Arzoxifene for prevention of fractures and invasive breast cancer in postmenopausal women

Correlation between 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels and latitude in Brazilian postmenopausal women: from the Arzoxifene Generations Trial

SUMMARY

We investigated vitamin D status in Brazilian cities located at different latitudes. Insufficiency (<50 nmol/L) was common (17 %), even in those living in a tropical climate. Vitamin D insufficiency increased as a function of latitude. Mean 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) levels in each site and latitude correlation were very high (r = -0.88; p=0.02). [corrected].

INTRODUCTION

Inadequate vitamin D, determined by low levels of 25(OH)D, has become very common despite the availability of sunlight at some latitudes. National data from a country that spans a wide range of latitudes would help to determine to what extent latitude or other factors are responsible for vitamin D deficiency. We investigated vitamin D status in cities located at different latitudes in Brazil, a large continental country.

METHODS

The source is the Brazilian database from the Generations Trial (1,933 osteopenic or osteoporotic postmenopausal women (60 to 85 years old) with 25(OH)D measurements). 25(OH)D below 25 nmol/L (10 ng/mL) was an exclusion criterion. Baseline values were between fall and winter. The sites included Recife, Salvador, Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Curitiba, and Porto Alegre. Mean and standard deviation of 25(OH)D, age, spine and femoral neck T-score, calcium, creatinine, and alkaline phosphatase were calculated for each city. Pearson correlation was used for 25(OH)D and latitude.

RESULTS

Insufficiency (<50 or <20 ng/mL) was common (329 subjects, 17 %). Vitamin D insufficiency increased as a function of latitude, reaching 24.5 % in the southernmost city, Porto Alegre. The correlation between mean 25(OH)D levels in each site and latitude was very high (r = -0.88, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

There is a high percentage of individuals with vitamin D insufficiency in Brazil, even in cities near the equator, and this percentage progressively increases with more southern latitudes.

Osteoporosis update from the 2012 Santa Fe Bone Symposium

The core of the 2012 Santa Fe Bone Symposium consisted of plenary presentations on new developments in the fields of osteoporosis and metabolic bone disease, with a focus on current and future implications for patient care. These were complemented by oral abstracts, interactive discussions of challenging cases, a debate on benefits and risks of long-term bisphosphonate therapy, and a panel discussion of controversial issues in the management of osteoporosis. Other topics included a review of the most important scientific publications in the past year, new and emerging therapy for osteoporosis, the benefits and limitations of clinical practice guidelines in the care of individual patients, the effects of metallic elements on skeletal health, clinical applications of bone turnover markers, an engineering perspective of skeletal health and disease, and an update on the role of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry in education, certification, accreditation, and advocacy for high-quality bone density testing. The symposium was highlighted by an inaugural presentation of "2 Million 2 Many," a national campaign of the National Bone Health Alliance to increase awareness of osteoporosis.

Osteoporosis and cancer

Cancer is a major risk factor for bone loss and fractures. This is due both to direct effects of cancer cells on the skeleton and to deleterious effects of cancer-specific therapies on bone cells. Marked improvements in survival for many cancers mean that strategies to limit bone loss and reduce fracture risk must be incorporated into the care plans for nearly all patients with cancer. The vast majority of effort thus far has focused on bone loss in patients with breast and prostate cancers, with comparatively few studies in other malignancies. Antiresorptive therapies have proven nearly universally effective for limiting bone loss in cancer patients, although few studies have been powered sufficiently to include fractures as primary endpoints, and patients are frequently neither identified nor treated according to published guidelines. Nonpharmacologic approaches to limit falls, particularly in elderly patients, are also likely important adjunctive measures for most cancer patients.

Use of Pharmacologic Interventions for Breast Cancer Risk Reduction: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline

Purpose

To update the 2009 American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline on pharmacologic interventions for breast cancer (BC) risk reduction.

