Romosozumab followed by denosumab versus denosumab only: a post hoc analysis of FRAME and FRAME extension.

IF 5.1 1区 医学 Q1 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM Journal of Bone and Mineral Research Pub Date : 2024-09-02 DOI:10.1093/jbmr/zjae116
Felicia Cosman, Mary Oates, Donald Betah, Jen Timoshanko, Zhenxun Wang, Serge Ferrari, Michael R McClung
{"title":"Romosozumab followed by denosumab versus denosumab only: a post hoc analysis of FRAME and FRAME extension.","authors":"Felicia Cosman, Mary Oates, Donald Betah, Jen Timoshanko, Zhenxun Wang, Serge Ferrari, Michael R McClung","doi":"10.1093/jbmr/zjae116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Osteoanabolic-first treatment sequences are superior to oral bisphosphonates for fracture reduction and bone mineral density (BMD) gain. However, data comparing osteoanabolic medications, with the more potent antiresorptive, denosumab (DMAb), are limited. We analyzed FRAME and FRAME Extension data to assess BMD and fracture incidence in patients treated with romosozumab (Romo) followed by DMAb (Romo/DMAb) versus DMAb (DMAb/DMAb) for 24 months. In FRAME, women aged ≥55 years (total hip [TH] or femoral neck [FN] T-score: -2.5 to -3.5) were randomized to Romo or placebo for 12 months followed by DMAb for 12 months. In FRAME Extension, both cohorts received DMAb for another 12 months. This post hoc analysis compared BMD change and fracture incidence in patients on Romo/DMAb (months 0-24) versus DMAb/DMAb (months 12-36). Patient characteristics were balanced by propensity score weighting (PSW) and sensitivity analyses were conducted using PSW with multiple imputation (PSW-MI) and propensity score matching (PSM). Unmeasured confounding was addressed using E-values. After PSW, over 24 months, compared with DMAb/DMAb, treatment with Romo/DMAb produced significantly greater BMD increases at the lumbar spine [LS], TH, and FN (mean differences: 9.3%, 4.4%, and 4.1%, respectively; all p<0.001). At month 24, in women with a baseline T-score of -3.0, the probability of achieving a T-score > -2.5 was higher with Romo/DMAb versus DMAb/DMAb (LS: 92% versus 47%; TH: 50% versus 5%). In the Romo/DMAb versus DMAb/DMAb cohorts, new vertebral fractures were significantly reduced (0.62% versus 1.26% [odds ratio = 0.45; p=0.003]) and rates of clinical, nonvertebral, and hip fractures were lower (differences not significant). Similar BMD and fracture outcomes were observed with PSW-MI and PSM sensitivity analyses. The sequence of Romo/DMAb resulted in greater BMD gains and higher probability of achieving T-scores > -2.5, significantly reduced new vertebral fracture incidence, and numerically lowered the incidence (not significant) of clinical, nonvertebral, and hip fractures versus DMAb only through 24 months.</p>","PeriodicalId":185,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bone and Mineral Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11371899/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Bone and Mineral Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jbmr/zjae116","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Osteoanabolic-first treatment sequences are superior to oral bisphosphonates for fracture reduction and bone mineral density (BMD) gain. However, data comparing osteoanabolic medications, with the more potent antiresorptive, denosumab (DMAb), are limited. We analyzed FRAME and FRAME Extension data to assess BMD and fracture incidence in patients treated with romosozumab (Romo) followed by DMAb (Romo/DMAb) versus DMAb (DMAb/DMAb) for 24 months. In FRAME, women aged ≥55 years (total hip [TH] or femoral neck [FN] T-score: -2.5 to -3.5) were randomized to Romo or placebo for 12 months followed by DMAb for 12 months. In FRAME Extension, both cohorts received DMAb for another 12 months. This post hoc analysis compared BMD change and fracture incidence in patients on Romo/DMAb (months 0-24) versus DMAb/DMAb (months 12-36). Patient