4.5 Article

Sclerostin Blockade and Zoledronic Acid Improve Bone Mass and Strength in Male Mice With Exogenous Hyperthyroidism

期刊

ENDOCRINOLOGY
卷 158, 期 11, 页码 3765-3777

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1210/en.2017-00247

关键词

-

资金

  1. MedDrive Starting Grant of Technische Universitat Dresden
  2. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [Sonderforschungsbereich/Transregio-67, Schwerpunktprogramm 1629]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hyperthyroidism in mice is associated with low bone mass, high bone turnover, and high concentrations of sclerostin, a potent Wnt inhibitor. Here, we explored the effects of either increasing bone formation with sclerostin antibodies (Scl-Ab) or reducing bone turnover with bisphosphonates on bone mass and strength in hyperthyroid mice. Twelve-week-old C57BL/6 male mice were rendered hyperthyroid using L-thyroxine (T4; 1.2 mg/mL added to the drinking water) and treated with 20 mg/kg Scl-Ab twice weekly or 100 mg/kg zoledronic acid (ZOL) once weekly or phosphate-buffered saline for 4 weeks. Hyperthyroid mice displayed a lower trabecular bone volume at the spine (242%, P < 0.05) and the distal femur (255%, P < 0.05) compared with euthyroid controls. Scl-Ab and ZOL treatment of hyperthyroid mice increased trabecular bone volume at the spine by threefold and twofold, respectively. Serum bone formation and resorption markers were increased in hyperthyroid mice and suppressed by treatment with ZOL but not Scl-Ab. Trabecular bone stiffness at the lumbar vertebra was 63% lower in hyperthyroid mice (P < 0.05) and was increased fourfold by Sci-Ab (P < 0.001) and threefold by ZOL treatment (P < 0.01). Bone strength based on ultimate load, which was 10% lower in hyperthyroidism, was increased by Scl-Ab by 71% and ZOL by 22% (both P < 0.001). Increased proportion of low mineralized bone seen in hyperthyroid mice was restored by treatmentwith Scl-Ab and ZOL. Thus, bone-forming and antiresorptive drugs prevent bone loss in hyperthyroid mice via different mechanisms.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据