Longitudinal Effects of Teriparatide or Zoledronic Acid on Bone Modeling- and Remodeling-Based Formation in the SHOTZ Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previously, we reported on bone histomorphometry, biochemical markers, and bone mineral density distribution after 6 and 24 months of treatment with teriparatide (TPTD) or zoledronic acid (ZOL) in the SHOTZ study. The study included a 12-month primary study period, with treatment (TPTD 20 μg/d by subcutaneous injection or ZOL 5 mg/yr by intravenous infusion) randomized and double-blind until the month 6 biopsy (TPTD, n = 28; ZOL, n = 30 evaluable), then open-label, with an optional 12-month extension receiving the original treatment. A second biopsy (TPTD, n = 10; ZOL, n = 9) was collected from the contralateral side at month 24. Here we present data on remodeling-based bone formation (RBF), modeling-based bone formation (MBF), and overflow modeling-based bone formation (oMBF, modeling overflow adjacent to RBF sites) in the cancellous, endocortical, and periosteal envelopes. RBF was significantly greater after TPTD versus ZOL in all envelopes at 6 and 24 months, except the periosteal envelope at 24 months. MBF was significantly greater with TPTD in all envelopes at 6 months but not at 24 months. oMBF was significantly greater at 6 months in the cancellous and endocortical envelopes with TPTD, with no significant differences at 24 months. At 6 months, total bone formation surface was also significantly greater in each envelope with TPTD treatment (all p < 0.001). For within-group comparisons from 6 to 24 months, no statistically significant changes were observed in RBF, MBF, or oMBF in any envelope for either the TPTD or ZOL treatment groups. Overall, TPTD treatment was associated with greater bone formation than ZOL. Taken together the data support the view that ZOL is a traditional antiremodeling agent, wheareas TPTD is a proremodeling anabolic agent that increases bone formation, especially that associated with bone remodeling, including related overflow modeling, with substantial modeling-based bone formation early in the course of treatment. © 2017 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.
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 | 0.000 | 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".