Meta-analysis and systematic review: burosumab as a promising treatment for children with X-linked hypophosphatemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of burosumab therapy in children with X-Linked Hypophosphatemia (XLH). Materials and methods We systematically reviewed literature from PubMed, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, and Embase up until January 2024, using EndNote Web for study organization. The Newcastle–Ottawa scale guided quality assessment, while Revman software was used for data analysis and visualization. Study selection, quality evaluation, and data aggregation were independently performed by three researchers. Results The meta-analysis encompassed ten studies, including eight cohort studies that examined burosumab’s impact pre- and post-administration, and two randomized controlled trials comparing burosumab to standard therapy. The evidence from this review suggests burosumab’s superiority in managing XLH in pediatric populations, particularly in improving key biochemical markers including 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25-(OH)2D), phosphorus, and alkaline phosphatase (ALP), alongside improvements in the renal tubular maximum reabsorption rate of phosphate to glomerular filtration rate (TmP/GFR), and significant skeletal improvements as indicated by the rickets severity score (RSS) and the 6-minute walk test (6MWT). However, the long-term safety and effects, including height and quality of life (QOL) data, remains to be elucidated. Conclusions Burosumab has shown significant therapeutic effectiveness in treating children with XLH, highlighting its potential as a key treatment option.
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 | 0.013 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.032 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".