Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41307193›Full record

ReviewComprehensive Physiology2025

Physiological Differences Underlying Divergent Hypoxia Responses and Altitude Adaptations in Humans, Rats and Mice.

Johannes Burtscher, Robert T Mallet, Anupam Sah, Max Gassmann, Martin Burtscher, Rodrigo Iturriaga

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Comprehensive Physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Johannes BurtscherInstitute of Sport Science, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Robert T MalletDepartment of Physiology and Anatomy, University of North Texas Health Science Center, Fort Worth, Texas, USA.
Anupam SahDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics and Medical Psychology, University Hospital for Psychiatry II, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Max GassmannInstitute of Veterinary Physiology, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Martin BurtscherInstitute of Sport Science, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Rodrigo IturriagaInstituto de Ciencias Biomédicas, Universidad Autónoma de Chile, Santiago, Chile.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hypobaric hypoxia, a defining feature of high-altitude environments, poses a considerable physiological challenge to both humans and rodents. To withstand hypoxic stress, mammals have developed cellular and systemic adaptations that not only safeguard against acute and future episodes of oxygen deprivation but may also enhance overall resilience and functional capacity. A central aim of current research is to harness these health-promoting effects of hypoxic exposure as a therapeutic strategy for a range of medical conditions. To date, much of the evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of such interventions derives from rodent studies. In this review, we summarize current knowledge on hypoxia tolerance, oxygen transport, and oxygen consumption in humans, rats, and mice, and evaluate the extent to which findings from rodent models can be extrapolated to humans. While the anatomical, physiological, and molecular foundations of oxygen transport and utilization are broadly conserved across species, there are important quantitative differences-largely linked to body-mass variation-as well as qualitative distinctions. Mice that evolved in high-altitude environments, display remarkable hypoxia tolerance. Their physiological repertoire includes highly efficient pulmonary gas exchange, metabolic downregulation, and substantial plasticity of the mitochondrial electron transport system under hypoxic conditions. In contrast, rats exhibit heightened vulnerability in hypoxia, manifesting as right ventricular hypertrophy, excessive erythropoiesis, and myocardial injury. These interspecies differences highlight that the robust hypoxia tolerance of mice-and the potentially comparatively greater susceptibility of rats than humans-must be carefully considered when translating findings from rodent hypoxia research into human contexts.

Indexed as

AcclimatizationAdaptation, PhysiologicalAltitudeHypoxiaAnimalsHumansMiceOxygen ConsumptionRatsSpecies Specificitychronic continuous hypoxiaerythropoietinhigh altitude adaptationhuman physiologyhypoxia inducible factorintermittent hypoxia conditioningmouseratred blood cellsspecies differences

Identifiers

PMID41307193
PMCPMC12658720

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.