Osteonecrosis of the Jaw and Nonmalignant Disease: Is There an Association with Rheumatoid Arthritis?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To review cases of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ) occurring in association with benign disease and to describe and compare the clinical course and outcome for patients with BRONJ and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or osteoporosis. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed observations of all patients referred for treatment and followup for BRONJ from January 2007 to December 2011. Only patients with malignant disease were excluded. Demographic data, medical history, maxillofacial findings, BRONJ treatment, and followup were reviewed for each case. RESULTS: Over a 5-year period, we diagnosed 112 patients with BRONJ. Among these patients, 15 received bisphosphonate (BP) treatment for nonmalignant disease (mean age 65.7 ± 19.8 yrs, 80% women). Patients received BP for a variety of reasons: 8 (53%) to prevent osteoporosis in association with underlying RA; 6 (40%) to prevent idiopathic osteoporosis; and 1 (7%) to treat ankle algodystrophy. The mean oral BP exposure period was 48.4 months (median 36 mo). In 13 cases (86.6%), BRONJ was diagnosed following dental extraction. Of the 8 patients with RA, 5 (62.5%) were taking prednisone at the time of the discovery of BRONJ. Major surgery, sequestrectomy, or alveolectomy was performed in 9 patients (60%), all of whom healed within 3 to 36 months (mean 11.5 mo). Comparative analysis of all the variables showed no statistically significant differences between patients with RA and others. CONCLUSION: ONJ is a rare adverse effect of BP therapy, especially when administered orally. Within the limits of our study, we were unable to demonstrate a difference in BRONJ disease spectrum, clinical course, or outcome between patients with and those without RA.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".