MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059732874 · doi:10.1007/s00198-011-1755-2

Infections in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis treated with denosumab or placebo: coincidence or causal association?

2011· article· en· W2059732874 on OpenAlexaff
Nelson B. Watts, Christian Roux, John F. Modlin, Jacques P. Brown, A. Daniels, Simon Jackson, S. Y. Smith, Donald J. Zack, Lifen Zhou, Andreas Grauer, Serge Ferrari

Bibliographic record

VenueOsteoporosis International · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre hospitalier de l'Université LavalCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec
FundersNational Institutes of HealthMedpaceSanofiServierAmgenPfizerEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsDenosumabMedicineAdverse effectPlaceboInternal medicineOsteoporosisSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: Serious adverse events of infections that occurred in subjects receiving denosumab or placebo in the Fracture Reduction Evaluation of Denosumab in Osteoporosis every 6 Months (FREEDOM) study were examined in detail. Serious adverse events of infections in denosumab subjects had heterogeneous etiology, with no clear clinical pattern to suggest a relationship to time or duration of exposure to denosumab. INTRODUCTION: Denosumab reduces the risk for new vertebral, hip, and nonvertebral fractures compared with placebo. In the pivotal phase 3 fracture trial (FREEDOM), the overall safety profile and incidence of adverse events including adverse events of infections were similar between groups. Serious adverse events of erysipelas and cellulitis were more frequent in denosumab-treated subjects. In this report, we further evaluate the details of infectious events in FREEDOM to better understand if RANKL inhibition with denosumab influences infection risk. METHODS: FREEDOM was an international multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis randomly assigned to receive placebo (n = 3,906) or denosumab 60 mg every 6 months (n = 3,902). The incidence of adverse events and serious adverse events categorized within the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities system organ class, "Infections and Infestations," was compared between the placebo and denosumab groups by body systems and preferred terms. The temporal relationship between occurrence of serious adverse events of infections of interest and administration of denosumab was explored. RESULTS: Serious adverse events of infections involving the gastrointestinal system, renal and urinary system, ear, and endocarditis were numerically higher in the denosumab group compared with placebo, but the number of events was small. No relationship was observed between serious adverse events of infections and timing of administration or duration of exposure to denosumab. CONCLUSIONS: Serious adverse events of infections that occurred with denosumab treatment had heterogeneous etiology, with no clear clinical pattern to suggest a relationship to time or duration of exposure to denosumab.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations135
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOsteoporosis InternationalSame topicBone health and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207