The efficacy of Denosumab in the treatment of femoral head osteonecrosis: a retrospective comparative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study aimed to compare clinical and radiological differences of ONFH patients who were treated with denosumab, and a control group. A total of 178 patients (272 hips) with symptomatic, nontraumatic ONFH were divided into a denosumab group (98 patients, 146 hips) and a control group (80 patients, 126 hips). Patients in the denosumab group received a 60 mg subcutaneous dose of denosumab every 6 months. For the clinical assessments, Harris hip scores (HHS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) were evaluated. Plain radiographs and MRI were performed before and a minimum of 1 year after administration of denosumab, which were evaluated for radiological results including femoral head collapse (≥ 2 mm) and volume change of necrotic lesion. Femoral head collapse occurred in 36 hips (24.7%) in the denosumab group, and 48 hips (38.1%) in the control group, which was statistically significant (P = 0.012). Twenty-three hips (15.8%) in the denosumab group and 29 hips (23%) in the control group required THA, which showed no significant difference (P = 0.086). At the final follow-up, 71.9% of hips in the denosumab group had a good or excellent HHS compared with 48.9% in the control group, showing a significant difference (P = 0.012). The denosumab group showed a significantly higher rate of necrotic lesion volume reductions compared with the control group (P < 0.001). Denosumab can significantly reduce the volume of necrotic lesions and prevent femoral head collapse in patients with ARCO stage I or II ONFH.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".