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

The relationship between treatment-related changes in total hip BMD measured after 12, 18, and 24 mo and fracture risk reduction in osteoporosis clinical trials: the FNIH-ASBMR-SABRE project

There is a strong association between total hip bone mineral density (THBMD) changes after 24 mo of treatment and reduced fracture risk. We examined whether changes in THBMD after 12 and 18 mo of treatment are also associated with fracture risk reduction. We used individual patient data (n = 122 235 participants) from 22 randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trials of osteoporosis medications. We calculated the difference in mean percent change in THBMD (active-placebo) at 12, 18, and 24 mo using data available for each trial. We determined the treatment-related fracture reductions for the entire follow-up period, using logistic regression for radiologic vertebral fractures and Cox regression for hip, non-vertebral, "all" (combination of non-vertebral, clinical vertebral, and radiologic vertebral) fractures and all clinical fractures (combination of non-vertebral and clinical vertebral). We performed meta-regression to estimate the study-level association (r2 and 95% confidence interval) between treatment-related differences in THBMD changes for each BMD measurement interval and fracture risk reduction. The meta-regression revealed that for vertebral fractures, the r2 (95% confidence interval) was 0.59 (0.19, 0.75), 0.69 (0.32, 0.82), and 0.73 (0.33, 0.84) for 12, 18, and 24 mo, respectively. Similar patterns were observed for hip: r2 = 0.27 (0.00, 0.54), 0.39 (0.02, 0.63), and 0.41 (0.02, 0.65); non-vertebral: r2 = 0.27 (0.01, 0.52), 0.49 (0.10, 0.69), and 0.53 (0.11, 0.72); all fractures: r2 = 0.44 (0.10, 0.64), 0.63 (0.24, 0.77), and 0.66 (0.25, 0.80); and all clinical fractures: r2 = 0.46 (0.11, 0.65), 0.64 (0.26, 0.78), and 0.71 (0.32, 0.83), for 12-, 18-, and 24-mo changes in THBMD, respectively. These findings demonstrate that treatment-related THBMD changes at 12, 18, and 24 mo are associated with fracture risk reductions across trials. We conclude that BMD measurement intervals as short as 12 mo could be used to assess fracture efficacy, but the association is stronger with longer BMD measurement intervals.

Pre-treatment bone mineral density and the benefit of pharmacologic treatment on fracture risk and BMD change: analysis from the FNIH-ASBMR SABRE project

Some osteoporosis drug trials have suggested that treatment is more effective in those with low BMD measured by DXA. This study used data from a large set of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine whether the anti-fracture efficacy of treatments differs according to baseline BMD. We used individual patient data from 25 RCTs (103 086 subjects) of osteoporosis medications collected as part of the FNIH-ASBMR SABRE project. Participants were stratified into FN BMD T-score subgroups (≤-2.5, > -2.5). We used Cox proportional hazard regression to estimate treatment effect for clinical fracture outcomes and logistic regression for the radiographic vertebral fracture outcome. We also performed analyses based on BMD quintiles. Overall, 42% had a FN BMD T-score ≤ -2.5. Treatment with anti-osteoporosis drugs led to significant reductions in fractures in both T-score ≤ -2.5 and > -2.5 subgroups. Compared to those with FN BMD T-score > -2.5, the risk reduction for each fracture outcome was greater in those with T-score ≤ -2.5, but only the all-fracture outcome reached statistical significance (interaction P = .001). Results were similar when limited to bisphosphonate trials. In the quintile analysis, there was significant anti-fracture efficacy across all quintiles for vertebral fractures and with greater effects on fracture risk reduction for non-vertebral, all, and all clinical fractures in the lower BMD quintiles (all interaction P ≤ .03). In summary, anti-osteoporotic medications reduced the risk of fractures regardless of baseline BMD. Significant fracture risk reduction with treatment for 4 of the 5 fracture endpoints was seen in participants with T-scores above -2.5, though effects tended to be larger and more significant in those with baseline T-scores <-2.5.

Influence of age on the efficacy of pharmacologic treatments on fracture risk reduction and increases in BMD: RCT results from the FNIH-ASBMR-SABRE project

There is a common belief that antiosteoporosis medications are less effective in older adults. This study used data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine whether the anti-fracture efficacy of treatments and their effects on BMD differ in people ≥70 compared to those <70 yr. We used individual patient data from 23 RCTs of osteoporosis medications collected as part of the FNIH-ASBMR SABRE project. We assessed the following fractures: radiographic vertebral, non-vertebral, hip, all clinical, and all fractures. We used Cox proportional hazard regression to estimate treatment effect for clinical fracture outcomes, logistic regression for the radiographic vertebral fracture outcome, and linear regression to estimate treatment effect on 24-mo change in hip and spine BMD in each age subgroup. The analysis included 123 164 (99% female) participants; 43% being ≥70 yr. Treatment with anti-osteoporosis drugs significantly and similarly reduced fractures in both subgroups (eg, odds ratio [OR] = 0.47 and 0.51 for vertebral fractures in those below and above 70 yr, interaction P = .19; hazard ratio [HR] for all fractures: 0.72 vs 0.70, interaction P = .20). Results were similar when limited to bisphosphonate trials with the exception of hip fracture risk reduction which was somewhat greater in those <70 (HR = 0.44) vs ≥70 (HR = 0.79) yr (interaction P = .02). Allocation to anti-osteoporotic drugs resulted in significantly greater increases in hip and spine BMD at 24 mo in those ≥70 compared to those <70 yr. In summary, anti-osteoporotic medications similarly reduced the risk of fractures regardless of age, and the few small differences in fracture risk reduction by age were of uncertain clinical significance.

Domino Reaction Protocol to Synthesize Benzothiophene-Derived Chemical Entities as Potential Therapeutic Agents

An efficient synthesis of 3-amino-2-formyl-functionalized benzothiophenes by a domino reaction protocol and their use to synthesize a library of novel scaffolds have been reported. Reactions of ketones and 1,3-diones with these amino aldehyde derivatives formed a series of benzothieno[3,2-b]pyridine and 3,4-dihydro-2H-benzothiopheno[3,2-b]quinolin-1-one, respectively. A plausible mechanism for the formation of fused pyridine derivatives by the Friedlander reaction has been elucidated by density functional theory (DFT) calculations. Furthermore, hydrazones were obtained by reacting the aldehyde functional group of benzothiophenes with different hydrazine derivatives. Preliminary screening of these compounds against several bacterial strains and cancer cell lines led to the discovery of several hit molecules. Hydrazone and benzothieno[3,2-b]pyridine derivatives are potent cytotoxic and antibacterial agents, respectively. One of the potent compounds effected ∼97% growth inhibition of the LOX IMVI cell line at 10 μM concentration.

