Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Differences in type II collagen turnover of osteoarthritic human knee and ankle joints

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

We analysed hyaline cartilage of human knee and ankle joints for collagen and proteoglycan turnover in order to find differences in the metabolism and biochemical content of the extracellular matrix that could explain the higher prevalence of osteoarthritis (OA) in the knee joint, compared to the ankle joint.

Methods

Cartilage tissue from ankle and knee joints of OA patients were assessed for total collagen and proteoglycan content. For turnover, the aggrecan 846-epitope (CS 846), the type II collagen C-propeptide (CP2) and the collagenase-generated intrahelical cleavage neoepitope (C2C) were quantified.

Results

Molecular analyses showed that type II collagen turnover (CP2 and C2C) was significantly elevated in the ankle, whereas aggrecan turnover (CS 846), total proteoglycan and total collagen were comparable between both joints. Analysis of the inter-relationships in the components of cartilage matrix turnover showed a significant positive correlation of C2C vs CP2.

Conclusions

The data suggest an increased type II collagen turnover in ankle vs knee OA cartilage but a comparable aggrecan turnover and comparable contents of type II collagen and proteoglycan. These findings point towards a focused attempt in advanced OA cartilage to structurally repair the collagen network that was more pronounced in the ankle joint and may explain in part the higher prevalence of OA in the knee as compared to the ankle joint.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Felson DT, Naimark A, Anderson J, Kazis L, Castelliand W, Meenan RF (1987) The prevalence of knee osteoarthritis in the elderly. The Framingham Osteoarthritis Study. Arthritis Rheum 30(8):914–918

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Koepp H, Eger W, Muehleman C, Valdellon A, Buckwalter JA, Kuettner KE, Cole AA (1999) Prevalence of articular cartilage degeneration in the ankle and knee joints of human organ donors. J Orthop Sci 4(6):407–412

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Peyron JG (1984) The epidemiology of osteoarthritis. In: Moskowitz RW (ed) Osteoarthritis: diagnosis and treatment. W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 9–27

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bush JR, Beier F (2013) TGF-beta and osteoarthritis—the good and the bad. Nat Med 19(6):667–669

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Williams JM (1992) Animal models of articular cartilage repair. In: Schleyerbach R, Peyron JG, Hascall VC (eds) Articular cartilage and osteoarthritis, KE Kuettner. Raven, New York, pp 511–525

  6. Aigner T, Dudhia J (1997) Phenotypic modulation of chondrocytes as a potential therapeutic target in osteoarthritis: a hypothesis. Ann Rheum Dis 56(5):287–291

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Xu L, Servais J, Polur I, Kim D, Lee PL, Chung K, Li Y (2010) Attenuation of osteoarthritis progression by reduction of discoidin domain receptor 2 in mice. Arthritis Rheum 62(9):2736–2744. doi:10.1002/art.27582

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Pulsatelli L, Addimanda O, Brusi V, Pavloskaand B, Meliconi R (2013) New findings in osteoarthritis pathogenesis: therapeutic implications. Ther Adv Chronic Dis 4(1):23–43. doi:10.1177/2040622312462734

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Gebhard PM, Gehrsitz A, Bau B, Söder S, Eger W, Aigner T (2003) Quantification of expression levels of cellular differentiation markers does not support a general shift in the cellular phenotype of osteoarthritic chondrocytes. J Orthop Res 21(1):96–101

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Nelson F, Dahlberg L, Laverty S, Reiner A, Pidoux I, Ionescu M, Fraser GL, Brooks E, Tanzer M, Rosenberg LC, Dieppe P, Poole AR (1998) Evidence for altered synthesis of type II collagen in patients with osteoarthritis. J Clin Invest 102(12):2115–2125

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Glant TT, Mikecz K, Roughley PJ, Buzás E, Poole AR (1986) Age-related changes in protein-related epitopes of human articular-cartilage proteoglycans. Biochem J 236(1):71–75

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Rizkalla G, Reiner A, Bogoch E, Poole AR (1992) Studies of the articular cartilage proteoglycan aggrecan in health and osteoarthritis. Evidence for molecular heterogeneity and extensive molecular changes in disease. J Clin Invest 90(6):2268–2277

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Billinghurst RC, Dahlberg L, Ionescu M, Reiner A, Bourne R, Rorabeck C, Mitchell P, Hambor J, Diekmann O, Tschesche H, Chen J, Van Wart H, Poole AR (1997) Enhanced cleavage of type II collagen by collagenases in osteoarthritic articular cartilage. J Clin Invest 99(7):1534–1545

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Aurich M, Poole AR, Reiner A, Mollenhauer C, Margulis A, Kuettner KE, Cole AA (2002) Matrix homeostasis in aging normal human ankle cartilage. Arthritis Rheum 46(11):2903–2910

