Permanent Discontinuation of Glucocorticoids in Polymyalgia Rheumatica Is Uncommon but May Be Enhanced by Amino Bisphosphonates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The duration of treatment with glucocorticoids (GC) in polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) is often longterm. Amino bisphosphonates (N-BP) are used in PMR for the prevention of GC-induced osteoporosis, but they coulsd also have immunomodulatory properties. Whether they can be effective as an adjuvant treatment in PMR is unknown. We aimed to establish whether the use of N-BP in our PMR cohort may be associated with GC discontinuation. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of all patients diagnosed with PMR recorded in our electronic medical notes. Cox regression analyses were used to examine the association between the use of N-BP and discontinuation of GC. RESULTS: Data were retrieved for 385 patients (mean age 71 ± 10 yrs, 64% females, mean initial prednisone dose 19 ± 9 mg/day). The median followup time was 38 months (range 9-57); more than 60% of patients were exposed to N-BP. GC were discontinued in 47% of patients after a median time of 20 months (range 14-27), but subsequently restarted in 39%. Overall, 276/385 patients (72%) were actively treated at their last available evaluation (mean prednisone dose 4.9 ± 5.5 mg/day), while 123/205 (60%) were still receiving GC after 24 months of followup. The use of N-BP was associated with the discontinuation of GC (adjusted HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.50-0.88), independent of age, initial GC dose, and osteoporosis. CONCLUSION: Unlike current guidelines, longterm treatment with GC is often necessary. These preliminary data suggest that N-BP may be involved in the management of PMR.
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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".