Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Feb 1.
Published in final edited form as: Arthritis Rheumatol. 2017 Feb;69(2):352–361. doi: 10.1002/art.39844

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Inhibition of MIF activity either by gene deletion or by neutralizing antibody does not protect young adult mice from injury-induced OA. A. Twelve-week old Mif−/− or WT mice received either the DMM or sham procedure. OA severity was analyzed 10 weeks after surgery by the Saf-o score. Mif−/− DMM: n=14; Mif−/− sham: n=16; WT DMM: n=16; WT sham: n=13. B. Osteophytes were measured in the mice from (A) and summed scores from the MTP and MFC are presented. C. Twelve-week old WT mice received the DMM procedure and were treated for 10 weeks with either the MIF neutralizing antibody (Anti-MIF) or IgG control antibody. The contralateral limb was used as the un-operated control. OA severity was analyzed 10 weeks after surgery by the Saf-O score. Anti-MIF DMM: n=15; Anti-MIF contralateral control: n=15; IgG DMM: n=14; IgG contralateral control: n=14. D. Osteophytes were measured in the mice from (C) and summed scores from the MTP and MFC are presented. Horizontal lines on the graph represent the mean of each group. Significant differences were determined by Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric one-way ANOVA followed by Dunn’s multiple comparisons test.