Study of Romosozumab (AMG 785) in Tibial Diaphyseal Fract... | NCT00907296 | Trialant
NCT00907296
Sponsor
Amgen
Status
Completed
Last Update Posted
Sep 22, 2022Actual
Enrollment
402Actual
Phase
Phase 2
Conditions
Fracture Healing
Interventions
Romosozumab
Placebo
Countries
United States
Australia
Bulgaria
Canada
Denmark
Estonia
France
Germany
Greece
Hong Kong
Hungary
India
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Mexico
New Zealand
Norway
Poland
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
United Kingdom
Protocol Section
Identification Module
NCT ID
NCT00907296
Obsolete or Duplicate NCT IDs
Not provided
Organization Study
20062017
Secondary IDs
ID
Type
Description
Link
2008-008392-34
EudraCT Number
Brief Title
Study of Romosozumab (AMG 785) in Tibial Diaphyseal Fractures Status Post Intramedullary Nailing
Official Title
A Multi-center, Randomized, Double Blind, Placebo-controlled Study of AMG 785 in Skeletally Mature Adults With a Fresh Unilateral Tibial Diaphyseal Fracture Status Post Definitive Fracture Fixation With an Intramedullary Nail
Acronym
STARTT
Organization
AmgenINDUSTRY
Status Module
Record Verification Date
Sep 2022
Overall Recruitment Status or Expanded Access Status
Completed
Last Known Status
Not provided
Delayed Posting
Not provided
Why Stopped
Not provided
Expanded Access Info
No
Start Date
Sep 2, 2009Actual
Primary Completion Date
Mar 6, 2012Actual
Completion Date
May 10, 2013Actual
First Submitted Date
May 21, 2009
First Submission Date that Met QC Criteria
May 21, 2009
First Posted Date
May 22, 2009Estimated
Results Waived
Not provided
Results First Submitted Date
Apr 10, 2019
Results First Submitted that Met QC Criteria
Apr 10, 2019
Results First Posted Date
May 1, 2019Actual
Certification/Extension (aka Delayed Results) First Submitted Date
May 22, 2013
Certification/Extension First Submitted that Passed QC Review
May 22, 2013
Certification/Extension First Posted Date
May 23, 2013Estimated
Last Update Submitted Date
Sep 9, 2022
Last Update Posted Date
Sep 22, 2022Actual
Sponsor/Collaborators Module
Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor
Lead Sponsor
AmgenINDUSTRY
Collaborators
Name
Class
UCB Pharma
INDUSTRY
Oversight Module
Has Data Monitoring Committee (DMC)
No
Is FDA Regulated Drug
Not provided
Is FDA Regulated Device
Not provided
Is Unapproved Device
Not provided
Pediatric Postmarket Surveillance of a Device Product
Not provided
Product Exported from US
Not provided
FDAAA801 Violation
Not provided
Description Module
Brief Summary
The primary objective of this study is to investigate the effect of romosozumab compared with placebo on time to radiographic healing of fresh tibial diaphyseal fractures (fractures in the midsection of the shinbone).
Detailed Description
Not provided
Conditions Module
Conditions
Fracture Healing
Keywords
Fracture Healing
Tibial Diaphyseal Fracture
Design Module
Study Type
Interventional
Number of References to an Expanded Access Study
Not provided
Expanded Access Types
Not provided
Patient Registry
Not provided
Target Follow-Up Duration
Not provided
Phases
Phase 2
Interventional Study Design
Allocation
Biospecimen
No data available
No data is available for this block.
Enrollment
402Actual
Arms/Interventions Module
Arm Groups
Label
Type
Description
Intervention Names
Placebo
Placebo Comparator
Participants received subcutaneous injections of matching placebo on day 1 and at weeks 2, 6, and 12.
Drug: Placebo
Romosozumab 70 mg: 2 Doses
Experimental
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
Biological: Romosozumab
Romosozumab 70 mg: 3 Doses
Experimental
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
Biological: Romosozumab
Romosozumab 70 mg: 4 Doses
Experimental
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
Biological: Romosozumab
Romosozumab 140 mg: 2 Doses
Experimental
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
Biological: Romosozumab
Interventions
Name
Type
Description
Arm Group Labels
Other Names
Romosozumab
Biological
Administered by subcutaneous injection
Romosozumab 140 mg: 2 Doses
Romosozumab 140 mg: 3 Doses
Romosozumab 140 mg: 4 Doses
Outcomes Module
Primary Outcomes
Measure
Description
Time Frame
Time to Radiographic Healing
Time to radiographic healing was defined as the time from intramedullary (IM) nailing to the first occurrence of bridging of 3 out of 4 cortices. Radiographic fracture healing was determined by a panel of independent reviewers (orthopedic/trauma surgeons and radiologists) blinded to treatment.
The cumulative incidence function (CIF) method was used to estimate the median time to radiographic healing and the confidence intervals. Unplanned revision surgery to promote healing was considered a competing risk in CIF estimate.
52 weeks
Secondary Outcomes
Measure
Description
Time Frame
Change From Week 8 in Short Form (36) Health Survey Physical Functioning Domain
The Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-Item Health Survey (SF-36), Version 2, is a self-administered instrument that measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). The physical functioning domain includes 10 questions that assess limitations in physical activities because of health problems.
Norm-based scores were used in analyses, calibrated so that 50 is the average score and the standard deviation equals 10. The range of SF-36 physical functioning is 14.94 - 57.03. Higher scores indicate a higher level of functioning. A positive change from baseline score indicates an improvement in physical functioning.
