Evidence Hub

Long-term bone mineral density changes after surgical cure of patients with tumor-induced osteomalacia

Colangelo L, Pepe J, Nieddu L, Sonato C, Scillitani A, Diacinti D, Angelozzi M, Cipriani C et al.

Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2020

10 participants

Abstract

UNLABELLED: This paper reports our personal experience filling the gap regarding changes of bone mineral density after surgical treatment in patient suffering from tumor-induced osteomalacia.

INTRODUCTION: No systematic data are available regarding long-term bone mineral density (BMD) changes after surgical cure of patients with tumor-induced osteomalacia.

METHODS: From October 2001 through April 2018, we studied 10 consecutive patients (mean age ± SD, 45.5 ± 13.8 years; 5 males and 5 females) with tumor-induced osteomalacia. We evaluated BMD when initially presented at our Center and after surgical removal of the tumor.

RESULTS: Basal BMD and corresponding Z-score values (mean values ± SD) measured by DXA were as follows: L1-L4 = 0.692 ± 0.15 g/cm2, Z-score = - 2.80 ± 1.60; femur neck 0.447 ± 0.10 g/cm2, Z-score = - 2.66 ± 0.93; total femur = 0.450 ± 0.08 g/cm2, Z-score = -3.04 ± 0.85). Furthermore, Trabecular Bone Score (TBS) was evaluated in three patients (basal values, 0.990 ± 0.32). Seven patients were intermittently followed after surgical excision of the tumor while supplemented with cholecalciferol and calcium salts; the remaining three were lost to follow-up. There was a striking increase of BMD values that peaked at 26.7 ± 6.50 months: L1-L4 = 1.289 ± 0.247 g/cm2, p < 0.001, Z-score + 1.75 ± 1.42; femur neck = 0.890 ± 0.235 g/cm2, p = 0.028, Z-score = + 0.50 ± 1.40; total femur = 0.834 ± 0.150 g/cm2, p = 0.005, Z-score = - 0.74 ± 1.14. In patients with the…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 10 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free