| Background/objective: Osteoporosis is a global health concern with an increasing prevalence worldwide. Denosumab is an antiresoptive agent that has been demonstrated to be efective and safe in osteoporotic patients. This
study aimed to compare the efcacy and safety of the biosimilar denosumab candidate (Arylia) to the originator product (Prolia®) in postmenopausal osteoporotic patients.
Methods: In this randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, noninferiority trial, postmenopausal osteoporotic
patients received 60 mg of subcutaneous Arylia or Prolia® at months 0, 6, and 12 and were followed up for 18 months.
The primary endpoint was the noninferiority of the biosimilar product to the reference product in the percentage
change of bone mineral density (BMD) in 18 months at the lumbar spine (L1-L4), total hip, and femoral neck. The secondary endpoints were safety assessment, the incidence of new vertebral fractures, and the trend of bone turnover
markers (BTMs).
Results: A total of 190 patients were randomized to receive either biosimilar (n= 95) or reference (n= 95) denosumab. In the per-protocol (PP) analysis, the lower limits of the 95% two-sided confdence intervals of the diference
between Arylia and Prolia® in increasing BMD were greater than the predetermined noninferiority margin of− 1.78 at
the lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck sites (mean diferences [95% CIs] of 0.39 [− 1.34 to 2.11], 0.04 [− 1.61 to
1.69], and 0.41 [− 1.58 to 2.40], respectively). The two products were also comparable in terms of safety, new vertebral
fractures, and trend of BTMs.
Conclusion: The efcacy of the biosimilar denosumab was shown to be noninferior to that of the reference denosumab, with a comparable safety profle at 18 months. |