Other Outcomes
Not provided
Eligibility Module
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
Skeletally mature adults, age 18 to 85 years with radiographically closed growth plates
Fresh unilateral closed or Gustilo type I or type II open tibial fracture
Definitive fracture fixation with reamed (closed and open fractures) or unreamed (open fractures only) intramedullary nailing
Exclusion Criteria:
Major polytrauma or significant axial trauma
Associated lower extremity fracture that will delay subject's ability to bear weight beyond the normal time expected for a tibial shaft fracture
Use of bone grafts at the time of fracture fixation
Pathological fracture or metabolic or bone disease
History of symptomatic spinal stenosis or facial nerve paralysis
Malignancy within the last 5 years
Evidence of the following (currently or within the past 5 years): elevated transaminases, significantly impaired renal function, current hyper- or hypocalcaemia
Use of agents affecting bone metabolism
Subject refuses to use appropriate methods of contraception
Bhandari M, Schemitsch EH, Karachalios T, Sancheti P, Poolman RW, Caminis J, Daizadeh N, Dent-Acosta RE, Egbuna O, Chines A, Miclau T. Romosozumab in Skeletally Mature Adults with a Fresh Unilateral Tibial Diaphyseal Fracture: A Randomized Phase-2 Study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2020 Aug 19;102(16):1416-1426. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.19.01008.
Participants were randomized 1:1:1:1:1:1:1:1:1:3 to 1 of 9 romosozumab treatment groups or placebo. Randomization followed surgery and was stratified by type of fracture and definitive fracture fixation.
Recruitment Details
This study was conducted at 66 centers in Europe, India, North America, Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, and Mexico. Participants were enrolled from 02 September 2009 to 19 September 2011.
Type of Units Analyzed
Not provided
Arm/Group Information
ID
Title
Description
FG000
Placebo
Participants received subcutaneous injections of matching placebo on day 1 and at weeks 2, 6, and 12.
FG001
Romosozumab 70 mg: 2 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
Biological: Romosozumab
Romosozumab 140 mg: 4 Doses
Experimental
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
Biological: Romosozumab
Romosozumab 210 mg: 2 Doses
Experimental
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
Biological: Romosozumab
Romosozumab 210 mg: 3 Doses
Experimental
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
Biological: Romosozumab
Romosozumab 210 mg: 4 Doses
Experimental
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
Biological: Romosozumab
Romosozumab 210 mg: 2 Doses
Romosozumab 210 mg: 3 Doses
Romosozumab 210 mg: 4 Doses
Romosozumab 70 mg: 2 Doses
Romosozumab 70 mg: 3 Doses
Romosozumab 70 mg: 4 Doses
AMG 785
Evenity
Placebo
Drug
Administered by subcutaneous injection
Placebo
Week 8 and weeks 12, 16, 20, 24, 36, and 52
Number of Participants With Unplanned Revision Surgeries
52 weeks
Time to Clinical Healing
Time to clinical healing was defined as the time from the IM nailing surgery date to the first date that both the score for ability to bear weight on the fractured limb and the score for absence of pain at the fracture site were equal to 6.
The score for the ability to bear weight on the fractured limb was based on the ability to stand on affected leg without assistive device and the ability to walk without assistive device. The score ranges from 0 (unable to bear full body weight on the fractured limb) to 6 (able to bear full body weight on the fractured limb). Absence of pain at the fracture site was based on the absence of pain at the fracture site when applying direct pressure to the fracture site and applying a stress to the fracture site. The score ranges from 0 (pain without palpation at fracture site) to 6 (total absence of pain at fracture site).
Time to clinical healing was estimated using CIF; unplanned revision surgery was considered a competing risk in CIF estimate.
52 weeks
Orange
California
92868
United States
Research Site
Aurora
Colorado
80012
United States
Research Site
Denver
Colorado
80204
United States
Research Site
Jacksonville
Florida
32209
United States
Research Site
Indianapolis
Indiana
46202
United States
Research Site
Detroit
Michigan
48202
United States
Research Site
St Louis
Missouri
63110
United States
Research Site
Brooklyn
New York
11220
United States
Research Site
Rochester
New York
14642
United States
Research Site
Altoona
Pennsylvania
16602
United States
Research Site
Philadelphia
Pennsylvania
19104
United States
Research Site
Columbia
South Carolina
29203
United States
Research Site
Sandy City
Utah
84070
United States
Research Site
Geelong
Victoria
3220
Australia
Research Site
Parkville
Victoria
3050
Australia
Research Site
Blagoevgrad
2700
Bulgaria
Research Site
Pleven
5800
Bulgaria
Research Site
Plovdiv
4002
Bulgaria
Research Site
Rousse
7000
Bulgaria
Research Site
Sofia
1527
Bulgaria
Research Site
Red Deer
Alberta
T4N 6V7
Canada
Research Site
Ajax
Ontario
L1S 2J5
Canada
Research Site
Thunder Bay
Ontario
P7B 7C7
Canada
Research Site
Toronto
Ontario
M5C 1R6
Canada
