Giant osteoclasts in patients under bisphosphonates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bisphosphonates have been widely used for treatment of high bone resorption states. It lowers bone turnover by inhibiting osteoclasts bone resorption with various mechanisms of actions: inhibition of osteoclast formation and attachment to the bone surface, induction of metabolic injury, alteration of vesicle trafficking and induction of osteoclast apoptosis. Bone biopsies studies from patients under bisphosphonates have shown that some resorption parameters are decreased as expected but the number of osteoclasts seems not to be necessarily decreased. The description of osteoclasts morphology from patients treated with bisphosphonates has rarely been reported in the literature. CASE PRESENTATION: We describe in this paper two patients treated with bisphosphonates from whom iliac crest bone biopsies have shown large, multinucleated and apoptotic osteoclasts that were not associated with bone resorption activities. The characteristics of these osteoclasts are described and the literature reviewed. CONCLUSION: The appropriate recognition of these giant osteoclasts in bone tissues from patients treated with bisphosphonates is of primary importance for bone pathologists and should not be interpreted as signs of increased bone resorption as seen in hyperparathyroidism, bone cancer or Paget's disease of bone.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".