PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Denosumab”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

A study of the biological receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappaB ligand inhibitor, denosumab, in patients with multiple myeloma or bone metastases from breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappaB ligand (RANKL) is essential for the differentiation, function, and survival of osteoclasts, which play a key role in establishment and propagation of skeletal disease in patients with multiple myeloma or bone metastases as well as many other skeletal diseases. Denosumab (AMG 162), a fully human monoclonal antibody to RANKL, was developed to treat patients with skeletal diseases. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: This was a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, multicenter study to determine the safety and efficacy of denosumab in patients with breast cancer (n = 29) or multiple myeloma (n = 25) with radiologically confirmed bone lesions. Patients received a single dose of either denosumab (0.1, 0.3, 1.0, or 3.0 mg/kg s.c.) or pamidronate (90 mg i.v.). Bone antiresorptive effect was assessed by changes in urinary and serum N-telopeptide levels. Pharmacokinetics of denosumab also were assessed. RESULTS: Following a single s.c. dose of denosumab, levels of urinary and serum N-telopeptide decreased within 1 day, and this decrease lasted through 84 days at the higher denosumab doses. Pamidronate also decreased bone turnover, but the effect diminished progressively through follow-up. Denosumab injections were well tolerated. Mean half-lives of denosumab were 33.3 and 46.3 days for the two highest dosages. CONCLUSIONS: A single s.c. dose of denosumab given to patients with multiple myeloma or bone metastases from breast cancer was well tolerated and reduced bone resorption for at least 84 days. The decrease in bone turnover markers was similar in magnitude but more sustained than with i.v. pamidronate.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Denosumab in postmenopausal women with low bone mineral density.

BACKGROUND: Receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappaB ligand (RANKL) is essential for osteoclast differentiation, activation, and survival. The fully human monoclonal antibody denosumab (formerly known as AMG 162) binds RANKL with high affinity and specificity and inhibits RANKL action. METHODS: The efficacy and safety of subcutaneously administered denosumab were evaluated over a period of 12 months in 412 postmenopausal women with low bone mineral density (T score of -1.8 to -4.0 at the lumbar spine or -1.8 to -3.5 at the proximal femur). Subjects were randomly assigned to receive denosumab either every three months (at a dose of 6, 14, or 30 mg) or every six months (at a dose of 14, 60, 100, or 210 mg), open-label oral alendronate once weekly (at a dose of 70 mg), or placebo. The primary end point was the percentage change from baseline in bone mineral density at the lumbar spine at 12 months. Changes in bone turnover were assessed by measurement of serum and urine telopeptides and bone-specific alkaline phosphatase. RESULTS: Denosumab treatment for 12 months resulted in an increase in bone mineral density at the lumbar spine of 3.0 to 6.7 percent (as compared with an increase of 4.6 percent with alendronate and a loss of 0.8 percent with placebo), at the total hip of 1.9 to 3.6 percent (as compared with an increase of 2.1 percent with alendronate and a loss of 0.6 percent with placebo), and at the distal third of the radius of 0.4 to 1.3 percent (as compared with decreases of 0.5 percent with alendronate and 2.0 percent with placebo). Near-maximal reductions in mean levels of serum C-telopeptide from baseline were evident three days after the administration of denosumab. The duration of the suppression of bone turnover appeared to be dose-dependent. CONCLUSIONS: In postmenopausal women with low bone mass, denosumab increased bone mineral density and decreased bone resorption. These preliminary data suggest that denosumab might be an effective treatment for osteoporosis. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00043186.).

Alendronate↗
PubMed2006

RANK ligand inhibition with denosumab for the management of osteoporosis.

Receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappaB ligand (RANKL) is a cytokine member of the tumour necrosis factor family that is the principal final mediator of osteoclastic bone resorption. It plays a major role in the pathogenesis of postmenopausal osteoporosis, as well bone loss associated with rheumatoid arthritis, metastatic cancer, multiple myeloma, aromatase inhibitor therapy and androgen deprivation therapy. Denosumab (AMG 162) is an investigational fully human monoclonal antibody with a high affinity and specificity for RANKL. By inhibiting the action of RANKL, denosumab reduces the differentiation, activity and survival of osteoclasts, thereby slowing the rate of bone resorption. Denosumab has been shown to increase bone mineral density (BMD) and reduce bone turnover in postmenopausal women with low BMD. Denosumab is a potential treatment for osteoporosis and other skeletal disorders.