Research Site
Waterloo
Ontario
N2J 1C4
Canada
Research Site
Windsor
Ontario
N9A 1E1
Canada
Research Site
Montreal
Quebec
H3G 1A4
Canada
Research Site
Montreal
Quebec
H4J 1C5
Canada
Research Site
Ã…rhus C
8000
Denmark
Research Site
Hvidovre
2650
Denmark
Research Site
København NV
2400
Denmark
Research Site
Tallinn
11312
Estonia
Research Site
Tartu
50410
Estonia
Research Site
Lille
59000
France
Research Site
Marseille
13009
France
Research Site
Nantes
44035
France
Research Site
Paris
75571
France
Research Site
Aachen
52074
Germany
Research Site
Hamburg
20246
Germany
Research Site
Hanover
30625
Germany
Research Site
Mannheim
68165
Germany
Research Site
Münster
48149
Germany
Research Site
Athens
12462
Greece
Research Site
Athens
14561
Greece
Research Site
Larissa
41110
Greece
Research Site
Pátrai
26500
Greece
Research Site
Thessaloniki
56429
Greece
Research Site
Hong Kong
Hong Kong
Research Site
New Territories
Hong Kong
Research Site
Budapest
1081
Hungary
Research Site
Miskolc
3526
Hungary
Research Site
Nyíregyháza
4400
Hungary
Research Site
Szeged
6725
Hungary
Research Site
Bangalore
Karnataka
560 034
India
Research Site
Bangalore
Karnataka
560 054
India
Research Site
Mangalore
Karnataka
575 002
India
Research Site
Pune
Maharashtra
411 005
India
Research Site
Jaipur
Rajasthan
302 022
India
Research Site
Madurai
Tamil Nadu
625 020
India
Research Site
Gandhinagar
382 428
India
Research Site
Mangalore
575 001
India
Research Site
Nashik
422 009
India
Research Site
Florence
50139
Italy
Research Site
Milan
20122
Italy
Research Site
Milan
20142
Italy
Research Site
Pisa
56126
Italy
Research Site
Roma (RM)
00133
Italy
Research Site
Verona
37126
Italy
Research Site
Liepāja
3400
Latvia
Research Site
Riga
1004
Latvia
Research Site
Riga
1005
Latvia
Research Site
Valmiera
4201
Latvia
Research Site
Kaunas
44320
Lithuania
Research Site
Vilnius
04130
Lithuania
Research Site
Monterrey
Nuevo León
64040
Mexico
Research Site
Christchurch
8022
New Zealand
Research Site
Tauranga
3143
New Zealand
Research Site
Kongsvinger
2226
Norway
Research Site
Bialystok
15-276
Poland
Research Site
Bytom
41-902
Poland
Research Site
Kraków
31-826
Poland
Research Site
Krakow
30-901
Poland
Research Site
Lublin
20-718
Poland
Research Site
Bucharest
014461
Romania
Research Site
Bucharest
050098
Romania
Research Site
Timișoara
300736
Romania
Research Site
Moscow
115280
Russia
Research Site
Moscow
117292
Russia
Research Site
Moscow
119049
Russia
Research Site
Moscow
127299
Russia
Research Site
Moscow
129327
Russia
Research Site
Saint Petersburg
196247
Russia
Research Site
Yaroslavl
150003
Russia
Research Site
Bratislava
833 05
Slovakia
Research Site
Nitra
950 01
Slovakia
Research Site
Piešťany
921 01
Slovakia
Research Site
Leeds
LS1 3EX
United Kingdom
Research Site
London
E1 1BB
United Kingdom
Research Site
Newcastle
NE1 4LP
United Kingdom
Research Site
Norwich
NR4 7UY
United Kingdom
Research Site
Oxford
OX3 9DU
United Kingdom
Research Site
Stanmore
HA7 4LP
United Kingdom
FG002
Romosozumab 70 mg: 3 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
FG003
Romosozumab 70 mg: 4 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
FG004
Romosozumab 140 mg: 2 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
FG005
Romosozumab 140 mg: 3 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
FG006
Romosozumab 140 mg: 4 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
FG007
Romosozumab 210 mg: 2 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
FG008
Romosozumab 210 mg: 3 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
FG009
Romosozumab 210 mg: 4 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
FG000103 subjects
FG00134 subjects
FG00234 subjects
FG00333 subjects
FG00433 subjects
FG00533 subjects
FG00633 subjects
FG00733 subjects
FG00831 subjects
FG00935 subjects
Received Treatment
FG000100 subjects
FG00134 subjects
FG00234 subjects
FG00332 subjects
FG00433 subjects
FG00532 subjects
FG00631 subjects
FG00732 subjects
FG00830 subjects
FG00935 subjects
COMPLETED
FG00083 subjects
FG00129 subjects
FG00232 subjects
FG00329 subjects
FG00432 subjects
FG00524 subjects
FG00627 subjects
FG00726 subjects
FG00827 subjects
FG00928 subjects
NOT COMPLETED
FG00020 subjects
FG0015 subjects
FG0022 subjects
FG0034 subjects
FG0041 subjects
FG0059 subjects
FG0066 subjects
FG0077 subjects
FG0084 subjects
FG0097 subjects
Type
Comment
Reasons
Ineligibility Determined
FG0001 subjects
FG0010 subjects
FG0020 subjects
FG0031 subjects
FG0040 subjects
FG0050 subjects
FG0060 subjects
FG0071 subjects
FG0080 subjects
FG0090 subjects
Protocol Deviation
FG0000 subjects
FG0011 subjects
FG0020 subjects
FG0030 subjects
FG004
Noncompliance
FG0001 subjects
FG0011 subjects
FG0021 subjects
FG0030 subjects
FG004
Adverse Event
FG0002 subjects
FG0010 subjects
FG0020 subjects
FG0030 subjects
FG004
Withdrawal by Subject
FG0007 subjects
FG0012 subjects
FG0021 subjects
FG0031 subjects
FG004
Lost to Follow-up
FG0009 subjects
FG0011 subjects
FG0020 subjects
FG0032 subjects
FG004
Type of Units Analyzed
Not provided
Arm/Group Information
ID
Title
Description
BG000
Placebo
Participants received subcutaneous injections of matching placebo on day 1 and at weeks 2, 6, and 12.
