| Literature DB >> 27381034 |
Timothy P LaBranche1,2, Alison M Bendele3, Brian C Omura3, Kathryn E Gropp4, Susan I Hurst4, Cedo M Bagi4, Thomas R Cummings4, Lonnie E Grantham5, David L Shelton6, Mark A Zorbas7.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether the effects of nerve growth factor (NGF) inhibition with tanezumab on rats with medial meniscal tear (MMT) effectively model rapidly progressive osteoarthritis (RPOA) observed in clinical trials.Entities:
Keywords: Arthritis; Knee Osteoarthritis; Osteoarthritis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27381034 PMCID: PMC5264211 DOI: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2015-208913
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Rheum Dis ISSN: 0003-4967 Impact factor: 19.103
Figure 1Study designs for (A) the initial arm (28-day study), (B) the second arm (delayed-treatment onset study) and (C) the weight-bearing (amputation) study. GA, gait analysis; HA, histopathology analysis; MMT, medial meniscal tear; SC, subcutaneous.
Figure 2Weight-bearing corresponds with severity of cartilage damage in MMT rats. (A) Gait deficiency in tanezumab-treated MMT rats compared with control treatment and sham surgery rats. Data expressed as per cent decrease from mean of right and left (SE). Starting on day 7, 10 animals per treatment group were removed for microscopic evaluation. (B) Substantial tibial cartilage degeneration width, as determined by histopathology on days 7, 14 and 28 (n=10 rats/group). (C) Representative photomicrographs (50× magnification) from the isotype and sham surgery controls and tanezumab treatment groups on day 28. Days reflect days after MMT surgery. *p<0.05 versus isotype control; **p<0.01 versus isotype control; ***p<0.001 versus isotype control. CD, cartilage degeneration; MMT, medial meniscal tear.
Histopathology summary, n=10/group; mean (SE)
| Parameter/day | Isotype control | Vehicle control | Sham surgery | Tanezumab | Tanezumab | Tanezumab |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | 41.33 (5.43) | 33.33 (2.22) | 5.33 (2.95)*** | 50.67 (10.29) | 60.00 (8.94) | 70.67 (11.60) |
| 14 | 68.00 (15.83) | 50.67 (7.38) | 46.67 (5.71) | 74.67 (8.93) | 164.00 (26.15)** | 141.33 (22.59)* |
| 28 | 33.33 (4.10) | 32.00 (4.07) | 16.00 (5.55)* | 65.33 (10.60) | 185.33 (50.73)*** | 161.33 (76.24)** |
| 7 | 865.33 (26.70) | 893.33 (13.91) | 870.67 (35.84) | 1068.00 (33.46)** | 1041.33 (48.42)* | 1128.00 (60.65)*** |
| 14 | 637.33 (26.28) | 633.33 (31.13) | 641.33 (28.63) | 664.00 (24.49) | 689.33 (31.74) | 688.00 (29.02) |
| 28 | 476.00 (16.03) | 466.67 (15.78) | 472.00 (20.09) | 530.67 (17.87) | 570.67 (22.82)** | 545.33 (15.71)* |
| 7 | 2.00 (0.15) | 2.00 (0.00) | 0.00 (0.00)*** | 2.40 (0.16) | 2.20 (0.13) | 2.20 (0.13) |
| 14 | 2.80 (0.25) | 2.60 (0.16) | 0.00 (0.00)*** | 3.10 (0.31) | 2.60 (0.16) | 2.70 (0.30) |
| 28 | 3.00 (0.26) | 3.40 (0.16) | 0.00 (0.00)*** | 4.60 (0.16)** | 4.40 (0.34)** | 4.20 (0.29)* |
| 7 | 1.30 (0.15) | 1.20 (0.13) | 0.20 (0.13)*** | 2.30 (0.15)** | 2.10 (0.10)* | 2.70 (0.26)*** |
| 14 | 2.20 (0.20) | 2.50 (0.17) | 0.10 (0.10)*** | 3.50 (0.17)** | 3.70 (0.15)*** | 3.80 (0.13)*** |
| 28 | 2.80 (0.25) | 3.70 (0.26)* | 0.20 (0.13)*** | 4.60 (0.16)*** | 4.80 (0.13)*** | 4.70 (0.15)*** |
| 7 | 119.33 (26.79) | 121.33 (26.88) | 0 (0.00)*** | 167.33 (21.79) | 150.33 (29.65) | 223.67 (14.59)* |
| 14 | 309.67 (10.90) | 299.67 (16.03) | 0 (0.00)*** | 382.67 (27.93) | 476.67 (43.62)** | 417.67 (41.30) |
| 28 | 581.67 (34.20) | 601.67 (27.38) | 0 (0.00)*** | 1106.67 (49.20)*** | 1068.33 (75.30)*** | 1093.33 (50.63)*** |
*p<0.05 versus isotype control; **p<0.01 versus isotype control; ***p<0.001 versus isotype control.