Animals↗
PubMed2007

[Therapeutic agents for disorders of bone and calcium metabolism--Denosumab, a fully human monoclocal antibody-targeting RANKL as a therapy for cancer-induced bone diseases].

Receptor activator of nuclear-kappaB ligand (RANKL) is a protein expressed by oseoblastic stromal cells, binds to receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappaB (RANK) and is the primary mediator of osteoclast differentiation, activation, and survival. RANKL is responsible for osteoclast-mediated bone resorption in a broad range of conditions and play a key role in establishment and propagation of skeletal disease in patients with advanced cancer. Denosumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody that binds RANKL with high affinity and specificity and inhibits RANKL-RANK interaction, mimicking the endogenous effects of osteoprotegerin, a soluble RANKL decoy receptor. In the phase 1 clinical trials in healthy post menopausal women and patients with multiple myeloma or breast cancer with bone metastasis including Japanese (except for multiple myeloma) showed that single and multiple subcutaneous injection of denosumab caused rapid and sustained suppression of markers of osteoclastic bone resorption with favorable safety profiles. Currently, the larger global clinical trials to investigate the effect of this agent for the treatment of cancer-induced bone disease as well as osteoporosis are underway.

Antibodies, Monoclonal↗
PubMed2005

Technology evaluation: denosumab, Amgen.

Amgen, as part of its program targeting the RANK/RANKL/ osteoprotegerin pathway, is developing denosumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody, delivered subcutaneously, targeting the receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappaB ligand, for the potential treatment of diseases associated with bone loss, such as osteoporosis and bone metastases. The antibody is currently undergoing phase III clinical trials.

Antibodies, Monoclonal↗
PubMed2026

Pharmacological therapies for the prevention of fractures in men.

