MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2296779032 · doi:10.1002/jbmr.2804

A Longitudinal Study of Skeletal Histomorphometry at 6 and 24 Months Across Four Bone Envelopes in Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis Receiving Teriparatide or Zoledronic Acid in the SHOTZ Trial

2016· article· en· W2296779032 on OpenAlexaff
David W. Dempster, Hua Zhou, Robert R. Recker, Jacques P. Brown, Michael A. Bolognese, Christopher Recknor, David L. Kendler, E. Michael Lewiecki, David A. Hanley, Sudhaker D. Rao, Paul D. Miller, Grattan C. Woodson, R. Lindsay, Neil Binkley, Jahangir Alam, Valerie A. Ruff, Eileen R. Gallagher, Kathleen A. Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Mineral Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsinVentiv Health ClinicalUniversity of CalgaryUniversité Laval
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesEli Lilly and CompanyAmgen
KeywordsTeriparatideZoledronic acidMedicineOsteoporosisCancellous boneBone remodelingUrologyInternal medicineEndocrinologySurgeryBone mineral

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previously, we reported the effects of teriparatide (TPTD) and zoledronic acid (ZOL) on bone formation based on biochemical markers and bone histomorphometry of the cancellous envelope at month 6 in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis who participated in the 12-month primary Skeletal Histomorphometry in Subjects on Teriparatide or Zoledronic Acid Therapy (SHOTZ) study. Patients were eligible to enter a 12-month extension on their original treatment regimen: TPTD 20 μg/day (s.c. injection) or ZOL 5 mg/year (i.v. infusion). A second biopsy was performed at month 24. Here we report longitudinal changes between and within each treatment group in the cancellous, endocortical, intracortical, and periosteal bone envelopes in patients with evaluable biopsies at months 6 and 24 (paired data set: TPTD, n = 10; ZOL, n = 9). Between-group differences are also reported in the larger set of patients with evaluable biopsies at month 6 (TPTD, n = 28; ZOL, n = 30). Data from the cancellous envelope at month 6 or month 24 provided a reference to compare differences across envelopes within each treatment group. The 24-month results extend our earlier report that TPTD and ZOL possess different tissue-level mechanisms of action. Moreover, these differences persisted for at least 2 years in all four bone envelopes. Few longitudinal differences were observed within or across bone envelopes in ZOL-treated patients, suggesting that the low bone formation indices at month 6 persisted to month 24. Conversely, the magnitude of the effect of TPTD on bone formation varied across individual envelopes: median values for mineralizing surface (MS/BS) and bone formation rate (BFR/BS) at month 6 were approximately 3-fold to 5-fold higher in the endocortical and intracortical envelopes compared to the cancellous envelope. Although MS/BS and BFR/BS declined in these envelopes at month 24, median values continued to exceed, or were not significantly different from, those in the cancellous envelope. This study demonstrates for the first time that bone formation indices are higher with TPTD treatment than with ZOL in all four bone envelopes and the difference persists for at least 2 years. Moreover, the magnitude of the effect of TPTD in cortical bone remains robust at 24 months. © 2016 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Citations53
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bone and Mineral ResearchSame topicBone health and osteoporosis researchFrench-language works237,207