Effects of Up to 5 Years of Denosumab Treatment on Bone Histology and Histomorphometry: The FREEDOM Study Extension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Denosumab reduced bone resorption, increased bone mineral density (BMD), and decreased new vertebral, hip, and nonvertebral fracture risk in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis in the FREEDOM trial. Consistent with its mechanism of action, transiliac crest bone biopsies from subjects treated with denosumab for 1 to 3 years demonstrated reduced bone turnover that was reversible upon treatment cessation. Long-term denosumab treatment for up to 6 years in the FREEDOM extension provides sustained bone turnover reduction and continued low fracture incidence. Here, we evaluate 5 years of denosumab treatment on bone remodeling at the tissue level. Transiliac crest bone biopsies were obtained from 41 subjects (13 cross-over and 28 long-term from the FREEDOM placebo and denosumab groups, respectively) at year 2 of the FREEDOM extension, representing up to 5 years of denosumab treatment. Demographics for this subset were comparable to the overall extension cohort. The mean (SD) duration from the last denosumab dose to the first dose of tetracycline was 5.7 (0.5) months. Qualitative bone histology assessed in all biopsy samples was unremarkable, showing normally mineralized lamellar bone. Structural indices, including trabecular bone volume, number, and surface, were similar between cross-over and long-term groups. Bone resorption was decreased as reflected by eroded surface in cross-over and long-term subjects. A total of 11 of 13 (85%) cross-over subjects and 20 of 28 (71%) long-term subjects had specimens with double or single tetracycline label in trabecular and/or cortical compartments; specimens from 5 cross-over subjects and 10 long-term subjects were evaluable for dynamic trabecular bone parameters. Dynamic remodeling indices were low for both groups and consistent with reduced bone turnover with denosumab. In conclusion, denosumab treatment through 5 years resulted in normal bone quality with reduced bone turnover. These observations are consistent with its mechanism of action and associated with continued BMD increases and low fracture incidence.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".