†Damage to calcified cartilage and subchondral bone was scored on a 6-point numerical scale (0=no changes to 5=increased basophilia; marked to severe fragmentation of calcified cartilage, mesenchymal change in marrow involves up to three-fourths of the total area and articular cartilage has collapsed into the epiphysis to a depth of >250 µm from tidemark).
‡Medial tibial subchondral/epiphysial bone sclerosis was scored on a 6-point numerical scale (0=no changes to 5=76%–100% increase in subchondral or epiphysial trabecular bone thickness in medial versus lateral; very little marrow space remains in medial tibia).
Figure 3Delaying onset of treatment from day 0 until after gait deficiency returns to normal (day 57 but not day 23) resulted in no difference in cartilage damage between treated and untreated MMT rats sacrificed 14 days after treatment. Data points include mean substantial tibial cartilage degeneration width measurements (tanezumab 0.1 mg/kg/week for 14 days; n=10 rats/group). Days reflect days after MMT surgery. CD, cartilage degeneration; MMT, medial meniscal tear.
Figure 4The rat MMT model is dependent on dynamic weight-bearing for cartilage damage. Rats underwent either MMT or sham surgery±amputation of the lower tibia. (A) Tibial cartilage substantial degeneration width (SE), as determined by histopathology at day 14 after MMT surgery was observed in MMT rats (no amputation). (B) Representative photomicrographs from each group (16× magnification). (C) Top row depicts X-ray images of the right knee. Second row shows representative two-dimensional μCT images of the proximal tibia (arrows indicate less cancellous bone at metaphysis). Third row shows the image of tibial epiphysis (arrow indicates thicker subchondral bone at medial tibial plateau and arrowhead points at osteophyte). Bottom row shows proximal tibial metaphysis (square indicates areas of secondary spongiosa where cancellous bone has been evaluated). MMT, medial meniscal tear; μCT, micro-CT.
Bone parameters evaluated ex vivo by µ-CT at proximal tibial epiphysis and metaphysis
| Parameter | Normal rats | MMT surgery | MMT plus amputation | Sham plus amputation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TV, mm3 | 1.65±0.11 | 1.87±0.14 | 1.83±0.07 | 1.67±0.11 |
| BV, mm3 | 0.76±0.10 | 0.74±0.09 | 0.67±0.04†,‡ | 0.64±0.05†,‡ |
| BV/TV, ratio | 0.46±0.03 | 0.43±0.02 | 0.37±0.03††,‡ | 0.38±0.02††,‡ |
| BMD, g/cm2 | 985.14±16.44 | 990.85±14.89 | 983.37±14.97 | 1005.05±11.05 |
| TV, mm3 | 2.81±0.05 | 2.88±0.04 | 2.87±0.05 | 2.80±0.14 |
| BV, mm3 | 0.73±0.06 | 0.57±0.06††† | 0.24±0.07†††,‡‡‡ | 0.26±0.05†††,‡‡‡ |
| BV/TV, ratio | 0.26±0.02 | 0.20±0.02††† | 0.08±0.02†††,‡‡‡ | 0.09±0.02†††,‡‡‡ |
| BMD, g/cm2 | 929.74±32.06 | 922.53±57.59 | 848.15±40.35 | 943.72±68.42 |
| TV, mm3 | 0.93±0.01 | 0.95±0.01 | 0.94±0.02 | 0.96±0.00 |
| BV, mm3 | 0.15±0.02 | 0.07±0.01††† | 0.01±0.01†††,‡‡‡ | 0.03±0.02†††,‡‡‡ |
| BV/TV, ratio | 0.16±0.02 | 0.08±0.01††† | 0.01±0.01†††,‡‡‡ | 0.03±0.02†††,‡‡‡ |
| TbN, 1/mm | 2.82±0.35 | 1.65±0.26††† | 0.32±0.19†††,‡‡‡ | 0.63±0.32†††,‡‡‡ |
| TbT, ìm | 0.056±0.002 | 0.048±0.005† | 0.039±0.007†††,‡‡‡ | 0.041±0.010†,‡ |
| TbS, ìm | 0.30±0.04 | 0.57±0.09††† | 4.94±4.64†††,‡‡‡ | 2.01±1.23†††,‡‡‡ |
| BMD, g/cm2 | 918.43±19.86 | 923.92±37.10 | 864.96±41.79 | 921.60±45.66 |
†p<0.05 versus normal; ‡p<0.05 versus MMT; ††p<0.01 versus normal; ‡‡p<0.01 versus MMT; †††p<0.001 versus normal and ‡‡‡p<0.001 versus MMT.
BMD, bone mineral density; BV, bone volume; MMT, medial meniscal tear; TbN, trabecular number; TbS, trabecular separation; TbT, trabecular thickness; TV, tissue volume; μCT, micro-CT.