BACKGROUND: Parathyroid hormone-related protein (PTHrP) has anabolic effects in bone, which has led to the clinical use of N-terminal fragments of PTHrP and PTH. Since 10% to 20% of fractures demonstrate healing complications and osteoporosis continues to be a debilitating disease, the development of bone-forming agents is of utmost importance. Due to evidence that regions of PTHrP other than the N-terminus may have bone-forming effects, this study was designed to compare the effects of full-length PTHrP 1-141 to N-terminal PTHrP 1-86 on in vitro bone formation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MC3T3-E1 pre-osteoblasts were treated once every 6 d for 36 d with 5, 25, and 50 pM of PTHrP 1-141 or 1-86 for 1 or 24 h. Cells were also treated after blocking the N-terminus, the nuclear localization sequence (NLS), and the C-terminus of PTHrP, individually and in combination. Area of mineralization, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), and osteocalcin (OCN) were measured. RESULTS: PTHrP 1-141 and 1-86 increased mineralization after 24-h treatments, but not 1-h. PTHrP 1-141 was more potent than 1-86. Treatment with PTHrP 1-141 for 24-h, but not 1-86, resulted in a concentration-dependent increase in ALP, with no effect after 1-h. Exposure to both peptides for 1- or 24-h induced a concentration-dependent increase in OCN, with 24-h exceeding 1-h. Antibody blocking revealed that the NLS and C-terminus are anabolic. CONCLUSIONS: Both PTHrP 1-141 and 1-86 increased in vitro bone formation; however, PTHrP 1-141 was more effective. The NLS and C-terminus have anabolic effects distinct from the N-terminus. This demonstrates the advantage of PTHrP 1-141 as a skeletal anabolic agent. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND:Parathyroid hormone-related protein (PTHrP) has anabolic effects in bone, which has led to the clinical use of N-terminal fragments of PTHrP and PTH. Since 10% to 20% of fractures demonstrate healing complications and osteoporosis continues to be a debilitating disease, the development of bone-forming agents is of utmost importance. Due to evidence that regions of PTHrP other than the N-terminus may have bone-forming effects, this study was designed to compare the effects of full-length PTHrP 1-141 to N-terminal PTHrP 1-86 on in vitro bone formation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MC3T3-E1 pre-osteoblasts were treated once every 6 d for 36 d with 5, 25, and 50 pM of PTHrP 1-141 or 1-86 for 1 or 24 h. Cells were also treated after blocking the N-terminus, the nuclear localization sequence (NLS), and the C-terminus of PTHrP, individually and in combination. Area of mineralization, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), and osteocalcin (OCN) were measured. RESULTS:PTHrP 1-141 and 1-86 increased mineralization after 24-h treatments, but not 1-h. PTHrP 1-141 was more potent than 1-86. Treatment with PTHrP 1-141 for 24-h, but not 1-86, resulted in a concentration-dependent increase in ALP, with no effect after 1-h. Exposure to both peptides for 1- or 24-h induced a concentration-dependent increase in OCN, with 24-h exceeding 1-h. Antibody blocking revealed that the NLS and C-terminus are anabolic. CONCLUSIONS: Both PTHrP 1-141 and 1-86 increased in vitro bone formation; however, PTHrP 1-141 was more effective. The NLS and C-terminus have anabolic effects distinct from the N-terminus. This demonstrates the advantage of PTHrP 1-141 as a skeletal anabolic agent. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Yingben Xue; Zengli Zhang; Andrew C Karaplis; Geoffrey N Hendy; David Goltzman; Dengshun Miao Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2005-06-20 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Dennis M Black; Mary L Bouxsein; Lisa Palermo; Joan A McGowan; David C Newitt; Eyal Rosen; Sharmila Majumdar; Clifford J Rosen Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2008-03-18 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Dengshun Miao; Hanyi Su; Bin He; Jianjun Gao; Qingwen Xia; Min Zhu; Zhen Gu; David Goltzman; Andrew C Karaplis Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2008-12-17 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Verónica Alonso; Arancha R de Gortázar; Juan A Ardura; Irene Andrade-Zapata; M Victoria Alvarez-Arroyo; Pedro Esbrit Journal: J Cell Physiol Date: 2008-12 Impact factor: 6.384
Authors: D Lozano; L Fernández-de-Castro; S Portal-Núñez; A López-Herradón; S Dapía; E Gómez-Barrena; P Esbrit Journal: Br J Pharmacol Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 8.739
Authors: Blake E Hildreth; Krista M Hernon; Wessel P Dirksen; John Leong; Wachiraphan Supsavhad; Prosper N Boyaka; Thomas J Rosol; Ramiro E Toribio Journal: J Tissue Eng Date: 2015-10-12 Impact factor: 7.813
Authors: Renjie Jin; Julie A Sterling; James R Edwards; David J DeGraff; Changki Lee; Serk In Park; Robert J Matusik Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-04-05 Impact factor: 3.240