Skip to content

Efficacy and Safety of Romosozumab Treatment in Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis

A Multicenter, International, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Parallel-group Study to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of Romosozumab Treatment in Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01575834
Acronym
FRAME
Enrollment
7180
Registered
2012-04-12
Start date
2012-03-15
Completion date
2016-12-28
Last updated
2024-08-28

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Postmenopausal Osteoporosis

Keywords

Osteoporosis, Osteoporosis-Postmenopausal, Bone Diseases-Metabolic, Bone Diseases, Musculoskeletal Diseases

Brief summary

The purpose of this study is to determine if treatment with romosozumab is effective in preventing fractures in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis

Interventions

DRUGRomosozumab

Administered by subcutaneous injection once a month (QM)

DRUGPlacebo

Administered by subcutaneous injection once a month (QM)

DRUGDenosumab

Administered by subcutaneous injection once every 6 months (Q6M)

Sponsors

Amgen
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
QUADRUPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
55 Years to 90 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

\- Postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, defined as low bone mineral density (BMD T-score at the total hip or femoral neck of ≤ -2.50)

Exclusion criteria

* BMD T-score of ≤ -3.50 at the total hip or femoral neck * History of hip fracture * Any severe or more than 2 moderate vertebral fractures, as assessed by the central imaging based on lateral spine x-rays * Use of agents affecting bone metabolism * History of metabolic or bone disease (except osteoporosis) * Vitamin D insufficiency (vitamin D repletion and rescreening is permitted) * Current hyper- or hypocalcemia * Current, uncontrolled hyper- or hypothyroidism * Current, uncontrolled hyper- or hypoparathyroidism