RATIONALE: Pharmacological therapies for fracture prevention usually target osteoporosis, a skeletal disorder characterised by compromised bone mass or quality (or both). As most participants in osteoporosis trials are women, a review of pharmacological therapies for fracture prevention in men was warranted. OBJECTIVES: To determine the benefits and harms of bisphosphonates, parathyroid (PTH) or parathyroid-related protein (PTHrP) analogues, denosumab, and romosozumab therapy for the prevention of fractures in men. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP) until 14 October 2025, with no restrictions on date or language of publication. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials that compared bisphosphonates, PTH or PTHrP analogues, denosumab, or romosozumab (alone or with calcium or vitamin D, or both) with placebo, other drugs, or non-pharmacological therapies in men aged 50 years or older. Our primary comparison was bisphosphonates versus placebo. OUTCOMES: Critical outcomes were incidence of hip fractures, symptomatic vertebral fractures, other (not hip or vertebral) fractures, disability, participants with adverse events, study withdrawals due to adverse events, and participants with serious adverse events. Our primary time point was the final time point reported in the trials. RISK OF BIAS: We used Cochrane's RoB 2 tool to assess risk of bias. SYNTHESIS METHODS: We used a random-effects model for meta-analysis employing the Mantel-Haenszel approach, and the DerSimonian and Laird method to estimate between-trial variance. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. INCLUDED STUDIES: Seventeen trials (4132 participants) met our inclusion criteria. The average age of participants ranged from 52 to 73 years. Twelve trials used a placebo comparator versus bisphosphonate (7 trials, 2548 participants), PTH or PTHrP analogues (4 trials, 569 participants), denosumab (1 trial, 240 participants), and romosozumab (1 trial, 244 participants). For the other planned comparisons, a bisphosphonate was compared to vitamin D/vitamin D analogues (2 trials, 434 participants), to calcitonin (1 trial, 32 participants), to PTH or PTHrP analogues (1 trial, 19 participants), or to another bisphosphonate (1 trial, 301 participants), and one trial compared a bisphosphonate plus calcium to calcium tablets alone (46 participants). SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS: Placebo-controlled trials were largely susceptible to bias in selection of the reported result (83%), while most trials without a placebo control were also susceptible to bias arising from the randomisation process (100%) and in measurement of the outcome (80%). We are very uncertain about the effect of bisphosphonates on the incidence of hip fractures, symptomatic vertebral fractures, or other (non-hip non-vertebral) fractures compared to placebo at the final follow-up (up to two years). We downgraded the certainty of evidence once for risk of bias, twice for imprecision (very low event rates), and once for suspected publication bias. The certainty of evidence for incidence of other fractures was further downgraded for indirectness, as it was unclear if hip fractures were also included in the outcome. At up to two years, 2/875 participants (2 per 1000) in the bisphosphonate group reported hip fractures compared with 2/760 (3 per 1000) in the placebo group (risk ratio (RR) 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 8.51; I² = 36%; 4 trials, 1635 participants); 5/1021 (4/1000) participants in the bisphosphonate group had a symptomatic vertebral fracture compared to 7/855 (8/1000) participants in the placebo group (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.74; I² = 0%; 5 trials, 1876 participants); 25/1130 participants (16/1000) in the bisphosphonate group reported other (non-hip non-vertebral) fractures compared to 19/913 participants (21/1000) in the placebo group (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.45; I² = 0%; 6 trials, 2043 participants). Bisphosphonates probably do not increase the risk of adverse events: 1024/1374 participants (746/1000) receiving bisphosphonates reported adverse events compared to 826/1174 participants (704/1000) receiving placebo (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.19; I² = 75%; 7 trials, 2548 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) or serious adverse events: 329/1329 participants (272/1000) receiving bisphosphonate reported serious adverse events compared to 323/1128 participants (286/1000) receiving placebo (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.08; I² = 0%; 6 trials, 2457 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We downgraded the certainty of evidence once due to potential bias for adverse events and serious adverse events. We are very uncertain if bisphosphonates result in more withdrawals due to adverse events: 41/1374 participants (25/1000) in the bisphosphonate group withdrew due to adverse events compared with 43/1174 participants (37/1000) in the placebo group (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.18; I² = 37%; 7 trials, 2548 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We downgraded the certainty of evidence once for risk of bias, once for indirectness, and once for imprecision. No trial reported disability. We are very uncertain about the effects of PTH or PTHrP analogues, denosumab, or romosozumab compared to placebo on fracture outcomes. We are very uncertain about the effects of PTH/PTHrP analogues on total adverse events, withdrawals due to adverse events, and serious adverse events. Denosumab may not increase the risk of adverse events or serious adverse events compared to placebo, while the evidence for withdrawals due to adverse events is very uncertain. Romosozumab probably does not increase the risk of adverse events and may not increase the risk of serious adverse events or result in more withdrawals due to adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We are very uncertain about the effects of bisphosphonates compared to placebo on the incidence of hip fractures, symptomatic vertebral fractures, or other (non-hip non-vertebral) fractures in men at up to two years of use. Bisphosphonates probably do not increase the risk of adverse events or serious adverse events, and we are very uncertain if they result in more withdrawals due to adverse events. We downgraded the certainty of evidence for indirectness, imprecision (low event rate), and serious risk of bias in selection of the reported result, as it was unclear if all studies fully reported every fracture. We found similar results for PTH or PTHrP analogues, denosumab, or romosozumab versus placebo. Larger, longer placebo-controlled studies are needed to determine whether pharmacological therapies are beneficial for reducing fractures in men. FUNDING: This Cochrane review had no dedicated funding. REGISTRATION: Protocol (2021): https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD014707.

Humans↗
PubMed2006

[Monoclonal antibody targeting RANKL as a therapy for cancer-induced bone diseases].

Receptor activator of NF-kappaB ligand (RANKL), its receptor RANK, and osteoprotegerin (OPG), the physiological inhibitor of RANKL, were discovered using a genomics-based approach. Bone loss is dependent on RANKL, the primary mediator of osteoclast formation, function, and survival. The study of the RANK/RANKL/OPG axis in animal models has firmly established the central importance of this pathway in bone mass regulation and provided the initial rationale for the design of a mechanism-based targeted approach to inhibit RANKL in pathologic bone loss settings, including cancer-induced bone disease. Denosumab (AMG 162), a fully human monoclonal antibody that can bind and inhibit human RANKL in a way that mimics the natural bone-protecting actions of OPG, is currently in development. A phase 1 clinical trial in patients with multiple myeloma or breast carcinoma with bone metastases showed that a single subcutaneous injection of denosumab caused rapid and sustained suppression of bone turnover markers and was well tolerated. Larger trials are underway to investigate the effect of denosumab for the treatment of cancer-induced bone disease and other bone loss disorders.

