Cited by 19Bone health and osteoporosis researchBone Metabolism and DiseasesBioinformatics and Genomic Networks

Comparisons of gene expression between peripheral blood mononuclear cells and bone tissue in osteoporosis

Open access
Xie, Lihua, Feng, Eryou, Li, Shengqiang, Chai, Hao, Chen, Juan, Li, Li, Ge, Jirong·2023·Medicine

Abstract

Osteoporosis (OP) is one of the major public health problems in the world. However, the biomarkers between the peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMs) and bone tissue for prognosis of OP have not been well characterized. This study aimed to explore the similarities and differences of the gene expression profiles between the PBMs and bone tissue and identify potential genes, transcription factors (TFs) and hub proteins involved in OP. The patients were enrolled as an experimental group, and healthy subjects served as normal controls. Human whole-genome expression chips were used to analyze gene expression profiles from PBMs and bone tissue. And the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were subsequently studied using Gene Ontology and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes enrichment analysis. The above DEGs were constructed into protein-protein interaction network. Finally, TF-DEGs regulation networks were constructed. Microarray analysis revealed that 226 DEGs were identified between OP and normal controls in the PBMs, while 2295 DEGs were identified in the bone tissue. And 13 common DEGs were obtained by comparing the 2 tissues. The Gene Ontology analysis indicated that DEGs in the PBMs were more involved in immune response, while DEGs in bone were more involved in renal response and urea transmembrane transport. And the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes analysis indicated almost all of the pathways in the PBMs were overlapped with those in the bone tissue. Furthermore, protein-protein interaction network presented 6 hub proteins: PI3K1, APP, GNB5, FPR2, GNG13, and PLCG1. APP has been found to be associated with OP. Finally, 5 key TFs were identified by TF-DEGs regulation networks analysis (CREB1, RUNX1, STAT3, CREBBP, and GLI1) and were supposed to be associated with OP. This study enhanced our understanding of the pathogenesis of OP. PI3K1, GNB5, FPR2, GNG13, and PLCG1 might be the potential targets of OP.

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 · 10.1097/md.0000000000033829

Cites

44 of 44 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?

  • Crossing PMOP DEGs and osteoporosis genes with 298 homeobox genes found 11 potential target genes.

    “we crossed differentially expressed genes from GSE230665 (RNA-Seq datasets compares PMOP bones with postmenopausal healthy bones, |logFC| > 0.8, p < 0.05)25 and osteoporosis-related genes from GeneCards database (score > 1) with 298 homeobox genes and found 11 potential target genes (Supplementary Fig. 1a).”

    From Targeting Msx2 as a brake in the fusion fate of osteoclasts and an anabolic therapy in pre-clinical models of osteoporosis (2025) · cites this paper as [25]

    The cited paper identifies GSE230665 as one of its publicly available datasets and reports bone-tissue DEGs between women with osteoporosis and healthy controls (Methods §§2.1–2.2; Results §3.1). But Methods §§2.2–2.3 describe microarray data, not RNA-seq, and use fold change >2.0 rather than the citing sentence’s |logFC| >0.8 cutoff. The crossing with homeobox genes and the 11 targets are presented as the citing authors’ own analysis, not as a finding attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    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

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 45 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [15]Liu ZH YD, Zhu HM Wang HF. Chinese people recommended diagnostic criteria for osteoporosis (second draft). Chin J Osteoporos. 2019; 6: 1– 3.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Xie, L., Feng, E., Li, S., Chai, H., Chen, J., Li, L., & Ge, J.
Affiliations
  • Fujian Academy of Chinese Medicine Sciences (CN)
  • Fuzhou Second Hospital (CN)
  • Fujian University of Traditional Chinese Medicine (CN)
Corresponding author
Ge, Jirong
Venue
Medicine
Published
2023-05-19
Volume
102
Issue
20
Pages
e33829
ISSN
0025-7974 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4377046843
Cited by
19
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4
FWCI
5.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Natural Science Foundation of China (81873323, 81674007)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Bone health and osteoporosis research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bone Metabolism and Diseases
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Keywords
osteoporosis, peripheral blood mononuclear cells, bone, gene expression profiling, differentially expressed genes, transcription factors, hub proteins, APP, formyl peptide receptor 2, phospholipase C-gamma1, CREB1, RUNX1, STAT3, CREB-binding protein, Gli1, biomarkers, protein-protein interaction network
MeSH terms
Bone and Bones, Genetic Markers, Humans, Leukocytes, Mononuclear, Osteoporosis, Gene Expression, Computational Biology, Gene Expression Profiling, Gene Regulatory Networks, Transcriptome

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