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Percentage of Participants With New Vertebral Fracture Through Month 1212 MonthsNew vertebral fractures occurred when there was ≥ 1 grade increase from the previous grade of 0 in any vertebra from T4 to L4 using the Genant semiquantitative scoring method. The Genant semiquantitative scoring method was based on assessment of x-rays according to the following scale: * Grade 0 (Normal) = no fracture; * Grade 1 (Mild) = mild fracture, 20 to 25% reduction in vertebral height (anterior, middle, or posterior); * Grade 2 (Moderate) = moderate fracture, 25 to 40% reduction in anterior, middle, and/or posterior height; * Grade 3 (Severe) = severe fracture, greater than 40% reduction in anterior, middle, and/or posterior height.
Percentage of Participants With New Vertebral Fracture Through Month 2424 monthsNew vertebral fractures occurred when there was ≥ 1 grade increase from the previous grade of 0 in any vertebra from T4 to L4 using the Genant semiquantitative scoring method. The Genant semiquantitative scoring method was based on assessment of x-rays according to the following scale: * Grade 0 (Normal) = no fracture; * Grade 1 (Mild) = mild fracture, 20 to 25% reduction in vertebral height (anterior, middle, or posterior); * Grade 2 (Moderate) = moderate fracture, 25 to 40% reduction in anterior, middle, and/or posterior height; * Grade 3 (Severe) = severe fracture, greater than 40% reduction in anterior, middle, and/or posterior height.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Percentage of Participants With a Nonvertebral Fracture Through Month 2424 MonthsA nonvertebral fracture was defined as a fracture present on a copy of radiographs or other diagnostic images such as computerized tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging confirming the fracture within 14 days of reported fracture image date as recorded by the study site, and/or documented in a copy of the radiology report, surgical report, or discharge summary, excluding skull, facial, mandible, cervical vertebrae, thoracic vertebrae, lumbar vertebrae, metacarpus, finger phalanges, and toe phalanges. In addition, fractures associated with high trauma severity or pathologic fractures were excluded.
Percentage of Participants With a Clinical Fracture Through Month 2424 MonthsClinical fractures included clinical vertebral and nonvertebral fractures (excluding skull, facial, mandible, cervical vertebrae, thoracic vertebrae, lumbar vertebrae, metacarpus, finger phalanges, and toe phalanges) that were associated with signs and/or symptoms indicative of a fracture. Clinical vertebral fractures were included regardless of trauma severity or pathologic fractures; nonvertebral fractures associated with high trauma severity or pathologic fractures were excluded.
Percentage of Participants With a Major Nonvertebral Fracture Through Month 1212 MonthsA major nonvertebral fracture was a subset of nonvertebral fractures including pelvis, distal femur (ie, femur excluding hip), proximal tibia (ie, tibia excluding ankle), ribs, proximal humerus (ie, humerus excluding elbow), forearm, and hip.
Percentage of Participants With a Major Nonvertebral Fracture Through Month 2424 MonthsA major nonvertebral fracture was a subset of nonvertebral fractures including pelvis, distal femur (ie, femur excluding hip), proximal tibia (ie, tibia excluding ankle), ribs, proximal humerus (ie, humerus excluding elbow), forearm, and hip.
Percentage of Participants With a New or Worsening Vertebral Fracture Through Month 1212 MonthsA new or worsening vertebral fracture was identified when there was a ≥ 1 grade increase from the previous grade in any vertebra from T4 to L4.
Percentage of Participants With a New or Worsening Vertebral Fracture Through Month 2424 MonthsA new or worsening vertebral fracture was identified when there was a ≥ 1 grade increase from the previous grade in any vertebra from T4 to L4.
Percentage of Participants With a Hip Fracture Through Month 1212 MonthsHip fractures were defined as a subset of nonvertebral fractures including fractures of the femur neck, femur intertrochanter, and femur subtrochanter.
Percentage of Participants With a Hip Fracture Through Month 2424 MonthsHip fractures were defined as a subset of nonvertebral fractures including fractures of the femur neck, femur intertrochanter, and femur subtrochanter.
Percentage of Participants With a Major Osteoporotic Fracture Through Month 1212 MonthsMajor osteoporotic fractures included clinical vertebral fractures and fractures of the hip, forearm and humerus. Fractures associated with high trauma severity or pathologic fractures were excluded.
Percentage of Participants With a Clinical Fracture Through Month 1212 MonthsClinical fractures included clinical vertebral and nonvertebral fractures (excluding skull, facial, mandible, cervical vertebrae, thoracic vertebrae, lumbar vertebrae, metacarpus, finger phalanges, and toe phalanges) that were associated with signs and/or symptoms indicative of a fracture. Clinical vertebral fractures were included regardless of trauma severity or pathologic fractures; nonvertebral fractures associated with high trauma severity or pathologic fractures were excluded.
Percentage of Participants With Multiple New or Worsening Vertebral Fractures Through Month 1212 MonthsA new or worsening vertebral fracture was identified when there was a ≥ 1 grade increase from the previous grade in any vertebra from T4 to L4. A participant had multiple new or worsening vertebral fractures when there were ≥ 2 vertebrae from T4 to L4 with ≥ 1 grade increase from the previous grade. The multiple new or worsening vertebral fractures need not have occurred at the same visit.
Percentage of Participants With Multiple New or Worsening Vertebral Fractures Through Month 2424 MonthsA new or worsening vertebral fracture was identified when there was a ≥ 1 grade increase from the previous grade in any vertebra from T4 to L4. A participant had multiple new or worsening vertebral fractures when there were ≥ 2 vertebrae from T4 to L4 with ≥ 1 grade increase from the previous grade. The multiple new or worsening vertebral fractures need not have occurred at the same visit.
Percent Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density at the Lumbar Spine at Month 12Baseline and Month 12Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). DXA scans were analyzed by a central imaging center.
Percent Change From Baseline In Bone Mineral Density at the Lumbar Spine at Month 24Baseline and Month 24Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). DXA scans were analyzed by a central imaging center.
Percent Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density of the Total Hip at Month 12Baseline and Month 12Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). DXA scans were analyzed by a central imaging center.
Percent Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density of the Total Hip at Month 24Baseline and Month 24Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). DXA scans were analyzed by a central imaging center.
Percent Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density of the Femoral Neck at Month 12Baseline and Month 12Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). DXA scans were analyzed by a central imaging center.
Percent Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density of the Femoral Neck at Month 24Baseline and Month 24Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). DXA scans were analyzed by a central imaging center.
Percentage of Participants With a Major Osteoporotic Fracture Through Month 2424 MonthsMajor osteoporotic fractures included clinical vertebral fractures and fractures of the hip, forearm and humerus. Fractures associated with high trauma severity or pathologic fractures were excluded.
Percentage of Participants With a Nonvertebral Fracture Through Month 1212 MonthsA nonvertebral fracture was defined as a fracture present on a copy of radiographs or other diagnostic images such as computerized tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging confirming the fracture within 14 days of reported fracture image date recorded by the study site, and/or documented in a copy of the radiology report, surgical report, or discharge summary, excluding skull, facial, mandible, cervical vertebrae, thoracic vertebrae, lumbar vertebrae, metacarpus, finger phalanges, and toe phalanges. In addition, fractures associated with high trauma severity or pathologic fractures were excluded.

