Cargando…

Denosumab versus romosozumab for postmenopausal osteoporosis treatment

Denosumab and romosozumab, a recently approved new drug, are effective and widely known molecular-targeted drugs for postmenopausal osteoporosis treatment. However, no studies have directly compared their therapeutic effects or safety in postmenopausal osteoporosis. This retrospective observational...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kobayakawa, Tomonori, Miyazaki, Akiko, Saito, Makoto, Suzuki, Takako, Takahashi, Jun, Nakamura, Yukio
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8175428/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34083636
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-91248-6
_version_ 1783703055692201984
author Kobayakawa, Tomonori
Miyazaki, Akiko
Saito, Makoto
Suzuki, Takako
Takahashi, Jun
Nakamura, Yukio
author_facet Kobayakawa, Tomonori
Miyazaki, Akiko
Saito, Makoto
Suzuki, Takako
Takahashi, Jun
Nakamura, Yukio
author_sort Kobayakawa, Tomonori
collection PubMed
description Denosumab and romosozumab, a recently approved new drug, are effective and widely known molecular-targeted drugs for postmenopausal osteoporosis treatment. However, no studies have directly compared their therapeutic effects or safety in postmenopausal osteoporosis. This retrospective observational registry study compared the efficacy of 12-month denosumab or romosozumab treatment in postmenopausal osteoporosis patients. The primary outcome was the change in bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine. Secondary outcomes included BMD changes at the total hip and femoral neck, changes in bone turnover markers, and adverse events. Propensity score matching was employed to assemble patient groups with similar baseline characteristics. Sixty-nine patients each received either denosumab or romosozumab for 12 months. The mean 12-month percentage change from baseline in lumbar spine BMD was 7.2% in the denosumab group and 12.5% in the romosozumab group, indicating a significant difference between the groups. The percentage changes in BMD at both the total hip and femoral neck were also significantly higher at 12 months in the romosozumab group than in the denosumab group. In denosumab patients, bone formation and bone resorption markers were significantly decreased at 6 and 12 months from baseline. In the romosozumab group, the bone formation marker was significantly increased at 6 months and then returned to baseline, while the bone resorption marker was significantly decreased at both time points. Adverse events were few and predominantly minor in both groups, with no remarkable difference in the incidence of new vertebral fractures. Romosozumab showed a higher potential for improving BMD than denosumab in this clinical study of postmenopausal osteoporosis patient treatment.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8175428
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81754282021-06-04 Denosumab versus romosozumab for postmenopausal osteoporosis treatment Kobayakawa, Tomonori Miyazaki, Akiko Saito, Makoto Suzuki, Takako Takahashi, Jun Nakamura, Yukio Sci Rep Article Denosumab and romosozumab, a recently approved new drug, are effective and widely known molecular-targeted drugs for postmenopausal osteoporosis treatment. However, no studies have directly compared their therapeutic effects or safety in postmenopausal osteoporosis. This retrospective observational registry study compared the efficacy of 12-month denosumab or romosozumab treatment in postmenopausal osteoporosis patients. The primary outcome was the change in bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine. Secondary outcomes included BMD changes at the total hip and femoral neck, changes in bone turnover markers, and adverse events. Propensity score matching was employed to assemble patient groups with similar baseline characteristics. Sixty-nine patients each received either denosumab or romosozumab for 12 months. The mean 12-month percentage change from baseline in lumbar spine BMD was 7.2% in the denosumab group and 12.5% in the romosozumab group, indicating a significant difference between the groups. The percentage changes in BMD at both the total hip and femoral neck were also significantly higher at 12 months in the romosozumab group than in the denosumab group. In denosumab patients, bone formation and bone resorption markers were significantly decreased at 6 and 12 months from baseline. In the romosozumab group, the bone formation marker was significantly increased at 6 months and then returned to baseline, while the bone resorption marker was significantly decreased at both time points. Adverse events were few and predominantly minor in both groups, with no remarkable difference in the incidence of new vertebral fractures. Romosozumab showed a higher potential for improving BMD than denosumab in this clinical study of postmenopausal osteoporosis patient treatment. Nature Publishing Group UK 2021-06-03 /pmc/articles/PMC8175428/ /pubmed/34083636 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-91248-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Kobayakawa, Tomonori
Miyazaki, Akiko
Saito, Makoto
Suzuki, Takako
Takahashi, Jun
Nakamura, Yukio
Denosumab versus romosozumab for postmenopausal osteoporosis treatment
title Denosumab versus romosozumab for postmenopausal osteoporosis treatment
title_full Denosumab versus romosozumab for postmenopausal osteoporosis treatment
title_fullStr Denosumab versus romosozumab for postmenopausal osteoporosis treatment
title_full_unstemmed Denosumab versus romosozumab for postmenopausal osteoporosis treatment
title_short Denosumab versus romosozumab for postmenopausal osteoporosis treatment
title_sort denosumab versus romosozumab for postmenopausal osteoporosis treatment
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8175428/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34083636
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-91248-6
work_keys_str_mv AT kobayakawatomonori denosumabversusromosozumabforpostmenopausalosteoporosistreatment
AT miyazakiakiko denosumabversusromosozumabforpostmenopausalosteoporosistreatment
AT saitomakoto denosumabversusromosozumabforpostmenopausalosteoporosistreatment
AT suzukitakako denosumabversusromosozumabforpostmenopausalosteoporosistreatment
AT takahashijun denosumabversusromosozumabforpostmenopausalosteoporosistreatment
AT nakamurayukio denosumabversusromosozumabforpostmenopausalosteoporosistreatment