ReviewBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2026
Adjuvant pharmacological strategies for the musculoskeletal system during long-term space missions.
Review in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Microgravity-induced changes in skeletal muscle and possible countermeasures: What we can learn from bed rest and human space studies.Experimental physiology · 2026Review
- Adjuvant pharmacological strategies for the musculoskeletal system during long-term space missions.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Review
- Human hypoxia models in aerospace medicine: Potential applications for human pharmacological research.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Review
- Review
- Deep space environment empowering drug design and development.Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2025Review
- Advancing insights into microgravity induced muscle changes using Caenorhabditis elegans as a model organism.NPJ microgravity · 2024Review
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite 2 h of daily exercise training, muscle wasting and bone loss are still present after 6-month missions to the international space station. Some crew members lose bone much faster than others. In preparation for missions to the Moon and Mars, space agencies are therefore reviewing their countermeasure portfolios. Here, we discuss the potential of current pharmacological strategies. Bone loss in space is fuelled by bone resorption. Alendronate, an oral bisphosphonate, reduced bone losses in experimental bed rest and space. However, gastrointestinal side effects precluded its further utilization in space. Zoledronate (a potent bisphosphonate), denosumab (RANKL antagonist) and romosozumab (sclerostin antagonist) are all administered via injection. They effectively suppress bone resorption and are routinely prescribed against osteoporosis. Their serious adverse effects, namely, osteonecrosis of the jaw and atypical femur fractures occur very rarely when the usage is limited to 1 or 2 years. Hence, utilization of one of these compounds may outweigh the bone risks of space travelling, in particular in those with high bone resorption rates. Muscle wasting in space is likely due to hampered muscle protein synthesis. Even though this might theoretically be countered by the synthesis-boosting effects of anabolic steroids, the practical grounds for such recommendation are currently weak. Moreover, they reveal their full potential only when combined with an anabolic exercise stimulus, for example, via strength training. It therefore seems that a combination of exercise and pharmacological countermeasures should be considered for musculoskeletal health on the way to the Moon and Mars and back.
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.