furthermore, risk of bias should be assessed by systematic reviews of animal studies to provide insight into the reliability of the available evidence.

The separation-induced vocalization test in guinea pig pups is one of many that has been used to screen for anxiolytic-like properties of drugs. The test is based on the cross-species phenomenon that infants emit distress calls when placed in social isolation. Here we report a systematic review and meta-analysis of pharmacological intervention in the separation-induced vocalization test in guinea pig pups. Electronic databases were searched for original research articles, yielding 32 studies that met inclusion criteria. We extracted data on pharmacological intervention, animal and methodological characteristics, and study quality indicators. Meta-analysis showed that the different drug classes in clinical use for the treatment of anxiety disorders, have comparable effects on vocalization behaviour, irrespective of their mechanism of action. Of the experimental drugs, nociception (NOP) receptor agonists proved very effective in this test. Analysis further indicated that the commonly used read-outs total number and total duration of vocalizations are equally valid. With regard to methodological characteristics, repeated testing of pups as well as selecting pups with moderate or high levels of vocalization were associated with larger treatment effects. Finally, reporting of study methodology, randomization and blinding was poor and Egger's test for small study effects showed that publication bias likely occurred. This review illustrates the value of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in improving translational value and methodological aspects of animal models. It further shows the urgent need to implement existing publication guidelines to maximize the output and impact of experimental animal studies.

No abstract