KEN OKAZAKI
   Department   School of Medicine(Tokyo Women's Medical University Hospital), School of Medicine
   Position   Professor and Division head
Article types Original article
Language English
Peer review Peer reviewed
Title Comparison of Romosozumab Versus Denosumab Treatment on Bone Mineral Density After One Year in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients with Severe Osteoporosis: A Randomized Clinical Pilot Study.
Journal Formal name:Modern rheumatology
Abbreviation:Mod Rheumatol
ISSN code:14397609/14397595
Domestic / ForeginForegin
Volume, Issue, Page e-pub,pp.epub
Author and coauthor Mochizuki Takeshi, Yano Koichiro, Ikari Katsunori, Hiroshima Ryo, Okazaki Ken
Publication date 2022/06
Summary OBJECTIVES:To investigate the effect of romosozumab versus denosumab treatment on bone mineral density (BMD), disease activity, and joint damage in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and severe osteoporosis.METHODS:Fifty-one postmenopausal women were enrolled and randomized equally into two groups to receive either romosozumab or the denosumab. Changes (Δ) in the BMD (at lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck), disease activity score in 28 joints (DAS28)-erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and van der Heijde-modified Total Sharp Score (TSS) from baseline to 12 months after treatment were evaluated.RESULTS:The ΔBMD at 12 months in the romosozumab and denosumab groups were 10.2 ± 5.6% and 5.0 ± 3.1% (p = 0.002) for the lumbar spine, 3.7 ± 4.9% and 3.5 ± 3.0% (p = 0.902) for total hip, and 3.6 ± 4.7% and 3.2 ± 4.9% (p = 0.817) for femoral neck, respectively. The ΔDAS28-ESR at 12 months in the romosozumab and denosumab groups was 0.14 and 0.22 (p = 0.643), respectively, whereas, the ΔTSS at 12 months was 0.33 and 0.29 (p = 0.927), respectively.CONCLUSIONS:Our results suggest that romosozumab treatment was more effective in increasing the BMD at the lumbar spine than denosumab, and may be selected for patients who require a significant increase in the lumbar spine BMD. Moreover, romosozumab may be not affect disease activity and joint damage in patients with RA.
DOI 10.1093/mr/roac059
PMID 35689558