CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 46

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Osteoblastic and anti-osteoclastic activities of strontium-substituted silicocarnotite ceramics: In vitro and in vivo studies

Zeng, Junkai, Guo, Jingshu, Sun, Zhenyu, Deng, Fanyan, Ning, Congqin, Xie, Youzhuan·2020·Bioactive Materials
DOI 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.03.008PMC PMC7138933
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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 · 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.03.008

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Graphical abstract
Graphical abstract CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Fig. 1 (A) Cross-section view of CPS and Sr-CPS scaffold; (B) XRD patterns of CPS and Sr-CPS samples; (C) Raman spectra of CPS and Sr-CPS scaffold.
Fig. 1 (A) Cross-section view of CPS and Sr-CPS scaffold; (B) XRD patterns of CPS and Sr-CPS samples; (C) Raman spectra of CPS and Sr-CPS scaffold.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Fig. 2 (A) rBMSCs cultured with different concentrations of ceramics extracts; (B) Ca, Si, Sr concentration of CPS and Sr-CPS samples from 1/16 dilution; (C) In vitro degradation of CPS and Sr-CPS scaffolds.
Fig. 2 (A) rBMSCs cultured with different concentrations of ceramics extracts; (B) Ca, Si, Sr concentration of CPS and Sr-CPS samples from 1/16 dilution; (C) In vitro degradation of CPS and Sr-CPS scaffolds.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Fig. 3 (A) ALP staining of rBMSCs at day 7; (B) Quantification of the ALP staining; (C) Semi-quantitative analysis of the alizarin red staining at 21 days. * Compared with the control group; # compared with CPS group.
Fig. 3 (A) ALP staining of rBMSCs at day 7; (B) Quantification of the ALP staining; (C) Semi-quantitative analysis of the alizarin red staining at 21 days. * Compared with the control group; # compared with CPS group.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Fig. 4 (A) Expression of the osteogenesis-specific genes including RUNX2, BSP, OPN and OCN; (B) Western blotting showed that Sr-CPS affected the Wnt/β-catenin pathway-related proteins GSK3β, p-GSK3β, β-catenin and RUNX-2; (C) Quantification of the Western blotting. * Compared with the control group; # compared with CPS group.
Fig. 4 (A) Expression of the osteogenesis-specific genes including RUNX2, BSP, OPN and OCN; (B) Western blotting showed that Sr-CPS affected the Wnt/β-catenin pathway-related proteins GSK3β, p-GSK3β, β-catenin and RUNX-2; (C) Quantification of the Western blotting. * Compared with the control group; # compared with CPS group.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Fig. 5 (A) TRAP staining of osteoclasts at day 7; (B) Bone marrow macrophages (BMMs) were treated with different extracts and analyzed using CCK-8 assays; (C,D) Quantification of the number and size of osteoclasts. * Compared with the control group; # compared with CPS group.
Fig. 5 (A) TRAP staining of osteoclasts at day 7; (B) Bone marrow macrophages (BMMs) were treated with different extracts and analyzed using CCK-8 assays; (C,D) Quantification of the number and size of osteoclasts. * Compared with the control group; # compared with CPS group.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Fig. 6 (A) Expression of the osteoclast-specific genes including NFATc1, Cathepsin K, TRAF6, c-FOS, TRAP and MMP-9; (B) Western blotting showed that Sr-CPS affected the NF-κB pathway-related proteins IκBα, P65 and p-P65; (C) Quantification of the Western blotting. * Compared with the control group; # compared with CPS group.
Fig. 6 (A) Expression of the osteoclast-specific genes including NFATc1, Cathepsin K, TRAF6, c-FOS, TRAP and MMP-9; (B) Western blotting showed that Sr-CPS affected the NF-κB pathway-related proteins IκBα, P65 and p-P65; (C) Quantification of the Western blotting. * Compared with the control group; # compared with CPS group.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Fig. 7 (A) Micro-CT evaluation of the repaired skull after 8 weeks of implantation, (B) 3d-reconstruction images of Micro-CT. The blue part was the new bone and the white was the scaffold, (C) 3d-reconstruction images of residual scaffolds (scale bar = 1.5 mm), (D) Morphometric analysis of Micro-CT, including BMD, Tb.N, Tb.Th, BV/TV and the residual volume of scaffolds.* Compared with Sham group; # compared with CPS group.
Fig. 7 (A) Micro-CT evaluation of the repaired skull after 8 weeks of implantation, (B) 3d-reconstruction images of Micro-CT. The blue part was the new bone and the white was the scaffold, (C) 3d-reconstruction images of residual scaffolds (scale bar = 1.5 mm), (D) Morphometric analysis of Micro-CT, including BMD, Tb.N, Tb.Th, BV/TV and the residual volume of scaffolds.* Compared with Sham group; # compared with CPS group.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Fig. 8 H&E staining. (A) Defect sites at weeks 8 after operation: the new bone formation (blue arrows) and residual scaffold (black arrows), (B) The interface between bone and scaffold. (40x & 100x).
Fig. 8 H&E staining. (A) Defect sites at weeks 8 after operation: the new bone formation (blue arrows) and residual scaffold (black arrows), (B) The interface between bone and scaffold. (40x & 100x).CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Fig. 9 (A) Masson staining: the region between surrounding bone and scaffold (40x & 100x); (B) TRAP staining: TRAP positive cells (black arrows); (C) IHC staining of RUNX-2; (D) IHC staining of ALP; (E) Quantitative analysis for TRAP staining and IHC staining. * Compared with CPS group; # compared with Sr-5 group.
Fig. 9 (A) Masson staining: the region between surrounding bone and scaffold (40x & 100x); (B) TRAP staining: TRAP positive cells (black arrows); (C) IHC staining of RUNX-2; (D) IHC staining of ALP; (E) Quantitative analysis for TRAP staining and IHC staining. * Compared with CPS group; # compared with Sr-5 group.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 43

