Cited by 82Bone Metabolism and DiseasesBone fractures and treatmentsBone health and osteoporosis research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effects of receptor activator of NFκB (RANK) signaling blockade on fracture healing.

Open access

Abstract

As dominant regulators of osteoclastogenesis and bone resorption, receptor activator of NFκB (RANK), receptor activator of NFκB ligand, and OPG have been identified as ideal drug targets for the treatment of metabolic bone disease. One concern regarding the therapeutic use of RANK signaling inhibitors is their effect on fracture healing. Therefore we tested if uncoupling and osteoclast depletion via RANK blockade affects callus formation, maturation and matrix remodeling, as well as union rates in a mouse tibia fracture model. Low dose (1 mg/kg i.p.) RANK:Fc therapy had no effect on callus formation, matrix maturation and remodeling, and resulted in 100% bony union by day 28. High dose RANK:Fc treatment (10 mg/kg i.p.) effectively eliminated osteoclasts at the fracture site on day 14, with no significant effects on fracture healing. When therapy was discontinued, normal numbers of osteoclasts were observed at the fracture site by day 28. However, continuous therapy resulted in a large osteopetrotic callus consisting of both mineralized and unmineralized matrix that was void of osteoclasts, but bony union was unaffected at day 28. We also evaluated this process in the complete absence of RANK signaling using RANK ‐/‐ mice. These animals exhibited significant radiographic and histologic evidence of callus formation, indicating that RANK signaling is not required for fracture callus formation. However, only 33% of RANK ‐/‐ animals formed bony unions compared to 100% of the osteopetrotic control mice. This defect was most likely a result of decreased blood flow, as evidenced by fewer blood vessels in the RANK ‐/‐ animals. Together, these data imply that osteoclast depletion via inhibition of RANK signaling is a viable option for the treatment of pathological bone loss since no adverse effects on fracture healing are observed when therapy is discontinued. © 2003 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

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/s0736-0266(03)00011-1

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Cruess RL, 1975, Fracture healing, Can J Surg, 18, 403

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Flick, L. M., Weaver, J. M., Ulrich‐Vinther, M., Abuzzahab, F., Zhang, X., Dougall, W. C., Anderson, D., O'Keefe, R. J., & Schwarz, E. M.
Affiliations
University of Rochester Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
  • Flick, Lisa M.
  • Schwarz, Edward M.
Venue
Journal of Orthopaedic Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2003-07
Volume
21
Issue
4
Pages
676-684
ISSN
  • 0736-0266 (ISSN-L)
  • 1554-527X
OpenAlex
W2078086616
Cited by
82
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Orthopaedic Research® (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r29ar044220-05)
  • National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (AR-45791, AR 44220)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bone Metabolism and Diseases
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Bone fractures and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Bone health and osteoporosis research
Keywords
RANK signaling, fracture healing, osteoclasts, callus formation, bone remodeling, bony union, blood flow, bone resorption, metabolic bone disease
MeSH terms
Animals, Bony Callus, Glycoproteins, Cricetinae, Mice, Inbred CBA, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Mice, Mutant Strains, Osteoblasts, Osteoclasts, Recombinant Proteins, Regional Blood Flow, Tibial Fractures, Signal Transduction, NF-kappa B, CHO Cells, Fracture Healing, Receptors, Tumor Necrosis Factor, Receptors, Cytoplasmic and Nuclear, Mice, Osteoprotegerin

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