MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409462544 · doi:10.1242/dmm.052200

Expanding the neuroimmune research toolkit with <i>in vivo</i> brain organoid technologies

2025· review· en· W4409462544 on OpenAlexafffund
Ai Tian, Afrin Bhattacharya, Julien Muffat, Yun Li

Bibliographic record

VenueDisease Models & Mechanisms · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsCanada Research ChairsUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGarry Hurvitz Centre for Brain and Mental HealthCanada Research ChairsStem Cell Network
KeywordsOrganoidNeuroscienceInduced pluripotent stem cellMicrogliaBiologyHuman brainComputer scienceComputational biologyMedicineEmbryonic stem cellImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human pluripotent stem cell-derived microglia-like cells (MLCs) and brain organoid systems have revolutionized the study of neuroimmune interactions, providing new opportunities to model human-specific brain development and disease. Over the past decade, advances in protocol design have improved the fidelity, reproducibility and scalability of MLC and brain organoid generation. Co-culturing of MLCs and brain organoids have enabled direct investigations of human microglial interactions in vitro, although opportunities remain to improve microglial maturation and long-term survival. To address these limitations, innovative xenotransplantation approaches have introduced MLCs, organoids or neuroimmune organoids into the rodent brain, providing a vascularized environment that supports prolonged development and potential behavioral readouts. These expanding in vitro and in vivo toolkits offer complementary strategies to study neuroimmune interactions in health and disease. In this Perspective, we discuss the strengths, limitations and synergies of these models, highlighting important considerations for their future applications.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.530
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.122
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisease Models & MechanismsSame topicNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration MechanismsFrench-language works237,207