Animals↗
PubMed2006

Inhibition of RANKL as a treatment for osteoporosis: preclinical and early clinical studies.

Osteoporosis and several other bone disorders occur when there is an imbalance between the resorption and formation components of bone remodeling activity. Therapies available for some of these conditions modulate the activity of osteoclasts and/or osteoblasts. The recent discoveries of receptor activator of NF-kappaB ligand (RANKL), an endogenous activator of osteoclastogenenesis and osteoclast activity and its inhibitor, osteoprotegerin (OPG) as pivotal regulatory factors in the pathogenesis of bone diseases like osteoporosis provide unique targets for therapeutic agents. In laboratory animals and now in humans, administering forms of OPG markedly inhibits osteoclast activity and improves bone strength, documenting that the strategy of inhibiting RANKL activity has therapeutic promise. A highly specific, fully human antibody against RANKL has been produced (denosumab) that in early studies in humans reduces bone turnover and improves bone density. Attributes of denosumab in these clinical studies include a very rapid onset of action, sustained effects for several months after a single injection, and good tolerability. These results provide the basis for studies evaluating the effectiveness of denosumab in several clinical conditions characterized by increased osteoclastic activity.

Animals↗
PubMed2006

The relative merits of anabolics versus anti-resorptive compounds: where our targets should be, and whether we are addressing them.

Currently available results from fracture trials provide evidence that the most potent anti-resorptive agents reduce vertebral and non-vertebral fractures maximally by 61% and 51%, respectively. Results from the Phase III trial with denosumab, the human monoclonal antibody, are eagerly awaited. Denosumab leads to sustained 80-90% reduction of bone resorption markers, which is below the level commonly achieved with bisphosphonates, and it will be interesting to see whether this leads to an improvement in its anti-fracture efficacy over bisphosphonates. If the majority of the anti-fracture efficacy of anti-resorptive agents results from the reduction of the remodelling space (removal of stress raisers) and the conservation of structural integrity of cancellous bone, a further decrease in bone resorption might not be desirable, especially as suppression of the residual remodelling capacity could lead to an increased risk for accumulation of microdamage. In contrast to anti-resorptive agents, the bone anabolic parathyroid hormone activates modelling drifts, which act to increase trabecular thickness and add bone predominantly on the endocortical, and to a lesser degree the periosteal, surface. Despite its anabolic nature, reduction of vertebral and non-vertebral fractures is only marginally better than those achieved with anti-resorptive agents. Ageing compromises locomotor capacity and is associated with an increased risk of falls. Perhaps it is time to shift our attendance to the age-related deterioration of muscle or neuromuscular function as a target and add this 'adjuvant therapy' to the potent anti-remodelling and bone anabolic agents available for the treatment of osteoporosis if we truly want to reduce fracture incidence beyond what is possible today.

Accidental Falls↗
PubMed2005

Osteoprotegerin and RANKL regulate bone resorption, density, geometry and strength.

Osteoprotegerin (OPG) and receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappaB ligand (RANKL) are dominant regulators of bone resorption. Many hormones, cytokines and growth factors mediate bone resorption by altering the ratio of RANKL to OPG. RANKL and OPG expression is also altered in numerous bone diseases, and these changes can reflect disease etiology or compensatory responses to disease. RANKL stimulates osteoclast formation, function and survival, and each of these effects is inhibited by OPG. OPG suppresses bone resorption and increases the density, area and strength of both cancellous and cortical bone. Denosumab (AMG 162), a fully human monoclonal antibody to RANKL, shares the pharmacologic attributes of OPG but has a significantly longer half-life that allows less frequent administration.

Animals↗
PubMed2006

Developments in the pharmacotherapeutic management of osteoporosis.

