Study of Romosozumab (AMG 785) in Tibial Diaphyseal Fractures Status Post Intramedullary Nailing

NCT ID: NCT00907296

Last Updated: 2022-09-22

Study Results

Results available

Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.

View full results

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

PHASE2

Total Enrollment

402 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2009-09-02

Study Completion Date

2013-05-10

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

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

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Fracture Healing

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

QUADRUPLE

Participants Caregivers Investigators Outcome Assessors

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Placebo

Participants received subcutaneous injections of matching placebo on day 1 and at weeks 2, 6, and 12.

Group Type PLACEBO_COMPARATOR

Placebo

Intervention Type DRUG

Administered by subcutaneous injection

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.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Romosozumab

Intervention Type BIOLOGICAL

Administered by subcutaneous injection

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.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Romosozumab

Intervention Type BIOLOGICAL

Administered by subcutaneous injection

Romosozumab 70 mg: 4 Doses

Participants received subcutaneous injections of 70 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Romosozumab

Intervention Type BIOLOGICAL

Administered by subcutaneous injection

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.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Romosozumab

Intervention Type BIOLOGICAL

Administered by subcutaneous injection

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.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Romosozumab

Intervention Type BIOLOGICAL

Administered by subcutaneous injection

Romosozumab 140 mg: 4 Doses

Participants received subcutaneous injections of 140 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Romosozumab

Intervention Type BIOLOGICAL

Administered by subcutaneous injection

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.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Romosozumab

Intervention Type BIOLOGICAL

Administered by subcutaneous injection

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.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Romosozumab

Intervention Type BIOLOGICAL

Administered by subcutaneous injection

Romosozumab 210 mg: 4 Doses

Participants received subcutaneous injections of 210 mg romosozumab on day 1 and weeks 2, 6, and 12.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Romosozumab

Intervention Type BIOLOGICAL

Administered by subcutaneous injection

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Romosozumab

Administered by subcutaneous injection

Intervention Type BIOLOGICAL

Placebo

Administered by subcutaneous injection

Intervention Type DRUG

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

AMG 785 Evenity

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

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
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

