Osteoclast density is not increased in bone adjacent to radiolucencies (cysts) in juvenile equine medial femoral condyles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Background There is a knowledge gap about how equine MFC subchondral radiolucencies (SR) arise and evolve. Osteoclasts are believed to have a role but have not been studied in situ. Objectives To measure and compare osteoclast density and the percentage of chondroclasts in healthy and MFC SR specimens from juvenile Thoroughbreds. Study design Cadaveric study. Methods Medial femoral condyles (MFC) from a tissue bank of equine stifles were studied. Inclusion criteria were MFCs (≤8 months old) with a computed tomography SR lesion and histological focal failure of endochondral ossification (L group). Contralateral, lesion‐free, MFCs were a control group (CC). Osteochondral slabs were cut through the lesion (L), a healthy site immediately caudal to the lesion, (internal control; IC) and the contralateral, site‐matched controls (CC). Histological sections were immunostained with Cathepsin K for osteoclast counting. Osteoclasts in contact with the growth cartilage (chondroclasts) were also counted. The sections were segmented into regions of interest (ROI) at different depths in the subchondral bone: ROI 1 (0‐1 mm), ROI 2 (1‐3 mm) and ROI 3 (3‐6 mm). Osteoclasts were counted and the bone area was measured in each ROI to calculate their density. Chondroclasts were counted in ROI 1 . Results Sections were studied from L and IC (n = 6) and CC sites (n = 5). Osteoclast density was significantly higher in ROI 1 when compared with ROI 3 in all groups. Although higher osteoclast density was measured in ROI 1 in the L group, no significant differences were detected when compared with control ROIs. The proportion of chondroclasts in ROI 1 was lower in the L sections when compared with controls but no significant differences were detected. Main limitations Limited sample size. Conclusions Osteoclasts are important actors in MFC subchondral bone development, digesting both growth cartilage (chondroclasts) and bone, but the pathophysiology of early MFC SRs cannot be explained solely by an increased osteoclast presence in the subchondral bone.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".