Novel Advances in the Role of Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators in Hormonal Replacement Therapy: A Paradigm Shift

Estrogen is a key regulatory hormone in the functioning of a female reproductive system. Estrogen hormone regulates many complex physiological processes, which has its role in reproduction and skeletal and cardiovascular systems by acting on estrogen receptors alpha (ERα) and beta (ERβ), which are nuclear transcription factors. Selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) are now being used to treat bone loss, breast carcinoma, and menopausal symptoms, metabolic neurodegenerative because of their characteristics that allow them to function as both estrogen agonists and antagonists, depending on the target tissue. First-generation SERMs, such as Tamoxifen, are used in the management protocol for breast cancer, which is estrogen receptor (ER-positive). Raloxifene is a second-generation SERM that is a valuable adjunct used to treat and prevent osteoporosis in postmenopausal women and prevent compression fractures of the vertebral column. Novel SERM molecules are on the horizon, proven more potent and efficacious in preventing and treating osteoporosis. These include Ospemifene, lasofoxifene, bazedoxifene and arzoxifene. The benefits of Raloxifene versus that of Bazedoxifene are under trial. Despite their therapeutic benefits and actions, these medications are not without adverse effects, such as thromboembolic disorders. Increased risk of uterine cancer has been linked to Tamoxifen. This article delves into the world of SERMs, including their development and discovery. The newer SERMs in late development, ospemifene, lasofoxifene, bazedoxifene, and arzoxifene, are described in detail.

Chemoprevention and Lifestyle Modifications for Risk Reduction in Sporadic and Hereditary Breast Cancer

Female breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed malignancy worldwide. Risk assessment helps to identify women at increased risk of breast cancer and allows the adoption of a comprehensive approach to reducing breast cancer incidence through personalized interventions, including lifestyle modification, chemoprevention, intensified surveillance with breast imaging, genetic counseling, and testing. Primary prevention means acting on modifiable risk factors to reduce breast cancer occurrence. Chemoprevention with tamoxifen, raloxifene, anastrozole, and exemestane has already shown benefits in decreasing breast cancer incidence in women at an increased risk for breast cancer. For healthy women carrying BRCA 1 or BRCA 2 pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) germline variants, the efficacy of chemoprevention is still controversial. Adopting chemoprevention strategies and the choice among agents should depend on the safety profile and risk-benefit ratio. Unfortunately, the uptake of these agents has been low. Lifestyle modifications can reduce breast cancer incidence, and the recommendations for BRCA 1 or BRCA 2 P/LP germline variant carriers are comparable to the general population. This review summarizes the most recent evidence regarding the efficacy of chemoprevention and lifestyle interventions in women with sporadic and hereditary breast cancer.

Relationship between Change in Bone Mineral Density of Lumbar Spine and Risk of New Vertebral and Nonvertebral Fractures: A Meta-Analysis

Studies have shown that the change in lumbar spine bone mineral density with different osteoporosis drugs had a beneficial effect on the frequency of new vertebral and nonvertebral fractures in postmenopausal females, but their results were conflicting. This meta‐analysis was performed to evaluate this relationship. A systematic literature search up to May 2020 was performed and 20 studies with 73,390 postmenopausal females were included; of them, a total of 41,980 were treated with osteoporosis drugs and 31,410 with placebo. They reported relationships between the change in lumbar spine bone mineral density and the frequency of new vertebral and nonvertebral fractures in postmenopausal females. Odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated comparing the osteoporosis drugs to placebo effect on the frequency of new vertebral and nonvertebral fractures in postmenopausal females using the dichotomous method with a random or fixed‐effect model. Treatment with osteoporosis drugs had significantly lower frequency of new vertebral fractures (OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.45–0.63, P < 0.001) and nonvertebral fractures (OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.78–0.87, P < 0.001) compared to placebo in postmenopausal females. Treatment with osteoporosis drugs had a significantly lower frequency of new vertebral and nonvertebral fractures compared to placebo in postmenopausal females. This relationship forces us to recommend osteoporosis drugs in postmenopausal females to avoid any possible new fractures. A cost‐effective study is recommended.

Validation of the Surrogate Threshold Effect for Change in Bone Mineral Density as a Surrogate Endpoint for Fracture Outcomes: The FNIH-ASBMR SABRE Project

The surrogate threshold effect (STE) is defined as the minimum treatment effect on a surrogate that is reliably predictive of a treatment effect on the clinical outcome. It provides a framework for implementing a clinical trial with a surrogate endpoint. The aim of this study was to update our previous analysis by validating the STE for change in total hip (TH) BMD as a surrogate for fracture risk reduction; the novelty of this study was this validation. To do so, we used individual patient data from 61,415 participants in 16 RCTs that evaluated bisphosphonates (nine trials), selective estrogen receptor modulators (four trials), denosumab (one trial), odanacatib (one trial), and teriparatide (one trial) to estimate trial-specific treatment effects on TH BMD and all, vertebral, hip, and nonvertebral fractures. We then conducted a random effects meta-regression of the log relative fracture risk reduction against 24-month change in TH BMD, and computed the STE as the intersection of the upper 95% prediction limit of this regression with the line of no fracture reduction. We validated the STE by checking whether the number of fractures in each trial provided 80% power and determining what proportion of trials with BMD changes ≥ STE reported significant reductions in fracture risk. We applied this analysis to (i) the trials on which we estimated the STE; and (ii) trials on which we did not estimate the STE. We found that the STEs for all, vertebral, hip, and nonvertebral fractures were 1.83%, 1.42%, 3.18%, and 2.13%, respectively. Among trials used to estimate STE, 27 of 28 were adequately powered, showed BMD effects exceeding the STE, and showed significant reductions in fracture risk. Among the validation set of 11 trials, 10 met these criteria. Thus STE differs by fracture type and has been validated in trials not used to develop the approach. © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Mesenchymal stem cells plus bone repair materials as a therapeutic strategy for abnormal bone metabolism: Evidence of clinical efficacy and mechanisms of action implied

The regeneration process of human bones is very complicated, the management and treatment of bone damage caused by diseases are the main problems faced by clinicians worldwide. It is known that cell-based stem cell therapy together with biomaterials is a fast-developing method of tissue regeneration. This review focuses on the different types and main characteristics of scaffolds and stem cells suitable for bone regeneration, and aims to provide a state-of-the-art description of the current treatment of common bone metabolism related diseases such as osteoarthritis, osteoporosis and osteosarcoma and the strategies based on stem cell biological scaffolds used in bone tissue engineering. This method may provide a new treatment option for the treatment of common bone metabolism-related diseases that cannot be cured by ordinary and routine applications. Three databases (PubMed, CNKI and Web of Science) search terms used to write this review are: "arthritis", "osteoporosis", "osteosarcoma", "bone tissue engineering", "mesenchymal stem cells", "materials", "bioactive scaffolds" and their combinations, and the most relevant studies are selected. As a conclusion, it needs to be emphasized that despite the encouraging results, further development is needed due to the need for more in-depth research, standardization of stem cell manufacturing processes, large-scale development of clinical methods for bone tissue engineering, and market regulatory approval. Although the research and application of tissue regeneration technology and stem cells are still in their infancy, the application prospect is broad and it is expected to solve the current clinical problems.

Endocrine prevention of breast cancer

Breast cancer (BC) is the most common non-cutaneous malignancy among women worldwide and is a significant cause of morbidity, mortality, and national health care expenditure. Unfortunately, with few exceptions like alcohol consumption, obesity, and physical activity, most BC risk factors are unmodifiable. Antiestrogen endocrine therapy, commonly known as BC chemoprevention, is an effective method of BC prevention. In multiple randomized trials, two selective estrogen receptor modulators - tamoxifen and raloxifene, and two aromatase inhibitors - exemestane and anastrozole have reduced BC incidence by 50%-65% in high-risk women. An estimated 15% of the US women between 35 and 79 years of age may qualify as high risk for BC, yet a small percentage of these women will ever have a formal BC risk assessment or a discussion of endocrine prevention options. The etiology of underutilization of endocrine prevention of BC is multifactorial - infrequent use of BC risk assessment tools in the primary care settings, insufficient knowledge of BC risk assessment tools and antiestrogen agents among primary care providers, concerns of side effects, inadequate time for counseling during primary care visit, and lack of predictive biomarkers may play significant roles. Many small studies incorporating risk assessment tools and decision-making aids showed minimal success in enhancing endocrine prevention. One critical factor for underutilization of endocrine prevention is low uptake of endocrine prevention by high-risk women even when appropriately recommended. Furthermore, adherence to BC endocrine prevention is unsatisfactorily low. Despite the current infrequent usage, endocrine prevention has the potential to reduce the public health burden of BC significantly. Innovative approaches like finding new agents, alternative dosing and schedule of currently available agents, transdermal medication delivery, increased public and professional awareness, and policymakers' commitments may bring the desired changes.

Treatment-Related Changes in Bone Turnover and Fracture Risk Reduction in Clinical Trials of Antiresorptive Drugs: Proportion of Treatment Effect Explained

Few analyses of antiresorptive (AR) treatment trials relate short-term changes in bone turnover markers (BTMs) to subsequent fracture reduction seeking to estimate the proportion of treatment effect explained (PTE) by BTMs. Pooling such information would be useful to assess new ARs or novel dosing regimens. In the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH) Bone Quality project, we analyzed individual-level data from up to 62,000 participants enrolled in 12 bisphosphonate (BP) and four selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) placebo-controlled fracture endpoint trials. Using BTM results for two bone formation markers (bone-specific alkaline phosphatase [bone ALP] and pro-collagen I N-propeptide [PINP]) and one bone resorption marker (C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen [CTX]) and incident fracture outcome data, we estimated the PTE using two different models. Separate analyses were performed for incident morphometric vertebral, nonvertebral, and hip fractures over 1 to 5 years of follow-up. For vertebral fracture, the results showed that changes in all three BTMs at 6 months explained a large proportion of the treatment effect of ARs (57 to >100%), but not for and non-vertebral or hip fracture. We conclude that short-term AR treatment-related changes in bone ALP, PINP, and CTX account for a large proportion of the treatment effect for vertebral fracture. Change in BTMs is a useful surrogate marker to study the anti-fracture efficacy of new AR compounds or novel dosing regiments with approved AR drugs. © 2020 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Nexus between PI3K/AKT and Estrogen Receptor Signaling in Breast Cancer

Signaling from estrogen receptor alpha (ERα) and its ligand estradiol (E2) is critical for growth of ≈70% of breast cancers. Therefore, several drugs that inhibit ERα functions have been in clinical use for decades and new classes of anti-estrogens are continuously being developed. Although a significant number of ERα+ breast cancers respond to anti-estrogen therapy, ≈30% of these breast cancers recur, sometimes even after 20 years of initial diagnosis. Mechanism of resistance to anti-estrogens is one of the intensely studied disciplines in breast cancer. Several mechanisms have been proposed including mutations in ESR1, crosstalk between growth factor and ERα signaling, and interplay between cell cycle machinery and ERα signaling. ESR1 mutations as well as crosstalk with other signaling networks lead to ligand independent activation of ERα thus rendering anti-estrogens ineffective, particularly when treatment involved anti-estrogens that do not degrade ERα. As a result of these studies, several therapies that combine anti-estrogens that degrade ERα with PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitors targeting growth factor signaling or CDK4/6 inhibitors targeting cell cycle machinery are used clinically to treat recurrent ERα+ breast cancers. In this review, we discuss the nexus between ERα-PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathways and how understanding of this nexus has helped to develop combination therapies.

Osteoporosis: Mechanism, Molecular Target and Current Status on Drug Development

CDATA[Osteoporosis is a pathological loss of bone mass due to an imbalance in bone remodeling where osteoclast-mediated bone resorption exceeds osteoblast-mediated bone formation resulting in skeletal fragility and fractures. Anti-resorptive agents, such as bisphosphonates and SERMs, and anabolic drugs that stimulate bone formation, including PTH analogues and sclerostin inhibitors, are current treatments for osteoporosis. Despite their efficacy, severe side effects and loss of potency may limit the long term usage of a single drug. Sequential and combinational use of current drugs, such as switching from an anabolic to an anti-resorptive agent, may provide an alternative approach. Moreover, there are novel drugs being developed against emerging new targets such as Cathepsin K and 17β-HSD2 that may have less side effects. This review will summarize the molecular mechanisms of osteoporosis, current drugs for osteoporosis treatment, and new drug development strategies.

Genomic Medicine: Lessons Learned From Monogenic and Complex Bone Disorders

Current genetic studies of monogenic and complex bone diseases have broadened our understanding of disease pathophysiology, highlighting the need for medical interventions and treatments tailored to the characteristics of patients. As genomic research progresses, novel insights into the molecular mechanisms are starting to provide support to clinical decision-making; now offering ample opportunities for disease screening, diagnosis, prognosis and treatment. Drug targets holding mechanisms with genetic support are more likely to be successful. Therefore, implementing genetic information to the drug development process and a molecular redefinition of skeletal disease can help overcoming current shortcomings in pharmaceutical research, including failed attempts and appalling costs. This review summarizes the achievements of genetic studies in the bone field and their application to clinical care, illustrating the imminent advent of the genomic medicine era.

Treatment-related changes in bone mineral density as a surrogate biomarker for fracture risk reduction: meta-regression analyses of individual patient data from multiple randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The validation of bone mineral density (BMD) as a surrogate outcome for fracture would allow the size of future randomised controlled osteoporosis registration trials to be reduced. We aimed to determine the association between treatment-related changes in BMD, assessed by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, and fracture outcomes, including the proportion of treatment effect explained by BMD changes.

METHODS

We did a pooled analysis of individual patient data from multiple randomised placebo-controlled clinical trials. We included data from multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trials of osteoporosis medications that included women and men at increased osteoporotic fracture risk. Using individual patient data for each trial we calculated mean 24-month BMD percent change together with fracture reductions and did a meta-regression of the association between treatment-related differences in BMD changes (percentage difference, active minus placebo) and fracture risk reduction. We also used individual patient data to determine the proportion of anti-fracture treatment effect explained by BMD changes and the BMD change needed in future trials to ensure fracture reduction efficacy.

FINDINGS

Individual patient data from 91 779 participants of 23 randomised, placebo-controlled trials were included. The trials had 1-9 years of follow-up and included 12 trials of bisphosphonate, one of odanacatib, two of hormone therapy (one of conjugated equine oestrogen and one of conjugated equine oestrogen plus medroxyprogesterone acetate), three of PTH receptor agonists, one of denosumab, and four of selective oestrogen receptor modulator trials. The meta-regression revealed significant associations between treatment-related changes in hip, femoral neck, and spine BMD and reductions in vertebral (r2 0·73, p<0·0001; 0·59, p=0·0005; 0·61, p=0·0003), hip (0·41, p=0·014; 0·41, p=0·0074; 0·34, p=0·023) and non-vertebral fractures (0·53, p=0·0021; 0·65, p<0·0001; 0·51, p=0·0019). Minimum 24-month percentage changes in total hip BMD providing almost certain fracture reductions in future trials ranged from 1·42% to 3·18%, depending on fracture site. Hip BMD changes explained substantial proportions (44-67%) of treatment-related fracture risk reduction.

INTERPRETATION

Treatment-related BMD changes are strongly associated with fracture reductions across randomised trials of osteoporosis therapies with differing mechanisms of action. These analyses support BMD as a surrogate outcome for fracture outcomes in future randomised trials of new osteoporosis therapies and provide an important demonstration of the value of public access to individual patient data from multiple trials.

FUNDING

Foundation for National Institutes of Health.

Association Between Drug Treatments for Patients With Osteoporosis and Overall Mortality Rates: A Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Previous studies have reported that drug treatments, particularly treatment with bisphosphonates, is associated with reduced overall mortality rates in addition to decreased fracture risk. If so, drug treatments should be recommended for this reason alone, regardless of a patient's risk of fracture.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether randomized clinical trials demonstrate that treatment with bisphosphonates, particularly zoledronate, is associated with reduced mortality rates.

DATA SOURCES

Science Direct, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials of drug treatments for osteoporosis published after 2009 and published or in press before April 19, 2019. Conference abstracts from annual osteoporosis society meetings were also included in the search.

STUDY SELECTION

Included studies were clinical trials that (1) were randomized and placebo-controlled; (2) studied drug treatments with proven antifracture efficacy; (3) used agents at the approved dose for treatment of osteoporosis; and (4) had a duration of 1 year or more. Abstracts from the literature searches were reviewed for inclusion and exclusion criteria, and mortality rate data were abstracted from the article by 1 researcher and validated by a second. A total of 2045 records were screened; 38 (1.8%) were included in the meta-analyses.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) checklist was followed for abstracting data and assessing data quality and validity. Data were pooled using random-effects models, and between-study variability was assessed using the I2 index. The risk of bias for each study was assessed, and funnel plots and Egger and Begg statistics were used to evaluate publication bias.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Associations of all drug treatments, particularly bisphosphonate and zoledronate treatments, with overall mortality.

RESULTS

Of 38 clinical trials that included 101 642 unique participants, 38 were included in the meta-analyses of all drug treatments (45 594 participants randomized to placebo; 56 048 to treatment); 21 clinical trials, of bisphosphonate treatments (20 244 participants randomized to placebo; 22 623 to treatment); and 6 clinical trials, of zoledronate treatments (6944 participants randomized to placebo; 6926 to treatment). No significant association was found between all drug treatments for osteoporosis and overall mortality rate (risk ratio [RR], 0.98; 95% CI, 0.91-1.05; I2 = 0%). Clinical trials of bisphosphonate treatment (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.86-1.04) showed no significant association with overall mortality. Also, clinical trials of zoledronate treatment (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.68-1.13) showed no association with overall mortality rate; however, evidence existed for heterogeneity of the results (I2 = 48.2%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Results of this meta-analysis suggest that bisphosphonate treatment may not be associated with reduced overall mortality rates in addition to decreased fracture risk and should only be recommended to reduce fracture risk. Additional trials are needed to clarify whether treatment with zoledronate reduces mortality rates.

Eldecalcitol increases bone mineral density in Chinese osteoporotic patients without vitamin D or calcium supplementation

Eldecalcitol increased bone mineral density (BMD) and prevented vertebral fractures in vitamin D-sufficient osteoporotic subjects. However, the effect of eldecalcitol on BMD under vitamin D insufficiency is unknown. We examined the effect of eldecalcitol on BMD compared with alfacalcidol in osteoporotic patients without vitamin D or calcium supplementation. This is a randomized, double-blind, active comparator trial. 265 Chinese osteoporotic patients were randomly assigned to receive 0.75 μg eldecalcitol or 1.0 μg alfacalcidol for 12 months without vitamin D or calcium supplementation. Baseline calcium intakes were less than 550 mg/day and mean serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] was below 43 nmol/L in both groups. Baseline BMD tended to be lower in patients with lower calcium intake and serum 25(OH)D. Lumbar BMD increased by 2.05% higher in eldecalcitol than alfacalcidol group at 12 months. Total hip and femoral neck BMD also increased by 1.33 and 1.78%, respectively, in the eldecalcitol than the alfacalcidol group. The effect of eldecalcitol on BMD was not affected by serum 25(OH)D or calcium intake. The incidence of adverse events was not different between the two groups. Incidence of hypercalcemia in the edecalcitol group was not affected by serum 25(OH)D. In conclusion, baseline BMD tended to be lower in patients with low calcium intake and serum 25(OH)D. Eldecalcitol increased lumbar and hip BMD more than alfacalcidol regardless of serum 25(OH)D or calcium intake without vitamin D or calcium supplementation. These results suggest that eldecalcitol is effective in increasing the BMD of osteoporotic patients regardless of vitamin D status or calcium intake.Clinical Trial Registration number JAPIC CTI 152904.

Advances in osteoporosis from 1970 to 2018

In 1970, there were no drugs under study for osteoporosis. Estrogen was used, but little was known about the correct dose for preventing bone loss. At that time, fractures were not even recognized as a disease, but regarded as part of normal aging. From 1970 to this year (2018), there have been extensive advances in the osteoporosis field ranging from fracture epidemiology to the remarkable invention of bone density measurements. There have been major advances in therapeutic options available for patients for prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. In parallel, the advances in the laboratory helped elucidate the process of bone remodeling, not only at the macroscopic level but also at the cellular level. This led to rapid advances in translational research from cellular biology to new therapies exemplified by the development of monoclonal antibodies for osteoporosis. Further understanding of the signaling pathways in bone cells will lead to new small molecules made for osteoporosis treatment, perhaps causing less adverse events. University-based research throughout the world has been a leader in most of these advances, and Pharma support for phase 1 to 4 studies helped bring these discoveries to patients. In the osteoporosis field alone, one sees the tremendous value of grant support for university research by National funding agencies such as the National Institute of Health in this country and similar agencies in other countries. There are clinical challenges that have to be solved with long-term compliance with osteoporosis medication if we want to reduce fracture incidence in the long term.

Influence of Prevalent Vertebral Fracture on the Correlation between Change in Lumbar Spine Bone Mineral Density and Risk of New Vertebral Fracture: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The correlation between change in bone mineral density (BMD) and the incidence of new vertebral fracture has been drawing attention in regard to evaluation of fracture risk and drug efficacy. We investigated the impact of the prevalence of vertebral fracture on this correlation via a meta-regression analysis with a view to improving evaluation of the correlation.

METHODS

A total of 19 postmenopausal osteoporosis clinical studies involving 62,432 patients in 46 placebo or treatment groups were identified through MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We performed a multivariate meta-regression analysis to examine the correlation between the percentage change in lumbar spine BMD from baseline at 3 years and the proportion of subjects experiencing new vertebral fractures, with or without the proportion of subjects with prevalent vertebral fracture as a covariate. We also analyzed the interaction between the subgroups divided by the proportion of subjects with prevalent vertebral fracture and the percentage change in lumbar spine BMD from baseline at 3 years.

RESULTS

A multivariate meta-regression analysis showed a significant correlation between the change in lumbar spine BMD and the proportion of subjects experiencing new vertebral fracture, and a lower Akaike information criterion was obtained when the proportion of subjects with prevalent vertebral fracture was added as an explanatory variable. Significant interaction between the proportion of subjects with prevalent vertebral fracture and the change in lumbar spine BMD was shown.

CONCLUSIONS

The change in lumbar spine BMD, not BMD T-score at one timepoint, had a significant correlation with the incidence of vertebral fracture. The prediction of the fracture risk by change in lumbar spine BMD was improved by adjusting the proportion of subjects with prevalent vertebral fracture in the study population. The difference of prevalence of vertebral fracture among populations should be considered when the association between change in lumbar spine BMD and incidence of vertebral fracture is examined.

Stem cells in Osteoporosis: From Biology to New Therapeutic Approaches

Osteoporosis is a systemic disease that affects the skeleton, causing reduction of bone density and mass, resulting in destruction of bone microstructure and increased risk of bone fractures. Since osteoporosis is a disease affecting the elderly and the aging of the world's population is constantly increasing, it is expected that the incidence of osteoporosis and its financial burden on the insurance systems will increase continuously and there is a need for more understanding this condition in order to prevent and/or treat it. At present, available drug therapy for osteoporosis primarily targets the inhibition of bone resorption and agents that promote bone mineralization, designed to slow disease progression. Safe and predictable pharmaceutical means to increase bone formation have been elusive. Stem cell therapy of osteoporosis, as a therapeutic strategy, offers the promise of an increase in osteoblast differentiation and thus reversing the shift towards bone resorption in osteoporosis. This review is focused on the current views regarding the implication of the stem cells in the cellular and physiologic mechanisms of osteoporosis and discusses data obtained from stem cell-based therapies of osteoporosis in experimental animal models and the possibility of their future application in clinical trials.

Estrogen signaling: An emanating therapeutic target for breast cancer treatment

Breast cancer, a most common malignancy in women, was known to be associated with steroid hormone estrogen. The discovery of estrogen receptor (ER) gave us not only a powerful predictive and prognostic marker, but also an efficient target for the treatment of hormone-dependent breast cancer with various estrogen ligands. ER consists of two subtypes i.e. ERα and ERβ, that are mostly G-protein-coupled receptors and activated by estrogen, specially 17β-estradiol. The activation is followed by translocation into the nucleus and binding with DNA to modulate activities of different genes. ERs can manage synthesis of RNA through genomic actions without directly binding to DNA. Receptors are tethered by protein-protein interactions to a transcription factor complex to communicate with DNA. Estrogens also exhibit nongenomic actions, a characteristic feature of steroid hormones, which are so rapid to be considered by the activation of RNA and translation. These are habitually related to stimulation of different protein kinase cascades. Majority of post-menopausal breast cancer is estrogen dependent, mostly potent biological estrogen (E2) for continuous growth and proliferation. Estrogen helps in regulating the differentiation and proliferation of normal breast epithelial cells. In this review we have investigated the important role of ER in development and progression of breast cancer, which is complicated by receptor's interaction with co-regulatory proteins, cross-talk with other signal transduction pathways and development of treatment strategies viz. selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs), selective estrogen receptor down regulators (SERDs), aromatase and sulphatase inhibitors.

Change in Bone Density and Reduction in Fracture Risk: A Meta-Regression of Published Trials

Meta-analyses conducted >15 years ago reported that improvements in bone mineral density (BMD) were associated with reduction in vertebral and nonvertebral fractures in osteoporosis trials. Numerous studies have been conducted since then, incorporating new therapies with different mechanisms of action and enrolling many more subjects. To extend these prior analyses, we conducted a meta-regression of 38 placebo-controlled trials of 19 therapeutic agents to determine the association between improvements in BMD and reductions in fracture risk. We used a linear model to examine the relationship between mean percent difference in BMD change between treatment and placebo groups and the logarithm of the relative risk. We found that greater improvements in BMD were strongly associated with greater reductions in vertebral and hip fractures but not nonvertebral fractures. For vertebral fracture, the r² values for total hip, femoral neck, and lumbar spine BMD change were 0.56, 0.54, and 0.63, respectively (p ≤ 0.0002). For a 2% or 6% improvement in total hip BMD, we might expect a 28% or 66% reduction, respectively, in vertebral fracture risk. For hip fracture, the r² values for total hip, femoral neck, and lumbar spine BMD change were 0.48 (p = 0.01), 0.42 (p = 0.02), and 0.22 (ns), respectively. For a 2% or 6% improvement in total hip BMD, we might expect a 16% or 40% reduction in hip fracture risk. In conclusion, our results extend prior observations that larger improvements in dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA)-based BMD are associated with greater reductions in fracture risk, particularly for vertebral and hip fractures. Although these results cannot be directly applied to predict the treatment benefit in an individual patient, they provide compelling evidence that improvements in BMD with osteoporosis therapies may be useful surrogate endpoints for fracture in trials of new therapeutic agents. © 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Treatment-Related Changes in Bone Turnover and Fracture Risk Reduction in Clinical Trials of Anti-Resorptive Drugs: A Meta-Regression

Few pooled analyses of antiresorptive (AR) treatment trials relate short-term changes in bone turnover markers (BTMs) to subsequent fracture reduction. Such information would be useful to assess new ARs or novel dosing regimens. In the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH) Bone Quality project, we analyzed individual-level data from 28,000 participants enrolled in 11 bisphosphonate (BP) and three selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) placebo-controlled fracture endpoint trials. Using BTM results for two bone formation markers (bone-specific alkaline phosphatase [bone ALP] and pro-collagen I N-propeptide [PINP]) and two bone resorption markers (N-terminal and C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen) and incident fracture outcome data, we performed a meta-regression relating the mean net effect of treatment on change in bone turnover (active minus placebo % difference after 3 to 12 months) to the log of study-wide fracture risk reduction, and used linear regression to plot the best fitting line. Separate analyses were performed for incident morphometric vertebral, nonvertebral, and hip fractures over 1 to 4 years of follow-up. Change in bone ALP and PINP were available for over 16,000 and 10,000 participants, respectively. For vertebral fracture, the results showed a strong relationship between treatment-related bone ALP or PINP changes and vertebral fracture risk reduction (r²  = 0.82 [p < 0.001] and r²  = 0.75 [p = 0.011], respectively) Relationships were weaker and no longer statistically significant for nonvertebral (r²  = 0.33 [p = 0.053] and r²  = 0.53 [p = 0.065], respectively) and hip fracture (r²  = 0.17 [p = 0.24] and r²  = 0.43 [p = 0.11], respectively) outcomes. Analyses limited to BP trials gave similar results. For all fracture types, relationships were weaker and nonsignificant for bone resorption markers. We conclude that short-term AR treatment-related changes in bone ALP and PINP strongly predict vertebral fracture treatment efficacy, but not nonvertebral or hip fracture treatment efficacy. Change in bone formation markers might be useful to predict the anti-vertebral fracture efficacy of new AR compounds or novel dosing regiments with approved AR drugs. © 2017 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Preventing invasive breast cancer using endocrine therapy

Developments in breast cancer treatment have resulted in reduction in breast cancer mortality in the developed world. However incidence continues to rise and greater use of preventive interventions including the use of therapeutic agents is needed to control this burden. High quality evidence from 9 major trials involving more than 83000 participants shows that selective oestrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) reduce breast cancer incidence by 38%. Combined results from 2 large trials with 8424 participants show that aromatase inhibitors (AIs) reduce breast cancer incidence by 53%. These benefits are restricted to prevention of ER positive breast cancers. Restricting preventive therapy to high-risk women improves the benefit-harm balance and many guidelines now encourage healthcare professionals to discuss preventive therapy in these women. Further research is needed to improve our risk-prediction models for the identification of high risk women for preventive therapy with greater accuracy and to develop surrogate biomarkers of response. Long-term follow-up of the IBIS-I trial has provided valuable insights into the durability of benefits from preventive therapy, and underscores the need for such follow up to fully evaluate other agents. Full utilisation of preventive therapy also requires greater knowledge and awareness among both doctors and patients about benefits, harms and risk factors. Healthcare professionals should routinely discuss preventive therapy with women at high-risk of breast cancer.

Incidence of vertebral fractures in calcium and vitamin D-supplemented postmenopausal Brazilian women with osteopenia or osteoporosis: data from Arzoxifene Generations Trial

OBJECTIVE

Vertebral fracture is the most common osteoporotic fracture, affecting quality of life and increasing mortality. Epidemiological data on incidence of vertebral fracture are scarce in Brazil and throughout Latin America. Our aim was to determine vertebral fracture incidence and risk factors in a female Brazilian population.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Postmenopausal women with low bone mass were studied from the Brazilian placebo group of Arzoxifene Generations Trial (n = 974), followed for up to 5 years. The primary endpoint was new vertebral fractures, detected by X-Ray. Experimental design defined two strata: A. Osteoporosis or previous vertebral fracture with osteopenia; B. Osteopenia without previous fracture. Previous fracture, T-score, ionized calcium, alkaline phosphatase, creatinine and glucose were analyzed at baseline. Crude and adjusted incidence rates of vertebral fractures were estimated and Poisson regression model was used.

RESULTS

Incidence rate was 7.7 (95% CI of 5.4 to 10.9) per 1,000 person-years (PY), increasing as a function of age. Women with new vertebral fractures had higher prevalence of previous nonvertebral fracture after menopause, were older and had lower lumbar spine (LS) T-score. Fracture risk increased by 46% for each unit reduction in LS T-score. Variables correlated with new vertebral fracture were age (p = 0.034), LS T-score, stratum A (p = 0.001 for both) and previous nonvertebral fracture after menopause (p = 0.019). In the final model, LS T-score was the strongest predictor.

CONCLUSIONS

Incidence rate of vertebral fracture of 7.7 per 1,000 PY. Age and previous fractures were associated with new vertebral fracture, but LS T-score was the most important predictor.

Gynecologic Safety of Conjugated Estrogens Plus Bazedoxifene: Pooled Analysis of Five Phase 3 Trials

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate gynecologic safety of conjugated estrogens/bazedoxifene treatment for menopausal symptoms and osteoporosis prevention in nonhysterectomized women.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We pooled data from five randomized, placebo-controlled trials of conjugated estrogens 0.625 mg/bazedoxifene 20 mg (n = 1583), conjugated estrogens 0.45 mg/bazedoxifene 20 mg (n = 1585), and placebo (n = 1241). Gynecologic safety was evaluated by pelvic examination, Papanicolaou smear, endometrial biopsy, transvaginal ultrasound, mammogram, adverse events, and diary records of vaginal bleeding and breast pain/tenderness. Incidence rates and relative risks (RR) versus placebo were calculated with inverse variance weighting. Data for conjugated estrogens 0.45 mg/medroxyprogesterone acetate 1.5 mg, an active comparator in two trials (n = 399), are included for comparison.

RESULTS

Endometrial hyperplasia occurred in <1% (n = 4 [0.3%], 2 [0.2%], 1 [0.5%], and 2 [0.2%] for conjugated estrogens 0.625 mg/bazedoxifene 20 mg, conjugated estrogens 0.45 mg/bazedoxifene 20 mg, conjugated estrogens/medroxyprogesterone acetate, and placebo). There was one endometrial cancer, which occurred with conjugated estrogens 0.45 mg/bazedoxifene 20 mg (0.44/1000 woman-years [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.00-2.37]; RR versus placebo 0.91 [95% CI, 0.17-4.82]). There were seven cases of breast cancer: four with conjugated estrogens 0.45 mg/bazedoxifene 20 mg (1.00/1000 woman-years [95% CI, 0.00-3.21] RR 1.11 [95% CI, 0.33-3.78]), two with placebo, and one with conjugated estrogens/medroxyprogesterone acetate. Unlike conjugated estrogens/medroxyprogesterone acetate, conjugated estrogens/bazedoxifene did not increase breast density, breast pain/tenderness, or vaginal bleeding versus placebo. No active treatment increased ovarian cysts.

CONCLUSION

Conjugated estrogens/bazedoxifene provides endometrial protection without increasing breast pain/density, vaginal bleeding, or ovarian cysts in nonhysterectomized postmenopausal women studied up to 2 years.

Novel Promising Estrogenic Receptor Modulators: Cytotoxic and Estrogenic Activity of Benzanilides and Dithiobenzanilides

The cytotoxicity of 27 benzanilides and dithiobenzanilides built on a stilbene scaffold and possessing various functional groups in aromatic rings previously described for their spasmolytic properties was assayed on three human cancer cell lines (A549 –lung adenocarcinoma, MCF-7 estrogen dependent breast adenocarcinoma and MDA-MB-231 estrogen independent breast adenocarcinoma) and 2 non-tumorigenic cell lines (CCD39Lu–lung fibroblasts, MCF-12A - breast epithelial). Three compounds (6, 15 and 18) showed selective antiproliferative activity against estrogen dependent MCF-7 cancer cells and their estrogenic activity was further confirmed in MCF-7 transfected with an estrogen receptor reporter plasmid and in HEK239 cells over-expressing the estrogen receptor alpha (ERα). Compound 18 is especially interesting as a potential candidate for therapy since it is highly toxic and selective towards estrogen dependent MCF7 cell lines (IC₅₀ = 5.07 μM versus more than 100 μM for MDA-MB-231) and almost innocuous for normal breast cells (IC₅₀ = 91.46 μM for MCF-12A). Docking studies have shown that compound 18 interacts with the receptor in the same cavity as estradiol although the extra aromatic ring is involved in additional binding interactions with residue W383. The role of W383 and the extended binding mode were confirmed by site-directed mutagenesis.