During the last two decades, several medications have been granted a marketing authorisation for the management of osteoporosis. Bisphosphonates are the most widely prescribed drugs in this area, worldwide. Alendronate and risedronate are given daily or weekly and have demonstrated their ability to reduce fracture rates at the spine and hip. Ibandronate has demonstrated spine antifracture efficacy with intervals between dosings greater than weekly. New developments in this class include intravenous administration of ibandronate or zoledronate, once every three months or once yearly. Raloxifene, a selective estrogen-receptor modulator, reduces spine fractures and, in post-hoc analyses, non-spine fractures in high-risk subjects. New selective estrogen-receptor modulators, including lasofoxifene, bazedoxifene and arzoxifene, are expected to demonstrate antifracture efficacy at the hip level, whilst retaining the extra-skeletal benefits (such as in the breast) that are obtained with raloxifene. The peptides from the parathyroid hormone family are potent stimulators of bone formation. Teriparatide (1 - 34 amino acid fragment of the parathyroid hormone) reduces spine and non-spine fractures, an effect that is sustained for up to 30 months after the withdrawal of treatment. The intact hormone (1 - 84 amino acids) showed similar results on spine fractures, and more data are requested to evaluate its effect on non-spine or hip fractures. Strontium ranelate is suggested to be the first medication to uncouple bone formation from bone resorption. It has shown antifracture efficacy at all sites in a large number of postmenopausal women. New developments include: denosumab, an antibody against receptor activator of NF-kappaB ligand (RANKL); a cytokine that is responsible for osteoclastogenesis; and inhibitors of cathepsin K, a cysteine protease that is involved in the cleavage of collagen.

Antibodies, Monoclonal↗
PubMed2006

[Molecular diagnostic and targeted therapy--"Barking dogs are going to bite": presentations from the 42nd Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Atlanta 2006].

This years ASCO-meeting reinforced the trend of the recent years to get off from empirical treatment concepts to tailored and individualized diagnostics and therapy. However, the basis for an individual therapy is a specific molecular diagnostic which can be reflected in the analysis of hormonal receptor, HER-1, HER-2 and topoisomerase IIalpha in breast cancer. All these markers are not only able to prognosticate the course of disease but they also can predict the success of specific treatment approaches. Trastuzumab is standard therapy in HER-2 positive breast cancer both in the adjuvant and palliative setting. But new therapeutic agents, as e. g. lapatinib, are promising in the treatment of HER-2 positive breast cancer even if trastuzumab is failing. Otherwise it might possibly be an alternative option but adequate clinical results have to be awaited. The targeted inactivation of EGFR-related signal transduction pathways by e. g. gefitinib did not show a substantial improvement neither as a single agent nor in combination with endocrine treatment. However, the appropriate subgroup which might benefit from this therapy has to be defined even if molecular data suggest that patients with ER positive and PR negative breast cancer might be such a group. The increasing knowledge in terms of the biology of bone metastasis led to the development of new treatment options as e. g. denosumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody for RANK ligand. Two adjuvant cytotoxic treatment trials revealed that taxanes improve the prognosis of node positive breast cancer and should be administered sequentially. The advantage of switching to an aromatase inhibitor after two to three years of tamoxifen in endocrine treatment of postmenopausal patients is proved by two clinical trials (IES, ARNO) which could demonstrate a survival benefit. In conclusion it seems to be evident that new targeted therapy options are effective and will set new standards for the treatment of breast cancer patients in the near future. The presentation for the ovarian cancer focused on the addition of a third cytotoxic agent to carboplatin and paclitaxel as the standard therapy for the primary treatment of ovarian cancer. New data of Bevacizumab in the treatment of primary and recurrent ovarian cancer were presented. However, this is not yet a standard treatment for all patients and needs further investigations within large, multicentre, randomised trials. The lymphonodectomy as part of the primary therapy of the endometrial cancer seems to be a benefit at least in patients with advanced disease or high risk stage I tumours. The adjuvant therapy of uterine sarcomas is still not yet very well investigated and clear. A trial which recruited 12 years demonstrated a benefit in overall survival which has to be interpreted with caution. In this year again there have been registered an increasing number of interesting contributions from Germany, which also received international attention.

Biomarkers, Tumor↗
PubMed2006

Mechanisms of osteoporosis in spinal cord injury.

