ArticleTissue engineering and regenerative medicine2018
Positive Effects of Bisphosphonates on Osteogenic Differentiation in Patient-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells for the Treatment of Osteoporosis.
Article in Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Analysis of Factors Associated with the Postoperative Healing of Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw in Patients with Osteoporosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Biological Responses of Ceramic Bone Spacers Produced by Green Processing of Additively Manufactured Thin Meshes.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Near-Infrared Contrast Agents for Bone-Targeted Imaging.Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecent evidence from
methodsIn this study, we evaluated the potential of using FDA-approved and clinically utilized bisphosphonates such as alendronate, ibandronate, and zoledronate to enhance the development of bone forming osteoblasts from osteoporosis patient- and healthy-person derived hBMSCs (op-MSCs and hp-MSCs, respectively). hBMSCs were obtained from postmenopausal women without endocrine diseases or receiving hormone replacement therapy. Cells were treated with or without a bisphosphonate (alendronate, ibandronate, and zoledronate) and analyzed over 21 days of culture.
resultshBMSC from osteoporosis-patient with bisphosphonates treatment demonstrated a significant increase in Alizarin red staining after 7 days compared to that from healthy-person. Calcium contents and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) enzyme activity also demonstrated an increased propensity in hMSCs from osteoporosis-patient compared to those from healthy-person, although there were inter-individual variations. Gene expression levels varied among different donors. There were no significant differences in the effect on the osteoblastic differentiation of hBMSCs among alendronate, ibandronate, and zoledronate. Statistical significance in the osteoblastic differentiation of hBMSCs between the positive control group cultured in osteogenic medium alone and groups cultured in osteogenic medium supplemented with bisphosphonate was not shown either. These results might be due to various cell types of hBMSCs from individual clinical patients and concentrations of bisphosphonate used.
conclusionOur study using a clinically relevant
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.