Methods

A systematic review of randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses published from June 2007 through June 2012 was completed using MEDLINE and Cochrane Collaboration Library. Primary outcome of interest was BC incidence (invasive and noninvasive). Secondary outcomes included BC mortality, adverse events, and net health benefits. Guideline recommendations were revised based on an Update Committee's review of the literature.

Results

Nineteen articles met the selection criteria. Six chemoprevention agents were identified: tamoxifen, raloxifene, arzoxifene, lasofoxifene, exemestane, and anastrozole.

Recommendations

In women at increased risk of BC age ≥ 35 years, tamoxifen (20 mg per day for 5 years) should be discussed as an option to reduce the risk of estrogen receptor (ER) –positive BC. In postmenopausal women, raloxifene (60 mg per day for 5 years) and exemestane (25 mg per day for 5 years) should also be discussed as options for BC risk reduction. Those at increased BC risk are defined as individuals with a 5-year projected absolute risk of BC ≥ 1.66% (based on the National Cancer Institute BC Risk Assessment Tool or an equivalent measure) or women diagnosed with lobular carcinoma in situ. Use of other selective ER modulators or other aromatase inhibitors to lower BC risk is not recommended outside of a clinical trial. Health care providers are encouraged to discuss the option of chemoprevention among women at increased BC risk. The discussion should include the specific risks and benefits associated with each chemopreventive agent.

Association of back pain with hypovitaminosis D in postmenopausal women with low bone mass

Background

Back pain is a major public health problem due to its high frequency, to the resulting activity constraint, and the need for surgery in many cases. Back pain is more frequent in women than men, mainly in postmenopausal women. High prevalence of hypovitaminosis D has been detected in postmenopausal women, and it is associated with decreased bone mass, sarcopenia, vertebral fractures, and inflammation, which can be related to back pain.

Methods

The relation between back pain and hypovitaminosis D was evaluated in this study, as well the difference regarding the number of bedridden days, number of days away from work, and daily activities limitation between women with and without hypovitaminosis D. This study reviewed baseline data from an interventional phase III multicenter trial in low bone mass postmenopausal women. The study included demographic data, 25OHD determinations, Newitt/Cummings questionnaire on back pain, and vertebral fracture identified thought X-ray evaluation.

Results

The trial included 9354 participants, but only 9305 underwent all the evaluations. The age median was 67 (60 - 85 years old) and age at menopause was 49 (18 - 72 years). Hypovitaminosis D was found in 22.5% of the subjects, 15.3% of them had vertebral fractures, 67.5% with back pain, and 14.8% reduced their daily activities in the previous six months. Subjects with hypovitaminosis D, compared to those without hypovitaminosis D, reported more back pain (69.5 v 66.9%, p: 0.022), more cases of severe back pain (8.5% v 6.8%, p: 0,004), higher limitation in their daily activities (17.2 v 14.0%, p: 0.001), and more fractures (17.4 v 14.6%, p: 0,002); also, they had more trouble to perform daily activities addressed in the Newwit/Cummings questionnaire.

Conclusion

Hypovitaminosis D was related to back pain, to its severity, and to difficulty in perform daily activities.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT00088010

Selective oestrogen receptor modulators in prevention of breast cancer: an updated meta-analysis of individual participant data

BACKGROUND

Tamoxifen and raloxifene reduce the risk of breast cancer in women at elevated risk of disease, but the duration of the effect is unknown. We assessed the effectiveness of selective oestrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) on breast cancer incidence.

METHODS

We did a meta-analysis with individual participant data from nine prevention trials comparing four selective oestrogen receptor modulators (SERMs; tamoxifen, raloxifene, arzoxifene, and lasofoxifene) with placebo, or in one study with tamoxifen. Our primary endpoint was incidence of all breast cancer (including ductal carcinoma in situ) during a 10 year follow-up period. Analysis was by intention to treat.