  1. Rachner, 2011, Osteoporosis: now and the future, Lancet, 377, 1276, 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)62349-5 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Compston, 2019, Osteoporosis, Lancet, 393, 364, 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32112-3 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Akesson, 2013, Capture the Fracture: a Best Practice Framework and global campaign to break the fragility fracture cycle, Osteoporos. Int., 24, 2135, 10.1007/s00198-013-2348-z · DOI
  4. Lane, 2006, Epidemiology, etiology, and diagnosis of osteoporosis, Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol., 194, S3, 10.1016/j.ajog.2005.08.047 · DOI
  5. Chen, 2017, Matrine prevents bone loss in ovariectomized mice by inhibiting RANKL-induced osteoclastogenesis, Faseb. J. : Off. Publ. Feder. Am. Soc. Exp. Biol., 31, 4855, 10.1096/fj.201700316R · DOI
  6. Chow, 2011, Low-magnitude high-frequency vibration (LMHFV) enhances bone remodeling in osteoporotic rat femoral fracture healing, J. Orthop. Res. : Off. Publ. Orthop. Res. Soc., 29, 746, 10.1002/jor.21303 · DOI
  7. Cheng, 2016, Comparison of unilateral versus bilateral percutaneous kyphoplasty for the treatment of patients with osteoporosis vertebral compression fracture (OVCF): a systematic review and meta-analysis, Eur. Spine J. : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 25, 3439, 10.1007/s00586-016-4395-6 · DOI
  8. Balasubramanian, 2019, Risk of subsequent fracture after prior fracture among older women, Osteoporos. Int., 30, 79, 10.1007/s00198-018-4732-1 · DOI
  9. Egol, 2015, Bone grafting: sourcing, timing, strategies, and alternatives, J. Orthop. Trauma, 29, S10, 10.1097/BOT.0000000000000460 · DOI
  10. Duan, 2013, Cytocompatibility and osteogenic activity of a novel calcium phosphate silicate bioceramic: Silicocarnotite, J. Biomed. Mater. Res., 101, 1955, 10.1002/jbm.a.34497 · DOI
  11. Yuan, 2010, Osteoinductive ceramics as a synthetic alternative to autologous bone grafting, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 107, 13614, 10.1073/pnas.1003600107 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Motisuke, 2017, Influence of Si substitution on the reactivity of alpha-tricalcium phosphate, Mater. Sci. Eng. C Mater. Biol. Appl., 75, 816, 10.1016/j.msec.2017.02.099 · DOI
  13. Khan, 2014, Bioactive behavior of silicon substituted calcium phosphate based bioceramics for bone regeneration, Mater. Sci. Eng. C Mater. Biol. Appl., 35, 245, 10.1016/j.msec.2013.11.013 · DOI
  14. Lu, 2012, Mechanical properties and in vitro bioactivity of Ca5(PO4)2SiO4 bioceramic, J. Biomater. Appl., 26, 637, 10.1177/0885328210383599 · DOI
  15. Pavone, 2017, Pharmacological therapy of osteoporosis: a systematic current review of literature, Front. Pharmacol., 8, 803, 10.3389/fphar.2017.00803 · DOI
  16. Hodges, 1950, The strontium content of human bones, J. Biol. Chem., 185, 519, 10.1016/S0021-9258(18)56336-5 · DOI
  17. Kargozar, 2019, Multiple and promising applications of strontium (Sr)-Containing bioactive glasses in bone tissue engineering, Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol., 7, 161, 10.3389/fbioe.2019.00161 · DOI
  18. El-Hajj Fuleihan, 2004, Strontium ranelate--a novel therapy for osteoporosis or a permutation of the same?, N. Engl. J. Med., 350, 504, 10.1056/NEJMe038229 · DOI
  19. Sips, 1995, Intestinal strontium absorption: from bioavailability to validation of a simple test representative for intestinal calcium absorption, Clin. Chem., 41, 1446, 10.1093/clinchem/41.10.1446 · DOI
  20. Yang, 2011, Strontium enhances osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells and in vivo bone formation by activating Wnt/catenin signaling, Stem Cell., 29, 981, 10.1002/stem.646 · DOI
  21. Zhu, 2016, Strontium inhibits titanium particle-induced osteoclast activation and chronic inflammation via suppression of NF-kappaB pathway, Sci. Rep., 6
  22. Chen, 2019, Inhibitory effects of N-[2-(4-acetyl-1-piperazinyl) phenyl]-2-(2-chlorophenoxy) acetamide on osteoclast differentiation in vitro via the downregulation of TRAF6, Int. J. Mol. Sci., 20, 10.3390/ijms20205196 · DOI
  23. An, 2016, Natural products for treatment of bone erosive diseases: the effects and mechanisms on inhibiting osteoclastogenesis and bone resorption, Int. Immunopharm., 36, 118, 10.1016/j.intimp.2016.04.024 · DOI
  24. O'Donnell, 2010, Materials characterisation and cytotoxic assessment of strontium-substituted bioactive glasses for bone regeneration, J. Mater. Chem., vol. 20, 8934, 10.1039/c0jm01139h · DOI
  25. O'Donnell, 2008, Structural analysis of a series of strontium-substituted apatites, Acta Biomater., 4, 1455, 10.1016/j.actbio.2008.04.018 · DOI
  26. Mcmillan, 1983, Raman-spectroscopic studies of silicate and related glass structure—a review, 106, 57
  27. Minear, 2010, Wnt proteins promote bone regeneration, Sci. Transl. Med., 2, 10.1126/scitranslmed.3000231 · DOI
  28. Ling, 2009, Wnt signaling controls the fate of mesenchymal stem cells, Gene, 433, 1, 10.1016/j.gene.2008.12.008 · DOI
  29. Holmen, 2005, Essential role of beta-catenin in postnatal bone acquisition, J. Biol. Chem., 280, 21162, 10.1074/jbc.M501900200 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Zhi, 2020, l-tetrahydropalmatine suppresses osteoclastogenesis in vivo and in vitro via blocking RANK-TRAF6 interactions and inhibiting NF-kappaB and MAPK pathways, J. Cell Mol. Med., 24, 785, 10.1111/jcmm.14790 · DOI
  31. Yamaguchi, 2012, The intact strontium ranelate complex stimulates osteoblastogenesis and suppresses osteoclastogenesis by antagonizing NF-kappaB activation, Mol. Cell. Biochem., 359, 399, 10.1007/s11010-011-1034-8 · DOI
  32. Bai, 2017, Dual crosslinked chondroitin sulfate injectable hydrogel formed via continuous Diels-Alder (DA) click chemistry for bone repair, Carbohydr. Polym., 166, 123, 10.1016/j.carbpol.2017.02.062 · DOI
  33. Morales, 2004, Effects of 1alpha,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 and growth hormone on apoptosis and proliferation in UMR 106 osteoblast-like cells, Endocrinology, 145, 87, 10.1210/en.2003-0718 · DOI
  34. Zuo, 2012, Osteoblastogenesis regulation signals in bone remodeling, Osteoporos. Int., 23, 1653, 10.1007/s00198-012-1909-x · DOI
  35. Holstein, 2019, A patent review of bisphosphonates in treating bone disease, Expert Opin. Ther. Pat., 29, 315, 10.1080/13543776.2019.1608180 · DOI
  36. Wojda, 2018, Parathyroid hormone for bone regeneration, J. Orthop. Res. : Off. Publ. Orthop. Res. Soc., 36, 2586, 10.1002/jor.24075 · DOI
  37. Bonnelye, 2008, Dual effect of strontium ranelate: stimulation of osteoblast differentiation and inhibition of osteoclast formation and resorption in vitro, Bone, 42, 129, 10.1016/j.bone.2007.08.043 · DOI
  38. Lin, 2013, Enhanced osteoporotic bone regeneration by strontium-substituted calcium silicate bioactive ceramics, Biomaterials, 34, 10028, 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.09.056 · DOI
  39. Naruphontjirakul, 2018, In vitro osteogenesis by intracellular uptake of strontium containing bioactive glass nanoparticles, Acta Biomater., 66, 67, 10.1016/j.actbio.2017.11.008 · DOI
  40. Gentleman, 2010, The effects of strontium-substituted bioactive glasses on osteoblasts and osteoclasts in vitro, Biomaterials, 31, 3949, 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.01.121 · DOI
  41. Hutmacher, 2000, Scaffolds in tissue engineering bone and cartilage, Biomaterials, 21, 2529, 10.1016/S0142-9612(00)00121-6 · DOI
  42. Hill, 2005, Canonical Wnt/beta-catenin signaling prevents osteoblasts from differentiating into chondrocytes, Dev. Cell, 8, 727, 10.1016/j.devcel.2005.02.013 · DOI
  43. Abu-Amer, 2013, NF-kappaB signaling and bone resorption, Osteoporos. Int., 24, 2377, 10.1007/s00198-013-2313-x · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 46

Metadata

Authors
Zeng, J., Guo, J., Sun, Z., Deng, F., Ning, C., & Xie, Y.
ORCID
Xie, Youzhuan
Venue
Bioactive Materials
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-09
Volume
5
Issue
3
Pages
435-446
ISSN
2452-199X
DOI
10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.03.008
PMC
PMC7138933
Cited by
46
References
2
Language
en
Licence
Funders
Ministry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China

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