Cited by 328Osteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPharmacological Effects of Medicinal Plants

Application of biomarkers in the development of drugs intended for the treatment of osteoarthritis

Open access
Kraus, V.B., Burnett, B., Coindreau, J., Cottrell, S., Eyre, D., Gendreau, M., Gardiner, J., Garnero, P. +12 more·2011·Osteoarthritis and Cartilage

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a chronic and slowly progressive disease for which biomarkers may be able to provide a more rapid indication of therapeutic responses to therapy than is currently available; this could accelerate and facilitate OA drug discovery and development programs. The goal of this document is to provide a summary and guide to the application of in vitro (biochemical and other soluble) biomarkers in the development of drugs for OA and to outline and stimulate a research agenda that will further this goal. METHODS: The Biomarkers Working Group representing experts in the field of OA biomarker research from both academia and industry developed this consensus document between 2007 and 2009 at the behest of the Osteoarthritis Research Society International Federal Drug Administration initiative (OARSI FDA initiative). RESULTS: This document summarizes definitions and classification systems for biomarkers, the current outcome measures used in OA clinical trials, applications and potential utility of biomarkers for development of OA therapeutics, the current state of qualification of OA-related biomarkers, pathways for biomarker qualification, critical needs to advance the use of biomarkers for drug development, recommendations regarding practices and clinical trials, and a research agenda to advance the science of OA-related biomarkers. CONCLUSIONS: Although many OA-related biomarkers are currently available they exist in various states of qualification and validation. The biomarkers that are likely to have the earliest beneficial impact on clinical trials fall into two general categories, those that will allow targeting of subjects most likely to either respond and/or progress (prognostic value) within a reasonable and manageable time frame for a clinical study (for instance within 1-2 years for an OA trial), and those that provide early feedback for preclinical decision-making and for trial organizers that a drug is having the desired biochemical effect. As in vitro biomarkers are increasingly investigated in the context of specific drug treatments, advances in the field can be expected that will lead to rapid expansion of the list of available biomarkers with increasing understanding of the molecular processes that they represent.

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.joca.2010.08.019

Cites

127 of 127 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • An integrated framework synthesizing circulating biomarkers, synovial fluid analysis, quantitative imaging parameters, and clinical evaluation can enable clinicians to detect disease earlier, stratify patients by disease subtypes, predict progression trajectories, and monitor therapeutic responses with greater precision.

    “By synthesizing information from circulating biomarkers, synovial fluid analysis, quantitative imaging parameters, and clinical evaluation, an integrated framework can help facilitate holistic orthopedic care and enable clinicians to detect disease earlier, stratify patients according to disease subtypes, predict progression trajectories, and monitor therapeutic responses with greater precision [9”

    From Biomarker-Guided Imaging and AI-Augmented Diagnosis of Degenerative Joint Disease (2025) · cites this paper as [10]

    Section 3.5 (Diagnostic) describes potential early detection and identification of OA subtypes; section 3.3 (Prognostic) describes predicting progression and treatment response. Section 6.1 (General Overview) suggests that combining biomarkers with imaging may eventually inform patient diagnosis, treatment, and monitoring. The paper does not establish that an integrated framework using all four named inputs already enables clinicians to deliver these benefits with greater precision; it presents these applications largely as prospective, particularly in the context of drug development. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 129 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [51]Clark AG Jordan JM Vilim V Renner JB Dragomir AD Luta G Serum cartilage oligomeric matrix protein reflects osteoarthritis presence and severity: the Johnston County Osteoarthritis Project Arthritis Rheum 1999 42 2356 2364 10555031
  2. [102]Hellio Le Graverand MP Brandt KD Mazzuca SA Katz BP Buck R Lane KA Association between concentrations of urinary type II collagen neoepitope (uTIINE) and joint space narrowing in patients with knee osteoarthritis Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2006 14 1189 1195 16753310

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kraus, V. B., Burnett, B., Coindreau, J., Cottrell, S., Eyre, D., Gendreau, M., Gardiner, J., Garnero, P., Hardin, J., Henrotin, Y., Heinegård, D., Ko, A., Lohmander, L. S., Matthews, G., Menetski, J., Moskowitz, R., Persiani, S., Poole, A. R., Rousseau, J.-C., & Todman, M.
Affiliations
  • Duke Medical Center (US)
  • Duke University (US)
  • Amgen (United States) (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Wyeth (US)
  • Inserm (FR)
  • Albert Einstein College of Medicine (US)
  • University of Liège (BE)
  • Lund University (SE)
  • Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA (United States) (US)
  • Case Western Reserve University (US)
  • McGill University (CA)
  • Hospices Civils de Lyon (FR)
  • Smith & Nephew (United Kingdom) (GB)
Corresponding author
Kraus, V.B.
Venue
Osteoarthritis and Cartilage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-05
Volume
19
Issue
5
Pages
515-542
ISSN
1063-4584 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2059670411
Cited by
328
References
129
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 35 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 24
FWCI
19.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Osteoarthritis and Cartilage (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • ORBi (University of Liège) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (P30AG028716)
  • National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (AR 50245, P01AR050245)
  • National Center for Research Resources (UL1RR024128)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Osteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Pharmacological Effects of Medicinal Plants
Keywords
osteoarthritis, biomarkers, drug development, biomarker qualification, prognostic factors, treatment response monitoring, clinical trial outcome measures, drug discovery
MeSH terms
Clinical Trials as Topic, Humans, Osteoarthritis, Specimen Handling, Biomarkers, Treatment Outcome, Drug Monitoring, Drug Discovery

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