Aromatization inhibition alone or in combination with GnRH agonists for the treatment of premenopausal breast cancer patients

An Ultrasensitive Routine LC-MS/MS Method for Estradiol and Estrone in the Clinically Relevant Sub-Picomolar Range

BACKGROUND

Current analytical routine methods lack the sensitivity to monitor plasma estrogen levels in breast cancer patients treated with aromatase inhibitors. Such monitoring is warranted for premenopausal patients treated with an aromatase inhibitor and an LH-releasing hormone analogue in particular. Therefore, we aimed to develop a routine tandem mass spectroscopy combined with liquid chromatography (LC-MS/MS) method for estradiol (E2) and estrone (E1) for use in the sub-picomolar range.

METHOD

Calibrators, quality controls (QC), or serum samples were spiked with isotope-labeled internal standard and purified by liquid-liquid extraction. The reconstituted extracts were analyzed by LC-MS/MS in negative electrospray ionization mode. QCs at 6 levels made from pooled patient sera were used to validate the accuracy, sensitivity, and precision of the method.

RESULTS

We achieved limits of quantification of 0.6 pmol/L (0.16 pg/mL) for E2 and 0.3 pmol/L (0.07 pg/mL) for E1. The coefficient of variation was below 9.0% at all QC levels for E2 (range, 1.7-153 pmol/L), and below 7.8% for E1 (range, 1.7-143 pmol/L). The method is traceable to the E2 reference standard BCR576. Reference ranges for E2 and E1 in healthy, postmenopausal women were obtained, for E2: 3.8 to 36 pmol/L, for E1: 22 to 122 pmol/L. We measured and confirmed ultra-low E2 and E1 concentrations in sera from patients on the aromatase inhibitors letrozole or exemestane.

CONCLUSION

This ultrasensitive LC-MS/MS method is suitable for routine assessment of serum E1 and E2 levels in breast cancer patients during estrogen suppression therapy. The method satisfies all requirements for measurement of E2 in the clinical setting as stated by the Endocrine Society in 2013.

PRECIS

We report an ultrasensitive LCMS/MS routine assay that measures pretreatment and suppressed levels of estradiol/estrone during aromatase inhibitor treatment of postmenopausal breast cancer patients.

Treatment of Breast Cancer With Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Analogs

Although significant progress has been made in the implementation of new breast cancer treatments over the last three decades, this neoplasm annually continues to show high worldwide rates of morbidity and mortality. In consequence, the search for novel therapies with greater effectiveness and specificity has not come to a stop. Among the alternative therapeutic targets, the human gonadotropin-releasing hormone type I and type II (hGnRH-I and hGnRH–II, respectively) and its receptor, the human gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor type I (hGnRHR-I), have shown to be powerful therapeutic targets to decrease the adverse effects of this disease. In the present review, we describe how the administration of GnRH analogs is able to reduce circulating concentrations of estrogen in premenopausal women through their action on the hypothalamus–pituitary–ovarian axis, consequently reducing the growth of breast tumors and disease recurrence. Also, it has been mentioned that, regardless of the suppression of synthesis and secretion of ovarian steroids, GnRH agonists exert direct anticancer action, such as the reduction of tumor growth and cell invasion. In addition, we discuss the effects on breast cancer of the hGnRH-I and hGnRH-II agonist and antagonist, non-peptide GnRH antagonists, and cytotoxic analogs of GnRH and their implication as novel adjuvant therapies as antitumor agents for reducing the adverse effects of breast cancer. In conclusion, we suggest that the hGnRH/hGnRHR system is a promising target for pharmaceutical development in the treatment of breast cancer, especially for the treatment of advanced states of this disease.

The utility of anti-Müllerian hormone in the diagnosis and prediction of loss of ovarian function following chemotherapy for early breast cancer

Aim

Chemotherapy results in permanent loss of ovarian function in some premenopausal women. Accurate identification in women with hormone-sensitive early breast cancer (eBC) would allow optimisation of subsequent endocrine treatment. We sought to assess whether analysis of anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) using a sensitive automated assay could identify women who would not regain ovarian function after chemotherapy.

Methods

Data from women in the Ovarian Protection Trial in Premenopausal Breast Cancer Patients (OPTION) trial of goserelin (a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogue) for ovarian protection were analysed. Women were assessed for premature ovarian insufficiency (POI: amenorrhoea with elevated follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH)) at 24 months after diagnosis. The accuracy of AMH for the diagnosis of POI and its prediction from measurement at the end of chemotherapy was calculated.

