MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Bisphosphonate Therapy in Langerhans Cell Histiocytosis: An International Retrospective Descriptive Study

2015· article· en· W2901163551 on OpenAlexaff
Deepak Chellapandian, Polyzois Makras, Gregory Kaltsas, Cor van den Bos, Anne‐Sophie Carret, Sheila Weitzman, Maarten Egeler, Oussama Abla

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHistiocytic Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversité de MontréalSickKids FoundationCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLangerhans cell histiocytosisMedicineDenosumabBone painHistiocytosisBisphosphonateCurettageInternal medicineSurgeryPathologyDermatologyDiseaseOsteoporosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH) is a monoclonal disorder characterized by proliferation and accumulation of atypical Langerhans cells and in up to 55% of all cases somatic mutations in BRAF proves to be the driver. Although uncommon, it is potentially fatal and carries significant morbidity. Bone involvement in LCH can be destructive, painful and often associated with pathologic fractures. There is no consensus in the treatment strategies for bone LCH which could vary from simple curettage with biopsy and/or intralesional steroids to more toxic systemic chemotherapy. However, the number of treatments for this disease is limited and other options need to be explored. Bisphosphonates are osteoclast inhibitors that can target certain osteoclast markers expressed by the multinucleated giant cells in the skin, bone and lymph nodes LCH lesions and can potentially be used to alleviate bone pain and possibly control the progression of disease activity. Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of bisphosphonates in treating bone LCH and extra-osseous disease. Methods: An international multicenter retrospective chart review was conducted in children and adults with LCH who received bisphosphonates between 1995 and 2014. Results: Eighteen patients were identified from 4 centers. All received bisphosphonates therapy either at diagnosis or at ≥ 1st reactivation. Median age at start of bisphosphonates was 23.7 years (range 5.7-38.3 years), and median follow-up time post-bisphosphonate therapy was 2.8 years (range 0.9-5.0 years). Patients had either single system bone disease or bone lesions as part of their multisystem disease. Patients were treated with different bisphosphonates with majority received zoledronic acid (n=10), followed by pamidronate (n=4) and alendronate (n= 3); one patient received both pamidronate and zoledronic acid. All patients reported significant reduction in pain to either no or mild pain after administration of bisphosphonates. Thirteen of 18 patients (72%) achieved complete remission (CR) in their bone lesions, including lesions in skin (n=1), lung (n=1) and pituitary (n=1); 2 had partial response and 3 had no response. Among the 13 CR patients, 12 had no active disease for a median of 4.1 years (range 2.8 - 5.1 years) and 1 developed radiographic neurodegeneration after 2 years. Bisphosphonate therapy was well tolerated by all patients with no major toxicity. Progression-free survival (PFS) was 75 ± 11% at 3 years, with a trend favoring better PFS (P=0.24) in patients with no or first reactivation compared with those having ≥ 2 reactivations. Conclusion: Bisphosphonates is a well-tolerated medication that can significantly improve bone pain in patients with bone LCH, and may even be effective in treating extra-osseous disease. A prospective randomized trial evaluating the role of bisphosphonates in multifocal bone LCH is warranted. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicHistiocytic Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207