ClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT07757373Updated Aug 12, 2026

Romosozumab Versus Denosumab In Glucocorticoid-induced Osteoporosis: An Extended Observation Of a Clinical Trial at 6 Years

A Phase 4 interventional study of Romosozumab and Denosumab in Glucocorticoid-Associated Osteopenia and Osteoporosis, sponsored by Tuen Mun Hospital. Not yet recruiting at 1 site in Hong Kong. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-08-12.

Sponsored by Tuen Mun Hospital · Phase 4, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
54
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Where this study stands

Counted across the records on this site · 2026-11-12

Among 20 studies testing romosozumab in Osteoporosis — 5 open to participants now, 8 under way, none of them phase 3. romosozumab · Osteoporosis.

Planned enrollment
15th of 20
54 · median 80
Started
2026
the only one that year
Phase 4
10 of 20
5 open now
Registered
19th of 20
by date
Lead sponsor
3 of 20
Tuen Mun Hospital

Among the 20 studies testing romosozumab in Osteoporosis, this one is the 15th largest by planned enrollment, is the only one that started in 2026, is one of 10 in phase 4, and was the 19th registered.

By phase

20 studies; the count open now beside each. This study's row is marked.

Phase 4this study10 · 5 open
Phase 35 · 0 open
Phase 13 · 0 open
Phase 22 · 0 open

By the year they started

First in 2012; this study’s year is marked. 1 started in 2026.

Tested beside romosozumab

Size and results

Median enrollment 80 across the 20 interventional studies. Of the 12 that completed or were terminated, 10 (83%) have results posted.

Was this useful?
Watch this landscapeDownload CSVWith an account: a weekly mail of what changed among 20 studies testing romosozumab in Osteoporosis, or all of them as a file.
02

Study summary

This is an extended observation study of a RCT comparing the efficacy of romorozumab and denosumab in high-risk patients using long-term glucocorticoids. In the romosozumab arm, patients were shifted to denosumab after the first year. The denosumab arm of patients were continued on denosumab. This study aims to look at the bone mineral density changes in both groups of patients after 6 years.

Read the detailed description

Sclerostin is a glycoprotein secreted by osteocytes under the influence of mechanical loading that inhibits activation of the canonical Wnt pathway involved in osteoblastogenesis, leading to suppression of bone formation. Moreover, sclerostin enhances resorption of the bone by stimulating the production of RANKL by the osteocytes. Romosozumab (ROMO) is a humanized monoclonal antibody against sclerostin. By having a dual mechanism on bone resorption and formation, ROMO has been shown by head-to-head RCTs to be more effective than oral alendronate in reducing vertebral and hip fractures in postmenopausal women. ROMO has also been demonstrated to be superior to teriparatide in raising the BMD and bone strength of the spine and hip at month 12 in postmenopausal women with low bone mass. In subjects transitioned from bisphosphonates, a phase 3 RCT showed that the use of ROMO was associated with a greater gain in the hip BMD after 12 months than teriparatide. However, there is little information on the comparative efficacy of ROMO and denosumab (DEN) in postmenopausal osteoporosis. There is also a paucity of data regarding the use of ROMO in patients with GIOP and long-term data on the BMD changes.

Recently, an open-label 24-month RCT comparing the efficacy of ROMO with DEN in high-risk adult patients using long-term GCs (daily prednisolone dose of ≥5mg/day for ≥12 months) was conducted. All patients had moderate to high risk of osteoporotic fracture as evidenced by at least one of the following: (1) a personal history of fragility/vertebral fracture; (2) dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) T score ≤-2.5 [age ≥40 years] or Z scores ≤-3.0 [age \<40 years] at spine, hip or femoral neck; or (3) high risk of 10-year FRAX-estimated major fracture).

A total of 70 patients were enrolled and 63 completed the study. At month 12, the spine BMD at month 12 was significantly higher in the ROMO than DEN group after adjustment for baseline values and confounding factors. At month 24, the spine BMD continued to increase in both the ROMO and DEN groups, and the intergroup difference remained significantly different. P1NP increased significantly at month 3 after ROMO treatment but suppression of CTX was greater by DEN. Both treatments were well tolerated, with more frequent injection site reaction observed in the ROMO group. The results from this study suggested that ROMO was superior to DEN in raising the spinal BMD in high-risk patients with GIOP. On switching to DEN, the spinal BMD continued to improve in both treatment groups at month 24.

The participants of the original study were continued on denosumab (60mg SC every 6 months) and a DXA scan was repeated at month 48. Fifty-four patients (27 ROMO-DEN; 27 DEN) completed this extension phase. At month 48, the spine and hip BMD increased significantly from baseline in both the sequential ROMO-DEN and DEN alone groups. However, the absolute gain in BMD from baseline to month 48 at the spine and hip was significantly higher in the ROMO-DEN than DEN group of patients.

As there is a lack of data on the very long-term efficacy of sequential ROMO and DEN in the treatment of high risk patients using long-term GCs, the current extension study is carried out to look at the changes in BMD compared between the two treatment arms at year 6. This will provide useful information in the literature regarding the sequential ROMO/DEN regimen in long-term GC users.

03

Conditions studied

  • Glucocorticoid-Associated Osteopenia and Osteoporosis

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • glucocorticoids
  • bone mineral density
  • romosozumab
  • denosumab
04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

- patients who are continued on 6-monthly subcutaneous injection of DEN in either the ROMO or DEN arms after month 48; (2) those who are willing to have a repeat DXA assessment at the end of 6 years

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • patients who refuse to be maintained on denosumab after month 48
  • patients who are maintained on other anti-osteoporotic drugs after month 48
  • patients in whom prednisolone is planned to be tapered or discontinued after month 48.
05

Study design

Phase
Phase 4
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
54 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    romosozumab

    romosozumab for 12 months, followed by denosumab

    Drug: Romosozumab · Drug: Denosumab

  • Active comparator
    denosumab alone

    Drug: Denosumab

Interventions

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Bone mineral density at year 6

    Time frame: 6 years

07

Study locations

1 site
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Start is estimated for Sep 2026; primary completion for Sep 2027, 12 months later.

Of 55 non-industry phase 4 interventional studies under Osteoporosis, half reached primary completion within 46 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 31 and three quarters within 71. This study's planned 12 months is below that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 65 studies reached it within 46 months; a quarter within 29 and three quarters within 71.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Jul 19, 2026
First posted
Aug 11, 2026
StartEst.
Sep 1, 2026
Primary completionEst.
Sep 30, 2027
CompletionEst.
Dec 1, 2027
Last update
Aug 12, 2026
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Aug 12, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07757373
Lead sponsor
Tuen Mun Hospital
Responsible party
Chi Chiu Mok (Consultant, Tuen Mun Hospital) — Principal investigator
First posted
Aug 11, 2026
Start date
Sep 1, 2026 (estimated)
Primary completion
Sep 30, 2027 (estimated)
Completion
Dec 1, 2027 (estimated)
Last update
Aug 12, 2026

Study contacts

Chi Chiu Mok, MD, FRCP
Contact
ccmok2006@gmail.com
24685111
becky Fong
Contact
becky_fongls@yahoo.com.hk
37673430

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Aug 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Studies of the drug tested here: Romosozumab

Start the discussion