Combinatorial Inhibition of Myostatin and Activin A Improves Femoral Bone Properties in the G610C Mouse Model of Osteogenesis Imperfecta

Osteogenesis imperfecta (OI) is a collagen-related bone disorder characterized by fragile osteopenic bone and muscle weakness. We have previously shown that the soluble activin receptor type IIB decoy (sActRIIB) molecule increases muscle mass and improves bone strength in the mild to moderate G610C mouse model of OI. The sActRIIB molecule binds multiple transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β) ligands, including myostatin and activin A. Here, we investigate the musculoskeletal effects of inhibiting activin A alone, myostatin alone, or both myostatin and activin A in wild-type (Wt) and heterozygous G610C (+/G610C) mice using specific monoclonal antibodies. Male and female Wt and +/G610C mice were treated twice weekly with intraperitoneal injections of monoclonal control antibody (Ctrl-Ab, Regn1945), anti-activin A antibody (ActA-Ab, Regn2476), anti-myostatin antibody (Mstn-Ab, Regn647), or both ActA-Ab and Mstn-Ab (Combo, Regn2476, and Regn647) from 5 to 16 weeks of age. Prior to euthanasia, whole body composition, metabolism and muscle force generation assessments were performed. Post euthanasia, hindlimb muscles were evaluated for mass, and femurs were evaluated for changes in microarchitecture and biomechanical strength using micro–computed tomography (μCT) and three-point bend analyses. ActA-Ab treatment minimally impacted the +/G610C musculoskeleton, and was detrimental to bone strength in male +/G610C mice. Mstn-Ab treatment, as previously reported, resulted in substantial increases in hindlimb muscle weights and overall body weights in Wt and male +/G610C mice, but had minimal skeletal impact in +/G610C mice. Conversely, the Combo treatment outperformed ActA-Ab alone or Mstn-Ab alone, consistently increasing hindlimb muscle and body weights regardless of sex or genotype and improving bone microarchitecture and strength in both male and female +/G610C and Wt mice. Combinatorial inhibition of activin A and myostatin more potently increased muscle mass and bone microarchitecture and strength than either antibody alone, recapturing most of the observed benefits of sActRIIB treatment in +/G610C mice. © 2022 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).     

Deep Brain Stimulation Compared With Contingency Management for the Treatment of Cocaine Use Disorders: A Threshold and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

ObjectivesCocaine is the second most frequently used illicit drug worldwide (after cannabis), and cocaine use disorder (CUD)-related deaths increased globally by 80% from 1990 to 2013. There is yet to be a regulatory-approved treatment. Emerging preclinical evidence indicates that deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the nucleus accumbens may be a therapeutic option. Prior to expanding the costly investigation of DBS for treatment of CUD, it is important to ensure societal cost-effectiveness.AimsWe conducted a threshold and cost-effectiveness analysis to determine the success rate at which DBS would be equivalent to contingency management (CM), recently identified as the most efficacious therapy for treatments of CUDs.Materials and MethodsQuality of life, efficacy, and safety parameters for CM were obtained from previous literature. Costs were calculated from a societal perspective. Our model predicted the utility benefit based on quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental-cost-effectiveness ratio resulting from two treatments on a one-, two-, and five-year timeline.ResultsOn a one-year timeline, DBS would need to impart a success rate (ie, cocaine free) of 70% for it to yield the same utility benefit (0.492 QALYs per year) as CM. At no success rate would DBS be more cost-effective (incremental-cost-effectiveness ratio <$50,000) than CM during the first year. Nevertheless, as DBS costs are front loaded, DBS would need to achieve success rates of 74% and 51% for its cost-effectiveness to exceed that of CM over a two- and five-year period, respectively.ConclusionsWe find DBS would not be cost-effective in the short term (one year) but may be cost-effective in longer timelines. Since DBS holds promise to potentially be a cost-effective treatment for CUDs, future randomized controlled trials should be performed to assess its efficacy.