The challenges for cancer chemoprevention

The incidence of cancer is rising in parallel with an ageing populous thus increasing the strain on both treatment options and budgets for healthcare providers worldwide. New cancer therapies are being developed but at what cost? The new treatments are expensive and poor survival rates still exist for some cancers. What is needed now is to prevent or at least limit the disease occurring in the first place. This review evaluates the current situation and the progress in upcoming strategies as well as suggesting some areas for further research within the increasingly important field of cancer chemoprevention. The key principles of cancer chemoprevention are discussed and areas for improvement highlighted. Despite significant progress, chemoprevention has not been widely adopted. Cancer chemoprevention has many challenges to face but this only emphasises the size of the task. These hurdles include a lack of awareness of the benefits, a lack of interest and a lack of investment in taking prevention forward. Despite the huge potential importance of cancer prevention and clinical success stories such as the well-publicised HPV vaccine, the challenges remain significant. With cancer and its treatment being a global issue, the opportunities offered by chemoprevention must be re-evaluated and uptake of chemoprevention actively encouraged. If chemoprevention is to be adopted successfully, a holistic approach is required. This approach will involve multidisciplinary teams of healthcare providers and scientists with the big challenge particularly for medicinal chemists being to design and synthesise the ideal chemopreventative agent.

Breast cancer prevention with anti-estrogens: review of the current evidence and future directions

There is a potential for reducing the incidence of breast cancer by modifying or changing the reversible risk factors like dietary modifications, modifications in the sedentary life habits, etc. One of such methods which has gained popularity now is chemoprevention. Many agents have been evaluated in the chemoprevention setting in females with increased risk of breast cancers. Metformin, NSAIDS, Bisphosphonates, and statins were evaluated by various investigators with variable results. One of the agents that have been proven to be beneficial in this setting is the anti-estrogens. A major disadvantage of chemoprevention is that unlike prophylactic mastectomy it can never reduce the risk to near zero although it reduces the risk significantly. Another issue is the compliance as chemoprevention with anti-estrogens will need to be continued for 5 years while surgery is a one-time procedure. Another disadvantage is the possible side effects peculiar to each drug used which may not be a significant concern in prophylactic mastectomy group. All these factors must also be kept in mind and properly explained to the patient before starting chemoprevention using anti-estrogens. Here in this review we intend to look into the large randomized controlled trials to quantify the present status of chemoprevention with anti-estrogens.

Molecular cancer prevention: Current status and future directions

The heterogeneity and complexity of advanced cancers strongly support the rationale for an enhanced focus on molecular prevention as a priority strategy to reduce the burden of cancer. Molecular prevention encompasses traditional chemopreventive agents as well as vaccinations and therapeutic approaches to cancer-predisposing conditions. Despite challenges to the field, we now have refined insights into cancer etiology and early pathogenesis; successful risk assessment and new risk models; agents with broad preventive efficacy (eg, aspirin) in common chronic diseases, including cancer; and a successful track record of more than 10 agents approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of precancerous lesions or cancer risk reduction. The development of molecular preventive agents does not differ significantly from the development of therapies for advanced cancers, yet it has unique challenges and special considerations given that it most often involves healthy or asymptomatic individuals. Agents, biomarkers, cohorts, overall design, and endpoints are key determinants of molecular preventive trials, as with therapeutic trials, although distinctions exist for each within the preventive setting. Progress in the development and evolution of molecular preventive agents has been steadier in some organ systems, such as breast and skin, than in others. In order for molecular prevention to be fully realized as an effective strategy, several challenges to the field must be addressed. Here, the authors provide a brief overview of the context for and special considerations of molecular prevention along with a discussion of the results from major randomized controlled trials.

Medical prevention of breast cancer

Breast cancer is the most common cancer of women in Western Europe and North America. Effective strategies of medical prevention could reduce the burden of breast cancer mortality. The best evidence for a risk reduction exists for hormonal agents such as tamoxifen and raloxifene (22-72%) or aromatase inhibitors (50-65%). However, the severity of side effects and the lack of evidence for an improved survival compromise the risk/benefit balance. In this review the results of chemoprevention studies, including new treatment approaches, are summarized with critical discussion of their use in clinical practice.

Breast cancer prevention

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women with 232,670 new cases estimated in the USA for 2014. Approaches for reducing breast cancer risk include lifestyle modification, chemoprevention, and prophylactic surgery. Lifestyle modification has a variety of health benefits with few associated risks and is appropriate for all women regardless of breast cancer risk. Chemoprevention options have expanded rapidly, but most are directed at estrogen receptor positive breast cancer and uptake is low. Prophylactic surgery introduces significant additional risks of its own and is generally reserved for the highest risk women.

Clinical effects of selective estrogen receptor modulators on vulvar and vaginal atrophy

OBJECTIVE

Vaginal estrogen therapy at the lowest effective dose is generally recommended for the treatment of vulvar and vaginal atrophy (VVA), but not all women are candidates. Selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) aim to elicit specific positive effects on targeted tissues with neutral or minimal negative effects on other tissues. This review compares the vaginal effects of currently available and investigational SERMs.

METHODS

Relevant English-language articles published between 1980 and 2012 were identified through the PubMed database (search string "[Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulator OR SERM] AND [Vulvar OR Vaginal] AND Atrophy"), article reference lists, and EMBASE searches for individual SERMs. Both authors reviewed all articles, which formed the basis of this narrative literature review.

RESULTS

Activity profiles of SERMs in various tissues are distinct. Tamoxifen and arzoxifene have no specific positive vaginal effects but have reported variable or adverse gynecologic effects. Raloxifene does not improve VVA but can be used safely in combination with vaginal estrogen. Bazedoxifene has no demonstrated efficacy for VVA but, in combination with oral conjugated equine estrogens, improves the signs and symptoms of VVA. SERMs with positive vaginal effects (such as improvement in the vaginal maturation index, reduced vaginal pH, and improvement in the signs and symptoms of VVA) on postmenopausal symptomatic women include lasofoxifene (clinical development on hold) and ospemifene, which was recently approved for the treatment of VVA-related dyspareunia, with a class effect warning of potential venous thrombosis risk.

CONCLUSIONS

SERMs that specifically target the pathophysiology underlying VVA may provide an alternative to vaginal or systemic estrogen therapy.

Development of conjugated estrogens/bazedoxifene, the first tissue selective estrogen complex (TSEC) for management of menopausal hot flashes and postmenopausal bone loss

Conjugated estrogens (CE) combined with the selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) bazedoxifene (BZA) is a new option for alleviating menopausal symptoms and preventing postmenopausal bone loss. The rationale for developing the tissue selective estrogen complex (TSEC) CE/BZA was to combine CE's benefits with the SERM's tissue-specific properties to offset estrogenic stimulation of endometrial and breast tissue. TSECs provide a progestin-free alternative to traditional estrogen-progestin therapy (EPT) in women with a uterus. Preclinical studies supported bazedoxifene as the SERM of choice and demonstrated that CE/BZA provided an optimal balance of estrogen receptor agonist/antagonist activity compared with other potential TSEC pairings. Initial clinical development of CE/BZA focused on determining the appropriate dose ratio that would demonstrate efficacy with minimal to no stimulation of the breast or endometrium. Clinical studies confirmed the efficacy of the selected doses for maintaining bone mass; relieving vasomotor symptoms, vulvar-vaginal atrophy, and dyspareunia; and improving sexual function in postmenopausal women. Reduction of hot flashes also translated into improved menopause-specific quality of life and sleep. Unlike EPT, the FDA-approved dose of CE 0.45 mg/BZA 20mg does not cause a change in breast density or the endometrium, or increase breast pain compared with placebo. In clinical trials up to 2 years, CE 0.45 mg/BZA 20 mg has a favorable tolerability profile and rates of coronary heart disease, venous thromboembolism, and amenorrhea similar to placebo. Therefore, CE 0.45 mg/BZA 20 mg is an effective, well-tolerated alternative to EPT for menopausal symptom relief and osteoporosis prevention for postmenopausal women with a uterus.

Selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs): a review of clinical data

SERMs represent a diverse group of molecules with varying levels of estrogenic agonist and antagonist activity in target tissues. SERMs have a long regulatory approval history and have been studied for a variety of therapeutic indications. The clinical effects of SERMs have been evaluated in a large number of phase 3 clinical trials. Many of the available SERMs have proved to be effective as chemo-preventive agents and treatments for breast cancer and a number are useful for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. The endometrial effect of SERMs has been a key differentiator in clinical practice and a major hurdle for regulatory approval. The effect of SERMs in the vagina also represents a major distinction among different SERMs. This review summarized key clinical finding of SERMs in different target tissues.

Preventative therapies for healthy women at high risk of breast cancer

Tamoxifen has been shown to reduce the risk of developing estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer by at least 50%, in both pre- and postmenopausal women. The current challenge is to find new agents with fewer side effects and to find agents that are specifically suitable for premenopausal women with ER-negative breast cancer. Other selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs), such as raloxifene, arzoxifene, and lasofoxifene, have been shown to reduce the incidence of breast cancer by 50%-80%. SERMs are interesting agents for the prevention of breast cancer, but longer follow-up is needed for some of them for a complete risk-benefit profile of these drugs. Aromatase inhibitors have emerged as new drugs in the prevention setting for postmenopausal women. In the Mammary Prevention 3 (MAP3) trial, a 65% reduction in invasive breast cancer with exemestane was observed, and the Breast Cancer Intervention Study-II trial, which compared anastrozole with placebo, reported a 60% reduction in those cancers. Although SERMs and aromatase inhibitors have been proven to be excellent agents in the preventive setting specifically for postmenopausal women and ER-positive breast cancer, newer agents have to be found specifically for ER-negative breast cancers, which mostly occur in premenopausal women.

Breast-related effects of selective estrogen receptor modulators and tissue-selective estrogen complexes

A number of available treatments provide relief of menopausal symptoms and prevention of postmenopausal osteoporosis. However, as breast safety is a major concern, new options are needed, particularly agents with an improved mammary safety profile. Results from several large randomized and observational studies have shown an association between hormone therapy, particularly combined estrogen-progestin therapy, and a small increased risk of breast cancer and breast pain or tenderness. In addition, progestin-containing hormone therapy has been shown to increase mammographic breast density, which is an important risk factor for breast cancer. Selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) provide bone protection, are generally well tolerated, and have demonstrated reductions in breast cancer risk, but do not relieve menopausal symptoms (that is, vasomotor symptoms). Tissue-selective estrogen complexes (TSECs) pair a SERM with one or more estrogens and aim to blend the positive effects of the components to provide relief of menopausal symptoms and prevention of postmenopausal osteoporosis without stimulating the breast or endometrium. One TSEC combination pairing conjugated estrogens (CEs) with the SERM bazedoxifene (BZA) has completed clinical development and is now available as an alternative option for menopausal therapy. Preclinical evidence suggests that CE/BZA induces inhibitory effects on breast tissue, and phase 3 clinical studies suggest breast neutrality, with no increases seen in breast tenderness, breast density, or cancer. In non-hysterectomized postmenopausal women, CE/BZA was associated with increased bone mineral density and relief of menopausal symptoms, along with endometrial safety. Taken together, these results support the potential of CE/BZA for the relief of menopausal symptoms and prevention of postmenopausal osteoporosis combined with breast and endometrial safety.

Current strategies for the prevention of breast cancer

Due to the high incidence of breast cancer in the United States, optimal strategies for its prevention are imperative. This entails identification of women who are at an increased risk for breast cancer and an integrative approach that includes effective screening methods as well as nutritional, pharmacologic, and surgical management. Several breast cancer risk-assessment tools, such as the Gail and Claus models, can help clinicians determine the quantitative risk of breast cancer. The role of selective estrogen receptor modulators, such as tamoxifen and raloxifene, for the prevention of breast cancer has been well established. Several other agents, such as aromatase inhibitors, are currently being investigated. The potential adverse effects of these chemopreventive agents, which include an impact on the quality of life, must be discussed with the patient before deciding on this approach. Additionally, breast cancer risk factors have been identified over the years; some of them are modifiable, but others are not. Although there is no conclusive evidence to suggest the protective role of specific dietary components, alcohol consumption and obesity are associated with an increased breast cancer risk; thus lifestyle changes can lead to a lower risk of developing breast cancer. Surgical approaches, including bilateral risk-reduction mastectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy, are usually limited to women with a hereditary predisposition to development of breast cancer. The objective of this review is to summarize the various approaches directed at reducing the incidence of breast cancer.

Breast cancer risk assessment, prevention, and the future

Today breast cancer remains a major public health problem, although reducing its risk is now an achievable medical objective. Risk-assessment models may be used in estimating a woman's risk for developing breast cancer and to direct suitable candidates for preventive therapy. Researchers are attempting to enhance individualized risk assessment through incorporation of phenotypic biomarkers. Individual selective estrogen receptor modulators have been approved for breast cancer risk reduction, and other drug categories are being studied. It is critical that obstetrician-gynecologists be familiar with the evolving science of the risk assessment of breast cancer as well as interventional and surveillance strategies.

Breast cancer prevention by antihormones and other drugs: where do we stand?

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide. The selective estrogen-receptor (ER) modulators tamoxifen and raloxifene are approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the preventive therapy of breast cancer. Other drugs have shown promise but need further assessment. In the present review, we present an update of the chemoprevention of ER-positive breast cancer and discuss the potential role of metformin and aspirin, 2 drugs other than the specific "antihormones."

Suitable trial designs and cohorts for preventive breast cancer agents

Effective chemoprevention of oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer has been shown convincingly using several selective ER modulators and the aromatase inhibitor exemestane. Although these agents are well tolerated and the numbers needed-to-treat in the prevention setting are similar to other established preventive interventions, uptake has been poor in clinical practice because of difficulties in visualizing risk, predicting individual outcomes and measuring treatment benefit. In addition, new agents targeting ER-negative breast cancer are urgently needed. The development of new agents is hampered by the lack of suitable biomarkers and targets, as well as regulatory and financial considerations. Establishing breast cancer chemoprevention in standard clinical practice will require advances in many different fields, including biomarker research, the development of more powerful tools to predict and communicate the risks and benefits of treatments and establishing innovative trial designs. Furthermore, changes in regulatory procedures could reduce the size and cost of trials needed in the prevention setting. Identification of biomarkers for risk and efficacy that are easily accessible, such as blood-based biomarkers, will be key to future chemoprevention strategies.