Hello Shriya Shende

It is better to start with Hemophilia A mice as the best initial model before you move on to the dog model. This may help when attempting to test new therapeutics because they only require small amounts of drugs. Also, mice being small mammals are easy to breed and relatively inexpensive to maintain in large numbers. Although spontaneous bleeding does not naturally occur in mice, genome-editing technologies have contributed to the development of various hemophiliac mouse models.

But in the study of hemophilia, dog is always man’s best friend because unlike mice which is the favored animal model for many other diseases, dogs develop hemophilia naturally, have enough blood to contribute to research studies and live long enough to reveal long-term outcomes of treatments. Also, this disease works in the same way in both species. They react to medicines much like humans do, allowing researchers to look to dogs first as they calculate doses. The dogs also cooperate well. If you need to draw blood, they put their paws out. That’s it!

The primary benefits, value, and significance of dogs with hemophilia A is that they provide the investigational basis to study the pathophysiology of blood coagulation, hemostasis, and thrombosis, to safely and successfully translate many experimental therapies into clinical practice and to continue preclinical evaluation of promising new strategies and therapies. Because of the high homology of the canine and human immune system, assessments of FVIII immunogenicity using hemophilia A dogs may provide meaningful insights into the human immune response. Several therapeutic agents developed by performing research in dogs with hemophilia, have been successfully introduced into human clinical practice and have a multi-year track record of safety and efficacy worldwide. This means that these bleeder dogs are recognized as being a valid animal model of human-like hemophilia.

You may also want to refer to the article attached below for more information.

https://www.nature.com/articles/515S172a

Best.

Both mouse models and dog models have been used for studying hemophilia A, but each has its advantages and limitations. Ultimately, the choice of animal models depends on the specific research goals and resources available.

Dog models of hemophilia A were the first to be established and have been valuable for understanding the pathophysiology of the disease. Dogs naturally develop spontaneous hemophilia A due to genetic mutations, making them a useful model for studying the disease in a more realistic context. Dogs also have a similar size and physiology to humans, allowing for easier translation of findings to human patients. However, dog models can be more expensive to maintain and may present logistical challenges in terms of housing and handling.

Mouse models, particularly knockout mouse models, have become increasingly popular for studying hemophilia A. These models involve genetically engineering mice to lack specific clotting factors, mimicking the human condition. Mouse models offer several advantages, including lower cost, ease of maintenance, and the availability of various genetic tools for manipulation and analysis. Mice also have a shorter reproductive cycle, allowing for faster generation of experimental data. However, mice differ from humans and dogs in terms of physiology and immune responses, which may limit the direct translation of findings to humans.

In summary, both mouse models and dog models have contributed significantly to our understanding of hemophilia A. Dog models offer a more natural context for studying the disease, while mouse models provide greater flexibility and experimental advantages.

Mice are relatively inexpensive to purchase and maintain. Mice can be easily bred and manipulated genetically. They are small and easy to handle, which makes them ideal for experimental studies.

But if you are going for long term effects of hemophilia A, then dogs are a better option but mice will give you quick results.

Still Dog seems to be better