RESULTS

We analysed data for 83,399 women with 306,617 women-years of follow-up. Median follow-up was 65 months (IQR 54-93). Overall, we noted a 38% reduction (hazard ratio [HR] 0·62, 95% CI 0·56-0·69) in breast cancer incidence, and 42 women would need to be treated to prevent one breast cancer event in the first 10 years of follow-up. The reduction was larger in the first 5 years of follow-up than in years 5-10 (42%, HR 0·58, 0·51-0·66; p<0·0001 vs 25%, 0·75, 0·61-0·93; p=0·007), but we noted no heterogeneity between time periods. Thromboembolic events were significantly increased with all SERMs (odds ratio 1·73, 95% CI 1·47-2·05; p<0·0001). We recorded a significant reduction of 34% in vertebral fractures (0·66, 0·59-0·73), but only a small effect for non-vertebral fractures (0·93, 0·87-0·99).

INTERPRETATION

For all SERMs, incidence of invasive oestrogen (ER)-positive breast cancer was reduced both during treatment and for at least 5 years after completion. Similar to other preventive interventions, careful consideration of risks and benefits is needed to identify women who are most likely to benefit from these drugs.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK.

Preventive therapy for breast cancer

Trials with tamoxifen have clearly shown that the risk of developing oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer can be reduced by at least 50 % with prophylactic agents. The current challenge is to find new agents which achieve this or better efficacy, but with fewer side effects. Recent results indicate that the selective estrogen-receptor modulator (SERM) raloxifene has fewer endometrial cancers, gynaecologic symptoms, and thromboembolic side effects, but is also slightly less efficacious. Results for contralateral tumours in adjuvant trials suggest that aromatase inhibitors may be able to prevent up to 70-80 % of ER-positive breast cancers, and the MAP3 trial has shown to reduce all invasive breast cancer by 65 % in the preventive setting. The IBIS-II trial is currently investigating anastrozole in healthy postmenopausal women. New agents are needed for receptor negative breast cancer and premenopausal women, and several possibilities are currently under investigation.

The discovery and development of selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) for clinical practice

Selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) are structurally different compounds that interact with intracellular estrogen receptors in target organs as estrogen receptor agonists or antagonists. These drugs have been intensively studied over the past decade and have proven to be a highly versatile group for the treatment of different conditions associated with postmenopausal women's health, including hormone responsive cancer and osteoporosis. Tamoxifen, a failed contraceptive is currently used to treat all stages of breast cancer, chemoprevention in women at high risk for breast cancer and also has beneficial effects on bone mineral density and serum lipids in postmenopausal women. Raloxifene, a failed breast cancer drug, is the only SERM approved internationally for the prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis and vertebral fractures. However, although these SERMs have many benefits, they also have some potentially serious adverse effects, such as thromboembolic disorders and, in the case of tamoxifen, uterine cancer. These adverse effects represent a major concern given that long-term therapy is required to prevent osteoporosis or prevent and treat breast cancer. The search for the 'ideal' SERM, which would have estrogenic effects on bone and serum lipids, neutral effects on the uterus, and antiestrogenic effects on breast tissue, but none of the adverse effects associated with current therapies, is currently under way. Ospemifene, lasofoxifene, bazedoxifene and arzoxifene, which are new SERM molecules with potentially greater efficacy and potency than previous SERMs, have been investigated for use in the treatment and prevention of osteoporosis. These drugs have been shown to be comparably effective to conventional hormone replacement therapy in animal models, with potential indications for an improved safety profile. Clinical efficacy data from ongoing phase III trials are available or are awaited for each SERM so that a true understanding of the therapeutic potential of these compounds can be obtained. In this article, we describe the discovery and development of the group of medicines called SERMs. The newer SERMs in late development: ospemifene, lasofoxifene, bazedoxifene, are arzoxifene are described in detail.

