| Literature DB >> 26489025 |
Christopher L Newman1, Amy Creecy2, Mathilde Granke3, Jeffry S Nyman3, Nannan Tian4, Max A Hammond5, Joseph M Wallace6, Drew M Brown1, Neal Chen7, Sharon M Moe8, Matthew R Allen9.
Abstract
Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have an increased risk of fracture. Raloxifene is a mild antiresorptive agent that reduces fracture risk in the general population. Here we assessed the impact of raloxifene on the skeletal properties of animals with progressive CKD. Male Cy/+ rats that develop autosomal dominant cystic kidney disease were treated with either vehicle or raloxifene for five weeks. They were assessed for changes in mineral metabolism and skeletal parameters (microCT, histology, whole-bone mechanics, and material properties). Their normal littermates served as controls. Animals with CKD had significantly higher parathyroid hormone levels compared with normal controls, as well as inferior structural and mechanical skeletal properties. Raloxifene treatment resulted in lower bone remodeling rates and higher cancellous bone volume in the rats with CKD. Although it had little effect on cortical bone geometry, it resulted in higher energy to fracture and modulus of toughness values than vehicle-treated rats with CKD, achieving levels equivalent to normal controls. Animals treated with raloxifene had superior tissue-level mechanical properties as assessed by nanoindentation, and higher collagen D-periodic spacing as assessed by atomic force microscopy. Thus, raloxifene can positively impact whole-bone mechanical properties in CKD through its impact on skeletal material properties.Entities:
Keywords: bone quality; chronic kidney disease; raloxifene
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26489025 PMCID: PMC4840093 DOI: 10.1038/ki.2015.315
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Kidney Int ISSN: 0085-2538 Impact factor: 10.612
Biochemistry
| Biochemistry | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| BUN (mg/dL) | 14.62 ± 1.95 | 48.32 ± 8.20 | 44.12 ± 5.12 |
| Calcium (mg/dL) | 9.979 ± 0.987 | 11.610 ± 2.323 | 10.061 ± 2.421 |
| Phosphorus (mg/dL) | 4.527 ± 0.579 | 6.682 ± 2.408 | 9.700 ± 3.591 |
| PTH (pg/mL) | 181.97 ± 105.05 | 2194.39 ± 1811.01 | 1257.46 ± 1456.22 |
| FGF23 (pg/mL) | 698.36 ± 93.03 | 2556.83 ± 1401.96 | 6184.88 ± 3403.39 |
One-Way ANOVA followed by Fisher’s LSD tests
Kruskal-Wallis test followed Mann-Whitney U tests (with Bonferroni correction)
vs. Normal
vs. CKD (Vehicle)
Figure 1Cancellous bone structure in the proximal tibia and lumbar vertebra as determined by microCT. *, p<0.05 compared to NL; #, p<0.05 compared to CKD-VEH
MicroCT
| Proximal Tibia | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| BV/TV (%) | 17.04 ± 3.34 | 11.26 ± 1.51 | 14.9 ± 2.70 |
| Tb.Th (mm) | 0.106 ± 0.010 | 0.108 ± 0.004 | 0.103 ± 0.007 |
| Tb.N (1/mm) | 1.611 ± 0.253 | 1.052 ± 0.150 | 1.451 ± 0.211 |
| Tb.Sp (mm) | 0.369 ± 0.044 | 0.604 ± 0.114 | 0.420 ± 0.055 |
| Ct.Th (mm) | 0.876 ± 0.037 | 0.748 ± 0.056 | 0.783 ± 0.039 |
| Ct.Ar (mm2) | 8.767 ± 0.631 | 7.324 ± 0.358 | 7.611 ± 0.397 |
| Iap (mm4) | 15.00 ± 2.59 | 12.40 ± 0.58 | 12.30 ± 1.35 |
| Iml (mm4) | 10.23 ± 1.56 | 7.50 ± 0.59 | 7.86 ± 0.73 |
| Ct.Po (%) | 0.690 ± 0.324 | 0.948 ± 0.401 | 0.467 ± 0.274 |
| BV/TV (%) | 41.88 ± 2.92 | 30.01 ± 3.98 | 36.27 ± 1.76 |
| Tb.Th (mm) | 0.119 ± 0.004 | 0.110 ± 0.007 | 0.108 ± 0.005 |
| Tb.N (1/mm) | 3.581 ± 0.258 | 2.726 ± 0.324 | 3.401 ± 0.129 |
| Tb.Sp (mm) | 0.213 ± 0.021 | 0.280 ± 0.031 | 0.235 ± 0.014 |
| Ct.Th (mm) | 0.236 ± 0.033 | 0.170 ± 0.012 | 0.184 ± 0.025 |
One-Way ANOVA followed by Fisher’s LSD tests
Kruskal-Wallis test followed Mann-Whitney U tests (with Bonferroni correction)
vs. Normal
vs. CKD (Vehicle)
Figure 2Bone formation rates in the proximal tibia and caudal lumbar vertebra as determined by dynamic histomorphometry. *, p<0.05 compared to NL; #, p<0.05 compared to CKD-VEH
Histomorphometry