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Aurich M, Mwale F, Reiner A, Mollenhauer JA, Anders JO, Fuhrmann RA, Kuettner KE, Poole AR, Cole AA (2006) Collagen and proteoglycan turnover in focally damaged human ankle cartilage: evidence for a generalized response and active matrix remodeling across the entire joint surface. Arthritis Rheum 54(1):244–252

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Aurich M, Squires GR, Reiner A, Mollenhauer JA, Kuettner KE, Poole AR, Cole AA (2005) Differential matrix degradation and turnover in early cartilage lesions of human knee and ankle joints. Arthritis Rheum 52(1):112–119

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Aurich M, Eger W, Rolauffs B, Margulis A, Kuettner KE, Mollenhauer JA, Cole AA (2006) Ankle chondrocytes are more resistant to Interleukin-1 than chondrocytes derived from the knee. Orthopade 35(7):784–790

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Altman RD (1991) Classification of disease: osteoarthritis. Semin Arthritis Rheum 20(6 Suppl 2):40–47

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Chubinskaya S, Kuettner KE, Cole AA (1999) Expression of matrix metalloproteinases in normal and damaged articular cartilage from human knee and ankle joints. Lab Investig 79(12):1669–1677

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Mankin HJ, Dorfman H, Lippiello L, Zarins A (1971) Biochemical and metabolic abnormalities in articular cartilage from osteo-arthritic human hips. II Correlation of morphology with biochemical and metabolic data. J Bone Joint Surg Am 53(3):523–537

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Farndale RW, Buttle DJ, Barrett AJ (1986) Improved quantitation and discrimination of sulphated glycosaminoglycans by use of dimethylmethylene blue. Biochim Biophys Acta 883(2):173–177

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Huszar G, Maiocco J, Naftolin F (1980) Monitoring of collagen and collagen fragments in chromatography of protein mixtures. Anal Biochem 105(2):424–429

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kim YJ, Sah RL, Doong JY, Grodzinsky AJ (1988) Fluorometric assay of DNA in cartilage explants using Hoechst 33258. Anal Biochem 174(1):168–176

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Poole AR, Rizkalla G, Ionescu M, Reiner A, Brooks E, Rorabeck C, Bourne R, Bogoch E (1993) Osteoarthritis in the human knee: a dynamic process of cartilage matrix degradation, synthesis and reorganization. Agents Actions Suppl 39:3–13

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Jana Schömburg und Christine Mollenhauer for their help in sample preparation and Dr. Juergen Mollenhauer for the useful discussions during this project. All experimental data were collected at the Orthopaedic Research Laboratories of the University of Jena. Special thank goes to the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG), the Deutsche Arthrosehilfe e.V., and the Interdisciplinary Center for Clinical Research (IZKF) of the University of Jena for the financial support of this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Ingolstadt Hospital, Krumenauerstrasse 25, 85049, Ingolstadt, Germany

    Matthias Aurich

  2. Department of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Erlanger Allee 101, 07747, Jena, Germany

    Matthias Aurich & Gunther O. Hofmann

  3. Department of Biochemistry, Rush Medical College, 1735 W. Harrison St., Chicago, IL, 60612, USA

    Matthias Aurich

  4. Laboratory for Cell and Tissue Engineering, Department of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, Medical Center, Albert Ludwigs University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, Hugstetter Straße 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany

    Bernd Rolauffs

  5. Center for Biomedical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 500 Technology Sq, Cambridge, MA, 02139, USA

    Bernd Rolauffs

Authors
  1. Matthias Aurich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gunther O. Hofmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bernd Rolauffs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthias Aurich.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Funding

This work was supported in part by a grant from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft DFG 156/6-1), Deutsche Arthrosehilfe e.V. and the Interdisciplinary Center for Clinical Research (IZKF) (M.A.). The funding sources had no involvement in study design, in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data, in the writing of the report or in the decision to submit the article for publication.

Ethical approval

The study has been approved by the local ethics committee (approval #0981-10/02 from the Ethics Committee of the Medical Faculty at the University of Jena, Jena, Germany) and was performed in concordance with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and according to the German Data Protection Act. Before the start of the investigation, written informed consent was obtained. The legal requirements concerning confidential medical communication were met. At any time, the patients had the right to withdraw consent without giving reasons and without disadvantages regarding further medical treatment. The medical therapy of the patients during hospitalization was performed independently of this research project. Patient data was stored exclusively in the Hospital according to current data protection laws. Third persons were not provided insight into source data. Any patient has the right to have his data deleted.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Aurich, M., Hofmann, G.O. & Rolauffs, B. Differences in type II collagen turnover of osteoarthritic human knee and ankle joints. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 41, 999–1005 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-017-3414-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-017-3414-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation