Romosozumab (AMG 785) in Postmenopausal Women With Low Bone Mineral Density

September 9, 2022 updated by: Amgen

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

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.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

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.

  • 24-month Romosozumab Treatment Phase (months 1 to 24): Participants were randomized in a 1:1:1:1:1:1:1:1 ratio to receive 1 of 5 double-blind dosing regimens of romosozumab or placebo or open-label alendronate (ALN) or open-label teriparatide (TPTD) for the first 12 months of the study. At month 12, participants in the romosozumab and placebo groups continued their assigned treatment for an additional 12 months, participants in the TPTD group ended study participation, and participants in the ALN group transitioned to receive romosozumab 140 mg subcutaneously (SC) every month (QM) for an additional 12 months (months 12 to 24).
  • 12-month Denosumab Extension Phase (months 24 to 36): At the end of the 24-month romosozumab treatment phase, eligible participants were randomized 1:1 within their original treatment group to receive either denosumab or placebo every 6 months (Q6M) for 12 months.
  • 12-month Romosozumab Retreatment Phase (months 36 to 48): From months 36 to 48, participants initially randomized to romosozumab or placebo received romosozumab 210 mg SC QM. Participants who initially received ALN ended their participation at month 36 and were not retreated with romosozumab.
  • 24-month Follow-on Phase (months 48 to 72): At month 48, participants received 1 dose of zoledronic acid 5 mg intravenously or no intervention for an additional 24 months.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

419

Phase

  • Phase 2

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

53 years to 83 years (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

Female

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Ambulatory, postmenopausal women, aged ≥ 55 to ≤ 85
  • Low BMD measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and assessed by the central imaging vendor (equivalent to T-scores between -2.0 and -3.5)

Exclusion Criteria:

  • History of vertebral fracture, or fragility fracture of the wrist, humerus, hip or pelvis after age 50
  • Untreated hyper- or hypothyroidism
  • Current hyper- or hypoparathyroidism, hypo- or hypercalcemia
  • Elevated transaminases
  • Significantly impaired renal function
  • Positive for: human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis-C or hepatitis-B surface antigen
  • Malignancy
  • History of solid organ or bone marrow transplants
  • Use of agents affecting bone metabolism
  • Contraindicated or intolerant of alendronate therapy
  • Contraindicated or intolerant of teriparatide therapy

Inclusion Criteria for the 12 month extension phase (Month 24 to 36):

- Normocalcemia at or after the Month 21 visit but before the Month 24 study visit

Exclusion Criteria for the 12 month extension phase (Month 24 to 36)

  • Incidence of a clinical vertebral fracture or fragility fracture of the wrist, humerus, hip or pelvis during the initial 24 month treatment phase of the study
  • A BMD loss of ≥ 7.0% from baseline at any time up to the Month 18 visit of the initial 24-month treatment phase
  • Malignancy
  • History of osteonecrosis of the jaw
  • Use of proscribed medication during the initial 24 month treatment phase
  • Contraindicated or intolerant of denosumab therapy

Inclusion Criteria for the 12 month re-treatment phase (Month 36 to 48)

  • Albumin adjusted serum calcium of the most recent blood draw at or after the Month 30 visit but before the Month 36 study visit. Calcium repletion is permitted and central laboratory analysis of albumin adjusted serum calcium may be repeated before the Month 36 study visit
  • Participation in Group A or B during initial 24 month treatment phase
  • Subject has reached M36 of the study
  • Appropriate written informed consent must be obtained

Exclusion Criteria for the 12 month re-treatment phase (Month 36 to 48)

  • New malignancy
  • Use of proscribed medication during the 12 month extension phase

Inclusion Criteria for the 24 month follow-on phase (Month 48 to 72) General inclusion criteria for participation

  • Subject has reached month 48 of the study
  • Appropriate written informed consent must be obtained Inclusion criteria for assignment to the no intervention group
  • During the 24 month AMG 785 treatment phase, subject was assigned to any AMG 785 treatment group
  • During the 12 month denosumab extension phase, subject was assigned to the denosumab treatment group Exclusion for the 24 month follow-on phase (Month 48 to 72)
  • New malignancy
  • Use of proscribed meds during the 12 month re-treatment phase
  • Partial informed consent withdrawal and discontinuation of investigational product at any time up to month 48 visit
  • Incidence of a clinical vertebral fracture or fragility fracture of the wrist, humerus, hip or pelvis during the initial 24 month treatment phase of the study
  • BMD T-score of ≤ -2.5 at the lumbar spine, total hip, or femoral neck based on local read of the DXA scans at month 48
  • Intolerance to zoledronic acid

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Quadruple

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Placebo Comparator: Placebo

Participants received placebo matching to romosozumab once a month (QM) or once every 3 months (Q3M) administered subcutaneously (SC) for up to 24 months.

