1. Under osteoporotic conditions, several proinflammatory cytokines ...
Under osteoporotic conditions, several proinflammatory cytokines stimulate and upregulate RANKL expression and downregulate OPG, mediating bone formation, which is related to increased bone resorption. TNF-α, IL-1, IL-4, 1 L-6, IL-17, IL-23, IFN-γ and TGF-β are important inflammatory cytokines of RA. IL-17 not only induces a RANKL receptor activator on synovial fibroblasts, but also activates local inflammation, leading to up-regulation of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as TNF-α. TNF-α, IL-1, IL-6, IL-23 and TGF-β activate osteoclastogenesis by directly acting on osteoclast precursor cells or by inducing RANKL on synovial fibroblasts. IFN-γ and IL-2 have an inhibitory effect on osteoclastogenesis. OPG: osteoprotegerin; RANK: receptor activator of nuclear factor κB; RANKL: Receptor activator of nuclear factor κB ligand.
Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content of this slide: © The Author(s) Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (
Rheumatology (Oxford), kez042,
The content of this slide may be subject to copyright: please see the slide notes for details.

2. (A) The prevalence of ...
(A) The prevalence of OP was significantly different among the four subgroups (9.67%, 14.60%, 34.6% and 41.12%, respectively) (χ²= , P < 0.001). There was a clear increasing trend in the prevalence of OP among the four subgroups. (B) The median Sharp scores were significantly different between the normal bone mass group (13/58), the osteopenia group (19/67) and the OP group (70/131) (χ²= , P < 0.001). There was a clear increasing trend in the mean Sharp scores in the normal bone mass group, the osteopenia group,and the OP group. (C) The median HAQ score was significantly different between the normal bone mass group (1.1/1.3), the osteopenia group (1.3/1.9) and the OP group (1.5/1.1) (χ²= , P < 0.001). OP: osteoporosis.
Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content of this slide: © The Author(s) Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (
Rheumatology (Oxford), kez042,
The content of this slide may be subject to copyright: please see the slide notes for details.

3. Fig. 3 The prevalence of OP (A), Sharp score (B) and HAQ score (C) among subgroups with different disease ...
The disease course in the five subgroups was respectively ≤1, 1–3, 3–5, 5–10, and >10 years. (A) Data are presented as percentages, and the prevalence of OP in the five subgroups was significantly different (χ²= , P < 0.001). The highest prevalence of OP was found in subgroup 5 (42.78%). There was a clear increasing trend in the prevalence of OP among the five subgroups. (B) Sharp scores were significantly different between the five subgroups (χ²= , P < 0.001). The highest median Sharp score was found in subgroup 5. There was a clear increasing trend in the Sharp score among the five subgroups (r = 0.745, P < 0.001). (C) There was a similar outcome regarding the HAQ score among the different disease course subgroups (χ²= 8.020, P < 0.001). There was a positive linear correlation between HAQ score and disease course (r = 0.179, P < 0.001). OP: osteoporosis.
Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content of this slide: © The Author(s) Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (
Rheumatology (Oxford), kez042,
The content of this slide may be subject to copyright: please see the slide notes for details.

4. Fig. 4 Correlation of the Sharp score with femoral neck (A), total hip (B), and L1–4 (C) BMD and correlation of HAQ ...
(A) Pearson’s correlation test showed that the Sharp score was negatively correlated with femoral neck BMD (r = −0.305, P < 0.001). (B) Pearson’s correlation test showed that the Sharp score was negatively correlated with total hip BMD (r = −0.385, P < 0.001). (C) Pearson’s correlation test showed that Sharp score was negatively correlated with L1–4 BMD (r = −0.218, P < 0.001). (D) A modest negative correlation between HAQ and femoral neck BMD (r = −0.138, P < 0.001) was found. (E) Pearson’s correlation test showed that HAQ was negatively correlated with total hip BMD (r = −0.215, P < 0.001). (F) Pearson’s correlation test showed that HAQ was negatively correlated with L1–4 BMD (r = −0.218, P < 0.001). Regression lines are presented in the correlation plots.
Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content of this slide: © The Author(s) Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (
Rheumatology (Oxford), kez042,
The content of this slide may be subject to copyright: please see the slide notes for details.