@article{WuertzKozakRoszkowskiCambriaetal.2020, author = {Wuertz-Kozak, Karin and Roszkowski, Martin and Cambria, Elena and Block, Andrea and Kuhn, Gisela A. and Abele, Thea and Hitzl, Wolfgang and Drießlein, David and M{\"u}ller, Ralph and Rapp, Michael Armin and Mansuy, Isabelle M. and Peters, Eva M. J. and Wippert, Pia-Maria}, title = {Effects of Early Life Stress on Bone Homeostasis in Mice and Humans}, series = {International Journal of Molecular Sciences}, volume = {21}, journal = {International Journal of Molecular Sciences}, number = {18}, publisher = {Molecular Diversity Preservation International}, address = {Basel}, issn = {1422-0067}, doi = {10.3390/ijms21186634}, pages = {24}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Bone pathology is frequent in stressed individuals. A comprehensive examination of mechanisms linking life stress, depression and disturbed bone homeostasis is missing. In this translational study, mice exposed to early life stress (MSUS) were examined for bone microarchitecture (μCT), metabolism (qPCR/ELISA), and neuronal stress mediator expression (qPCR) and compared with a sample of depressive patients with or without early life stress by analyzing bone mineral density (BMD) (DXA) and metabolic changes in serum (osteocalcin, PINP, CTX-I). MSUS mice showed a significant decrease in NGF, NPYR1, VIPR1 and TACR1 expression, higher innervation density in bone, and increased serum levels of CTX-I, suggesting a milieu in favor of catabolic bone turnover. MSUS mice had a significantly lower body weight compared to control mice, and this caused minor effects on bone microarchitecture. Depressive patients with experiences of childhood neglect also showed a catabolic pattern. A significant reduction in BMD was observed in depressive patients with childhood abuse and stressful life events during childhood. Therefore, future studies on prevention and treatment strategies for both mental and bone disease should consider early life stress as a risk factor for bone pathologies.}, language = {en} } @misc{WuertzKozakRoszkowskiCambriaetal.2020, author = {Wuertz-Kozak, Karin and Roszkowski, Martin and Cambria, Elena and Block, Andrea and Kuhn, Gisela A. and Abele, Thea and Hitzl, Wolfgang and Drießlein, David and M{\"u}ller, Ralph and Rapp, Michael Armin and Mansuy, Isabelle M. and Peters, Eva M. J. and Wippert, Pia-Maria}, title = {Effects of Early Life Stress on Bone Homeostasis in Mice and Humans}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {670}, issn = {1866-8364}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-48532}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-485324}, pages = {26}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Bone pathology is frequent in stressed individuals. A comprehensive examination of mechanisms linking life stress, depression and disturbed bone homeostasis is missing. In this translational study, mice exposed to early life stress (MSUS) were examined for bone microarchitecture (μCT), metabolism (qPCR/ELISA), and neuronal stress mediator expression (qPCR) and compared with a sample of depressive patients with or without early life stress by analyzing bone mineral density (BMD) (DXA) and metabolic changes in serum (osteocalcin, PINP, CTX-I). MSUS mice showed a significant decrease in NGF, NPYR1, VIPR1 and TACR1 expression, higher innervation density in bone, and increased serum levels of CTX-I, suggesting a milieu in favor of catabolic bone turnover. MSUS mice had a significantly lower body weight compared to control mice, and this caused minor effects on bone microarchitecture. Depressive patients with experiences of childhood neglect also showed a catabolic pattern. A significant reduction in BMD was observed in depressive patients with childhood abuse and stressful life events during childhood. Therefore, future studies on prevention and treatment strategies for both mental and bone disease should consider early life stress as a risk factor for bone pathologies.