MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2609277705 · doi:10.2106/jbjs.rvw.16.00072

The Role of Denosumab in the Modern Treatment of Giant Cell Tumor of Bone

2017· article· en· W2609277705 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick Thornley, Anthony Habib, Anthony Bozzo, Nathan Evaniew, Michelle Ghert

Bibliographic record

VenueJBJS Reviews · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone Tumor Diagnosis and Treatments
Canadian institutionsJuravinski Cancer CentreMcMaster UniversityHamilton General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDenosumabMedicineSacrumRANKLGiant cellCurettageGiant-cell tumor of boneTeriparatideSurgeryRadiologyOsteoporosisPathologyInternal medicineActivator (genetics)ReceptorBone mineral

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

➢ Giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB) is a benign, locally aggressive, osteolytic lesion. Typical treatment involves extended intralesional curettage or en bloc resection. ➢ Denosumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody with inhibitory effects on RANKL (receptor activator of nuclear factor-κB ligand) that has shown early promise as a possible treatment adjuvant for GCTB. ➢ Current clinical trials of denosumab for GCTB have shown >85% clinical, radiographic, and histological responses. ➢ Case reports have demonstrated complete response or tumor stabilization with denosumab, allowing for less invasive surgical procedures. Current indications for denosumab in GCTB include lesions in the spine, sacrum, pelvis, and challenging lesions in upper and lower-extremity locations. ➢ Denosumab may be a therapeutic option in patients with unresectable or metastatic GCTB, but optimal length and dosing of treatment and long-term effects are unknown. Most concerning, potential rates of rapid recurrence post-treatment or pseudo-sarcomatous transformation following treatment cessation are still uncertain.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations19
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJBJS ReviewsSame topicBone Tumor Diagnosis and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207