BG001
Romosozumab 70 mg: 2 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
BG002
Romosozumab 70 mg: 3 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
BG003
Romosozumab 70 mg: 4 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
BG004
Romosozumab 140 mg: 2 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
BG005
Romosozumab 140 mg: 3 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
BG006
Romosozumab 140 mg: 4 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
BG007
Romosozumab 210 mg: 2 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
BG008
Romosozumab 210 mg: 3 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
BG009
Romosozumab 210 mg: 4 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
BG010
Total
Total of all reporting groups
Denominators
Units
Counts
Participants
BG000103
BG00134
BG00234
BG00333
BG00433
BG00533
BG00633
BG00733
BG00831
BG00935
BG010402
Baseline Measures
Title
Description
Population Description
Parameter Type
Dispersion Type
Unit of Measure
Calculate Percentage
Denominator Units Selected
Denominators
Classes
Age, Continuous
Mean
Standard Deviation
years
Title
Denominators
Categories
Title
Measurements
BG00040.3± 13.8
BG00138.6± 13.8
BG00243.2± 17.7
BG003
Sex: Female, Male
Count of Participants
Participants
Title
Denominators
Categories
Title
Measurements
Female
BG00029
BG0017
BG002
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Count of Participants
Participants
Title
Denominators
Categories
Title
Measurements
White
BG00080
BG00120
BG002
Randomization Stratification
Randomization was stratified according to
Gustilo-Anderson System for classifying open tibial fractures:
Gustilo type I open fracture: Open tibial fracture with a puncture wound smaller than 1 cm.
Gustilo type II open fracture: Open tibial fracture with a wound of 1-10 cm.
Definitive fracture fixation: with reamed or unreamed intramedullary (IM) nailing.
Count of Participants
Participants
Title
Denominators
Categories
Title
Measurements
Closed with reamed IM nail
BG00088
BG001
Type
Title
Description
Population Description
Reporting Status
Anticipated Posting Date
Parameter Type
Dispersion Type
Unit of Measure
Calculate Percentage
Time Frame
Units Analyzed
Denominator Units Selected
Arm/Group Information
Denominators
Classes
Analyses
Primary
Time to Radiographic Healing
Time to radiographic healing was defined as the time from intramedullary (IM) nailing to the first occurrence of bridging of 3 out of 4 cortices. Radiographic fracture healing was determined by a panel of independent reviewers (orthopedic/trauma surgeons and radiologists) blinded to treatment.
The cumulative incidence function (CIF) method was used to estimate the median time to radiographic healing and the confidence intervals. Unplanned revision surgery to promote healing was considered a competing risk in CIF estimate.
Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug.
Posted
Median
95% Confidence Interval
weeks
52 weeks
ID
Title
Description
OG000
Placebo
Participants received subcutaneous injections of matching placebo on day 1 and at weeks 2, 6, and 12.
OG001
Romosozumab 70 mg: 2 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
OG002
Romosozumab 70 mg: 3 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
OG003
Romosozumab 70 mg: 4 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
OG004
Romosozumab 140 mg: 2 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
OG005
Romosozumab 140 mg: 3 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
OG006
Romosozumab 140 mg: 4 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
OG007
Romosozumab 210 mg: 2 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
OG008
Romosozumab 210 mg: 3 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
OG009
Romosozumab 210 mg: 4 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
Units
Counts
Participants
OG000100
OG00134
OG00234
OG003
Title
Denominators
Categories
Title
Measurements
OG00016.4(14.6 to 18.0)
OG00118.6(14.0 to 24.4)
OG00218.3(13.0 to 21.0)
OG003
Group IDs
Group Description
Statistical Method
Statistical Comment
P-Value
P-Value Comment
Parameter Type
Parameter Value
Dispersion Type
Dispersion Value
Confidence Interval Sides
Confidence Interval %
CI Lower Limit
CI Upper Limit
CI Lower Limit Comment
CI Upper Limit Comment
Estimate Comment
Tested Non-Inferiority
Non-Inferiority Type
Non-Inferiority Comment
Other Analysis Description
OG000
OG001
The cause-specific hazard was modeled using a Cox proportional hazards model with 10 treatment groups as the independent variable, stratified by type of fracture and definitive fracture fixation (closed with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with unreamed IM nail) and adjusting for quality of surgical fixation.
Cox proportional hazard model
0.3598
Hazard Ratio (HR)
0.82
2-Sided
95
0.53
1.26
A hazard ratio > 1 favors romosozumab.
Superiority
Secondary
Change From Week 8 in Short Form (36) Health Survey Physical Functioning Domain
The Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36-Item Health Survey (SF-36), Version 2, is a self-administered instrument that measures the impact of disease on overall quality of life and consists of 36 questions in eight domains (physical function, pain, general and mental health, vitality, social function, physical and emotional health). The physical functioning domain includes 10 questions that assess limitations in physical activities because of health problems.
Norm-based scores were used in analyses, calibrated so that 50 is the average score and the standard deviation equals 10. The range of SF-36 physical functioning is 14.94 - 57.03. Higher scores indicate a higher level of functioning. A positive change from baseline score indicates an improvement in physical functioning.
Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug and with available data at each time point.
