Skip to main content

Effect of the duration of previous osteoporosis treatment on the effect of romosozumab treatment



The effect of romosozumab is affected by previous osteoporosis treatment. Here we showed that the duration of the previous treatment just before romosozumab affects the therapeutic effect of romosozumab. Using denosumab and oral bisphosphonates for more than 1 year attenuates the effect of romosozumab.


As an anti-sclerostin antibody, romosozumab suppresses bone resorption and stimulates bone formation. We investigated whether the effectiveness of 12 months of romosozumab treatment depended on the duration of previous treatment with teriparatide, denosumab, or oral bisphosphonates.


In total, 259 osteoporosis patients received subcutaneous injections of romosozumab (210 mg) every 4 weeks during 2019 and 2020. This study was designed as a pre–post comparison. The end points were the percent changes of bone mineral density (BMD) after 12 months of romosozumab treatment. The patients were divided into seven groups depending on the type and duration of previous treatment before starting romosozumab as follows: non-previous treatment group, change from teriparatide used for 1 year or less/more than 1 year, change from denosumab used for 1 year or less/more than 1 year, and change from oral bisphosphonates used for 1 year or less/more than 1 year.


The effects of previous treatment with teriparatide on the effectiveness of 12-month romosozumab did not clearly depend on the duration of treatment (p > 0.05). In contrast, the effects of previous treatments with denosumab or oral bisphosphonates on the effectiveness of 12-month romosozumab depended on the previous treatment duration, which was reflected by the differences in percent change of the spine BMD (both p < 0.05), however, there were no significant differences in the percent change of the total hip BMD (both p > 0.05).


The duration of the previous treatment affected the effectiveness of romosozumab. Using denosumab and oral bisphosphonate for more than 1 year attenuated the effect of romosozumab.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Data availability

The data are available from the corresponding authors upon reasonable request.

Code availability

Not applicable.


  1. Genant HK, Cooper C, Poor G et al (1999) Interim report and recommendations of the World Health Organization taskforce for osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 10:259–264.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cosman F, Beur SJ, LeBoff MS et al (2014) National Osteoporosis Foundation (2013) Clinician’s guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Osteoporosis Int 25:2359–2381.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. National Osteoporosis Foundation (2002) America’s bone health: the state of osteoporosis and low bone mass in our nation. National Osteoporosis Foundation, Washington (DC)

  4. International Osteoporosis Foundation (2020) The facts about osteoporosis and its impact. Accessed 3 May 2021

  5. Lewiecki EM, Wright NC, Curtis JR et al (2018) Hip fracture trends in the United States, 2002 to 2015. Osteoporos Int 29:717–722.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ebina K, Hirao M, Tsuboi H et al (2020) Effects of prior osteoporosis treatment on early treatment response of romosozumab in patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis. Bone 140:115574.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Tominaga A, Wada K, Okazaki K et al (2021) Early clinical effects, safety, and predictors of the effects of romosozumab treatment in osteoporosis patients: one-year study. Osteoporosis Int 1–11.

  8. Cosman F, Crittenden DB, Adachi JD et al (2016) Romosozumab treatment in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. N Engl J Med 375:1532–1543.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Baron R, Rawadi G (2007) Targeting the Wnt/beta-catenin pathway to regulate bone formation in the adult skeleton. Endocrinology 148(6):2635–2643.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ominsky MS, Vlasseros F, Jolette J et al (2010) Two doses of sclerostin antibody in cynomolgus monkeys increases bone formation, bone mineral density, and bone strength. J Bone Miner Res 25:948–959.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Li X, Warmington KS, Niu QT et al (2011) Inhibition of sclerostin by monoclonal antibody increases bone formation, bone mass, and bone strength in aged male rats. J Bone Miner Res 25:2647–2656.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bandeira L, Lewiecki EM, Bilezikian JP (2017) Romosozumab for the treatment of osteoporosis. Expert Opin Biol Ther 17:255–263.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Igarashi Y, Lee MY, Matsuzaki S (2002) Acid phosphatase as markers of bone metabolism. J Chromatogr B 781:345–358.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Eastell R, Krege JH, Chen P, Glass EV, Reginster JY (2006) Development of analgorism for using P1NP to monitor treatment of patients with teriparatide. Curr Med Res Opin 22:61–66.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Fogelman I, Blake GM (2000) Different approaches to bone densitometry. J Nucl Med 41:2015–2025

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ominsky MS, Brown DL, Van G et al (2015) Differential temporal effects of sclerostin antibody and parathyroid hormone on cancellous and cortical bone and quantitative differences in effects on the osteoblast lineage in young intact rats. Bone 81:380–391.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Shimizu T, Atira K, Murota E et al (2021) Effects after starting or switching from bisphosphonate to romosozumab or denosumab in Japanese postmenopausal patients. J Bone Miner Metab 13:1–8.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Popp AW, Varathan N, Buffat H et al (2018) Bone mineral density changes after 1 year of denosumab discontinuation in postmenopausal women with long-term denosumab treatment for osteoporosis. Calcif Tissue Int 103:50–54.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Solling ASK, Harslof T, Kaal A, Rejnmark L, Langdahl B (2016) Hypercalcemia after discontinuation of long-term denosumab treatment. Osteoporos Int 27:2383–2386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. McClung MR, Lewiecki EM, Geller ML et al (2013) Effect of denosumab on bone mineral density and biochemical markers of bone turnover: 8-year results of a phase 2 clinical trial. Osteoporos Int 24:227–235.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bone HG, Chapurlat R, Brandi M-L et al (2013) The effect of three or six years of denosumab exposure in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis: results from the freedom extension. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 98:4483–4492.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Takada J, Dinavahi R, Miyauchi A et al (2020) Relationship between P1NP, a biochemical marker of bone turnover, and bone mineral density in patients transitioned from alendronate to romosozumab or teriparatide: a post hoc analysis of the STRUCTURE trial. J Bone Miner Metab 38:310–315.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bone HG, Hosking D, Devogelaer JP et al (2004) Ten years’ experience with alendronate for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. N Engl J Med 350:1189–1199

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Bauer DC, Garnero P, Hochberg MC et al (2006) Pre-treatment bone turnover and fracture efficacy of alendronate: the fracture intervention trial. J Bone Miner Res 21:292–299.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Fogelman I, Ribot C, Smith R et al (2000) Risedronate reverse bone loss in postmenopausal women with low bone mass: results from a multinational, double-blind, placebo-controlled trail. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 85:1895–1900.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references


The authors would like to thank Enago ( for the manuscript review and editing support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. Wada.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

All procedures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The study was approved by the Tokyo Women’s Medical University Ethics Committee, number 5596.

Consent to participate

Informed consent was obtained from all participants included in the study.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Conflict of interest

Ayako Tominaga, Ken Okazaki, Hideharu Nishi, Yasushi Terayama, Yasuteru Kodama, and Yoshiharu Kato declare that they have no conflicts of interest. Keiji Wada received a speaking fee from Amgen Inc.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tominaga, A., Wada, K., Okazaki, K. et al. Effect of the duration of previous osteoporosis treatment on the effect of romosozumab treatment. Osteoporos Int 33, 1265–1273 (2022).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:


  • Anti-osteoporosis drug
  • Anti-sclerostin antibody
  • BMD
  • Duration of previous treatment
  • Osteoporosis
  • Romosozumab