| Tibia | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| MAR (μm/day) | 1.305 ± 0.185 | 2.470 ± 0.569 | 1.890 ± 0.511 |
| MS/BS (%) | 26.56 ± 5.14 | 33.32 ± 4.11 | 23.89 ± 4.75 |
| BFR/BS (μm3/μm2/year) | 126.65 ± 31.02 | 299.62 ± 74.35 | 170.40 ± 78.52 |
| Oc.S/BS (%) | 7.157 ± 1.250 | 15.739 ± 3.332 | 15.684 ± 6.857 |
| N.Oc/BS (1/mm) | 1.966 ± 0.412 | 4.125 ± 0.785 | 4.134 ± 1.653 |
| MAR (μm/day) | 1.057 ± 0.339 | 1.983 ± 0.876 | 1.574 ± 0.400 |
| MS/BS (%) | 13.62 ± 3.98 | 27.81 ± 5.73 | 16.21 ± 3.73 |
| BFR/BS (μm3/μm2/year) | 52.14 ± 21.76 | 211.94 ± 128.49 | 94.19 ± 39.80 |
One-Way ANOVA followed by Fisher’s LSD tests
Kruskal-Wallis test followed Mann-Whitney U tests (with Bonferroni correction)
vs. Normal
vs. CKD (Vehicle)
Figure 3Structural and apparent material properties of the femur as determined by four-point bending: (a) ultimate load, (b) energy to fracture, (c) ultimate stress, and (d) modulus of toughness. *, p<0.05 compared to NL; #, p<0.05 compared to CKD-VEH
Whole Bone Mechanics
| Femur | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Ultimate Force (N) | 272.08 ± 17.75 | 204.81 ± 23.20 | 223.44 ± 23.78 |
| Stiffness (N/mm) | 531.67 ± 47.41 | 412.96 ± 56.28 | 440.66 ± 30.52 |
| Energy to Fracture (mJ) | 119.16 ± 15.33 | 91.65 ± 14.13 | 107.24 ± 20.86 |
| Total Displacement (mm) | 781.56 ± 53.46 | 745.15 ± 67.76 | 825.01 ± 95.15 |
| Ultimate Stress (MPa) | 153.81 ± 15.68 | 143.94 ± 17.93 | 146.76 ± 13.28 |
| Elastic Modulus (MPa) | 4.649 ± 0.633 | 5.144 ± 0.971 | 4.998 ± 0.466 |
| Toughness (MPa) | 4.336 ± 0.382 | 3.652 ± 0.545 | 4.096 ± 0.814 |
| Total Strain (mε) | 50.44 ± 4.48 | 42.74 ± 4.23 | 47.73 ± 4.97 |
| Ultimate Force (N) | 256.89 ± 60.01 | 187.06 ± 48.03 | 179.57 ± 38.63 |
| Stiffness (N/mm) | 952.09 ± 314.20 | 866.74 ± 260.33 | 854.76 ± 277.85 |
| Energy (mJ) | 46.27 ± 10.60 | 28.05 ± 8.93 | 26.46 ± 7.33 |
| Total Displacement (mm) | 0.445 ± 0.123 | 0.355 ± 0.062 | 0.399 ± 0.97 |
| Ultimate Stress (MPa) | 42.49 ± 10.00 | 38.74 ± 9.16 | 34.16 ± 7.89 |
| Elastic Modulus (MPa) | 954.37 ± 334.35 | 1174.00 ± 447.08 | 1124.68 ± 372.23 |
| Toughness (MPa) | 1.310 ± 0.470 | 0.924 ± 0.347 | 0.714 ± 0.135 |
| Total Strain (mε) | 73.84 ± 25.98 | 58.37 ± 13.51 | 57.27 ± 12.07 |
One-Way ANOVA followed by Fisher’s LSD tests
Kruskal-Wallis test followed Mann-Whitney U tests (with Bonferroni correction)
vs. Normal
vs. CKD (Vehicle)
Material Properties – Mechanics
| Nanoindentation | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Elastic Modulus (GPa) | 11.066 ± 2.766 | 9.666 ± 1.021 | 13.200 ± 3.345 |
| Hardness (MPa) | 202.62 ± 22.86 | 192.68 ± 47.35 | 422.81 ± 291.97 |
| Elastic Modulus (GPa) | 52.99 ± 25.81 | 43.21 ± 16.31 | 49.25 ± 26.20 |
One-Way ANOVA followed by Fisher’s LSD tests
Kruskal-Wallis test followed Mann-Whitney U tests (with Bonferroni correction)
vs. Normal
vs. CKD (Vehicle)
Material Properties – Composition and Morphology
| Raman Spectroscopy | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Crystallinity (1/FWHM PO43−ν1) | 0.0529 ± 0.0003 | 0.0534 ± 0.0008 | 0.0535 ± 0.0005 |
| Carbonate Substitution (CO32−ν1/PO43−ν1) | 0.247 ± 0.008 | 0.242 ± 0.013 | 0.239 ± 0.015 |
| Relative Mineralization (PO43−ν1/Amide I) | 2.650 ± 0.332 | 2.274 ± 0.501 | 2.384 ± .0422 |
| D-Periodicity (nm) | 65.321 ± 0.946 | 64.466 ± 1.391 | 65.438 ± 1.289 |
| Pyridinoline per Collagen (mol/mol) | 0.474 ± 0.485 | 0.223 ± 0.087 | 0..305 ± 0.079 |
| Deoxypyridinoline per Collagen (mol/mol) | 0.372 ± 0.388 | 0.203 ± 0.095 | 0.271 ± 0.088 |
| Pentosidine per Collagen (mmol/mol) | 815.39 ± 621.34 | 507.06 ± 288.11 | 617.48 ± 171.46 |
| Bound Water (%) | 18.60 ± 3.61 | 17.88 ± 4.00 | 17.34 ± 3.43 |
| Pore Water (%) | 3.829 ± 0.988 | 5.572 ± 3.567 | 4.158 ± 0.965 |
One-Way ANOVA followed by Fisher’s LSD tests
Kruskal-Wallis test followed Mann-Whitney U tests (with Bonferroni correction)
vs. Normal
vs. CKD (Vehicle)
Figure 4Collagen fibril D-periodic spacing as determined by AFM imaging. #, p<0.05 compared to CKD-VEH