Osteoporosis is a known complication of spinal cord injury (SCI), but its mechanism remains unknown. The pathogenesis of osteoporosis after SCI is generally considered disuse. However, although unloading is an important factor in the pathogenesis of osteoporosis after SCI, neural lesion and hormonal changes also seem to be involved in this process. Innervation and neuropeptides play an important role in normal bone remodelling. SCI results in denervation of the sublesional bones and the neural lesion itself may play a pivotal role in the development of osteoporosis after SCI. Although upper limbs are normally loaded and innervated, bone loss also occurs in the upper extremities in patients with paraplegia, indicating that hormonal changes may be associated with osteoporosis after SCI. SCI-mediated hormonal changes may contribute to osteoporosis after SCI by different mechanisms: (1) increased renal elimination and reduced intestinal absorption of calcium leading to a negative calcium balance; (2) vitamin D deficiency plays a role in the pathogenesis of SCI-induced osteoporosis; (3) SCI antagonizes gonadal function and inhibits the osteoanabolic action of sex steroids; (4) hyperleptinaemia after SCI may contribute to the development of osteoporosis; (5) pituitary suppression of TSH may be another contributory factor to bone loss after SCI; and (6) bone loss after SCI may be caused directly, at least in part, by insulin resistance and IGFs. Thus, oversupply of osteoclasts relative to the requirement for bone resorption and/or undersupply of osteoblasts relative to the requirement for cavity repair results in bone loss after SCI. Mechanisms for the osteoporosis following SCI include a range of systems, and osteoporosis after SCI should not be simply considered as disuse osteoporosis. Unloading, neural lesion and hormonal changes after SCI result in severe bone loss. The aim of this review is to improve understanding with regard to the mechanisms of osteoporosis after SCI. The understanding of the pathogenesis of osteoporosis after SCI can help in the consideration of new treatment strategies. Because bone resorption after SCI is very high, intravenous bisphosphonates and denosumab should be considered for the treatment of osteoporosis after SCI.

Biomechanical Phenomena↗
PubMed2005

Gateways to clinical trials.

Gateways to Clinical Trials are a guide to the most recent clinical trials in current literature and congresses. The data in the following tables have been retrieved from the Clinical Trials Knowledge Area of Prous Science Integrity, the drug discovery and development portal, http://integrity. prous.com. This issue focuses on the following selection of drugs: 131I-chTNT; Abatacept, adalimumab, alemtuzumab, APC-8015, aprepitant, atazanavir sulfate, atomoxetine hydrochloride, azimilide hydrochloride; Bevacizumab, bortezomib, bosentan, buserelin; Caspofungin acetate, CC-4047, ChAGCD3, ciclesonide, clopidogrel, curcumin, Cypher; Dabigatran etexilate, dapoxetine hydrochloride, darbepoetin alfa, darusentan, denosumab, DMXB-Anabaseine, drospirenone, drospirenone/estradiol, duloxetine hydrochloride, dutasteride; Edodekin alfa, efaproxiral sodium, elaidic acid-cytarabine, erlotinib hydrochloride, ertapenem sodium, escitalopram oxalate, eszopiclone, etonogestrel/testosterone decanoate, exenatide; Fulvestrant; Gefitinib, glycine, GVS-111; Homoharringtonine; ICC-1132, imatinib mesylate, iodine (I131) tositumomab, i.v. gamma-globulin; Levetiracetam, levocetirizine, lintuzumab, liposomal nystatin, lumiracoxib, lurtotecan; Manitimus, mapatumumab, melatonin, micafungin sodium, mycophenolic acid sodium salt; Oblimersen sodium, OGX-011, olmesartan medoxomil, omalizumab, omapatrilat, oral insulin; Parathyroid hormone (human recombinant), pasireotide, peginterferon alfa-2a, peginterferon alfa-2b, peginterferon alfa-2b/ribavirin, phVEGF-A165, pimecrolimus, pitavastatin calcium, plerixafor hydrochloride, posaconazole, pramlintide acetate, prasterone, pregabalin, PT-141; Quercetin; Ranolazine, rosuvastatin calcium, rubitecan, rupatadine fumarate; Sardomozide, sunitinib malate; Tadalafil, talactoferrin alfa, tegaserod maleate, telithromycin, testosterone transdermal patch, TH-9507, tigecycline, tiotropium bromide, tipifarnib, tocilizumab, treprostinil sodium; Valdecoxib, vandetanib, vardenafil hydrochloride hydrate, voriconazole.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