MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311279646 · doi:10.1111/joim.13593

Global guidance for the recognition, diagnosis, and management of tumor‐induced osteomalacia

2022· review· en· W4311279646 on OpenAlex
Suzanne M. Jan de Beur, Salvatore Minisola, Weibo Xia, Bo Abrahamsen, Jean‐Jacques Body, Maria Luisa Brandi, Roderick Clifton‐Bligh, Michael T. Collins, Pablo Florenzano, Pascal Houillier, Yasuo Imanishi, Erik A. Imel, Aliya Khan, M. Carola Zillikens, Seiji Fukumoto

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Internal Medicine · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParathyroid Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcMaster University Medical Centre
FundersNHLBI Division of Intramural ResearchNational Institutes of HealthAustralian and New Zealand Bone and Mineral SocietyInternational Osteoporosis FoundationAboca S.p.A. Società AgricolaEuropean Calcified Tissue SocietyUltragenyx PharmaceuticalAmerican Society for Bone and Mineral ResearchAlexion PharmaceuticalsEli Lilly and CompanyChugai PharmaceuticalAmgen
KeywordsMedicineOsteomalaciaIntensive care medicinePathologyOsteoporosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Tumor‐induced osteomalacia (TIO) is a rare paraneoplastic syndrome caused by mesenchymal tumors that secrete fibroblast growth factor 23 (FGF23). Patients present with progressive bone pain, muscle weakness, and fragility fractures. TIO is characterized by hypophosphatemia, excess renal phosphate excretion, and low/inappropriately normal 1,25‐dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH) 2 D) levels. Rarity and enigmatic clinical presentation of TIO contribute to limited awareness among the medical community. Accordingly, appropriate diagnostic tests may not be requested, leading to delayed diagnosis and poorer patient outcomes. We have developed a global guidance document to improve the knowledge of TIO in the medical community, enabling the recognition of patients with TIO and appropriate referral. We provide recommendations aiding diagnosis, referral, and treatment, helping promote a global standard of patient management. We reviewed the literature and conducted a three‐round Delphi survey of TIO experts. Statements were drafted based on published evidence and expert opinions (≥70% consensus required for final recommendations). Serum phosphate should be measured in patients presenting with chronic muscle pain or weakness, fragility fractures, or bone pain. Physical examination should establish features of myopathy and identify masses that could be causative tumors. Priority laboratory evaluations should include urine/serum phosphate and creatinine to assess renal tubular reabsorption of phosphate and TmP/GFR, alkaline phosphatase, parathyroid hormone, 25‐hydroxyvitamin D, 1,25(OH) 2 D, and FGF23. Patients with the clinical/biochemical suspicion of TIO should be referred to a specialist for diagnosis confirmation, and functional imaging should be used to localize causative tumor(s). Recommended treatment is tumor resection or, with unresectable/unidentifiable tumors, phosphate salts plus active vitamin D, or burosumab.

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.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.593

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.301 · 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