Evidence Hub

Denosumab prevents metacarpal shaft cortical bone loss in patients with erosive rheumatoid arthritis

Sharp JT, Tsuji W, Ory P, Harper-Barek C, Wang H, Newmark R

Arthritis care & research, 2010

227 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Osteoclast-mediated bone loss in the hand predicts future bone erosions in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Osteoclast activity depends on RANKL, which is inhibited by denosumab, an investigational fully human monoclonal antibody against RANKL. We measured metacarpal shaft cortical bone thickness using a novel computer-based technique, digital x-ray radiogrammetry (DXR), to evaluate the effects of denosumab on cortical bone in RA.

METHODS: Patients (n = 227) with active, erosive RA were randomized to receive subcutaneous denosumab 60 mg or 180 mg or placebo every 6 months. All patients received stable doses of methotrexate and daily calcium and vitamin D. For this blinded post hoc analysis (n = 218), cortical bone loss was determined by DXR using computer-assisted measurement of cortical thickness and shaft width at 21 midshaft levels of the second through fourth metacarpal bones of both hands.

RESULTS: At 12 months, patients receiving denosumab had significantly less metacarpal bone loss versus placebo (denosumab 60 mg: -0.0034, denosumab 180 mg: 0.0001 gain, placebo: -0.0108; P < or = 0.01 for both denosumab doses). Twelve-month decreases from baseline greater than the smallest detectable change occurred in 2 patients in the denosumab 180 mg group, 9 patients in the denosumab 60 mg group, and 12 patients in the placebo group. Negative correlation was significant between static cortical thickness ratios and static erosion scores (6 and 12 months), and for…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 227 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free