As a rule of thumb, it’s best to assume that all studies like this are in mice or rats unless the headline specifically says “in human trials”.
Murine studies are a dime a dozen and therefore it’s the default assumption when reading research papers. When human trials commence the fact that it’s in humans is a big part of the research and therefore paper titles.
I would be in favor of adding a standardized [in mice] to the titles of all HN submissions about medical breakthroughs. Most of them end up being in mice and many do not reproduce in humans. It would help, at a glance, to know how significant a study's results are.
This works in mice with small tumors for two weeks until the experiment ends. It's quite different form working in humans with big tumors for 5 years.
Mice are good for early tries. The researchers had 9 bacterias and only 1 was successful. Experiments in mice are cheaper and have less ethical problems than experiments in humans.
(Hey! They even injected the cancer cells in mice and waited a week until it grow. Nobody will approve that in humans.)
Murine studies are a dime a dozen and therefore it’s the default assumption when reading research papers. When human trials commence the fact that it’s in humans is a big part of the research and therefore paper titles.