Exemestane: one part of the chemopreventive spectrum for ER-positive breast cancer

Development of drugs to prevent breast cancer has focused largely on anti-estrogenic agents, leading to approval by the US FDA of two such agents for this purpose: tamoxifen and raloxifene. However, the uptake of these drugs by high-risk women and their primary care physicians has been limited, due in large part to a perceived unfavorable risk:benefit balance. The current focus is on aromatase inhibitors, which appear to have more acceptable side effects in addition to being more efficacious in reducing breast cancer risk in high-risk women. The placebo-controlled phase III MAP.3 trial tested the AI exemestane in high-risk women and documented a 65% relative reduction in total and a 73% reduction in ER-positive breast cancers in the intervention compared to the placebo group. Toxicities centered around musculoskeletal side effects, but in the relatively short 35-month median follow-up period, these did not impair quality-of-life. A bone study nested within MAP.3 demonstrated significant decreases in bone mineral density (BMD) and in structural parameters of bone quality. The strengths and weaknesses of preventive exemestane as evaluated in the MAP.3 trial are discussed as are relevant areas for future consideration: influence of obesity, alternative dosing, and biomarker use in phase III prevention trials of aromatase inhibitors.

Exemestane for breast cancer prevention: a critical shift?

The Mammary Prevention 3 (MAP.3) placebo-controlled randomized trial in 4,560 high-risk postmenopausal women showed a 65% reduction in invasive breast cancer with the use of exemestane at 35 months median follow-up. Few differences in adverse events were observed between the arms, suggesting a promising risk:benefit balance with exemestane for use in chemoprevention. Yet, the MAP.3 design and implementation raise concerns regarding limited data maturity and not prospectively including key bone-related and other toxicities as study end points. Exemestane for prevention is juxtaposed against selective estrogen receptor modulators and the other aromatase inhibitors. Additional issues for prevention, including the influence of obesity, alternative dosing, and biomarker use in phase III trials, are addressed.

SIGNIFICANCE

The recently completed MAP.3 trial of exemestane for breast cancer prevention offers a potential new standard for pharmaceutical risk reduction in high-risk postmenopausal women. In addition to describing key findings from the publication of MAP.3 and related trials, our review undertakes a detailed analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of MAP.3 as well as the implications for future prevention research.

Exemestane for primary prevention of breast cancer in postmenopausal women

PURPOSE

The benefits and risks of exemestane for the primary prevention of breast cancer are discussed and compared with other breast cancer chemoprevention therapies.

SUMMARY

Selective estrogen-receptor modulators (SERMs) are the current mainstay for primary prevention of breast cancer. As an alternative, exemestane, an aromatase inhibitor, has been evaluated for breast cancer prevention in postmenopausal women. A study of 4560 high-risk postmenopausal women taking exemestane 25 mg daily for a median of three years found a 65% relative reduction in the annual occurrence of invasive breast cancer compared with placebo (0.19% versus 0.55%; hazard ratio, 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18-0.70; p = 0.002) and a 53% reduction in invasive plus noninvasive breast cancer (0.35% versus 0.77%; hazard ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.27-0.79; p = 0.04). Adverse effects from exemestane are generally mild, with the most common being diarrhea, joint pain, and menopausal-related symptoms. Importantly, exemestane did not increase the risks of endometrial cancers, thromboembolism, cardiovascular events, or cataracts. However, joint stiffness and arthralgia were more common when compared with tamoxifen or raloxifene. Ongoing clinical trials with other aromatase inhibitors are underway to evaluate the benefits and long-term skeletal risks.

CONCLUSION

Exemestane 25 mg daily taken for at least three years is a new option for the prevention of breast cancer in high-risk postmenopausal women. Indirectly compared with SERMs, exemestane has a similar frequency of bothersome adverse effects without the risk of thromboembolic events or endometrial cancer, though an increased risk of osteoporosis is of concern.

