Effect of Ibuprofen and Exercise Training on Bone, Body Composition and Strength in Older Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic low-grade systemic inflammation occurs in part due to increased pro-inflammatory cytokines mediated via cyclooxygenase (COX) pathways and contributes to excessive loss of muscle and bone mass with age. Administration of ibuprofen, a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) with inhibitory effects on COX, after resistance training enhances muscle mass in older individuals (Trappe et al. 2011) and hip areal bone mineral density (aBMD) in young women (Kohrt et al. 2010). PURPOSE: To examine the effects of longer term (i.e. 9 months) exercise training with ibuprofen supplementation (given after exercise sessions) on bone and muscle in older women. METHODS: Participants (n = 60, 64.8 ± 4.4y) were randomly assigned (double blind) to supervised resistance training or stretching 3d/week, and ibuprofen (400mg, post-exercise) or placebo (i.e. 4 groups) for 9 months. Baseline and post-intervention testing included: a) dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) for total body, lumbar spine, and hip aBMD, and total body lean tissue and fat mass; b) predicted 1-repetition maximum (1-RM) testing (biceps curl, hack squat). Data was analyzed with SPSS using alpha value of 0.05 via 3-factor ANOVA with two between-groups factors (ibuprofen versus placebo, resistance versus stretching), and one repeated-measures factor (baseline versus 9 month post-testing) controlling for age as a covariate. RESULTS: There was no effect of the ibuprofen on any of the dependent variables. There was a significant exercise x time interaction for biceps curl strength (p<0.01; resistance training increased 23% versus 3% for stretching), hack squat strength (p<0.01; resistance training increased110% versus 15% for stretching), and total body fat mass (p=0.04; resistance training decreased 2% versus 2% increase with stretching). There were trends for exercise x time interactions for aBMD at the total body (p = 0.07; 0.3% increase for the resistance training versus stretching decrease of 0.5%), and lumbar spine (p = 0.11; 0.6% decrease in the resistance training group versus 0.8% decrease for stretching). CONCLUSIONS: Resistance exercise increased strength, decreased fat mass, and trended towards improving aBMD of the total body and lumbar spine. Ibuprofen supplementation following exercise showed no additional benefits. Supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".