Effects of Long-Term Denosumab on Bone Histomorphometry and Mineralization in Women With Postmenopausal Osteoporosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context: Denosumab is a potent antiresorptive agent that reduces fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Objective: Determine effects of up to 10 years of denosumab on bone histology, remodeling, and matrix mineralization characteristics. Design and Setting: International, multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial [Fracture Reduction Evaluation of Denosumab in Osteoporosis Every 6 Months (FREEDOM)] with a long-term open-label extension. Patients: Postmenopausal women with osteoporosis (92 women in FREEDOM, 46 in extension) who provided iliac bone biopsies, including 11 who provided biopsies at multiple time points. Interventions: FREEDOM subjects were randomized 1:1 to subcutaneous denosumab 60 mg or placebo every 6 months for 3 years. Long-term extension subjects continued receiving denosumab, open-label, for 7 additional years. Outcomes: Bone histology, histomorphometry, matrix mineralization. Results: Ten-year denosumab biopsies showed normal histology. Bone histomorphometry indicated normal bone structure and reduced bone remodeling after 10 years of denosumab, similar to levels after 2 and/or 3 and 5 years of denosumab. The degree of mineralization of bone was increased and mineralization heterogeneity was reduced in the denosumab years 2/3 group vs placebo. Changes in these mineralization variables progressed from years 2/3 to year 5 of denosumab, but not thereafter. Conclusions: Denosumab for 2/3, 5, and 10 years was associated with normal histology, low bone remodeling rate, increased matrix mineralization, and lower mineralization heterogeneity compared with placebo. These variables were unchanged from year 5 to year 10. These data, in combination with the maintenance of low fracture rates for up to 10 years as previously reported with denosumab therapy, suggest that strong, prolonged remodeling inhibition does not impair bone strength.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".