Posted
Mean
Standard Deviation
units on a scale
Week 8 and weeks 12, 16, 20, 24, 36, and 52
ID
Title
Description
OG000
Placebo
Participants received subcutaneous injections of matching placebo on day 1 and at weeks 2, 6, and 12.
OG001
Romosozumab 70 mg: 2 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
Secondary
Number of Participants With Unplanned Revision Surgeries
Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug
Posted
Count of Participants
Participants
52 weeks
ID
Title
Description
OG000
Placebo
Participants received subcutaneous injections of matching placebo on day 1 and at weeks 2, 6, and 12.
OG001
Romosozumab 70 mg: 2 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
OG002
Romosozumab 70 mg: 3 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
OG003
Romosozumab 70 mg: 4 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
OG004
Romosozumab 140 mg: 2 Doses
Secondary
Time to Clinical Healing
Time to clinical healing was defined as the time from the IM nailing surgery date to the first date that both the score for ability to bear weight on the fractured limb and the score for absence of pain at the fracture site were equal to 6.
The score for the ability to bear weight on the fractured limb was based on the ability to stand on affected leg without assistive device and the ability to walk without assistive device. The score ranges from 0 (unable to bear full body weight on the fractured limb) to 6 (able to bear full body weight on the fractured limb). Absence of pain at the fracture site was based on the absence of pain at the fracture site when applying direct pressure to the fracture site and applying a stress to the fracture site. The score ranges from 0 (pain without palpation at fracture site) to 6 (total absence of pain at fracture site).
Time to clinical healing was estimated using CIF; unplanned revision surgery was considered a competing risk in CIF estimate.
Participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug
Posted
Median
95% Confidence Interval
weeks
52 weeks
ID
Title
Description
OG000
Placebo
Participants received subcutaneous injections of matching placebo on day 1 and at weeks 2, 6, and 12.
OG001
Romosozumab 70 mg: 2 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
Time Frame
52 weeks
Description
Other Adverse Events summarizes the non-serious occurrences of adverse events that exceed the indicated frequency threshold.
All-Cause Mortality Comment
Not provided
Arm/Groups
ID
Title
Description
Deaths (Affected)
Deaths (At Risk)
Serious Events (Affected)
Serious Events (At Risk)
Other Events (Affected)
Other Events (At Risk)
EG000
Placebo
Participants received subcutaneous injections of matching placebo on day 1 and at weeks 2, 6, and 12.
10
100
38
100
EG001
Romosozumab 70 mg: 2 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
4
34
9
34
EG002
Romosozumab 70 mg: 3 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
2
34
17
34
EG003
Romosozumab 70 mg: 4 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
3
32
12
32
EG004
Romosozumab 140 mg: 2 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12
3
33
16
33
EG005
Romosozumab 140 mg: 3 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12
4
32
7
32
EG006
Romosozumab 140 mg: 4 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
2
31
9
31
EG007
Romosozumab 210 mg: 2 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
3
32
10
32
EG008
Romosozumab 210 mg: 3 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
3
30
9
30
EG009
Romosozumab 210 mg: 4 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
0
35
6
35
Serious Adverse Events
Term
Organ System
Source Vocabulary
Assessment Type
Notes
Statistical Information
Abdominal pain upper
Gastrointestinal disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0011 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG0030 affected32 at risk
EG0040 affected33 at risk
EG0050 affected32 at risk
EG0060 affected31 at risk
EG0070 affected32 at risk
EG0080 affected30 at risk
EG0090 affected35 at risk
Chest pain
General disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0011 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Chills
General disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0011 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Device breakage
General disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Inflammation
General disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Malaise
General disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0011 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Oedema peripheral
General disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0011 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Cellulitis
Infections and infestations
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0001 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Device related infection
Infections and infestations
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0001 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Infection
Infections and infestations
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0021 affected34 at risk
EG003
Localised infection
Infections and infestations
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0001 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Malaria
Infections and infestations
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Pneumonia
Infections and infestations
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0001 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0021 affected34 at risk
EG003
Post procedural infection
Infections and infestations
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0021 affected34 at risk
EG003
Wound infection
Infections and infestations
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Bone fissure
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0001 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Femur fracture
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0001 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Fracture displacement
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Loss of anatomical alignment after fracture reduction
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0011 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Lower limb fracture
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0001 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Ulna fracture
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Wound
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0002 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Blood creatine phosphokinase increased
Investigations
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0011 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Oxygen saturation decreased
Investigations
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0001 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Arthralgia
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Exostosis
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Pain in extremity
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0011 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Rotator cuff syndrome
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Cholesteatoma
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0011 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Cerebral ischaemia
Nervous system disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0001 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Paraplegia
Nervous system disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Transient ischaemic attack
Nervous system disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Delirium
Psychiatric disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0011 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Calculus ureteric
