TrialSignal

Clinical trial intelligence for biotech diligence. Search source-linked clinical trial records, open structured report previews and unlock premium diligence workflows.

Support: support@intelligencetrials.comBilling: billing@intelligencetrials.com

Product

Public searchIntelligence directoriesMethodologySample reportPricing

Account

Create accountSign inDashboardReset password

Legal and support

Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceContact us

© 2026 TrialSignal. All rights reserved.

TrialSignal provides research intelligence only. Reports and IP notes are not medical, legal, regulatory, investment, patentability or freedom-to-operate advice.

TrialSignal
Sign inCreate account
HomeSearchIntelligenceMethodologyDemo reportPricingContactDashboardSign inCreate account

Full-access demo report

Go to dashboardAdd to folder
NCT04729621COMPLETEDdemo full access

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Multinational, Multicenter Study to Compare Efficacy, Safety, and Immunogenicity of TVB-009P and Denosumab (Prolia®) in Patients With Postmenopausal Osteoporosis

Sponsor

Source record

Teva Pharmaceuticals USA

Phase

Source record

PHASE3

Modality

AI-normalized

monoclonal antibody

Target

AI-normalized

TVB-009, Prolia®

Indication / condition

AI-normalized

Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal

Intervention

Source record

TVB-009, Prolia®

Related intelligence directories

Indication directory: OsteoporosisModality directory: monoclonal antibodyTarget directory: TVB-009

Source & freshness

Source record

NCT ID

NCT04729621

Original source

ClinicalTrials.gov

Source last updated

Apr 18, 2024

Ingested at

Jun 04, 2026

Internal sync

Jun 05, 2026

Model version

trialsignal-ai-v1

Normalized confidence

88%

Validation status

validated

Open original registry record
View original source fields

NCT ID

NCT04729621

Title

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Multinational, Multicenter Study to Compare Efficacy, Safety, and Immunogenicity of TVB-009P and Denosumab (Prolia®) in Patients With Postmenopausal Osteoporosis

Sponsor

Teva Pharmaceuticals USA

Status

COMPLETED

Phase

PHASE3

Condition raw

Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal

Condition normalized

Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal

Modality raw

monoclonal antibody

Modality normalized

monoclonal antibody

Target raw

TVB-009, Prolia®

Target normalized

TVB-009, Prolia®

Interventions

TVB-009, Prolia®

Public preview

Source record

Teva Pharmaceuticals USA conducted a Phase 3 clinical trial (NCT04729621) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TVB-009P compared to Denosumab (Prolia®) in treating postmenopausal osteoporosis. The study involved 332 participants and was completed in June 2023.

AI-generated analysis supports research triage only. Verify source records, publications, sponsor disclosures and IP databases before making diligence decisions. Model: trialsignal-ai-v1.

Contacts

Source record

Study official: Teva Medical Expert, MD (STUDY_DIRECTOR) | Affiliation: Teva Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Access state

Full report

Public pages expose searchable facts. Premium access unlocks detailed analytical fields and workflow tools.

Open primary registry source

Workspace filing

Add to folder

Try the folder workflow with this demo report. Sign in to persist folders in your real workspace.

TrialSignal

Clinical trial intelligence report

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Multinational, Multicenter Study to Compare Efficacy, Safety, and Immunogenicity of TVB-009P and Denosumab (Prolia®) in Patients With Postmenopausal Osteoporosis

Source-linked diligence brief with registry provenance, taxonomy normalization and premium analytical context.

Generated

Jun 25, 2026

Report code

NCT04729621-Jun 25, 2026

NCT ID

NCT04729621

Status

COMPLETED

Phase

PHASE3

Sponsor

Teva Pharmaceuticals USA

Executive brief

Investment-Ready Snapshot

Teva Pharmaceuticals USA conducted a Phase 3 clinical trial (NCT04729621) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TVB-009P compared to Denosumab (Prolia®) in treating postmenopausal osteoporosis. The study involved 332 participants and was completed in June 2023.

Source & freshness

Provenance

SourceClinicalTrials.gov
Source updatedApr 18, 2024
Internal syncJun 05, 2026
Model versiontrialsignal-ai-v1

https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04729621

Indication

Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal

Modality

monoclonal antibody

Target

TVB-009, Prolia®

Intervention

TVB-009, Prolia®

Source record

Protocol Description

This is a multinational, multicenter, randomized, double-blind study to demonstrate similar efficacy and safety of TVB-009 compared to Prolia® administered subcutaneously at doses of 60 mg every 26 weeks. Approximately 326 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis will be randomized to receive either TVB-009 or Prolia®. At week 52, patients in the Prolia® arm will be re-randomized 1:1 to either continue with a third dose of Prolia® or transition to TVB-009 and receive a single dose of TVB-009 in the transition period to assess immunogenicity and safety after a transition from Prolia® to TVB-009. The total treatment duration for each patient is 78 weeks.

