The Effects of Supraphysiologic Doses of Vitamin D3 in Conjunction With Teriparatide on Bone Mineral Density in Two Postmenopausal Females With Severe Osteoporosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Teriparatide was approved by the FDA in 2002 for the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women who are at high risk for fractures. Previous studies involving the use of teriparatide in conjunction with vitamin D and calcium supplementation have suggested that sufficient vitamin D levels may not be a requirement to achieve an effective response to teriparatide. We present a case of two postmenopausal females with severe osteoporosis who were treated with teriparatide along with calcium and supraphysiologic doses of vitamin D, as illustrated by an increase from their baseline serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations. Both patients experienced an increase in bone mineral density that was significantly higher than what has been seen in prior studies of teriparatide administration in conjunction with physiologic doses of vitamin D. These findings suggest that administering supraphysiologic doses of vitamin D may in fact potentiate the effects of teriparatide in postmenopausal females with osteoporosis, resulting in larger increases in bone mineral density than would otherwise be expected. doi:10.4021/jem104 w
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".