Renal and urinary disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Pulmonary embolism
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Erythema
Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0011 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Medical device removal
Surgical and medical procedures
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Deep vein thrombosis
Vascular disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Haematoma
Vascular disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0001 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Vascular insufficiency
Vascular disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0001 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Other Adverse Events
Term
Organ System
Source Vocabulary
Assessment Type
Notes
Statistical Information
Diarrhoea
Gastrointestinal disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0002 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0022 affected34 at risk
EG0030 affected32 at risk
EG0042 affected33 at risk
EG0050 affected32 at risk
EG0060 affected31 at risk
EG0071 affected32 at risk
EG0083 affected30 at risk
EG0090 affected35 at risk
Vomiting
Gastrointestinal disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0004 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0021 affected34 at risk
EG003
Asthenia
General disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Medical device discomfort
General disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0003 affected100 at risk
EG0012 affected34 at risk
EG0021 affected34 at risk
EG003
Oedema peripheral
General disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0006 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0024 affected34 at risk
EG003
Pain
General disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0007 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0022 affected34 at risk
EG003
Pyrexia
General disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0005 affected100 at risk
EG0012 affected34 at risk
EG0021 affected34 at risk
EG003
Influenza
Infections and infestations
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0001 affected100 at risk
EG0012 affected34 at risk
EG0021 affected34 at risk
EG003
Nasopharyngitis
Infections and infestations
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0004 affected100 at risk
EG0012 affected34 at risk
EG0022 affected34 at risk
EG003
Rhinitis
Infections and infestations
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0001 affected100 at risk
EG0012 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Upper respiratory tract infection
Infections and infestations
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0003 affected100 at risk
EG0011 affected34 at risk
EG0024 affected34 at risk
EG003
Fall
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0003 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Limb injury
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Procedural pain
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0002 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Alanine aminotransferase increased
Investigations
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Diabetes mellitus
Metabolism and nutrition disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0001 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Arthralgia
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0006 affected100 at risk
EG0011 affected34 at risk
EG0021 affected34 at risk
EG003
Bone pain
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0003 affected100 at risk
EG0011 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Pain in extremity
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0006 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Headache
Nervous system disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0003 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0022 affected34 at risk
EG003
Paraesthesia
Nervous system disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0003 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Depressed mood
Psychiatric disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Insomnia
Psychiatric disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0005 affected100 at risk
EG0011 affected34 at risk
EG0022 affected34 at risk
EG003
Cough
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0002 affected100 at risk
EG0011 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Oropharyngeal pain
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0001 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0020 affected34 at risk
EG003
Blister
Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders
MedDRA 16.0
Systematic Assessment
EG0000 affected100 at risk
EG0010 affected34 at risk
EG0022 affected34 at risk
EG003
Certain Agreements
Are all PI(s) employees of the sponsor?
No
Restriction Type
OTHER
Results Disclosure Restriction on PI(s)?
Yes
Other Details
The Clinical Trial Agreement generally does not restrict an investigator's discussion of trial results after completion. The Agreement permits Amgen a limited period of time to review material discussing trial results (typically up to 45 days and possible extension). Amgen may remove confidential information, but authors have final control and approval of publication content. For multicenter studies, the investigator agrees not to publish any results before the first multi-center publication.
Point of Contact
Title
Organization
Phone
Extension
Email
Study Director
Amgen Inc.
866-572-6436
medinfo@amgen.com
ID
Term
C557282
romosozumab
Ancestor Terms
Not provided
Browse Leaves
Not provided
Browse Branches
Not provided
0 subjects
FG0050 subjects
FG0060 subjects
FG0070 subjects
FG0080 subjects
FG0090 subjects
0 subjects
FG0051 subjects
FG0060 subjects
FG0072 subjects
FG0080 subjects
FG0090 subjects
0 subjects
FG0050 subjects
FG0061 subjects
FG0070 subjects
FG0080 subjects
FG0091 subjects
1 subjects
FG0055 subjects
FG0063 subjects
FG0072 subjects
FG0084 subjects
FG0092 subjects
0 subjects
FG0053 subjects
FG0062 subjects
FG0072 subjects
FG0080 subjects
FG0094 subjects
45.9
± 15.6
BG00441.3± 13.7
BG00541.0± 14.9
BG00638.7± 12.7
BG00742.8± 13.7
BG00836.8± 13.8
BG00941.7± 14.4
BG01040.9± 14.4
10
BG0038
BG0048
BG00511
BG00611
BG0075
BG00813
BG00912
BG010114
Male
BG00074
BG00127
BG00224
BG00325
BG00425
BG00522
BG00622
BG00728
BG00818
BG00923
BG010288
24
BG00329
BG00422
BG00523
BG00624
BG00725
BG00824
BG00928
BG010299
Black or African American
BG0002
BG0012
BG0021
BG0030
BG0041
BG0051
BG0061
BG0070
BG0080
BG0090
BG0108
Hispanic or Latino
BG0001
BG0011
BG0020
BG0031
BG0041
BG0051
BG0060
BG0071
BG0081
BG0091
BG0108
Asian
BG00020
BG00111
BG0029
BG0033
BG0049
BG0058
BG0068
BG0077
BG0086
BG0095
BG01086
Other
BG0000
BG0010
BG0020
BG0030
BG0040
BG0050
BG0060
BG0070
BG0080
BG0091
BG0101
30
BG00230
BG00329
BG00429
BG00529
BG00629
BG00729
BG00828
BG00929
BG010350
Gustilo type I/II open with reamed IM nail
BG00010
BG0013
BG0024
BG0033
BG0043
BG0054
BG0064
BG0074
BG0083
BG0094
BG01042
Gustilo type I/II open with unreamed IM nail
BG0005
BG0011
BG0020
BG0031
BG0041
BG0050
BG0060
BG0070
BG0080
BG0092
BG01010
32
OG00433
OG00532
OG00631
OG00732
OG00830
OG00935
18.2
(13.7 to 20.7)
OG00417.8(12.6 to 22.9)
OG00518.1(13.1 to 20.7)
OG00617.0(12.7 to 21.4)
OG00714.4(12.6 to 17.0)
OG00815.4(13.3 to 17.4)
OG00916.4(14.4 to 18.6)
OG000
OG002
The cause-specific hazard was modeled using a Cox proportional hazards model with 10 treatment groups as the independent variable, stratified by type of fracture and definitive fracture fixation (closed with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with unreamed IM nail) and adjusting for quality of surgical fixation.