}, language = {en} } @misc{WippertPuschmannDriessleinetal.2017, author = {Wippert, Pia-Maria and Puschmann, Anne-Katrin and Drießlein, David and Arampatzis, Adamantios and Banzer, Winfried and Beck, Heidrun and Schiltenwolf, Marcus and Schmidt, Hendrik and Schneider, Christian and Mayer, Frank}, title = {Development of a risk stratification and prevention index for stratified care in chronic low back pain. Focus: yellow flags (MiSpEx network)}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-403424}, pages = {11}, year = {2017}, abstract = {Introduction: Chronic low back pain (LBP) is a major cause of disability; early diagnosis and stratification of care remain challenges. Objectives: This article describes the development of a screening tool for the 1-year prognosis of patients with high chronic LBP risk (risk stratification index) and for treatment allocation according to treatment-modifiable yellow flag indicators (risk prevention indices, RPI-S). Methods: Screening tools were derived from a multicentre longitudinal study (n = 1071, age >18, intermittent LBP). The greatest prognostic predictors of 4 flag domains ("pain," "distress," "social-environment," "medical care-environment") were determined using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression analysis. Internal validity and prognosis error were evaluated after 1-year follow-up. Receiver operating characteristic curves for discrimination (area under the curve) and cutoff values were determined. Results: The risk stratification index identified persons with increased risk of chronic LBP and accurately estimated expected pain intensity and disability on the Pain Grade Questionnaire (0-100 points) up to 1 year later with an average prognosis error of 15 points. In addition, 3-risk classes were discerned with an accuracy of area under the curve = 0.74 (95\% confidence interval 0.63-0.85). The RPI-S also distinguished persons with potentially modifiable prognostic indicators from 4 flag domains and stratified allocation to biopsychosocial treatments accordingly. Conclusion: The screening tools, developed in compliance with the PROGRESS and TRIPOD statements, revealed good validation and prognostic strength. These tools improve on existing screening tools because of their utility for secondary preventions, incorporation of exercise effect modifiers, exact pain estimations, and personalized allocation to multimodal treatments.}, language = {en} } @article{WippertPuschmannDriessleinetal.2017, author = {Wippert, Pia-Maria and Puschmann, Anne-Katrin and Drießlein, David and Arampatzis, Adamantios and Banzer, Winfried and Beck, Heidrun and Schiltenwolf, Marcus and Schmidt, Hendrik and Schneider, Christian and Mayer, Frank}, title = {Development of a risk stratification and prevention index for stratified care in chronic low back pain. Focus: yellow flags (MiSpEx network)}, series = {Pain reports}, volume = {9}, journal = {Pain reports}, publisher = {Wolters Kluwer Health}, address = {Riverwoods, IL}, doi = {10.1097/PR9.0000000000000623}, pages = {1 -- 11}, year = {2017}, abstract = {Introduction: Chronic low back pain (LBP) is a major cause of disability; early diagnosis and stratification of care remain challenges. Objectives: This article describes the development of a screening tool for the 1-year prognosis of patients with high chronic LBP risk (risk stratification index) and for treatment allocation according to treatment-modifiable yellow flag indicators (risk prevention indices, RPI-S). Methods: Screening tools were derived from a multicentre longitudinal study (n = 1071, age >18, intermittent LBP). The greatest prognostic predictors of 4 flag domains ("pain," "distress," "social-environment," "medical care-environment") were determined using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression analysis. Internal validity and prognosis error were evaluated after 1-year follow-up. Receiver operating characteristic curves for discrimination (area under the curve) and cutoff values were determined. Results: The risk stratification index identified persons with increased risk of chronic LBP and accurately estimated expected pain intensity and disability on the Pain Grade Questionnaire (0-100 points) up to 1 year later with an average prognosis error of 15 points. In addition, 3-risk classes were discerned with an accuracy of area under the curve = 0.74 (95\% confidence interval 0.63-0.85). The RPI-S also distinguished persons with potentially modifiable prognostic indicators from 4 flag domains and stratified allocation to biopsychosocial treatments accordingly. Conclusion: The screening tools, developed in compliance with the PROGRESS and TRIPOD statements, revealed good validation and prognostic strength. These tools improve on existing screening tools because of their utility for secondary preventions, incorporation of exercise effect modifiers, exact pain estimations, and personalized allocation to multimodal treatments.}, language = {en} }