Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

View full-text article in PMC

. 2019 Jul 1;10:659. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2019.00659

Search in PMC
Search in PubMed
View in NLM Catalog
Add to search

Copyright © 2019 Balkrishna, Sakat, Joshi, Paudel, Joshi, Joshi, Ranjan, Gupta, Bhattacharya and Varshney

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

PMC Copyright notice

Effect of DAR treatment on articular cartilage erosion of knee joint. Low (100×) and high (400×) magnification images of safranin-O stained sections of the knee joints showing: (A) Normal knee-joint histology in the untreated Balb/c mice showing normal uncalcified cartilage (UC), calcified cartilage (CC), and subchondral bone (SB). (B) Collagen-antibody stimulated DC animal showing cartilage degradation extending up to the SB region. (C) Treatment of CAIA mice with DAR showing cartilage degradation till the UC region. (D) Treatment of the CAIA mice with MTX showed superficial fibrillation of the articular cartilage (FB) region. (E) Collagen-antibody stimulated mice showed an increase in total lesion score induction knee-joint cartilage region damages. Significant reduction in the lesion score was detected in the CAIA mice treated with DAR and MTX. Both DAR and MTX treatments showed similar efficacy. Values in the results are mean ± SEM. Non-parametric Kruskal–Wallis analysis was used to calculate the statistical difference in NC versus DC (p-value ## < 0.01), MTX or DAR treatment versus DC (p-value * < 0.05), and comparison between MTX and DAR treatments [p-value ψ > 0.05 (non-significant)].