SynthesisPloS one2021
Osteoblast-osteoclast co-cultures: A systematic review and map of available literature.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of anti-osteoporotic treatments on hyperlipidemia risk in osteoporosis patients: evidence from a population-based retrospective cohort study.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- A Protocol for Modeling Human Bone Inflammation: Co-Culture of Osteoblasts and Osteoclasts Exposed to Different Inflammatory Microenvironments.Methods and protocols · 2025Article
- Stimuli-responsive hybrid materials for 4DMaterials today. Bio · 2025Review
- Developing a Bone-Mimicking Microenvironment: Surface Coating Method for Investigating Bone RemodelingACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2025Article
- Osteogenic CpG Oligodeoxynucleotide, iSN40, Inhibits Osteoclastogenesis in a TLR9-Dependent Manner.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Strategies for the Codelivery of Osteoclasts and Mesenchymal Stem Cells in 3D-Printable Osteochondral Scaffolds.Tissue engineering. Part C, Methods · 2024Article
- Comparative Analysis of Osteoblastic Responses to Titanium and Alumina-Toughened Zirconia Implants: An In Vitro Study.Biomolecules · 2024Article
- Clinical Characteristics, Current Treatment Options, Potential Mechanisms, Biomarkers, and Therapeutic Targets in Avascular Necrosis of Femoral Head.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2024Review
- Effect of systemic atorvastatin on bone regeneration in critical-sized defects in hyperlipidemia: an experimental study.International journal of implant dentistry · 2023Article
- Hydrogels and Bioprinting in Bone Tissue Engineering: Creating Artificial Stem-Cell Niches for In Vitro Models.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2023Review
- The Impact of Culture Variables on a 3D Human In Vitro Bone Remodeling Model: A Design of Experiments Approach.Advanced healthcare materials · 2023Article
- Tuning the resorption-formation balance in anBone reports · 2023Article
- The effects of seeding density and osteoclastic supplement concentration on osteoclastic differentiation and resorption.Bone reports · 2023Article
- Article
- Clinically-driven design of novel methods of investigation on skeletal health status in neurological disorders. The case of the traumatic brain injuries.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Article
- Article
- Human Platelet Lysate as Alternative of Fetal Bovine Serum for Enhanced HumanFrontiers in immunology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Drug research with animal models is expensive, time-consuming and translation to clinical trials is often poor, resulting in a desire to replace, reduce, and refine the use of animal models. One approach to replace and reduce the use of animal models is to use in vitro cell-culture models. To study bone physiology, bone diseases and drugs, many studies have been published using osteoblast-osteoclast co-cultures. The use of osteoblast-osteoclast co-cultures is usually not clearly mentioned in the title and abstract, making it difficult to identify these studies without a systematic search and thorough review. As a result, researchers are all developing their own methods, leading to conceptually similar studies with many methodological differences and, as a consequence, incomparable results. The aim of this study was to systematically review existing osteoblast-osteoclast co-culture studies published up to 6 January 2020, and to give an overview of their methods, predetermined outcome measures (formation and resorption, and ALP and TRAP quantification as surrogate markers for formation and resorption, respectively), and other useful parameters for analysis. Information regarding these outcome measures was extracted and collected in a database, and each study was further evaluated on whether both the osteoblasts and osteoclasts were analyzed using relevant outcome measures. From these studies, additional details on methods, cells and culture conditions were extracted into a second database to allow searching on more characteristics. The two databases presented in this publication provide an unprecedented amount of information on cells, culture conditions and analytical techniques for using and studying osteoblast-osteoclast co-cultures. They allow researchers to identify publications relevant to their specific needs and allow easy validation and comparison with existing literature. Finally, we provide the information and tools necessary for others to use, manipulate and expand the databases for their needs.
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.