Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39041711›Full record

Trial reportJournal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research2024

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

Felicia Cosman, Mary Oates, Donald Betah, Jen Timoshanko, Zhenxun Wang, Serge Ferrari, Michael R McClung

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01575834 (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), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01575834 phase3completednot on this map

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

TypeinterventionalSponsorAmgenRan2012 to 2016Enrolled7,180ConditionsPostmenopausal OsteoporosisArmsRomosozumab, Placebo, Denosumab
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. A systematic review and meta-analysis of sequential treatment strategies for osteoporosis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Denosumab-efficacy, safety, persistence and sequential strategies-a systematic review.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026
    Review
  3. Efficacy of romosozumab followed by denosumab in glucocorticoid users; a randomized clinical trial.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Sequential and Long-term Therapy for Osteoporosis.Current osteoporosis reports · 2025
    Review
  11. Goal-directed osteoporosis treatment: ASBMR/BHOF task force position statement 2024.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Felicia CosmanDepartment of Medicine, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY 10032, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-4554-6616
Mary OatesAmgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA 91230, United States.
Donald BetahAmgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA 91230, United States.
Jen TimoshankoUCB Pharma, Slough SL1 3WE, United Kingdom.
Zhenxun WangAmgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA 91230, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1636-7240
Serge FerrariDivision of Bone Diseases, Geneva University Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, CH-1211 Geneva, Switzerland.
Michael R McClungOregon Osteoporosis Center, Portland, OR 97225, United States.

Funding

Amgen Inc.UCB Pharma
6 · The paper itself

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.

Indexed as

Bone DensityDenosumabAgedAntibodies, MonoclonalBone Density Conservation AgentsFemaleFractures, BoneHumansMiddle AgedAntibodies, MonoclonalBone Density Conservation AgentsDenosumabromosozumabanabolicsantiresorptivesclinical trialsmenopauseosteoporosis

Identifiers

PMID39041711
PMCPMC11371899

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.