Placebo to Romosozumab
DrugAdministered by subcutaneous injection QM or Q3M.
NCT Number: NCT00896532
The primary objective was to determine the effect of treatment with romosozumab versus placebo at month 12 on the percent change from baseline in bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine in postmenopausal women with low bone density.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me55 year–85 year
Female
Interventional
Phase 2
This study included a 24-month treatment phase followed by rerandomization to a 12-month extension phase with denosumab or placebo, followed by a 12-month retreatment phase with romosozumab, followed by a 24-month follow-on phase with zoledronic acid or no intervention.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria
for the 12 month extension phase (Month 24 to 36):
Exclusion criteria
for the 12 month extension phase (Month 24 to 36)
Inclusion criteria
for the 12 month re-treatment phase (Month 36 to 48)
Exclusion criteria
for the 12 month re-treatment phase (Month 36 to 48)
Inclusion criteria
for the 24 month follow-on phase (Month 48 to 72) General inclusion criteria for participation
Administered by subcutaneous injection QM or Q3M.
Administered orally once a week
Other names: Fosamax
Teriparatide 20 μg administered by subcutaneous injection once a day
Other names: Forsteo
Administered by subcutaneous injection
Other names: AMG 785, EVENITY™
Denosumab 60 mg administered by subcutaneous injection Q6M
Other names: Prolia®
Administered by subcutaneous injection Q6M
Zoledronic acid 5 mg administered intravenously
Other names: Aclasta
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
Bone mineral density was measured using dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Images were analyzed by a central imaging reader.
Time frame: Baseline to 6 months
Bone mineral density was measured using dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Images were analyzed by a central imaging reader.
Percent change from baseline to month 6 was analyzed using a linear mixed effects model with the percent change from baseline to month 6 in DXA BMD as dependent variable, and baseline BMD value, machine type, geographic region, interaction of baseline BMD and machine type, visit, treatment (categorical) and interaction of treatment and visit as the independent variables.
Time frame: Baseline to 6 months
Bone mineral density was measured using dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Images were analyzed by a central imaging reader.
Percent change from baseline to month 6 was analyzed using a linear mixed effects model with the percent change from baseline to month 6 in DXA BMD as dependent variable, and baseline BMD value, machine type, geographic region, interaction of baseline BMD and machine type, visit, treatment (categorical) and interaction of treatment and visit as the independent variables.
Time frame: Baseline to 6 months
Bone mineral density was measured using dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Images were analyzed by a central imaging reader.
Percent change from baseline to month 6 was analyzed using a linear mixed effects model with the percent change from baseline to month 6 in DXA BMD as dependent variable, and baseline BMD value, machine type, geographic region, interaction of baseline BMD and machine type, visit, treatment (categorical) and interaction of treatment and visit as the independent variables.
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
Bone mineral density was measured using dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Images were analyzed by a central imaging reader.
Percent change from baseline to 12 months in BMD was analyzed using a linear mixed effects model with the percent change from baseline to month 12 in DXA BMD as dependent variable, and baseline BMD value, machine type, geographic region, interaction of baseline BMD and machine type, visit, treatment (categorical) and interaction of treatment and visit as the independent variables.
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
Bone mineral density was measured using dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Images were analyzed by a central imaging reader.
Percent change from baseline to 12 months in BMD was analyzed using a linear mixed effects model with the percent change from baseline to month 12 in DXA BMD as dependent variable, and baseline BMD value, machine type, geographic region, interaction of baseline BMD and machine type, visit, treatment (categorical) and interaction of treatment and visit as the independent variables.
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months
Bone mineral density was measured using dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Images were analyzed by a central imaging reader.
Percent change from baseline in distal radius BMD was analyzed using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with the percent change from baseline to Month 12 in DXA BMD as dependent variable, baseline BMD value, machine type, interaction of baseline BMD and machine type, treatment (categorical) and geographic region as the independent class variables.
Time frame: Baseline and months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12
Percent change from baseline in the bone turnover marker (BTM) P1NP was analyzed using a linear mixed effects model with the natural logarithm of the ratio of BTM (follow-up versus baseline) as the dependent variables, and visit, treatment (categorical), interaction of treatment and visit and the natural logarithm of the baseline BTM as the independent variables; outcomes were then transformed back to percent change from baseline.
Time frame: Baseline and months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12
Percent change from baseline in the bone turnover marker (BTM) CTX was analyzed using a linear mixed effects model with the natural logarithm of the ratio of BTM (follow-up versus baseline) as the dependent variables, and visit, treatment (categorical), interaction of treatment and visit and the natural logarithm of the baseline BTM as the independent variables; outcomes were then transformed back to percent change from baseline.
Time frame: Baseline and months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12
Percent change from baseline in the bone turnover marker (BTM) osteocalcin was analyzed using a linear mixed effects model with the natural logarithm of the ratio of BTM (follow-up versus baseline) as the dependent variables, and visit, treatment (categorical), interaction of treatment and visit and the natural logarithm of the baseline BTM as the independent variables; outcomes were then transformed back to percent change from baseline.
Time frame: Baseline and months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12
Percent change from baseline in the bone turnover marker (BTM) BSAP was analyzed using a linear mixed effects model with the natural logarithm of the ratio of BTM (follow-up versus baseline) as the dependent variables, and visit, treatment (categorical), interaction of treatment and visit and the natural logarithm of the baseline BTM as the independent variables; outcomes were then transformed back to percent change from baseline.
Amgen
Industry
A Randomised, Placebo-controlled, Multi-dose Phase 2 Study to Determine the Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability of AMG 785 in the Treatment of Postmenopausal Women With Low Bone Mineral Density
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT00890981
Bone Diseases, Bone Diseases, Metabolic
View Trial DetailsNCT00887965
Bone Diseases, Bone Diseases, Metabolic
View Trial DetailsNCT00980174
Bone Diseases, Bone Diseases, Metabolic
View Trial DetailsNCT00089661
Bone Diseases, Bone Diseases, Metabolic
View Trial Details