Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 299

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Evidence for increased bone resorption in patients with progressive knee osteoarthritis: Longitudinal results from the Chingford study

Bettica, Paolo, Cline, Gary, Hart, Deborah J., Meyer, Joan, Spector, Tim D.·2002·Arthritis & Rheumatism

Abstract

Objective: Several studies have suggested that increased subchondral bone turnover is a determinant of progression of osteoarthritis (OA). To test this hypothesis, the level of urinary N‐terminal type I collagen telopeptides (NTx) and C‐terminal type I collagen telopeptides (CTx), which are validated markers of bone resorption, was measured at 3 different time points in a subset of patients from the Chingford study. Methods: The original Chingford study population comprised 1,003 women. From this group, postmenopausal women not receiving any bone‐modifying medication who had a baseline knee radiograph and a repeat radiograph 4 years later, and for whom a baseline lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) measurement was available, were identified and separated into 4 groups as follows: controls (n = 50), progressive OA (n = 71), nonprogressive OA (n = 36), and osteoporosis (n = 59). NTx and CTx were measured in urine samples collected at baseline, year 1, and year 2. Results: Patient age and years since menopause were similar among groups at baseline. As expected, both body mass index (BMI) and BMD were lowest in patients with osteoporosis. Median resorption marker levels over the 3 time points were 31–87% higher in patients with either progressive OA or osteoporosis than in controls and patients with nonprogressive OA (P < 0.01, except for levels of CTx in patients with progressive OA versus nonprogressive OA). Levels of NTx and CTx did not differ significantly between women with progressive OA (defined either by the presence of osteophytes or by joint space narrowing) and those with osteoporosis or between controls and women with nonprogressive OA. Results were essentially unchanged after adjustment for age, BMI, BMD, and past use of hormone replacement therapy, or when NTx and CTx values at each time point were analyzed separately. Conclusion: Our data demonstrate that bone resorption is increased in patients with progressive knee OA and is not increased in those with nonprogressive knee OA. The increase in bone resorption seen in patients with progressive knee OA is similar to that observed in patients with osteoporosis. Altered bone turnover may be a diagnostic or therapeutic target in patients with progressive OA.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/art.10630

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 28

  1. 10.1093/rheumatology/36.1.16 · DOI
  2. 10.1136/ard.52.8.557 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1016/S1063-4584(05)80003-2 · DOI
  4. 10.1002/art.1780380112 · doi:10.1002/art.1780380112
  5. Calvo MS, 1996, Molecular basis and clinical application of biological markers of bone turnover, Endocr Rev, 17, 333
  6. 10.1053/joca.1999.0288 · DOI
  7. 10.1093/rheumatology/34.8.792 · doi:10.1093/rheumatology/34.8.792
  8. 10.1007/s002230010068 · DOI
  9. Stewart A, 1999, Bone density and bone turnover in patients with osteoarthritis and osteoporosis, J Rheumatol, 26, 622
  10. 10.1093/rheumatology/38.2.133 · doi:10.1093/rheumatology/38.2.133
  11. Seibel MJ, 1989, Urinary hydroxy‐pyridinium crosslinks provide indices of cartilage and bone involvement in arthritic diseases, J Rheumatol, 16, 964
  12. 10.1093/rheumatology/33.1.16 · doi:10.1093/rheumatology/33.1.16
  13. 10.1093/rheumatology/33.1.11 · DOI
  14. 10.1136/ard.45.12.969 · DOI
  15. 10.1093/rheumatology/31.11.759 · DOI
  16. 10.1053/joca.1997.0090 · DOI
  17. 10.1093/rheumatology/37.1.46 · DOI · Paper page
  18. 10.1093/rheumatology/28.5.393 · DOI
  19. 10.1002/1529-0131(199904)42:3<483::AID-ANR13>3.0.CO;2-O · DOI · Paper page
  20. Hart DJ, 1993, The relationship of obesity, fat distribution and osteoarthritis in women in the general population: the Chingford Study, J Rheumatol, 20, 331
  21. Burnett S, 1994, A radiographic atlas of osteoarthritis
  22. 10.1097/00003086-199609000-00033 · DOI
  23. Bettica P, 1997, Comparison of the clinical performance of the immunoenzymometric assays for N‐terminal and C‐terminal type I collagen telopeptides and the HPLC assay for pyridinium cross‐links, Eur J Clin Chem Clin Biochem, 35, 63
  24. 10.1359/jbmr.1998.13.7.1124 · DOI · Paper page
  25. 10.1053/joca.1998.0234 · doi:10.1053/joca.1998.0234
  26. Hart DJ, Hellgren & Lawrence grade 1 osteophytes in the knee: doubtful or definite?, Osteoarthritis Cartilage
  27. 10.1016/S0895-4356(00)00273-0 · DOI
  28. 10.1136/bmj.307.6897.172 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 299

Metadata

Authors
Bettica, P., Cline, G., Hart, D. J., Meyer, J., & Spector, T. D.
Venue
Arthritis & Rheumatism
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-12
Volume
46
Issue
12
Pages
3178-3184
ISSN
  • 0004-3591 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-0131
OpenAlex
W2005692528
Cited by
299
References
0
FWCI
6.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evidence for increased bone resorption in patients with progressive knee osteoarthritis: Longitudinal results from the Chingford study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/art.10630
The paper
Bettica, P., Cline, G., Hart, D. J., Meyer, J., & Spector, T. D. (2002). Evidence for increased bone resorption in patients with progressive knee osteoarthritis: Longitudinal results from the Chingford study. Arthritis & Rheumatism. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.10630

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.