Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

BACKGROUND: Valvular calcification is central to the pathogenesis and progression of aortic stenosis, with preclinical and observational studies suggesting that bone turnover and osteoblastic differentiation of valvular interstitial cells are important contributory mechanisms. We aimed to establish whether inhibition of these pathways with denosumab or alendronic acid could reduce disease progression in aortic stenosis. METHODS: In a single-center, parallel group, double-blind randomized controlled trial, patients >50 years of age with calcific aortic stenosis (peak aortic jet velocity >2.5 m/s) were randomized 2:1:2:1 to denosumab (60 mg every 6 months), placebo injection, alendronic acid (70 mg once weekly), or placebo capsule. Participants underwent serial assessments with Doppler echocardiography, computed tomography aortic valve calcium scoring, and 18F-sodium fluoride positron emission tomography and computed tomography. The primary end point was the calculated 24-month change in aortic valve calcium score. RESULTS: A total of 150 patients (mean age, 72±8 years; 21% women) with calcific aortic stenosis (peak aortic jet velocity, 3.36 m/s [2.93-3.82 m/s]; aortic valve calcium score, 1152 AU [655-2065 AU]) were randomized and received the allocated trial intervention: denosumab (n=49), alendronic acid (n=51), and placebo (injection n=25, capsule n=25; pooled for analysis). Serum C-terminal telopeptide, a measure of bone turnover, halved from baseline to 6 months with denosumab (0.23 [0.18-0.33 µg/L] to 0.11 µg/L [0.08-0.17 µg/L]) and alendronic acid (0.20 [0.14-0.28 µg/L] to 0.09 µg/L [0.08-0.13 µg/L]) but was unchanged with placebo (0.23 [0.17-0.30 µg/L] to 0.26 µg/L [0.16-0.31 µg/L]). There were no differences in 24-month change in aortic valve calcium score between denosumab and placebo (343 [198-804 AU] versus 354 AU [76-675 AU]; P=0.41) or alendronic acid and placebo (326 [138-813 AU] versus 354 AU [76-675 AU]; P=0.49). Similarly, there were no differences in change in peak aortic jet velocity or 18F-sodium fluoride aortic valve uptake. CONCLUSIONS: Neither denosumab nor alendronic acid affected progression of aortic valve calcification in patients with calcific aortic stenosis. Alternative pathways and mechanisms need to be explored to identify disease-modifying therapies for the growing population of patients with this potentially fatal condition. Registration: URL:; Unique identifier: NCT02132026.

Original publication




Journal article



Publication Date





2418 - 2427


alendronate, aortic stenosis, calcium signaling, computed tomography, X-ray, denosumab, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Alendronate, Aortic Valve Stenosis, Bone Density Conservation Agents, Denosumab, Disease Progression, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography, Treatment Outcome, Vascular Calcification