Submit a comment
Abstract
The WNT pathway has become an attractive target for skeletal therapies. High-bone-mass phenotypes in patients with loss-of-function mutations in the LRP5/6 inhibitor Sost (sclerosteosis), or in its downstream enhancer region (van Buchem disease), highlight the utility of targeting Sost/sclerostin to improve bone properties. Sclerostin-neutralizing antibody is highly osteoanabolic in animal models and in human clinical trials, but antibody-based inhibition of another potent LRP5/6 antagonist, Dkk1, is largely inefficacious for building bone in the unperturbed adult skeleton. Here, we show that conditional deletion of Dkk1 from bone also has negligible effects on bone mass. Dkk1 inhibition increases Sost expression, suggesting a potential compensatory mechanism that might explain why Dkk1 suppression lacks anabolic action. To test this concept, we deleted Sost from osteocytes in, or administered sclerostin neutralizing antibody to, mice with a Dkk1-deficient skeleton. A robust anabolic response to Dkk1 deletion was manifest only when Sost/sclerostin was impaired. Whole-body DXA scans, μCT measurements of the femur and spine, histomorphometric measures of femoral bone formation rates, and biomechanical properties of whole bones confirmed the anabolic potential of Dkk1 inhibition in the absence of sclerostin. Further, combined administration of sclerostin and Dkk1 antibody in WT mice produced a synergistic effect on bone gain that greatly exceeded individual or additive effects of the therapies, confirming the therapeutic potential of inhibiting multiple WNT antagonists for skeletal health. In conclusion, the osteoanabolic effects of Dkk1 inhibition can be realized if sclerostin upregulation is prevented. Anabolic therapies for patients with low bone mass might benefit from a strategy that accounts for the compensatory milieu of WNT inhibitors in bone tissue.
Authors
Phillip C. Witcher, Sara E. Miner, Daniel J. Horan, Whitney A. Bullock, Kyung-Eun Lim, Kyung Shin Kang, Alison L. Adaniya, Ryan D. Ross, Gabriela G. Loots, Alexander G. Robling
Guidelines
The Editorial Board will only consider comments that are deemed relevant and of interest to readers. The Journal will not post data that have not been subjected to peer review; or a comment that is essentially a reiteration of another comment.
- Comments appear on the Journal’s website and are linked from the original article’s web page.
- Authors are notified by email if their comments are posted.
- The Journal reserves the right to edit comments for length and clarity.
- No appeals will be considered.
- Comments are not indexed in PubMed.
Specific requirements
- Maximum length, 400 words
- Entered as plain text or HTML
- Author’s name and email address, to be posted with the comment
- Declaration of all potential conflicts of interest (even if these are not ultimately posted); see the Journal’s conflict-of-interest policy
- Comments may not include figures