Countries

Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Czechia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Estonia, Germany, Hungary, India, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Mexico, New Zealand, Poland, Romania, Spain, Switzerland, United Kingdom, United States

Participant flow

Recruitment details

This study was conducted at 222 centers in Europe, Central/Latin America, Asia, North America, and Australia/New Zealand. The first participant enrolled on 15 March 2012 and the last participant enrolled on 06 December 2013.

Pre-assignment details

Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive either romosozumab 210 mg or matched placebo for the 12-month, double-blind, placebo-controlled period. Randomization was stratified by age (\< 75 years, ≥ 75 years) and prevalent vertebral fracture (yes, no), as determined by site staff at randomization based on local reading of the spine X-ray.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Placebo/Denosumab
Participants received placebo subcutaneous injections once a month for 12 months, followed by 60 mg denosumab subcutaneously once every 6 months for 24 months.
3,591
Romosozumab/Denosumab
Participants received romosozumab 210 mg subcutaneous injections once a month for 12 months, followed by 60 mg denosumab subcutaneously once every 6 months for 24 months.
3,589
Total7,180

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Overall StudyAdministrative decision1533
Overall StudyAdverse Event6361
Overall StudyDeath8174
Overall StudyIneligibility Determined58
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up5568
Overall StudyNoncompliance5227
Overall StudyOther7070
Overall StudyProtocol Deviation43
Overall StudyRequirement for Alternative Therapy24
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject352390

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicPlacebo/DenosumabRomosozumab/DenosumabTotal
Age, Continuous70.8 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.9
70.9 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 7
70.9 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 7
Age, Customized
< 65 years
757 Participants768 Participants1525 Participants
Age, Customized
≥ 65 years
2834 Participants2821 Participants5655 Participants
Age Strata per Randomization
< 75 years
2471 Participants2470 Participants4941 Participants
Age Strata per Randomization
≥ 75 years
1120 Participants1119 Participants2239 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
1416 Participants1427 Participants2843 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
2175 Participants2162 Participants4337 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Prevalent Vertebral Fracture Strata per Randomization
No
3386 Participants3385 Participants6771 Participants
Prevalent Vertebral Fracture Strata per Randomization
Yes
205 Participants204 Participants409 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
American Indian/Alaska Native
63 Participants64 Participants127 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Asian
441 Participants425 Participants866 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Black or African American
74 Participants77 Participants151 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Multiple
59 Participants60 Participants119 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander
1 Participants0 Participants1 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Other
901 Participants900 Participants1801 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
White
2052 Participants2063 Participants4115 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
3591 Participants3589 Participants7180 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
EG002
affected / at risk
EG003
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —— / —— / —— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
2,059 / 3,5762,019 / 3,5812,434 / 3,5762,463 / 3,581
serious
Total, serious adverse events
314 / 3,576344 / 3,581733 / 3,576728 / 3,581

Outcome results

Primary

Percentage of Participants With New Vertebral Fracture Through Month 12

New vertebral fractures occurred when there was ≥ 1 grade increase from the previous grade of 0 in any vertebra from T4 to L4 using the Genant semiquantitative scoring method. The Genant semiquantitative scoring method was based on assessment of x-rays according to the following scale: * Grade 0 (Normal) = no fracture; * Grade 1 (Mild) = mild fracture, 20 to 25% reduction in vertebral height (anterior, middle, or posterior); * Grade 2 (Moderate) = moderate fracture, 25 to 40% reduction in anterior, middle, and/or posterior height; * Grade 3 (Severe) = severe fracture, greater than 40% reduction in anterior, middle, and/or posterior height.

