Trial reportOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2013
Actions of osteoporosis treatments on bone histomorphometric remodeling: a two-fold principal component analysis.
Trial report in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Postmenopausal Iron Overload Exacerbated Bone Loss by Promoting the Degradation of Type I Collagen.BioMed research international · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
unlabelledThis was the first study to apply principal component analysis method to bone histomorphometric parameters. The results corroborated teriparatide's distinct, yet different, mechanisms of action, which stimulate both bone formation and resorption.
introductionThis study consolidated bone histomorphometric parameters and compared the effects of two osteoporosis treatments on bone remodeling by using a principal component analysis (PCA).
methodsIncluded in this analysis were postmenopausal women with osteoporosis who were treated with either teriparatide or alendronate and who completed transiliac bone biopsy at either 6 or 18 months in the randomized, double-blind Forteo Alendronate Comparator Trial. Eighteen histomorphometric parameters were grouped into formation and resorption categories. The first principal component of each category was estimated through the PCA. The summation of principal formation component (PFC) and principal resorption component (PRC) was calculated to represent the overall level of bone turnover. The difference between PFC and PRC was computed to determine the balance between formation and resorption.
resultsThe PFC was significantly higher in the teriparatide group than in the alendronate group (P < 0.0001), while the PRC was numerically lower in the alendronate group (P = 0.18). The mean difference between the PFC and PRC was positive in the teriparatide group and negative in the alendronate group.
conclusionsOur approach of consolidating bone histomorphometric remodeling parameters corroborated the idea that the distinct, yet different, mechanisms of action of teriparatide treatment stimulate both bone formation and resorption, and alendronate treatment suppresses both bone formation and resorption.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23881284What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.