MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043861038 · doi:10.1210/jc.2003-030050

Effect of Pamidronate Treatment in Children with Polyostotic Fibrous Dysplasia of Bone

2003· article· en· W2043861038 on OpenAlexaff
Horacio Plotkin, Frank Rauch, Leonid Zeitlin, Craig F. Munns, Rose Travers, Francis H. Glorieux

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityShriners Hospitals for Children - Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolyostotic fibrous dysplasiaMedicineFibrous dysplasiaBone painInternal medicineOsteochondrodysplasiaElevated alkaline phosphataseUrologyEtidronic acidEndocrinologyOsteoporosisAlkaline phosphataseSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intravenous infusions with the bisphosphonate compound pamidronate decrease bone pain and reportedly can lead to refilling of dysplastic lesions in adults with fibrous dysplasia (FD) of bone. Here we describe the effects of this treatment approach in 18 children and adolescents (age at start of therapy, 6.2-17.5 yr; eight girls) with polyostotic FD, who received pamidronate for 1.2-9.1 yr (median, 3.8 yr). Treatment cycles with pamidronate (1-1.5 mg/kg.d on 3 consecutive days) were given every 4 months. Levels of serum alkaline phosphatase and urinary collagen type I N-telopeptide were elevated at baseline and decreased continuously during the first 3 yr of therapy. There was no radiographic evidence of filling of lytic lesions or thickening of the bone cortex surrounding the lesions in any patient. Histomorphometric results in dysplastic bone tissue of patients receiving pamidronate (n = 7; time of therapy, 1.4-4.8 yr) were similar to those of patients without medical therapy (n = 9). No serious side effects were noted. In conclusion, pamidronate therapy appears to be safe in children and adolescents with polyostotic FD. However, we found no clear evidence that pamidronate has an effect on dysplastic lesions in such patients.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.340 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations233
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & MetabolismSame topicBone health and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207