Document is current
Any future updates will be listed below
-
Authors
Krüger, Dustin N.
Pannucci, Patrizia
Wesley, Callan D.
Neutel, Cedric H. G.
Martinet, Wim
De Meyer, Guido R. Y.
Hill, Stephen J.
Woolard, Jeanette
Franssen, Constantijn
Guns, Pieter-Jan
-
Funding
Funding for this research was provided by:
Horizon 2020 (858070, 858070, 858070, 858070, 858070)
Belgian Foundation against Cancer (C/2020/1374, 2021-034)
DOCPRO4 - Antwerp, Belgium (39984)
Bijzonder Onderzoeksfonds UGent (49195)
Bijzonder Onderzoeksfonds UAntwerp,Belgium (49194)
Research Foundation – Flanders, Belgium (I005122N)
King Baudouin Foundation, Belgium (Funds Pierre Masure, Alphonse & Marie Walckiers, and De Winter-Vermant 2018)
- License Information
-
More Information
Article History
Received: 19 September 2024
Accepted: 19 January 2025
First Online: 11 February 2025
Declarations
:
: Use of animals approval of the Ethical Committee for Animal Testing of the University of Antwerp (ethical file 2022–40) conformed with the ARRIVE guidelines, under Directive 2010/63/EU, and with the Belgian Royal Decree of 2013 and the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals published by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH Publication no.85–23, revised 1996).Welfare of animals was assessed daily by the animal caretakers and the principal researcher based on the Functional Observation Battery scoring system. Criteria for humane euthanasia were as follows: Animals displaying signs of pain based on the scoring table, meeting specific score thresholds, or exhibiting significant weight loss (> 20%).
: All authors have read and reviewed the manuscript and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
: The authors declare no competing interests.