Source record

Outcome Measures

primary

Percent Change From Baseline in LS-BMD at Week 52

  • •Percent change from baseline in lumbar spine bone mineral density (LS BMD) based on centrally assessed dual energy X ray absorptiometry (DXA) at week 52
secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in sCTX-1 at Week 26

  • •Percent change from baseline in serum C-telopeptide cross-link of type 1 collagen at week 26
secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in LS-BMD at Week 26

  • •Percent change from baseline in lumbar spine bone mineral density (LS BMD) based on centrally assessed dual energy X ray absorptiometry (DXA) at week 26
secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in Femoral Neck BMD at Week 26

  • •Percent change from baseline in femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD) based on centrally assessed dual energy X ray absorptiometry (DXA)at week 26
secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in Total Hip BMD at Week 26

  • •Percent change from baseline in total hip bone mineral density (BMD) based on centrally assessed dual energy X ray absorptiometry (DXA) at week 26
secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in sCTX-1

  • •Percent change from baseline in serum C-telopeptide cross-link of type 1 collagen
secondary

Percentage of Participatns With sCTX-1 Suppression at Week 4

  • •Proportion of patients with suppression of serum C-telopeptide cross-link of type 1 collagen at week 4
secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in P1NP

  • •Percent change from baseline in procollagen type 1 N propeptide (P1NP) to Week 52
secondary

Number of Fractures up to Week 52

  • •Number of patients with who experienced any new fractures up to week 52.
secondary

Percent Change From Week 52 in LS-BMD by DXA at Week 78

  • •Percent change from week 52 in lumbar spine bone mineral density (LS BMD) based on centrally assessed dual energy X ray absorptiometry (DXA) at week 78
secondary

Percent Change From Week 52 in Femoral Neck BMD by DXA at Week 78

  • •Percent change from week 52 in femoral neck bone mineral density (LS BMD) based on centrally assessed dual energy X ray absorptiometry (DXA) at week 78
secondary

Percent Change From Week 52 in Total Hip BMD by DXA at Week 78

  • •Percent change from week 52 in total hip bone mineral density (LS BMD) based on centrally assessed dual energy X ray absorptiometry (DXA) at week 78
secondary

Difference Between Percent Change From Baseline in sCTX-1 Between Week 52 and Week 78

  • •Difference in the percent change from baseline in serum C-telopeptide cross-link of type 1 collagen from baseline to Week 78 as compared to baseline to Week 52
secondary

Difference Between Percent Change From Baseline in P1NP Between Week 52 and Week 78

  • •The difference in the Percent change from baseline in procollagen type 1 N propeptide at Week 78 compared to Week 52.
secondary

Number of Patients With Fractures Between Week 52 and Week 78

  • •Number of patients experiencing new fractures between week 52 and week 78
secondary

Incidence of Adverse Event

  • •Number of patients reporting at least one treatment-emergent adverse event up to week 52
secondary

Incidence of Adverse Events in the Transition Period

  • •Number of patients reporting at least one treatment-emergent adverse event between weeks 52 and 78
secondary

Incidence of Antidrug Antibodies (ADAs) in the Main Treatment Period

  • •Number of patients with confirmed positive antidrug antibodies (ADAs) post-baseline through Week 52
secondary

Incidence of Antidrug Antibodies (ADAs) in the Transition Period

  • •Number of patients with confirmed positive antidrug antibodies (ADAs) at Week 65
secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in Femoral Neck BMD at Week 52

  • •Percent change from baseline in femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD) based on centrally assessed dual energy X ray absorptiometry (DXA)at week 52
secondary

Percent Change From Baseline in Total Hip BMD at Week 52

  • •Percent change from baseline in total hip bone mineral density (BMD) based on centrally assessed dual energy X ray absorptiometry (DXA) at week 52
secondary

Number of TEAEs Leading to Patient Withdraw From the Study

  • •Number of patients that withdraw or are removed from the study due to treatment emergent adverse events from both the main and transition treatment periods.
secondary

Local Tolerability at Injection Site

  • •Number of patients who report Injection Site Reactions at Day 1, Week 26, or Week 52.

Source record

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

4 items
•Postmenopausal womeen (≥60 and ≤90 years) with a diagnosis of osteoporosis
•Body weight ≥50 kg and ≤90 kg
•Bone Mineral Density (BMD) measurement T score of less than -2.5 but not less than -4.0 by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) at the lumbar spine at screening
•At least 3 vertebrae in the L1 L4 region that are evaluable by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA)

Exclusion criteria

8 items
•One severe or more than two moderate vertebral fractures
•History and/or presence of hip fracture or atypical femur fracture
•Any prior treatment with denosumab
•Ongoing use of any bone active drugs which can affect Bone Mineral Density (BMD)
•Vitamin D deficiency or hyper- or hypocalcemiacium at screening
•Hyperthyroidism, hypothyroidism, hypoparathyroidism or hyperparathyroidism
•Any medical condition that could jeopardize or would compromise the patient's safety or ability to participate in this study
•Other Inclusion/exclusion criteria may apply

AI analysis

Known Results And Readout Context

The trial demonstrated that TVB-009P is comparable to Prolia® in terms of efficacy and safety. Primary outcomes included percent change in lumbar spine bone mineral density (LS-BMD) at week 52. Secondary outcomes assessed various bone density measures and adverse events. Detailed results are pending publication as of April 2024.

IP intelligence

Patent And IP Landscape

## Deposited patents linked to trial assets No deposited patent records were confidently identified from available context. ## Patentability and FTO strategy Composition of matter for TVB-009P Method of treatment for osteoporosis using TVB-009P Formulation patents related to denosumab derivatives Ownership questions regarding Teva Pharmaceuticals' rights to TVB-009P and its formulation Potential licensing agreements with Amgen regarding Prolia® Investigate existing patents on denosumab and their expiration dates AI-suggested patent records were not saved as deposited patents because they were not verified against a structured patent data source. Explore alternative formulations or delivery methods for TVB-009P Consider combination therapies that do not infringe on existing patents

Source record

Contacts

Study official: Teva Medical Expert, MD (STUDY_DIRECTOR) | Affiliation: Teva Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Important research and legal disclaimer

TrialSignal reports support professional research triage only. They are not medical advice, legal advice, regulatory advice, investment advice, patentability opinions or freedom-to-operate opinions. AI-generated sections and patent notes require validation against primary sources, sponsor disclosures, publications, patent databases and qualified professional review.