Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38333006›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in pharmacology2024

Pharmacological and mechanistic aspects of quercetin in osteoporosis.

Ting-Ting Deng, Wen-Yu Ding, Xi-Xue Lu, Qing-Hao Zhang, Jin-Xin Du, Li-Juan Wang, Mei-Na Yang, Ying Yin, Fan-Jie Liu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. A microbiota-substrate-metabolite-target network suggests AKT1-associated links between gut microbiota-derived metabolites and osteoporosis.International microbiology : the official journal of the Spanish Society for Microbiology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Ting-Ting DengCollege of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, China.
Wen-Yu DingShandong Institute of Endocrine and Metabolic Diseases, Jinan, China.
Xi-Xue LuBone Biomechanics Engineering Laboratory of Shandong Province, Shandong Medicinal Biotechnology Center, School of Biomedical Sciences, Neck-Shoulder and Lumbocrural Pain Hospital of Shandong First Medical University, Shandong First Medical University and Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Jinan, China.
Qing-Hao ZhangBone Biomechanics Engineering Laboratory of Shandong Province, Shandong Medicinal Biotechnology Center, School of Biomedical Sciences, Neck-Shoulder and Lumbocrural Pain Hospital of Shandong First Medical University, Shandong First Medical University and Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Jinan, China.
Jin-Xin DuCollege of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, China.
Li-Juan WangCollege of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, China.
Mei-Na YangNHC Key Laboratory of Biotechnology Drugs (Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences), Biomedical Sciences College, Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, China.
Ying YinAffiliated Hospital of Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, China.
Fan-Jie LiuBone Biomechanics Engineering Laboratory of Shandong Province, Shandong Medicinal Biotechnology Center, School of Biomedical Sciences, Neck-Shoulder and Lumbocrural Pain Hospital of Shandong First Medical University, Shandong First Medical University and Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, Jinan, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Osteoporosis (OP) is a bone disease associated with increasing age. Currently, the most common medications used to treat OP are anabolic agents, anti-resorptive agents, and medications with other mechanisms of action. However, many of these medications have unfavorable adverse effects or are not intended for long-term use, potentially exerting a severe negative impact on a patient's life and career and placing a heavy burden on families and society. There is an urgent need to find new drugs that can replace these and have fewer adverse effects. Quercetin (Que) is a common flavonol in nature. Numerous studies have examined the therapeutic applications of Que. However, a comprehensive review of the anti-osteoporotic effects of Que has not yet been conducted. This review aimed to describe the recent studies on the anti-osteoporotic effects of Que, including its biological, pharmacological, pharmacokinetic, and toxicological properties. The outcomes demonstrated that Que could enhance OP by increasing osteoblast differentiation and activity and reducing osteoclast differentiation and activity via the pathways of Wnt/β-catenin, BMP/SMAD/RUNX2, OPG/RANKL/RANK, ERK/JNK, oxidative stress, apoptosis, and transcription factors. Thus, Que is a promising novel drug for the treatment of OP.

Indexed as

antiosteoporosisosteoblastosteoclastpharmacokineticsquercetintoxicology

Identifiers

PMID38333006
PMCPMC10851760

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.