The peroxisome proliferator–activated receptor γ agonist pioglitazone reduces the development of cartilage lesions in an experimental dog model of osteoarthritis: In vivo protective effects mediated through the inhibition of key signaling and catabolic pathways
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Emerging evidence indicates that peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPARgamma) may have protective effects in osteoarthritis (OA). The aim of this study was to evaluate the in vivo effect of a PPARgamma agonist, pioglitazone, on the development of lesions in a canine model of OA, and to explore the influence of pioglitazone on the major signaling and metabolic pathways involved in OA pathophysiologic changes. METHODS: OA was surgically induced in dogs by sectioning of the anterior cruciate ligament. The dogs were then randomly divided into 3 treatment groups in which they were administered either placebo, 15 mg/day pioglitazone, or 30 mg/day pioglitazone orally for 8 weeks. Following treatment, the severity of cartilage lesions was scored. Cartilage specimens were processed for histologic and immunohistochemical evaluations; specific antibodies were used to study the levels of matrix metalloproteinase 1 (MMP-1), ADAMTS-5, and inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS), as well as phosphorylated MAPKs ERK-1/2, p38, JNK, and NF-kappaB p65. RESULTS: Pioglitazone reduced the development of cartilage lesions in a dose-dependent manner, with the highest dosage producing a statistically significant change (P < 0.05). This decrease in lesions correlated with lower cartilage histologic scores. In addition, pioglitazone significantly reduced the synthesis of the key OA mediators MMP-1, ADAMTS-5, and iNOS and, at the same time, inhibited the activation of the signaling pathways for MAPKs ERK-1/2, p38, and NF-kappaB. CONCLUSION: These results indicate the efficacy of pioglitazone in reducing cartilage lesions in vivo. The results also provide new and interesting insights into a therapeutic intervention for OA in which PPARgamma activation can inhibit major signaling pathways of inflammation and reduce the synthesis of cartilage catabolic factors responsible for articular cartilage degradation.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".