Early Responsiveness of Women with Osteoporosis to Teriparatide After Therapy with Alendronate or Risedronate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Anabolic responsiveness to teriparatide can be blunted or delayed in patients previously treated with alendronate. The extent of this effect is different for other antiresorptives. This study evaluated the early anabolic effects of teriparatide in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis previously treated with alendronate or risedronate. METHODS: Patients treated for at least 24 months with alendronate or risedronate discontinued their bisphosphonate and received teriparatide for 12 months. The primary endpoint was a comparison of changes from baseline in N-terminal propeptide of type 1 collagen after 3 months between prior bisphosphonate groups. We also examined changes in other bone turnover markers, bone mineral density (BMD), and relationships between early changes in bone turnover markers and 12-month areal and volumetric BMD. RESULTS: In the prior risedronate group, the N-terminal propeptide of type 1 collagen increase was significantly greater after 3 months of teriparatide than in the prior alendronate group (mean +/- se, 86.0 +/- 5.6 vs. 61.2 +/- 5.3 ng/ml, respectively; P < 0.001). Findings were similar for the other bone turnover markers. The changes in areal BMD and trabecular spine volumetric BMD were also greater in the prior risedronate group (P < 0.05). Early changes in bone turnover markers correlated with changes in trabecular spine volumetric BMD at 12 months (Spearman r = 0.45). Teriparatide was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: This nonrandomized but prospective study suggests that there may be differences in anabolic responsiveness to teriparatide as a function of the type of prior bisphosphonate exposure.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".