85 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

UCB Pharma

INDUSTRY

Sponsor Role collaborator

Amgen

INDUSTRY

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

MD

Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR

Amgen

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Research Site

Birmingham, Alabama, United States

Site Status

Research Site

Orange, California, United States

Site Status

Research Site

Aurora, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Research Site

Denver, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Research Site

Jacksonville, Florida, United States

Site Status

Research Site

Indianapolis, Indiana, United States

Site Status

Research Site

Detroit, Michigan, United States

Site Status

Research Site

St Louis, Missouri, United States

Site Status

Research Site

Brooklyn, New York, United States

Site Status

Research Site

Rochester, New York, United States

Site Status

Research Site

Altoona, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Research Site

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Research Site

Columbia, South Carolina, United States

Site Status

Research Site

Sandy City, Utah, United States

Site Status

Research Site

Geelong, Victoria, Australia

Site Status

Research Site

Parkville, Victoria, Australia

Site Status

Research Site

Blagoevgrad, , Bulgaria

Site Status

Research Site

Pleven, , Bulgaria

Site Status

Research Site

Plovdiv, , Bulgaria

Site Status

Research Site

Rousse, , Bulgaria

Site Status

Research Site

Sofia, , Bulgaria

Site Status

Research Site

Red Deer, Alberta, Canada

Site Status

Research Site

Ajax, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Research Site

Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Research Site

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Research Site

Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Research Site

Windsor, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Research Site

Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Site Status

Research Site

Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Site Status

Research Site

Ã…rhus C, , Denmark

Site Status

Research Site

Hvidovre, , Denmark

Site Status

Research Site

København NV, , Denmark

Site Status

Research Site

Tallinn, , Estonia

Site Status

Research Site

Tartu, , Estonia

Site Status

Research Site

Lille, , France

Site Status

Research Site

Marseille, , France

Site Status

Research Site

Nantes, , France

Site Status

Research Site

Paris, , France

Site Status

Research Site

Aachen, , Germany

Site Status

Research Site

Hamburg, , Germany

Site Status

Research Site

Hanover, , Germany

Site Status

Research Site

Mannheim, , Germany

Site Status

Research Site

Münster, , Germany

Site Status

Research Site

Athens, , Greece

Site Status

Research Site

Athens, , Greece

Site Status

Research Site

Larissa, , Greece

Site Status

Research Site

Pátrai, , Greece

Site Status

Research Site

Thessaloniki, , Greece

Site Status

Research Site

Hong Kong, , Hong Kong

Site Status

Research Site

New Territories, , Hong Kong

Site Status

Research Site

Budapest, , Hungary

Site Status

Research Site

Miskolc, , Hungary

Site Status

Research Site

Nyíregyháza, , Hungary

Site Status

Research Site

Szeged, , Hungary

Site Status

Research Site

Bangalore, Karnataka, India

Site Status

Research Site

Bangalore, Karnataka, India

Site Status

Research Site

Mangalore, Karnataka, India

Site Status

Research Site

Pune, Maharashtra, India

Site Status

Research Site

Jaipur, Rajasthan, India

Site Status

Research Site

Madurai, Tamil Nadu, India

Site Status

Research Site

Gandhinagar, , India

Site Status

Research Site

Mangalore, , India

Site Status

Research Site

Nashik, , India

Site Status

Research Site

Florence, , Italy

Site Status

Research Site

Milan, , Italy

Site Status

Research Site

Milan, , Italy

Site Status

Research Site

Pisa, , Italy

Site Status

Research Site

Roma (RM), , Italy

Site Status

Research Site

Verona, , Italy

Site Status

Research Site

Liepāja, , Latvia

Site Status

Research Site

Riga, , Latvia

Site Status

Research Site

Riga, , Latvia

Site Status

Research Site

Valmiera, , Latvia

Site Status

Research Site

Kaunas, , Lithuania

Site Status

Research Site

Vilnius, , Lithuania

Site Status

Research Site

Monterrey, Nuevo León, Mexico

Site Status

Research Site

Christchurch, , New Zealand

Site Status

Research Site

Tauranga, , New Zealand

Site Status

Research Site

Kongsvinger, , Norway

Site Status

Research Site

Bialystok, , Poland

Site Status

Research Site

Bytom, , Poland

Site Status

Research Site

Kraków, , Poland

Site Status

Research Site

Krakow, , Poland

Site Status

Research Site

Lublin, , Poland

Site Status

Research Site

Bucharest, , Romania

Site Status

Research Site

Bucharest, , Romania

Site Status

Research Site

Timișoara, , Romania

Site Status

Research Site

Moscow, , Russia

Site Status

Research Site

Moscow, , Russia

Site Status

Research Site

Moscow, , Russia

Site Status

Research Site

Moscow, , Russia

Site Status

Research Site

Moscow, , Russia

Site Status

Research Site

Saint Petersburg, , Russia

Site Status

Research Site

Yaroslavl, , Russia

Site Status

Research Site

Bratislava, , Slovakia

Site Status

Research Site

Nitra, , Slovakia

Site Status

Research Site

Piešťany, , Slovakia

Site Status

Research Site

Leeds, , United Kingdom

Site Status

Research Site

London, , United Kingdom

Site Status

Research Site

Newcastle, , United Kingdom

Site Status

Research Site

Norwich, , United Kingdom

Site Status

Research Site

Oxford, , United Kingdom

Site Status

Research Site

Stanmore, , United Kingdom

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

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

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

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.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 32358413 (View on PubMed)

Related Links

Access external resources that provide additional context or updates about the study.

http://www.amgentrials.com

AmgenTrials clinical trials website

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

2008-008392-34

Identifier Type: EUDRACT_NUMBER

Identifier Source: secondary_id

20062017

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Non Randomized Humerusshaft Fracture
NCT00205972 COMPLETED PHASE4