Future directions in cancer prevention

Prevention of cancer remains the most promising strategy for reducing both its incidence and the mortality due to this disease. For more than four decades, findings from epidemiology, basic research and clinical trials have informed the development of lifestyle and medical approaches to cancer prevention. These include selective oestrogen receptor modulators and aromatase inhibitors for breast cancer, the 5-α-reductase inhibitors finasteride and dutasteride for prostate cancer, and the development of vaccines for viruses that are associated with specific cancers. Future directions include genetic, proteomic and other molecular approaches for identifying pathways that are associated with cancer initiation and development, as well as refining the search for immunologically modifiable causes of cancer.

Chemoprevention of Breast Cancer: The Paradox of Evidence versus Advocacy Inaction

Women who are at high risk of breast cancer can be offered chemoprevention. Chemoprevention strategies have expanded over the past decade and include selective receptor modulator inhibitors and aromatase inhibitors. Physicians are expected to provide individualized risk assessments to identify high risk women who may be eligible for chemoprevention. It is prudent that physicians utilize a shared decision approach when counseling high risk women about their preventive options. Barriers and misperceptions however exist with patient and physician acceptance of chemoprevention and continue to impede uptake of chemoprevention as a strategy to reduce breast cancer risk. Programs to increase awareness and elucidate the barriers are critical for women to engage in cancer prevention and promote chemoprevention adherence.

Chemoprevention for breast cancer

Despite the progress that has been made in breast cancer diagnosis and treatment, this disease is still a major health problem, being the most frequently diagnosed cancer and the first leading cause of cancer death among women both in developed and economically developing countries. In some developed countries incidence rate start to decrease from the end of last millennium and this can be explained, at least in part, by the decrease in hormone replacement therapy use by post-menopausal women. Chemoprevention has the potential to be an approach of utmost importance to reduce cancer burden at least among high-risk populations. Tamoxifen and raloxifene are both indicated for the prevention of breast cancer in women at high risk for the development of the disease, although raloxifene may have a more favorable adverse-effect profile, causing fewer uterine cancers and thromboembolic events. Aromatase inhibitors will most probably become an additional prevention treatment option in the near future, in view of the promising results observed in adjuvant trials and the interesting results of the very recently published first chemoprevention trial using an aromatase inhibitor.(2) Despite impressive results in most clinical trials performed to date, chemoprevention is still not widely used. Urgently needed are better molecular risk models to accurately identify high-risk subjects, new agents with a better risk/benefit ratio and validated biomarkers.

Tamoxifen vs Raloxifene vs Exemestane for Chemoprevention

Clinical trial data on selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) and aromatase inhibitors (AIs) have demonstrated reduced breast cancer incidence in the prevention setting among high-risk women. We conducted an extensive review of clinical trials and recent published reports of barriers to uptake of breast cancer chemoprevention, to provide health care professionals with information to improve decision-making regarding chemoprevention. Despite the positive results of these trials, uptake of chemoprevention has been low due to barriers in identifying high-risk women, lack of understanding of risks and benefits, as well as concerns about side effects. Interventions designed to increase uptake have met with limited success. Clinicians can support women in informed decision-making about SERMs and AIs by effectively communicating breast cancer risk and enhancing knowledge about the risks and benefits of chemoprevention. Promoting uptake and adherence to chemoprevention holds promise for reducing the public health burden of this disease.

Melatonin uses in oncology: breast cancer prevention and reduction of the side effects of chemotherapy and radiation

INTRODUCTION

The possible oncostatic properties of melatonin on different types of neoplasias have been studied especially in hormone-dependent adenocarcinomas. Despite the promising results of these experimental investigations, the use of melatonin in breast cancer treatment in humans is still uncommon.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews the usefulness of this indoleamine for specific aspects of breast cancer management, particularly in reference to melatonin's antiestrogenic and antioxidant properties: i) treatments oriented to breast cancer prevention, especially when the risk factors are obesity, steroid hormone treatment or chronodisruption by exposure to light at night (LAN); ii) treatment of the side effects associated with chemo- or radiotherapy.

