Effects Of a One-Month Treatment With PTH(1–34) on Bone Formation on Cancellous, Endocortical, and Periosteal Surfaces of the Human Ilium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Using bone histomorphometry, we found that a 1-month treatment with PTH(1-34) [hPTH(1-34)] stimulated new bone formation on cancellous, endocortical, and periosteal bone surfaces. Enhanced bone formation was associated with an increase in osteoblast apoptosis. INTRODUCTION: The precise mechanisms by which hPTH(1-34) increases bone mass and improves bone structure are unclear. Using bone histomorphometry, we studied the early effects of treating postmenopausal women with osteoporosis with hPTH(1-34). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Tetracycline-labeled iliac crest bone biopsies were obtained from 27 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis who were treated for 1 month with hPTH(1-34), 50 microg daily subcutaneously. The results were compared with tetracycline-labeled biopsies from a representative control group of 13 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. RESULTS: The bone formation rate on the cancellous and endocortical surfaces was higher in hPTH(1-34)-treated women than in control women by factors of 4.5 and 5.0, respectively. We also showed a 4-fold increase in bone formation rate on the periosteal surface, suggesting that hPTH(1-34) has the potential to increase bone diameter in humans. On the cancellous and endocortical surfaces, the increased bone formation rate was primarily caused by stimulation of formation in ongoing remodeling units, with a modest amount of increased formation on previously quiescent surfaces. hPTH(1-34)-stimulated bone formation was associated with an increase in osteoblast apoptosis, which may reflect enhanced turnover of the osteoblast population and may contribute to the anabolic action of hPTH(1-34). CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide new insight into the cellular basis by which hPTH(1-34) improves cancellous and cortical bone architecture and geometry in patients with osteoporosis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".