characteristics were balanced by propensity score weighting (PSW) and sensitivity analyses were conducted using PSW with multiple imputation (PSW-MI) and propensity score matching (PSM). Unmeasured confounding was addressed using E-values. After PSW, over 24 months, compared with DMAb/DMAb, treatment with Romo/DMAb produced significantly greater BMD increases at the lumbar spine [LS], TH, and FN (mean differences: 9.3%, 4.4%, and 4.1%, respectively; all p<0.001). At month 24, in women with a baseline T-score of -3.0, the probability of achieving a T-score > -2.5 was higher with Romo/DMAb versus DMAb/DMAb (LS: 92% versus 47%; TH: 50% versus 5%). In the Romo/DMAb versus DMAb/DMAb cohorts, new vertebral fractures were significantly reduced (0.62% versus 1.26% [odds ratio = 0.45; p=0.003]) and rates of clinical, nonvertebral, and hip fractures were lower (differences not significant). Similar BMD and fracture outcomes were observed with PSW-MI and PSM sensitivity analyses. The sequence of Romo/DMAb resulted in greater BMD gains and higher probability of achieving T-scores > -2.5, significantly reduced new vertebral fracture incidence, and numerically lowered the incidence (not significant) of clinical, nonvertebral, and hip fractures versus DMAb only through 24 months.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Romosozumab 后加 Denosumab 与仅加 Denosumab:FRAME 和 FRAME 延长期的事后分析。
在减少骨折和增加 BMD 方面,骨代谢优先治疗序列优于口服双膦酸盐。然而,将骨同化药物与更强效的抗骨吸收剂地诺单抗(DMAb)进行比较的数据非常有限。我们分析了 FRAME 和 FRAME 扩展期的数据,以评估接受罗莫索单抗(Romo)治疗 24 个月后再接受 DMAb(Romo/DMAb)治疗与接受 DMAb(DMAb/DMAb)治疗的患者的 BMD 和骨折发生率。在 FRAME 中,年龄≥55 岁的女性(全髋 [TH] 或股骨颈 [FN] T 评分:-2.5 至 -3.5)被随机分配接受 Romo 或安慰剂治疗 12 个月,然后再接受 DMAb 治疗 12 个月。在 FRAME 扩展阶段,两组患者都接受了为期 12 个月的 DMAb 治疗。这项事后分析比较了使用 Romo/DMAb(0-24 个月)和 DMAb/DMAb(12-36 个月)的患者的 BMD 变化和骨折发生率。通过倾向得分加权法(PSW)平衡了患者特征,并使用多重归因法(PSW-MI)和倾向得分匹配法(PSM)进行了敏感性分析。未测量的混杂因素通过 E 值来解决。PSW 后,在 24 个月内,与 DMAb/DMAb 相比,Romo/DMAb 治疗在腰椎 [LS]、TH 和 FN 的 BMD 增加幅度明显更大(平均差异分别为 9.3%、4.4% 和 4.4%):Romo/DMAb与DMAb/DMAb相比(LS:92%对47%;TH:50%对5%),P均为-2.5。在Romo/DMAb与DMAb/DMAb队列中,新发椎体骨折显著减少(0.62%对1.26%[几率比=0.45;P=0.003]),临床骨折、非椎体骨折和髋部骨折发生率较低(差异不显著)。PSW-MI 和 PSM 敏感性分析观察到了相似的 BMD 和骨折结果。与仅使用 DMAb 相比,Romo/DMAb 序列可使 BMD 增加更多,达到 T 评分 > -2.5 的概率更高,显著降低了新发椎体骨折的发生率,并在 24 个月内从数量上降低了临床骨折、非椎体骨折和髋部骨折的发生率(差异不显著)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Bone and Mineral Research
Journal of Bone and Mineral Research 医学-内分泌学与代谢
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
6.50%
发文量
257
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Bone and Mineral Research (JBMR) publishes highly impactful original manuscripts, reviews, and special articles on basic, translational and clinical investigations relevant to the musculoskeletal system and mineral metabolism. Specifically, the journal is interested in original research on the biology and physiology of skeletal tissues, interdisciplinary research spanning the musculoskeletal and other systems, including but not limited to immunology, hematology, energy metabolism, cancer biology, and neurology, and systems biology topics using large scale “-omics” approaches. The journal welcomes clinical research on the pathophysiology, treatment and prevention of osteoporosis and fractures, as well as sarcopenia, disorders of bone and mineral metabolism, and rare or genetically determined bone diseases.
期刊最新文献
The Quantification of Bone Mineral Density Using Photon Counting Computed Tomography and its Implications for Detecting Bone Remodelling. 24-Hour Activity Composition is Associated with Lower Fall and Fracture Risk in Older Men. A quasi-experimental study about shared decision-making and motivational interviewing on patients with a recent fracture attending a fracture liaison services. Atypical fractures at non-classical sites associated with anti-resorptive therapy: A Systematic Review. Epidural Steroid Injections and Fracture Incidence Among Older Individuals with Radiculopathy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1