EXPERT OPINION

The clinical utility of melatonin depends on the appropriate identification of its actions. Because of its SERM (selective estrogen receptor modulators) and SEEM (selective estrogen enzyme modulators) properties, and its virtual absence of contraindications, melatonin could be an excellent adjuvant with the drugs currently used for breast cancer prevention (antiestrogens and antiaromatases). The antioxidant actions also make melatonin a suitable treatment to reduce oxidative stress associated with chemotherapy, especially with anthracyclines, and radiotherapy.

Breast cancer incidence in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis or low bone mass using arzoxifene

The Generations trial, a multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial, compared arzoxifene 20 mg/day and placebo in 9,354 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis (N=5,252) or low bone mass (N=4,102). Primary outcomes were vertebral fracture in the osteoporotic population and invasive breast cancer in all study participants. Here, we report the detailed breast cancer findings from the trial. Breast cancers were detected by annual mammograms and clinical examination. After 48 months follow-up, breast cancer incidence was compared between treatment groups by estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) status and baseline risk factors. Baseline breast cancer risk factors, including age, estimated Gail risk, and bone mineral density, were well balanced between treatment groups. A total of 75 breast cancers occurred 53 in the placebo group and 22 in the arzoxifene group (HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.25-0.68, P<0.001). There were 62 invasive breast cancers, 39 identified as invasive ER-positive (placebo 30, arzoxifene 9; HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.14-0.63, P=0.001) and 30 identified as invasive PR-positive (placebo 23, arzoxifene 7; HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.13-0.71, P=0.003). Breast cancer risk reduction with arzoxifene was similar between Gail risk groups (P interaction=0.31) and between low bone mass and osteoporosis groups (P interaction=0.35). Although generally well tolerated, there was a significant increase in venous thromboembolism, vasomotor symptoms, muscle cramps, and some gynecological events with arzoxifene. These findings demonstrate that in this study arzoxifene reduced the risk of ER-positive breast cancer in this population of postmenopausal women with low bone mass or osteoporosis, an effect similar to that seen with other SERMs.

Arzoxifene versus raloxifene: effect on bone and safety parameters in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis

Arzoxifene increased bone mineral density and decreased bone turnover to a significantly greater extent than raloxifene. The hot flush incidence was lower with arzoxifene than raloxifene.

INTRODUCTION

To assess the effect of arzoxifene versus raloxifene on change in lumbar spine (LS) bone mineral density (BMD) in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

METHODS

In this 12-month study (NEXT trial), participants were randomly assigned to arzoxifene 20 mg/day (N = 158) or raloxifene 60 mg/day (N = 162). All received daily calcium and vitamin D. Change in LS BMD was assessed by DXA. Secondary objectives included assessment of femoral neck (FN) and total hip BMD, serum bone turnover markers, and safety.

RESULTS

Treatment groups were similar at baseline (mean age 63 years, mean LS BMD T-score -2.9). At 12 months, the increase in LS BMD with arzoxifene was greater than with raloxifene (+2.75% vs. +1.66%), as was FN and total hip BMD (P < 0.05). For LS and FN, this effect was also evident at 6 months. Arzoxifene reduced bone turnover to a greater extent than raloxifene at 3, 6, and 12 months (P < 0.05). The proportion of women reporting ≥ 1 adverse event did not differ between treatment groups, nor did vaginal bleeding. No cases of endometrial polyps, hyperplasia, or cancer were reported. Nasopharyngitis and bronchitis were reported more frequently with arzoxifene versus raloxifene (10.1% vs. 2.5%, and 5.1% vs. 0%, respectively) and new/worsening hot flushes were reported less frequently with arzoxifene (7.0% vs. 16.7%) (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Arzoxifene increased BMD and suppressed bone turnover to a greater extent than raloxifene and resulted in a lower incidence of new/worsening hot flushes. Based on subsequent findings from a fracture outcome study, this difference did not translate into improved fracture efficacy.

