Study record
MOTS-c promotes phosphorodiamidate morpholino oligomer uptake and efficacy in dystrophic mice
Ran N, Lin C, Leng L et al. · EMBO Mol Med · 2021
What this study reported
Reported that MOTS-c raised glycolytic flux and energy production capacity in dystrophic mouse muscle in vitro and in vivo, and increased uptake and activity of a morpholino oligomer in mdx mice. Dystrophin expression in peripheral muscle was higher with the combination than with the oligomer alone, with the largest relative increase in diaphragm.
Limitations
Single dystrophic mouse strain with no stated sex or randomisation; outcomes are molecular and functional surrogates in one disease model, and the design cannot separate MOTS-c effects from those of the oligomer partner.
Study record
| Study model | Animal study (in vivo) |
|---|---|
| Substance studied | MOTS-c administeredSynthetic MOTS-c was given to cells, animals or people. |
| Species | mouse |
| System studied | mdx dystrophic mice given MOTS-c with a phosphorodiamidate morpholino oligomer, plus dystrophic muscle cells in vitro |
| Population | Not reported |
| Design | Controlled animal experiment with in vitro experiments |
| Sample size as reported | Not reported |
| Control group | Not reported |
| Route (data field only) | Not reported |
| Endpoints measured | PMO uptake; dystrophin expression; glycolytic flux; muscle function |
| Pathways measured | Other |
| Research areas | Skeletal muscle · Mitochondrial biology |
| Evidence tier | C — Animal in vivo |
| Publication types | Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't |
Appraisal
Each dimension is recorded separately and never combined into a single score. A study can be well controlled and still tell you little about people.
- Relevance to MOTS-c
- Direct
- Model applicability
- Mammalian
- Sample size
- Not reported
- Controls
- Appropriate
- Outcome validity
- Surrogate
- Support for its own conclusion
- Moderate
Provenance
- Bibliographic fields retrieved from PubMed E-utilities efetch (title, journal, date, authors, DOI) on 2026-11-11.
- Annotated from the published abstract.
- Editorial review: approved (2026-11-11).
- Classification follows the site methodology; the record describes the study, not what MOTS-c does in people.