Cox proportional hazard model
0.6544
Hazard Ratio (HR)
0.91
2-Sided
95
0.59
1.39
A hazard ratio > 1 favors romosozumab.
Superiority
OG000
OG003
The cause-specific hazard was modeled using a Cox proportional hazards model with 10 treatment groups as the independent variable, stratified by type of fracture and definitive fracture fixation (closed with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with unreamed IM nail) and adjusting for quality of surgical fixation.
Cox proportional hazard model
0.9958
Hazard Ratio (HR)
1.00
2-Sided
95
0.64
1.58
A hazard ratio > 1 favors romosozumab.
Superiority
OG000
OG004
The cause-specific hazard was modeled using a Cox proportional hazards model with 10 treatment groups as the independent variable, stratified by type of fracture and definitive fracture fixation (closed with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with unreamed IM nail) and adjusting for quality of surgical fixation.
Cox proportional hazard model
0.6276
Hazard Ratio (HR)
0.90
2-Sided
95
0.59
1.37
A hazard ratio > 1 favors romosozumab.
Superiority
OG000
OG005
The cause-specific hazard was modeled using a Cox proportional hazards model with 10 treatment groups as the independent variable, stratified by type of fracture and definitive fracture fixation (closed with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with unreamed IM nail) and adjusting for quality of surgical fixation.
Cox proportional hazard model
0.8819
Hazard Ratio (HR)
0.97
2-Sided
95
0.63
1.49
A hazard ratio > 1 favors romosozumab.
Superiority
OG000
OG006
The cause-specific hazard was modeled using a Cox proportional hazards model with 10 treatment groups as the independent variable, stratified by type of fracture and definitive fracture fixation (closed with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with unreamed IM nail) and adjusting for quality of surgical fixation.
Cox proportional hazard model
0.7197
Hazard Ratio (HR)
0.92
2-Sided
95
0.60
1.42
A hazard ratio > 1 favors romosozumab.
Superiority
OG000
OG007
The cause-specific hazard was modeled using a Cox proportional hazards model with 10 treatment groups as the independent variable, stratified by type of fracture and definitive fracture fixation (closed with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with unreamed IM nail) and adjusting for quality of surgical fixation.
Cox proportional hazard model
0.6204
Hazard Ratio (HR)
1.11
2-Sided
95
0.73
1.70
A hazard ratio > 1 favors romosozumab.
Superiority
OG000
OG008
The cause-specific hazard was modeled using a Cox proportional hazards model with 10 treatment groups as the independent variable, stratified by type of fracture and definitive fracture fixation (closed with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with unreamed IM nail) and adjusting for quality of surgical fixation.
Cox proportional hazard model
0.4779
Hazard Ratio (HR)
1.18
2-Sided
95
0.75
1.84
A hazard ratio > 1 favors romosozumab.
Superiority
OG000
OG009
The cause-specific hazard was modeled using a Cox proportional hazards model with 10 treatment groups as the independent variable, stratified by type of fracture and definitive fracture fixation (closed with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with unreamed IM nail) and adjusting for quality of surgical fixation.
Cox proportional hazard model
0.9952
Hazard Ratio (HR)
1.00
2-Sided
95
0.65
1.53
A hazard ratio > 1 favors romosozumab.
Superiority
OG002
Romosozumab 70 mg: 3 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
OG003
Romosozumab 70 mg: 4 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
OG004
Romosozumab 140 mg: 2 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
OG005
Romosozumab 140 mg: 3 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
OG006
Romosozumab 140 mg: 4 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
OG007
Romosozumab 210 mg: 2 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
OG008
Romosozumab 210 mg: 3 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
OG009
Romosozumab 210 mg: 4 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
Units
Counts
Participants
OG000100
OG00134
OG00234
OG00332
OG00433
OG00532
OG00631
OG00732
OG00830
OG00935
Title
Denominators
Categories
Week 12
ParticipantsOG00088
ParticipantsOG00126
ParticipantsOG00228
ParticipantsOG00328
ParticipantsOG00429
ParticipantsOG00529
ParticipantsOG00624
ParticipantsOG00727
ParticipantsOG00827
ParticipantsOG00930
Title
Measurements
OG0005.77± 9.90
OG0016.31± 6.84
OG0025.67± 8.60
OG003
Week 16
ParticipantsOG00085
ParticipantsOG00124
ParticipantsOG00227
ParticipantsOG00327
Week 20
ParticipantsOG00083
ParticipantsOG00121
ParticipantsOG00225
ParticipantsOG00326
Week 24
ParticipantsOG00080
ParticipantsOG00125
ParticipantsOG00224
ParticipantsOG00327
Week 36
ParticipantsOG00079
ParticipantsOG00125
ParticipantsOG00225
ParticipantsOG00327
Week 52
ParticipantsOG00078
ParticipantsOG00126
ParticipantsOG00227
ParticipantsOG00326
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
OG005
Romosozumab 140 mg: 3 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
OG006
Romosozumab 140 mg: 4 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
OG007
Romosozumab 210 mg: 2 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
OG008
Romosozumab 210 mg: 3 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
OG009
Romosozumab 210 mg: 4 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
Units
Counts
Participants
OG000100
OG00134
OG00234
OG00332
OG00433
OG00532
OG00631
OG00732
OG00830
OG00935
Title
Denominators
Categories
Title
Measurements
OG0008
OG0011
OG0023
OG0033
OG0041
OG0050
OG0060
OG0070
OG0081
OG0091
OG002
Romosozumab 70 mg: 3 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
OG003
Romosozumab 70 mg: 4 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
OG004
Romosozumab 140 mg: 2 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
OG005
Romosozumab 140 mg: 3 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
OG006
Romosozumab 140 mg: 4 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
OG007
Romosozumab 210 mg: 2 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and week 2, and matching placebo at weeks 6 and 12.
