Impact of Bisphosphonates on Survival for Patients With Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In this article we describe the association of bisphosphonate therapy on survival within a regional cohort of patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) who received steroid therapy and were managed in a single center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The records of all patients with confirmed DMD who were born between 1963 and 2006 and who had received at least 1 year of steroid therapy were reviewed from birth until they reached the study end points (death, loss to follow-up, or the last follow-up was in 2009). A survival analysis was used to account for the variable follow-up duration within this cohort. RESULTS: Forty-four boys from this cohort with DMD were exposed to continuous steroid use. Bisphosphonate therapy was initiated for 16 patients (36%) between 1997 and 2007 at a median age of 12.5 years (range: 7-23 years). At the time of the last follow-up in 2009, 13 patients had died (30%) at a median age of 16 years (range: 14-27 years). Survival curves demonstrate that the prescription of bisphosphonates was associated with a significant improvement in survival rate (P = .005, log-rank test). Furthermore, a possible therapy-duration effect could be shown for bisphosphonate use (P = .007, log-rank test). CONCLUSIONS: The treatment of patients with DMD with steroids and bisphosphonates seems to be associated with significantly improved survival compared with treatment with steroids alone.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".