Twelve Months of Denosumab and/or Alendronate Is Associated With Improved Bone Fatigue Life, Microarchitecture, and Density in Ovariectomized Cynomolgus Monkeys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prolonged use of antiresorptives such as the bisphosphonate alendronate (ALN) and the RANKL inhibitor denosumab (DMAb) are associated with rare cases of atypical femoral fracture (AFF). The etiology of AFF is unclear, but it has been hypothesized that potent osteoclast inhibitors may reduce bone fatigue resistance. The purpose of this study was to quantify the relationship between antiresorptive treatment and fatigue life (cycles to failure) in bone from ovariectomized cynomolgus monkeys. We analyzed humeral bone from 30 animals across five treatment groups. Animals were treated for 12 months with subcutaneous (sc) vehicle (VEH), sc DMAb (25 mg/kg/month), or intravenous (iv) ALN (50 μg/kg/month). Another group received 6 months VEH followed by 6 months DMAb (VEH-DMAb), and the final group received 6 months ALN followed by 6 months DMAb (ALN-DMAb). A total of 240 cortical beam samples were cyclically tested in four-point bending at 80, 100, 120, or 140 MPa peak stress. High-resolution imaging and density measurements were performed to evaluate bone microstructure and composition. Samples from the ALN (p = 0.014), ALN-DMAb (p = 0.008), and DMAb (p < 0.001) groups illustrated higher fatigue-life measurements than VEH. For example, at 140 MPa the VEH group demonstrated a median ± interquartile range (IQR) fatigue life of 1987 ± 10593 cycles, while animals in the ALN, ALN-DMAb, and DMAb groups survived 9850 ± 13648 (+395% versus VEH), 10493 ± 16796 (+428%), and 14495 ± 49299 (+629%) cycles, respectively. All antiresorptive treatment groups demonstrated lower porosity, smaller pore size, greater pore spacing, and lower number of canals versus VEH (p < 0.001). Antiresorptive treatment was also associated with greater apparent density, dry density, and ash density (p ≤ 0.03). We did not detect detrimental changes following antiresorptive treatments that would explain their association with AFF. In contrast, 12 months of treatment may have a protective effect against fatigue fractures. © 2022 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".