Time frame: 12 Months

Population: Primary efficacy analysis set includes all participants who had a baseline and ≥ 1 postbaseline evaluation of vertebral fracture during the 12 months, including participants with missing baseline Genant scores whose first postbaseline spinal radiograph showed no fracture on the same vertebrae. Last observation carried forward imputation was used.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With New Vertebral Fracture Through Month 121.8 percentage of participants
RomosozumabPercentage of Participants With New Vertebral Fracture Through Month 120.5 percentage of participants
p-value: <0.00195% CI: [0.15, 0.47]Regression, Logistic
Primary

Percentage of Participants With New Vertebral Fracture Through Month 24

New vertebral fractures occurred when there was ≥ 1 grade increase from the previous grade of 0 in any vertebra from T4 to L4 using the Genant semiquantitative scoring method. The Genant semiquantitative scoring method was based on assessment of x-rays according to the following scale: * Grade 0 (Normal) = no fracture; * Grade 1 (Mild) = mild fracture, 20 to 25% reduction in vertebral height (anterior, middle, or posterior); * Grade 2 (Moderate) = moderate fracture, 25 to 40% reduction in anterior, middle, and/or posterior height; * Grade 3 (Severe) = severe fracture, greater than 40% reduction in anterior, middle, and/or posterior height.

Time frame: 24 months

Population: Primary efficacy analysis set includes all participants who had a baseline and ≥ 1 postbaseline evaluation of vertebral fracture during the 24 months, including participants with missing baseline Genant scores whose first postbaseline spinal radiograph showed no fracture on the same vertebrae. Last observation carried forward imputation was used.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With New Vertebral Fracture Through Month 242.5 percentage of participants
RomosozumabPercentage of Participants With New Vertebral Fracture Through Month 240.6 percentage of participants
p-value: <0.00195% CI: [0.15, 0.39]Regression, Logistic
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With a Clinical Fracture Through Month 12

Clinical fractures included clinical vertebral and nonvertebral fractures (excluding skull, facial, mandible, cervical vertebrae, thoracic vertebrae, lumbar vertebrae, metacarpus, finger phalanges, and toe phalanges) that were associated with signs and/or symptoms indicative of a fracture. Clinical vertebral fractures were included regardless of trauma severity or pathologic fractures; nonvertebral fractures associated with high trauma severity or pathologic fractures were excluded.

Time frame: 12 Months

Population: Full analysis set; Last observation carried forward imputation (LOCF) was used.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With a Clinical Fracture Through Month 122.5 percentage of participants
RomosozumabPercentage of Participants With a Clinical Fracture Through Month 121.6 percentage of participants
p-value: 0.00895% CI: [0.46, 0.89]Cox proportional hazards
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With a Clinical Fracture Through Month 24

Clinical fractures included clinical vertebral and nonvertebral fractures (excluding skull, facial, mandible, cervical vertebrae, thoracic vertebrae, lumbar vertebrae, metacarpus, finger phalanges, and toe phalanges) that were associated with signs and/or symptoms indicative of a fracture. Clinical vertebral fractures were included regardless of trauma severity or pathologic fractures; nonvertebral fractures associated with high trauma severity or pathologic fractures were excluded.

Time frame: 24 Months

Population: Full analysis set; LOCF imputation was used

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With a Clinical Fracture Through Month 244.1 percentage of participants
RomosozumabPercentage of Participants With a Clinical Fracture Through Month 242.8 percentage of participants
p-value: 0.09695% CI: [0.52, 0.87]Cox proportional hazards
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With a Hip Fracture Through Month 12

Hip fractures were defined as a subset of nonvertebral fractures including fractures of the femur neck, femur intertrochanter, and femur subtrochanter.

Time frame: 12 Months

Population: Full analysis set

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With a Hip Fracture Through Month 120.4 percentage of participants
RomosozumabPercentage of Participants With a Hip Fracture Through Month 120.2 percentage of participants
p-value: 0.1895% CI: [0.22, 1.35]Cox proportional hazards
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With a Hip Fracture Through Month 24

Hip fractures were defined as a subset of nonvertebral fractures including fractures of the femur neck, femur intertrochanter, and femur subtrochanter.

Time frame: 24 Months

Population: Full analysis set

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With a Hip Fracture Through Month 240.6 percentage of participants
RomosozumabPercentage of Participants With a Hip Fracture Through Month 240.3 percentage of participants
p-value: 0.1295% CI: [0.24, 1.04]Cox proportional hazards
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With a Major Nonvertebral Fracture Through Month 12

A major nonvertebral fracture was a subset of nonvertebral fractures including pelvis, distal femur (ie, femur excluding hip), proximal tibia (ie, tibia excluding ankle), ribs, proximal humerus (ie, humerus excluding elbow), forearm, and hip.

