The impact of bone marrow adipocytes on osteoblast and osteoclast differentiation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Throughout life, bone is constantly remodeled through the complementary processes of bone resorption and bone formation. Highly coordinated regulation of these activities is essential for maintaining consistent bone quality and quantity. Normally, the development and function of bone-forming (osteoblast) and bone-resorbing (osteoclast) cells are tightly regulated by signaling molecules secreted by these two cell types. Within the bone marrow microenvironment, osteoblasts arise from mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), which are in close contact with the hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) precursors that differentiate into mature osteoclasts. Signaling molecules secreted by osteoblasts (e.g., receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa B ligand and osteoprotegerin) and osteoclasts (e.g., bone morphogenetic protein 6, wingless-type MMTV integration site family member 10B, sphingosine-1-phosphate, and ephrin-B2) play a key role in bone remodeling by guiding the differentiation, localization, and function of bone cells. In addition to osteoblasts, bone marrow MSCs can also differentiate into adipocytes that affect bone remodeling by competitively suppressing intracellular osteogenic signals, including runt-related transcription factor 2, osterix, and beta-catenin, while simultaneously promoting the secretion of adipogenic signaling molecules such as leptin, adiponectin, chemerin, omentin-1, resistin, and visfatin. Secreted adipogenic factors have also been shown to affect the osteoclastogenic differentiation of HSCs. Herein, we discuss the impact of bone marrow adipocytes on the coupling of osteoblast and osteoclast differentiation, and the relevance to bone-loss disorders such as osteoporosis. © 2014 IUBMB Life, 66(3):147-155, 2014.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".