MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405710358 · doi:10.1210/clinem/dgae890

Systematic Review: Efficacy of Medical Therapy on Outcomes Important to Adult Patients With X-Linked Hypophosphatemia

2024· review· en· W4405710358 on OpenAlexafffund
Dalal S. Ali, Reza Mirza, Farah Alsarraf, Salma Hussein, Hajar Abu Alrob, Natasha M. Appelman‐Dijkstra, Signe Sparre Beck‐Nielsen, Martin Biosse Duplan, Maria Luisa Brandi, Thomas O. Carpenter, Catherine Chaussain, Martine Cohen‐Solal, Rachel Crowley, Karel Dandurand, Pablo Florenzano, Seiji Fukumoto, Claudia Gagnon, Paul Goodyer, Corinna Grasemann, Erik A. Imel, Suzanne M. Jan de Beur, Anna Lehman, E. Michael Lewiecki, Emmett Morgante, Leanne M. Ward, Aliya Khan, Gordon Guyatt

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParathyroid Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversité LavalUniversity of WaterlooMcGill University Health CentreMcMaster UniversityUniversité de SherbrookeChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioImpact
FundersSanofi GenzymeAmicus TherapeuticsSpark TherapeuticsUltragenyx PharmaceuticalAmgenMcMaster UniversityNovo NordiskSanofiUniversity of OttawaAlexion Pharmaceuticals
KeywordsObservational studyMedicineCertaintyRandomized controlled trialMEDLINEPhysical therapyMeta-analysisIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Understanding the effects of burosumab compared to conventional therapy or no treatment on patient-important outcomes in adults with X-linked hypophosphatemia (XLH) is essential to guide evidence-based treatment recommendations. OBJECTIVE: To examine the highest certainty evidence addressing the management of XLH in adults to inform treatment recommendations. METHODS: We searched Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central up to May 2023. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies of individuals aged 18+ with clinically or genetically confirmed XLH. Manuscripts comparing burosumab to no treatment or conventional therapy (phosphate and active vitamin D) and conventional therapy to no treatment were included. Two reviewers independently determined eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias (RoB). GRADE methodology was used to assess evidence certainty. RESULTS: We screened 4114 records, after removing duplicates, and assessed 254 full texts. One RCT and 2 observational studies were eligible. The RCT of burosumab vs no treatment had low RoB. Burosumab probably improves pain from fracture/pseudofracture healing (moderate certainty) but has little or no impact on direct pain measures (moderate certainty). Burosumab may reduce the need for parathyroidectomy (low certainty) but has little or no impact on fatigue (high certainty), stiffness (moderate certainty), and mobility (low certainty) over 24 weeks. Burosumab may increase dental abscess risk (low certainty). Indirect evidence comparing burosumab to conventional therapy provided low certainty regarding burosumab vs conventional therapy. Two observational studies on conventional therapy vs no treatment had high RoB and very low certainty regarding the impact of conventional therapy on patient-important outcomes. CONCLUSION: No formal comparisons between burosumab and conventional therapy in adults exist. Evidence for conventional therapy vs no treatment is very uncertain. Our review highlights the need for more data on the long-term effects of burosumab and conventional therapy on patient-important outcomes in adult patients with XLH.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.097
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.097
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.010
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.389 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & MetabolismSame topicParathyroid Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207