Time frame: 12 Months

Population: Full analysis set

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With a Major Nonvertebral Fracture Through Month 121.5 percentage of participants
RomosozumabPercentage of Participants With a Major Nonvertebral Fracture Through Month 121.0 percentage of participants
p-value: 0.09695% CI: [0.44, 1.02]Cox proportional hazards
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With a Major Nonvertebral Fracture Through Month 24

A major nonvertebral fracture was a subset of nonvertebral fractures including pelvis, distal femur (ie, femur excluding hip), proximal tibia (ie, tibia excluding ankle), ribs, proximal humerus (ie, humerus excluding elbow), forearm, and hip.

Time frame: 24 Months

Population: Full analysis set

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With a Major Nonvertebral Fracture Through Month 242.8 percentage of participants
RomosozumabPercentage of Participants With a Major Nonvertebral Fracture Through Month 241.9 percentage of participants
p-value: 0.09695% CI: [0.49, 0.91]Cox proportional hazards
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With a Major Osteoporotic Fracture Through Month 12

Major osteoporotic fractures included clinical vertebral fractures and fractures of the hip, forearm and humerus. Fractures associated with high trauma severity or pathologic fractures were excluded.

Time frame: 12 Months

Population: Full analysis set

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With a Major Osteoporotic Fracture Through Month 121.8 percentage of participants
RomosozumabPercentage of Participants With a Major Osteoporotic Fracture Through Month 121.1 percentage of participants
p-value: 0.01295% CI: [0.4, 0.9]Cox proportional hazards
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With a Major Osteoporotic Fracture Through Month 24

Major osteoporotic fractures included clinical vertebral fractures and fractures of the hip, forearm and humerus. Fractures associated with high trauma severity or pathologic fractures were excluded.

Time frame: 24 Months

Population: Full analysis set

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With a Major Osteoporotic Fracture Through Month 243.1 percentage of participants
RomosozumabPercentage of Participants With a Major Osteoporotic Fracture Through Month 241.9 percentage of participants
p-value: 0.00295% CI: [0.46, 0.84]Cox proportional hazards
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With a New or Worsening Vertebral Fracture Through Month 12

A new or worsening vertebral fracture was identified when there was a ≥ 1 grade increase from the previous grade in any vertebra from T4 to L4.

Time frame: 12 Months

Population: Primary efficacy analysis set includes all participants who had a baseline and ≥ 1 postbaseline evaluation of vertebral fracture during the 24 months, including participants with missing baseline Genant scores whose first postbaseline spinal radiograph showed no fracture on the same vertebrae. LOCF imputation was used

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With a New or Worsening Vertebral Fracture Through Month 121.8 percentage of participants
RomosozumabPercentage of Participants With a New or Worsening Vertebral Fracture Through Month 120.5 percentage of participants
p-value: 0.09695% CI: [0.17, 0.49]Regression, Logistic
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With a New or Worsening Vertebral Fracture Through Month 24

A new or worsening vertebral fracture was identified when there was a ≥ 1 grade increase from the previous grade in any vertebra from T4 to L4.

Time frame: 24 Months

Population: Primary efficacy analysis set includes all participants who had a baseline and ≥ 1 postbaseline evaluation of vertebral fracture during the 24 months, including participants with missing baseline Genant scores whose first postbaseline spinal radiograph showed no fracture on the same vertebrae. LOCF imputation was used.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With a New or Worsening Vertebral Fracture Through Month 242.5 percentage of participants
RomosozumabPercentage of Participants With a New or Worsening Vertebral Fracture Through Month 240.7 percentage of participants
p-value: 0.09695% CI: [0.16, 0.41]Regression, Logistic
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With a Nonvertebral Fracture Through Month 12

A nonvertebral fracture was defined as a fracture present on a copy of radiographs or other diagnostic images such as computerized tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging confirming the fracture within 14 days of reported fracture image date recorded by the study site, and/or documented in a copy of the radiology report, surgical report, or discharge summary, excluding skull, facial, mandible, cervical vertebrae, thoracic vertebrae, lumbar vertebrae, metacarpus, finger phalanges, and toe phalanges. In addition, fractures associated with high trauma severity or pathologic fractures were excluded.

