Duration-Dependent Increase of Human Bone Matrix Mineralization in Long-Term Bisphosphonate Users with Atypical Femur Fracture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bisphosphonates (BPs) are the most widely used drugs for the treatment of osteoporosis but prolonged use of BPs might increase the risk of atypical femur fracture (AFF). There are only a few studies that address the bone material quality in patients on long-term BP treatment with or without AFFs. We analyzed 52 trans-iliac bone biopsies from patients on long-term BP therapy with (n = 26) and without (n = 26) AFF. At the microscopic level, the degree of mineralization of bone (DMB) was assessed on whole bone by X-ray digitized microradiography while microhardness by Vickers microindentation, and bone matrix characteristics by Fourier transform infrared microspectroscopy (FTIRM) (mineral/organic ratio, mineral maturity and crystallinity, and collagen maturity) were measured at random focal areas. The AFF patients were treated longer than non-AFF patients (9.7 ± 3.3 years versus 7.9 ± 2.7 years). As expected, bone remodeling was low in both groups, without difference between them. The AFF group had significantly higher DMB in cortical bone (+2.9%, p = .001), which remained so after adjusting for treatment duration (p = .007), and showed a trend in cancellous bone (+1.6%, p = .05). Consistent with higher DMB, heterogeneity index (HI) was lower in the AFF than in the non-AFF group, illustrating lower heterogeneity of mineralization in the AFF group. A significant positive correlation between the duration of treatment and DMB in cortical bone was found in AFF, and not in the non-AFF group. Microhardness and bone matrix characteristics were similar between groups. We conclude that the AFF group had a duration-dependent increase in DMB leading to a significantly higher DMB than the non-AFF. Because BPs have high affinity to bone mineral and lining the walls of the osteocyte lacunae, the accumulation of matrix-bound BPs in AFF could lead to inhibition of the osteocyte cytoskeleton blunting their response to mechanical strains, a hypothesis to be further investigated. © 2021 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".