OG008
Romosozumab 210 mg: 3 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2 and 6, and matching placebo at week 12.
OG009
Romosozumab 210 mg: 4 Doses
Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.
Units
Counts
Participants
OG000100
OG00134
OG00234
OG00332
OG00433
OG00532
OG00631
OG00732
OG00830
OG00935
Title
Denominators
Categories
Title
Measurements
OG00018.4(16.6 to 20.4)
OG00121.4(15.7 to 28.6)
OG00218.3(14.4 to 22.4)
OG00317.1(14.4 to 21.0)
OG00420.8(12.6 to 28.0)
OG00522.3(15.0 to 24.3)
OG00615.0(12.6 to 17.0)
OG00716.3(12.4 to 21.0)
OG00814.6(12.9 to 18.6)
OG00917.6(14.9 to 19.7)
Group IDs
Group Description
Statistical Method
Statistical Comment
P-Value
P-Value Comment
Parameter Type
Parameter Value
Dispersion Type
Dispersion Value
Confidence Interval Sides
Confidence Interval %
CI Lower Limit
CI Upper Limit
CI Lower Limit Comment
CI Upper Limit Comment
Estimate Comment
Tested Non-Inferiority
Non-Inferiority Type
Non-Inferiority Comment
Other Analysis Description
OG000
OG001
The cause-specific hazard was modeled using a Cox proportional hazards model with 10 treatment groups as the independent variable, stratified by type of fracture and definitive fracture fixation (closed with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with unreamed IM nail) and adjusting for quality of surgical fixation.
Cox proportional hazard model
0.1713
Hazard Ratio (HR)
0.73
2-Sided
95
0.47
1.14
A hazard ratio > 1 favors romosozumab.
Superiority
OG000
OG002
The cause-specific hazard was modeled using a Cox proportional hazards model with 10 treatment groups as the independent variable, stratified by type of fracture and definitive fracture fixation (closed with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with unreamed IM nail) and adjusting for quality of surgical fixation.
Cox proportional hazard model
0.9958
Hazard Ratio (HR)
1.00
2-Sided
95
0.65
1.53
A hazard ratio > 1 favors romosozumab.
Superiority
OG000
OG003
The cause-specific hazard was modeled using a Cox proportional hazards model with 10 treatment groups as the independent variable, stratified by type of fracture and definitive fracture fixation (closed with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with unreamed IM nail) and adjusting for quality of surgical fixation.
Cox proportional hazard model
0.2950
Hazard Ratio (HR)
1.27
2-Sided
95
0.81
1.97
A hazard ratio > 1 favors romosozumab.
Superiority
OG000
OG004
The cause-specific hazard was modeled using a Cox proportional hazards model with 10 treatment groups as the independent variable, stratified by type of fracture and definitive fracture fixation (closed with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with unreamed IM nail) and adjusting for quality of surgical fixation.
Cox proportional hazard model
0.0844
Hazard Ratio (HR)
0.68
2-Sided
95
0.44
1.05
A hazard ratio > 1 favors romosozumab.
Superiority
OG000
OG005
The cause-specific hazard was modeled using a Cox proportional hazards model with 10 treatment groups as the independent variable, stratified by type of fracture and definitive fracture fixation (closed with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with unreamed IM nail) and adjusting for quality of surgical fixation.
Cox proportional hazard model
0.3225
Hazard Ratio (HR)
0.80
2-Sided
95
0.52
1.24
A hazard ratio > 1 favors romosozumab.
Superiority
OG000
OG006
The cause-specific hazard was modeled using a Cox proportional hazards model with 10 treatment groups as the independent variable, stratified by type of fracture and definitive fracture fixation (closed with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with unreamed IM nail) and adjusting for quality of surgical fixation.
Cox proportional hazard model
0.4754
Hazard Ratio (HR)
1.17
2-Sided
95
0.76
1.81
A hazard ratio > 1 favors romosozumab.
Superiority
OG000
OG007
The cause-specific hazard was modeled using a Cox proportional hazards model with 10 treatment groups as the independent variable, stratified by type of fracture and definitive fracture fixation (closed with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with unreamed IM nail) and adjusting for quality of surgical fixation.
Cox proportional hazard model
0.5578
Hazard Ratio (HR)
1.14
2-Sided
95
0.74
1.75
A hazard ratio > 1 favors romosozumab.
Superiority
OG000
OG008
The cause-specific hazard was modeled using a Cox proportional hazards model with 10 treatment groups as the independent variable, stratified by type of fracture and definitive fracture fixation (closed with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with unreamed IM nail) and adjusting for quality of surgical fixation.
Cox proportional hazard model
0.1864
Hazard Ratio (HR)
1.34
2-Sided
95
0.87
2.07
A hazard ratio > 1 favors romosozumab
Superiority
OG000
OG009
The cause-specific hazard was modeled using a Cox proportional hazards model with 10 treatment groups as the independent variable, stratified by type of fracture and definitive fracture fixation (closed with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with reamed IM nail, Gustilo type I/II open with unreamed IM nail) and adjusting for quality of surgical fixation.