Time frame: 12 Months

Population: Full analysis set

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With a Nonvertebral Fracture Through Month 122.1 percentage of participants
RomosozumabPercentage of Participants With a Nonvertebral Fracture Through Month 121.6 percentage of participants
p-value: 0.09695% CI: [0.53, 1.05]Cox proportional hazards
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With a Nonvertebral Fracture Through Month 24

A nonvertebral fracture was defined as a fracture present on a copy of radiographs or other diagnostic images such as computerized tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging confirming the fracture within 14 days of reported fracture image date as recorded by the study site, and/or documented in a copy of the radiology report, surgical report, or discharge summary, excluding skull, facial, mandible, cervical vertebrae, thoracic vertebrae, lumbar vertebrae, metacarpus, finger phalanges, and toe phalanges. In addition, fractures associated with high trauma severity or pathologic fractures were excluded.

Time frame: 24 Months

Population: Full analysis set

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With a Nonvertebral Fracture Through Month 243.6 percentage of participants
RomosozumabPercentage of Participants With a Nonvertebral Fracture Through Month 242.7 percentage of participants
p-value: 0.05795% CI: [0.57, 0.97]Cox proportional hazards
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Multiple New or Worsening Vertebral Fractures Through Month 12

A new or worsening vertebral fracture was identified when there was a ≥ 1 grade increase from the previous grade in any vertebra from T4 to L4. A participant had multiple new or worsening vertebral fractures when there were ≥ 2 vertebrae from T4 to L4 with ≥ 1 grade increase from the previous grade. The multiple new or worsening vertebral fractures need not have occurred at the same visit.

Time frame: 12 Months

Population: Primary efficacy analysis set includes all participants who had a baseline and ≥ 1 postbaseline evaluation of vertebral fracture during the 24 months, including participants with missing baseline Genant scores whose first postbaseline spinal radiograph showed no fracture on the same vertebrae. LOCF imputation was used.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With Multiple New or Worsening Vertebral Fractures Through Month 120.3 percentage of participants
RomosozumabPercentage of Participants With Multiple New or Worsening Vertebral Fractures Through Month 120.03 percentage of participants
p-value: 0.01195% CI: [0.01, 0.87]Regression, Logistic
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With Multiple New or Worsening Vertebral Fractures Through Month 24

A new or worsening vertebral fracture was identified when there was a ≥ 1 grade increase from the previous grade in any vertebra from T4 to L4. A participant had multiple new or worsening vertebral fractures when there were ≥ 2 vertebrae from T4 to L4 with ≥ 1 grade increase from the previous grade. The multiple new or worsening vertebral fractures need not have occurred at the same visit.

Time frame: 24 Months

Population: Primary efficacy analysis set includes all participants who had a baseline and ≥ 1 postbaseline evaluation of vertebral fracture during the 24 months, including participants with missing baseline Genant scores whose first postbaseline spinal radiograph showed no fracture on the same vertebrae. LOCF imputation was used.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
PlaceboPercentage of Participants With Multiple New or Worsening Vertebral Fractures Through Month 240.5 percentage of participants
RomosozumabPercentage of Participants With Multiple New or Worsening Vertebral Fractures Through Month 240.03 percentage of participants
p-value: <0.00195% CI: [0.01, 0.44]Regression, Logistic
Secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density at the Lumbar Spine at Month 12

Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). DXA scans were analyzed by a central imaging center.

Time frame: Baseline and Month 12

Population: Primary efficacy analysis set for BMD includes all randomized participants who had a baseline and ≥ 1 post-baseline evaluation at or before the time point under consideration in the study period; LOCF imputation was used.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density at the Lumbar Spine at Month 120.4 percent changeStandard Error 0.1
RomosozumabPercent Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density at the Lumbar Spine at Month 1213.1 percent changeStandard Error 0.1
Comparison: The treatment comparison of BMD at the lumbar spine was analyzed using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model which included treatment, age and prevalent vertebral fracture stratification variables, and baseline value of the endpoint, machine type and machine type-by-baseline value interaction.p-value: <0.00195% CI: [12.4, 12.9]ANCOVA
Secondary

Percent Change From Baseline In Bone Mineral Density at the Lumbar Spine at Month 24

Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). DXA scans were analyzed by a central imaging center.

