Modulation of OPG, RANK and RANKL by human chondrocytes and their implication during osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Earlier studies suggest the involvement of osteoprotegerin (OPG), RANK and RANK ligand (RANKL) in OA subchondral bone metabolism; however, few studies have looked at their functional consequences on chondrocytes. We compared the expression/production of OPG, RANK and RANKL on human normal and OA chondrocytes, and evaluated, on OA chondrocytes, their modulation by some catabolic factors. Furthermore, the role of OPG and RANKL on the production of catabolic/anabolic factors was assessed. METHODS: Expression was determined using real-time PCR, production of RANK and RANKL by flow cytometry and that of OPG by ELISA. Modulation of these factors was determined upon treatment with IL-1beta, TNF-alpha and PGE(2). The functional consequences were examined following treatment with soluble RANKL or OPG-Fc (OPG without the heparin-binding domain). RESULTS: OPG, RANK and RANKL were expressed and produced by human chondrocytes. Membranous RANK was produced only by an OA chondrocyte subpopulation (29%) localized throughout the cartilage. The OPG/RANKL ratio was significantly (P = 0.05) reduced on the OA chondrocytes, whereas the RANK/RANKL ratio was significantly (P < 0.03) increased. OPG and membranous RANKL levels were significantly enhanced by IL-1beta, TNF-alpha and PGE(2), whereas membranous RANK was significantly increased only with IL-1beta. Administration of soluble RANKL had no effect on the OA chondrocytes. However, addition of OPG-Fc significantly stimulated MMP-13 (P = 0.05) and protease-activated receptor-2 (PAR-2) (P < 0.04) production. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings showed that human chondrocytes express and produce OPG, RANK and RANKL. OA chondrocyte treatment with catabolic factors pointed towards an increased biological effect of OPG. Interestingly, OPG appears to be involved in OA progression by increasing two catabolic factors involved in cartilage pathophysiology.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".