Fig 1.
Body weight and body composition analysis.
(A) Body weights of ACE-031 treated marmosets and control at the end of the treatment compared to baseline during the treatment period (week 0 versus week 14). (B) Lean body mass of ACE-031 treated marmosets was significantly greater at the end of the treatment (week 14) when compared to its baseline (week 0) while no differences were observed in control during the treatment period (week 0 versus week 14). (C) No differences in fat mass were observed in either group during the treatment period. (D) There was a significant difference in the muscle mass of the arms when comparing ACE-031 treated marmosets to control marmosets at the end of the treatment period. (E) The percent change in body weight for individual marmosets in the over the duration of the treatment period. (F) The percent change in body weight for individual marmosets in the over the duration of the treatment period.
Fig 2.
Biceps brachii fiber type analysis.
(A, B) Representative biceps brachii muscle sections from control and ACE-031 treated marmosets. (C, D) Type II fibers (fast) and type I fibers (slow) had significantly increased cross-sectional area. (E, F) Type II fibers and type I fibers exhibited a rightward shift of the fiber CSA distribution with ACE-031 treatment.
Fig 3.
Ex vivo muscle functional assessment.
(A) Absolute isometric twitch force of the EDL in ACE-031 treated marmosets compared to control marmosets. (B) Specific isometric twitch force of the EDL was significantly greater in ACE-031 treated marmosets compared to control marmosets. (C) The optimal stimulation frequency of the EDL was determined from the Force-Frequency relationship curve. (D) Absolute isometric tetanic force of the EDL was not significantly different when comparing ACE-031 treated to control marmosets. (E) Specific isometric tetanic force of the EDL was significantly greater in ACE-031 treated marmosets compared to control marmosets.