Time frame: Baseline and Month 24

Population: Primary efficacy analysis set for BMD includes all randomized participants who had a baseline and ≥ 1 post-baseline evaluation at or before the time point under consideration in the study period; LOCF imputation was used.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline In Bone Mineral Density at the Lumbar Spine at Month 245.5 percent changeStandard Error 0.1
RomosozumabPercent Change From Baseline In Bone Mineral Density at the Lumbar Spine at Month 2416.6 percent changeStandard Error 0.1
Comparison: The treatment comparison of BMD at the lumbar spine was analyzed using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model which included treatment, age and prevalent vertebral fracture stratification variables, and baseline value of the endpoint, machine type and machine type-by-baseline value interaction.p-value: <0.00195% CI: [10.8, 11.4]ANCOVA
Secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density of the Femoral Neck at Month 12

Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). DXA scans were analyzed by a central imaging center.

Time frame: Baseline and Month 12

Population: Primary efficacy analysis set for BMD includes all randomized participants who had a baseline and ≥ 1 post-baseline evaluation at or before the time point under consideration in the study period; LOCF imputation was used.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density of the Femoral Neck at Month 120.3 percent changeStandard Error 0.1
RomosozumabPercent Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density of the Femoral Neck at Month 125.5 percent changeStandard Error 0.1
Comparison: The treatment comparison of BMD at the femoral neck was analyzed using an ANCOVA model which included included treatment, age and prevalent vertebral fracture stratification variables, and baseline value of the endpoint, machine type and machine type-by-baseline value interaction.p-value: <0.00195% CI: [4.9, 5.4]ANCOVA
Secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density of the Femoral Neck at Month 24

Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). DXA scans were analyzed by a central imaging center.

Time frame: Baseline and Month 24

Population: Primary efficacy analysis set for BMD includes all randomized participants who had a baseline and ≥ 1 post-baseline evaluation at or before the time point under consideration in the study period; LOCF imputation was used.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density of the Femoral Neck at Month 242.3 percent changeStandard Error 0.1
RomosozumabPercent Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density of the Femoral Neck at Month 247.3 percent changeStandard Error 0.1
Comparison: The treatment comparison of BMD at the femoral neck was analyzed using an ANCOVA model which included included treatment, age and prevalent vertebral fracture stratification variables, and baseline value of the endpoint, machine type and machine type-by-baseline value interaction.p-value: <0.00195% CI: [4.7, 5.2]ANCOVA
Secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density of the Total Hip at Month 12

Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). DXA scans were analyzed by a central imaging center.

Time frame: Baseline and Month 12

Population: Primary efficacy analysis set for BMD includes all randomized participants who had a baseline and ≥ 1 post-baseline evaluation at or before the time point under consideration in the study period; LOCF imputation was used.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density of the Total Hip at Month 120.3 percent changeStandard Error 0.1
RomosozumabPercent Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density of the Total Hip at Month 126.0 percent changeStandard Error 0.1
Comparison: The treatment comparison of BMD at the total hip was analyzed using an ANCOVA model which included treatment, age and prevalent vertebral fracture stratification variables, and baseline value of the endpoint, machine type and machine type-by-baseline value interaction.p-value: <0.00195% CI: [5.6, 6]ANCOVA
Secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density of the Total Hip at Month 24

Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). DXA scans were analyzed by a central imaging center.

Time frame: Baseline and Month 24

Population: Primary efficacy analysis set for BMD includes all randomized participants who had a baseline and ≥ 1 post-baseline evaluation at or before the time point under consideration in the study period; LOCF imputation was used.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboPercent Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density of the Total Hip at Month 243.2 percent changeStandard Error 0.1
RomosozumabPercent Change From Baseline in Bone Mineral Density of the Total Hip at Month 248.5 percent changeStandard Error 0.1
Comparison: The treatment comparison of BMD at the total hip was analyzed using an ANCOVA model which included treatment, age and prevalent vertebral fracture stratification variables, and baseline value of the endpoint, machine type and machine type-by-baseline value interaction.p-value: <0.00195% CI: [5.1, 5.5]ANCOVA

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 2, 2026