Immunity to infection has been extensively studied in humans and mice bearing naturally occurring or experimentally introduced germline mutations. Mouse studies are sometimes neglected by human immunologists, on the basis that mice are not humans and the infections studied are experimental and not natural. Conversely, human studies are sometimes neglected by mouse immunologists, on the basis of the uncontrolled conditions of study and small numbers of patients. However, both sides would agree that the infectious phenotypes of patients with inborn errors of immunity often differ from those of the corresponding mutant mice. Why is that? We argue that this important question is best addressed by revisiting and reinterpreting the findings of both mouse and human studies from a genetic perspective. Greater caution is required for reverse-genetics studies than for forward-genetics studies, but genetic analysis is sufficiently strong to define the studies likely to stand the test of time. Genetically robust mouse and human studies can provide invaluable complementary insights into the mechanisms of immunity to infection common and specific to these two species.
Keywords: genetic susceptibility to infectious diseases; human genetics; immunodeficiency; inborn errors of immunity; infectious diseases; mouse genetics.