Treatment effects, adverse outcomes and cardiovascular safety of romosozumab - Existing worldwide data: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND

Romosozumab is a novel monoclonal antibody that binds to sclerostin, and has dual effects of increasing bone formation and decreasing bone resorption, giving it a unique mechanism of action. The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis based on existing worldwide data on treatment effects and safety of romosozumab in randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

A systematic search was carried out on four databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). The keywords used for search was "(romosozumab) AND (osteoporosis OR safety)". Randomized controlled trial or post-hoc studies of the included randomized controlled trial which studied the effects and safety of romosozumab were included. The quality of selected studies was assessed with the Cochrane collaboration tool and the PEDro scale.

RESULTS

20 studies were included for qualitative analysis. 14 studies were included for meta-analysis. In total, there were 13,507 (n = 13,507) participants with 637 men and 12,870 women from original cohorts. The overall mean difference was in favor of romosozumab treatment for lumbar spine (10.04 (95 % confidence interval (CI) = 7.51-12.57; p < 0.00001)), total hip (4.04 (95 % CI = 3.10-4.99; p < 0.00001)) and femoral neck bone mineral density (3.77 (95 % CI = 2.90-4.64; p < 0.00001)) at 12 months. There was significantly less likelihood of new vertebral fractures with romosozumab compared to control (odds ratio (OR) 0.42 (95 % CI = 0.20-0.89); p = 0.02) at 12 months of treatment. There was significantly less likelihood of new vertebral fracture at 24 months with 12 months of romosozumab followed by sequential treatment with anti-resorptive compared to control with only anti-resorptive agent use (OR 0.36 (95 % CI = 0.18-0.71); p = 0.003). There was no significant difference in serious adverse events and fatal adverse events with use of romosozumab compared with control in our meta-analyses. There were no significant differences in serious cardiovascular events in Asian population of romosozumab with control group with 12 months of romosozumab treatment followed by 24 months of anti-resorptive agent with OR 1.09 (95 % CI = 0.40-2.96; P = 0.86). There was no significant difference between romosozumab group and control group for the median time to radiographic healing. Our qualitative analysis on Quantitative Computed Tomography (QCT), Finite element analysis (FEA) and bone biopsy analyses demonstrated that romosozumab improved parameters and measures in these domains as well.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, our study showed that romosozumab was an effective agent to treat osteoporosis with high quality evidence. There were no significant differences in the adverse events, serious adverse events, fatal adverse events identified. Further subgroup analysis of cardiovascular events and cardiovascular death in the total population showed no differences either.

THE TRANSLATIONAL POTENTIAL OF THIS ARTICLE

Given the results, romosozumab is an effective agent to treat patients with very-high risk of osteoporotic fractures.