MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4396688438 · doi:10.32920/25757982

Accumulation of Bone Strontium Measured by In Vivo XRF in Rats Supplemented with Strontium Citrate and Strontium Ranelate

2024· preprint· en· W4396688438 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gregory R. Wohl, David R. Chettle, Ana Pejović‐Milić, Cheryl Druchok, Colin E. Webber, Jonathan D. Adachi, Karen Beattie

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStrontium ranelateStrontiumIn vivoIsotopes of strontiumChemistryRadiochemistryOsteoporosisMedicineInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Strontium ranelate is an approved pharmacotherapy for osteoporosis in Europe and Australia, but not in Canada or the United States. Strontium citrate, an alternative strontium salt, however, is available for purchase over-the-counter as a nutritional supplement. The effects of strontium citrate on bone are largely unknown. The study's objectives were 1) to quantify bone strontium accumulation in female Sprague Dawley rats administered strontium citrate (N=7) and compare these levels to rats administered strontium ranelate (N=6) and vehicle (N=6) over 8 weeks, and 2) to verify an in vivo X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy (XRF) system for measurement of bone strontium in the rat. Daily doses of strontium citrate and strontium ranelate were determined with the intention to achieve equivalent amounts of elemental strontium. However, post-hoc analyses of each strontium compound conducted using energy dispersive spectrometry microanalysis revealed a higher elemental strontium concentration in strontium citrate than strontium ranelate. Bone strontium levels were measured at baseline and 8 weeks follow-up using a unique in vivo XRF technique previously used in humans. XRF measurements were validated against ex vivo measurements of bone strontium using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. Weight gain in rats in all three groups was equivalent over the study duration. A two-way ANOVA was conducted to compare bone strontium levels amongst the three groups. Bone strontium levels in rats administered strontium citrate were significantly greater (p<0.05) than rats administered strontium ranelate and vehicle. ANCOVA analyses were performed with Sr dose as a covariate to account for differences in strontium dosing. The ANCOVA revealed differences in bone strontium levels between the strontium groups were not significant, but that bone strontium levels were still very significantly greater than vehicle.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBone health and osteoporosis research→French-language works237,207→