Participants were then rerandomized to receive denosumab 60 mg or placebo to denosumab subcutaneously every 6 months from months 24 to 36. From months 36 to 48 participants received romosozumab 210 mg SC QM. At month 48 eligible participants received a single dose of open-label zoledronic acid 5 mg intravenously, or no intervention.

Administered by subcutaneous injection QM or Q3M.
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
Active Comparator: Alendronate

Participants received open-label alendronate (ALN) 70 mg orally (PO) every week (QW) for 12 months. At month 12 participants transitioned to receive romosozumab 140 mg subcutaneously every month for an additional 12 months (months 12 to 24).

Participants were then rerandomized to receive denosumab 60 mg or placebo to denosumab subcutaneously every 6 months from months 24 to 36. At month 36 participants ended study participation.

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
Administered orally once a week
Other Names:
  • Fosamax
Active Comparator: Teriparatide
Participants received open-label teriparatide 20 μg subcutaneously every day (QD) for 12 months. At month 12 participants ended study participation.
Teriparatide 20 μg administered by subcutaneous injection once a day
Other Names:
  • Forsteo
Experimental: Romosozumab 70 mg QM

Participants received double-blind romosozumab 70 mg subcutaneously every month for 24 months.

Participants were then rerandomized to receive denosumab 60 mg or placebo to denosumab subcutaneously every 6 months from months 24 to 36. From months 36 to 48 participants received romosozumab 210 mg SC QM. At month 48 eligible participants received a single dose of open-label zoledronic acid 5 mg intravenously, or no intervention.

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
Experimental: Romosozumab 140 mg Q3M

Participants received double-blind romosozumab 140 mg subcutaneously once every 3 months for 24 months.

Participants were then rerandomized to receive denosumab 60 mg or placebo to denosumab subcutaneously every 6 months from months 24 to 36. From months 36 to 48 participants received romosozumab 210 mg SC QM. At month 48 eligible participants received a single dose of open-label zoledronic acid 5 mg intravenously, or no intervention.

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
Experimental: Romosozumab 140 mg QM

Participants received double-blind romosozumab 140 mg QM subcutaneously for 24 months.

Participants were then rerandomized to receive denosumab 60 mg or placebo to denosumab subcutaneously every 6 months from months 24 to 36. From months 36 to 48 participants received romosozumab 210 mg SC QM. At month 48 eligible participants received a single dose of open-label zoledronic acid 5 mg intravenously, or no intervention.

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
Experimental: Romosozumab 210 mg Q3M

Participants received double-blind romosozumab 210 mg Q3M subcutaneously for 24 months.

Participants were then rerandomized to receive denosumab 60 mg or placebo to denosumab subcutaneously every 6 months from months 24 to 36. From months 36 to 48 participants received romosozumab 210 mg SC QM. At month 48 eligible participants received a single dose of open-label zoledronic acid 5 mg intravenously, or no intervention.

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
Experimental: Romosozumab 210 mg QM

Participants received double-blind romosozumab 210 mg QM subcutaneously for 24 months.

Participants were then rerandomized to receive denosumab 60 mg or placebo to denosumab subcutaneously every 6 months from months 24 to 36. From months 36 to 48 participants received romosozumab 210 mg SC QM. At month 48 eligible participants received a single dose of open-label zoledronic acid 5 mg intravenously, or no intervention.

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

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Percent Change From Baseline at Month 12 in BMD at the Lumbar Spine
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.
Baseline to 12 months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Percent Change From Baseline at Month 6 in BMD at the Lumbar Spine
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.

Baseline to 6 months
Percent Change From Baseline at Month 6 in BMD of the Total Hip
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.

Baseline to 6 months
Percent Change From Baseline at Month 6 in BMD of the Femoral Neck
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.

Baseline to 6 months
Percent Change From Baseline at Month 12 in BMD of the Total Hip
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.

Baseline to 12 months
Percent Change From Baseline at Month 12 in BMD of the Femoral Neck
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.

Baseline to 12 months
Percent Change From Baseline at Month 12 in BMD of the Distal Radius
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.

Baseline to 12 months
Percent Change From Baseline in Procollagen Type 1 N-telopeptide (P1NP)
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.
Baseline and months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12
Percent Change From Baseline in Type 1 Collagen C-telopeptide (CTX)
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.
Baseline and months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12
Percent Change From Baseline in Osteocalcin
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.
Baseline and months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12
Percent Change From Baseline in Bone-specific Alkaline Phosphatase (BSAP)
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.
Baseline and months 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

June 3, 2009

Primary Completion (Actual)

February 21, 2011

Study Completion (Actual)

February 18, 2016

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

May 7, 2009

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 7, 2009

First Posted (Estimate)

May 11, 2009

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

September 22, 2022

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

September 9, 2022

Last Verified

September 1, 2022

More Information

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Postmenopausal Osteoporosis

Clinical Trials on Romosozumab

3
Subscribe