The role of bone turnover markers in monitoring treatment in postmenopausal osteoporosis

Bone metabolism is assessed using biochemical bone turnover markers (BTM). BTM reflect the metabolic effect of drugs on bone turnover, help to establish the lowest dose inducing the largest change in the BTM, predict treatment-related reduction in fracture risk, and are helpful in bridging studies. Changes in BTM during anti-osteoporotic therapy depend on the cellular mechanism of action of the drug, degree of change in bone turnover rate and route of administration. BTM help to establish the optimal dose of anti-osteoporotic drugs because treatment-related changes in BTM are more rapid compared with change in BMD. A greater decrease in BTM levels during the first year of tantiresorptive treatment is associated with greater antifracture efficacy over 3 years. According to preliminary data, measurement of BTM can improve persistence with anti-resorptive treatment. The use of BTM to monitor anti-osteoporotic therapy in "real life" is limited at this stage.

Raloxifene and desmethylarzoxifene block estrogen-induced malignant transformation of human breast epithelial cells

There is association between exposure to estrogens and the development and progression of hormone-dependent gynecological cancers. Chemical carcinogenesis by catechol estrogens derived from oxidative metabolism is thought to contribute to breast cancer, yet exact mechanisms remain elusive. Malignant transformation was studied in MCF-10A human mammary epithelial cells, since estrogens are not proliferative in this cell line. The human and equine estrogen components of estrogen replacement therapy (ERT) and their catechol metabolites were studied, along with the influence of co-administration of selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs), raloxifene and desmethyl-arzoxifene (DMA), and histone deacetylase inhibitors. Transformation was induced by human estrogens, and selectively by the 4-OH catechol metabolite, and to a lesser extent by an equine estrogen metabolite. The observed estrogen-induced upregulation of CYP450 1B1 in estrogen receptor negative MCF-10A cells, was compatible with a causal role for 4-OH catechol estrogens, as was attenuated transformation by CYP450 inhibitors. Estrogen-induced malignant transformation was blocked by SERMs correlating with a reduction in formation of nucleobase catechol estrogen (NCE) adducts and formation of 8-oxo-dG. NCE adducts can be formed consequent to DNA abasic site formation, but NCE adducts were also observed on incubation of estrogen quinones with free nucleotides. These results suggest that NCE adducts may be a biomarker for cellular electrophilic stress, which together with 8-oxo-dG as a biomarker of oxidative stress correlate with malignant transformation induced by estrogen oxidative metabolites. The observed attenuation of transformation by SERMs correlated with these biomarkers and may also be of clinical significance in breast cancer chemoprevention.

Clinical evaluation of local ocular toxicity in candidate anti-adenoviral agents in vivo

BACKGROUND

Adenovirus causes ophthalmological nosocomial infections. Although cidofovir may be used systemically for immunocompromised patients in disseminated adenoviral infections, no specific anti-adenoviral agent has been established for the treatment of adenoviral ocular infection. It has been reported that cidofovir may cause lacrimal duct obstruction when used locally. We have reported that zalcitabine and stavudine showed anti-adenoviral activity in vitro. We now evaluate the side effects of these agents in eyes and ocular adnexa in an animal model.

METHODS

Cidofovir, zalcitabine and stavudine 1% solutions and balanced salt solution were given as eye drops to healthy female Japanese albino rabbits 4 times a day for 14 days. Clinical scores in the conjunctiva and eyelid were recorded, and lacrimal irrigation was carried out. The diameter of the lacrimal canaliculus was scanned with an ultrasonograph. Histopathological analysis was carried out in the cidofovir group.

RESULTS

In the cidofovir group, significant narrowing of lacrimal canaliculus, redness of eyelids and conjunctival injection were observed, but no obstruction of the lacrimal duct was found. Histology showed eosinophils, suggesting an allergic inflammation. Although zalcitabine and stavudine induced eyelid redness and conjunctival injection, no change was observed in the lacrimal pathway.

CONCLUSIONS

These drugs may be possible candidates as eye drops for adenoviral conjunctivitis but further study is required to prove its safety.