Biomarkers in Painful Symptomatic Knee OA Demonstrate That MRI Assessed Joint Damage and Type II Collagen Degradation Products Are Linked to Disease Progression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most prevalent arthritis worldwide, but the evolution of pain in relation to joint damage and biochemical markers are not well understood. We evaluated the relation between clinical pain measures and evoked pain in relation to structural damage and biochemical biomarkers in knee OA. Methods: A cross-sectional study in people with knee OA and healthy controls was conducted. A total of 130 participants with advanced OA requiring total knee replacement (TKR) (n=78), mild OA having standard care (n=42) and non-OA controls (n=6), with 4 drop-outs were assessed. Pain scoring was performed by the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC_P) and the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Pain sensitisation was assessed by pain pressure thresholds (PPT). Knee MRI assessed joint damage using the MRI Knee Osteoarthritis Score (MOAKS). Overall MOAKS scores were created for Bone Marrow Lesions (BML), Cartilage Degradation (CD) and effusion/Hoffa synovitis (tSyn). Type II collagen cleavage products (CTX-II) were determined by ELISA. Results: The advanced OA group had a mean age of 68.9 +/- 7.7 years and the mild group 63.1 +/-9.6. The advanced OA group had higher levels of pain, with mean WOMAC_P of 58.8 +/- 21.7 compared with the mild OA group of 40.6 +/-26.0. All OA subjects had pain sensitization by PPT compared with controls (p<0.05). WOMAC_P correlated with the total number of regions with cartilage damage (nCD) (R=0.225, p=0.033) and total number of BMLs (nBML) (R=0.195, p=0.065) using body mass index (BMI), age and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) as covariates. Levels of CTX-II correlated with tSyn (R=0.313, p=0.03), nBML (R=0.252, p=0.019), number of osteophytes (R=0.33, p=0.002) and nCD (R=0.218, p=0.042), using BMI and age as covariates. A multivariate analysis indicated that BMI and HADS were the most significant predictors of pain scores (p<0.05). Conclusion: People with both mild and advanced OA show features of pain sensitisation. We found that increasing MRI-detected joint damage was associated with higher levels of CTX-II, suggesting that increasing disease severity can be assessed by MRI and CTX-II biomarkers to evaluate OA disease progression.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".