MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2581998119

In Vivo Osteoinduction: Evaluating 2-Beta Coxatene as an Immunoinductive Compound and Novel Ingredient for Joint Support.

2016· article· en· W2581998119 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Katherine Spinks, James J Scaffidi

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmacological Effects of Medicinal Plants
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIn vivoOsteoarthritisGlucosamineAnkleCartilageJoint painChondroitin sulfateFacet jointJoint diseaseInternal medicinePhysical therapySurgeryPathologyBiotechnologyChemistryGlycosaminoglycanAlternative medicineBiologyBiochemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a degenerative joint disease characterized by progressive loss of articular cartilage. Many treatments lack the ability to stimulate the growth of native cartilage tissue while they simultaneously increase joint comfort. For the past few decades, dietary supplements have been investigated for the ability to both address joint inflammation and stimulate cartilage tissue. OBJECTIVES: The present study intended to examine the supplement's in vivo osteoinductive capabilities and clinical efficacy for overall joint health. DESIGN: The research team designed a randomized, double-blind, comparative clinical trial. SETTING: The study took place via telephone interviews. PARTICIPANTS: Participants had self-reported OA of a weight-bearing joint (ie, of the knee, hip, spine, or ankle). Patients were recruited using the Health Science Institute, a consumer supplement newsletter. INTERVENTION: -Acetyl-11-keto-β-Boswellic acid. A positive control group was blindly given 1500 mg of glucosamine hydrogen chloride and 1200 mg of chondroitin sulfate. Participants took the supplements for 3 mo. OUTCOME MEASURES: A histological evaluation was performed on an athymic rat to test the supplement's in vivo osteoinductive capabilities. A negative control, commercially purchased, unhydrolyzed type 2 collagen was used for that test. Participants were evaluated for parameters of pain and joint function at baseline (day 0) and at days 7, 30, and 90 using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) OA index and a visual analogue scale (VAS). RESULTS: The histological evaluation of the athymic rat confirmed that the Cyplexinol component of the 2BCT was positive for de novo bone tissue and collagen synthesis, corroborating osteoinduction. In the clinical trial, the intervention group reported significant decreases of 57.4%, 52.5%, and 58% in normalized WOMAC scores for pain, stiffness, and joint functionality, respectively, from baseline to postintervention. The control group reported a decrease of 17.5%, 18.1%, and 23.9% for pain, stiffness, and joint functionality, respectively. For the intervention group, pain intensity and frequency, as measured by the VAS, also decreased 57.1% and 56.3%, respectively, from baseline to postintervention, whereas the control group showed a decrease in VAS scores of 18.0% and 14.8%, respectively. In total, an average of 81.2% of participants administered the 2BCT had reported a statistically significant improvement from baseline to postintervention, compared with 22.9% of participants administered glucosamine and chondroitin. CONCLUSIONS: In vivo studies confirmed that the bioactive proteins (Cyplexinol) within the 2BCT stimulated de novo bone and cartilage tissue production, demonstrating osteoinduction. The intervention group reported greater improvements in the psychometric evaluations that assessed joint comfort when compared with participants given the glucosamine and chondroitin. The results suggest that 2BCT may provide a novel and synergistic response to preserving joint homeostasis and improving quality of life.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.117
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicPharmacological Effects of Medicinal PlantsFrench-language works237,207