Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 15, 2026
Detecting Migration and Infiltration of Neutrophils in Mice
Published on: February 6, 2020
Evaluation of some standard arthritogenic adjuvants ('modified perrigens') in male rats
Abstract:
Four commercially available arthritogenic adjuvants ('modified Perrigens') were compared with a Mycobacterium butyricum-mineral oil adjuvant for their ability to induce arthritis in male Holtzman rats. The induced arthritides were also compared with respect to their response to treatment with phenylbutazone and cyclophosphamide. Trivial differences were noted among the various adjuvants in their capability to induce the disease, the severity of the disease, or the response of the disease to therapeutic (phenylbutazone) or prophylactic (cyclophosphamide) administration of drugs. It was concluded that any one of the adjuvants was probably suitable for inducing an arthritis in rats for the testing of drugs and that perhaps other variables in the assay are more important in explaining inter-laboratory variation.
Insights
This study compared four arthritogenic adjuvants for inducing rat arthritis. Results showed minimal differences, suggesting any adjuvant is suitable for drug testing, with assay variables being more critical.
Area of Science:
- Immunology
- Pharmacology
- Veterinary Medicine
Background:
- Arthritis induction in animal models is crucial for drug development.
- Various adjuvants are used to induce experimental arthritis in rats.
- Understanding adjuvant efficacy and disease response is key for reliable drug testing.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the efficacy of four commercial arthritogenic adjuvants against a standard Mycobacterium butyricum adjuvant in inducing arthritis in rats.
- To evaluate the induced arthritides' response to phenylbutazone and cyclophosphamide treatments.
Main Methods:
- Male Holtzman rats were used to test the adjuvants' ability to induce arthritis.
- The severity and characteristics of the induced arthritis were assessed.
- Drug responses were evaluated using therapeutic (phenylbutazone) and prophylactic (cyclophosphamide) administration.
Main Results:
- Trivial differences were observed among the tested adjuvants in their capacity to induce arthritis.
- No significant variations were noted in disease severity across different adjuvants.
- The response to phenylbutazone and cyclophosphamide treatments showed minimal differences between adjuvant groups.
Conclusions:
- Any of the evaluated arthritogenic adjuvants are suitable for inducing rat arthritis models for drug testing.
- Inter-laboratory variations in drug testing assays may be attributed to factors other than the choice of adjuvant.