Results

AMH below the level of detection showed good diagnostic accuracy for POI at 24 months (n = 73) with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) area under the curve of 0.86, sensitivity 1.0 and specificity 0.73 at the assay limit of detection. In women aged >40 at diagnosis who did not receive goserelin, AMH measured at end of chemotherapy also gave good prediction of POI at 24 months (area under the curve (AUC) 0.89 95% CI 0.75–1.0, n = 32), with sensitivity 0.91, specificity 0.82, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) 42.8. FSH gave slightly lower AUC, and specificity was low at 0.55. Age but not tamoxifen impacted on AMH levels.

Conclusion

Using this sensitive AMH assay, the finding of an undetectable AMH level in women aged >40 at the end of chemotherapy for eBC gave a good prediction that ovarian function would not return. This may allow alterations in post-chemotherapy endocrine management.

•

Chemotherapy for early breast cancer results in permanent loss of ovarian function in some women.

•

We assessed the accuracy of measurement of anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) at end of chemotherapy for prediction of this in women aged >40 at diagnosis.

•

AMH measured at end of chemotherapy gave good prediction of premature ovarian insufficiency (POI) at 24 months.

•

This may allow optimisation of subsequent endocrine treatment.

Advances in the Adjuvant and Neoadjuvant Treatment of Breast Cancer

Several advances in the adjuvant systemic therapy of primary breast cancer have occurred in the last decade and contributed to a decline in disease-related mortality. These include the introduction of aromatase inhibitors, new chemotherapy agents, and the novel antibody trastuzumab. New supportive treatments, such as growth factors, have contributed to the optimization of chemotherapy dose and schedule, and have improved the efficacy and safety of the treatment. In this review we will outline some of the recent advances in the adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatment of breast cancer. We will also discuss ongoing and proposed clinical trials.

Is Estradiol Monitoring Necessary in Women Receiving Ovarian Suppression for Breast Cancer?

The Oncology Grand Rounds series is designed to place original reports published in the Journal into clinical context. A case presentation is followed by a description of diagnostic and management challenges, a review of the relevant literature, and a summary of the authors’ suggested management approaches. The goal of this series is to help readers better understand how to apply the results of key studies, including those published in Journal of Clinical Oncology, to patients seen in their own clinical practice.

A 36-year-old premenopausal woman had been diagnosed with stage III breast cancer. After an initial biopsy confirmed breast cancer, she underwent mastectomy and axillary node dissection for a left-sided breast cancer, measuring 7 cm. The tumor had lobular histology and was considered grade 2 of 3. Metastatic carcinoma was identified in 10 of 13 axillary nodes. Immunohistochemical studies showed that the tumor was strongly positive for estrogen and progesterone receptor expression and had a Ki-67 score of 15% (> 20% is considered high according to a Swedish quality control study and the St Gallen Expert Consensus). 1 , 2 There was no amplification of the HER2/neu gene. Staging scans were negative for metastatic disease. In the adjuvant setting, she received three cycles of anthracycline-cyclophosphamide combination chemotherapy followed by three cycles of taxane chemotherapy and then locoregional radiotherapy. After completion of chemotherapy, she developed amenorrhea. As adjuvant endocrine therapy, she began monthly goserelin administration to achieve ovarian function suppression (OFS), in combination with the aromatase inhibitor (AI) exemestane. She experienced menopausal symptoms including hot flashes, vaginal dryness, and sexual dysfunction. After two monthly treatments with goserelin and exemestane, a sensitive assay for serum estradiol was checked and returned at 16 pg/mL (61 pmol/L); postmenopausal range for sensitive assay is less than 15 pg/mL (< 50 pmol/L). The patient has now been referred to our unit to discuss further management.

Twelve-Month Estrogen Levels in Premenopausal Women With Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer Receiving Adjuvant Triptorelin Plus Exemestane or Tamoxifen in the Suppression of Ovarian Function Trial (SOFT): The SOFT-EST Substudy

PURPOSE

To describe estradiol (E2), estrone (E1), and estrone sulfate (E1S) levels during the first year of monthly triptorelin plus exemestane or tamoxifen and to assess possible suboptimal suppression while receiving exemestane plus triptorelin.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Premenopausal patients with early breast cancer on the Suppression of Ovarian Function Trial who selected triptorelin as the ovarian suppression method and were randomly assigned to exemestane plus triptorelin or tamoxifen plus triptorelin were enrolled until the target population of 120 patients was reached. Blood sampling time points were 0, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 36, and 48 months. Serum estrogens were measured with a highly sensitive and specific assay. This preplanned 12-month analysis evaluated E2, E1, E1S, follicle-stimulating hormone, and luteinizing hormone levels in all patients and the proportion of patients with E2 levels greater than 2.72 pg/mL at any time point during treatment with exemestane plus triptorelin.

RESULTS

One hundred sixteen patients (exemestane, n = 86; tamoxifen, n = 30; median age, 44 years; median E2, 51 pg/mL; 55% prior chemotherapy) started triptorelin and had one or more samples drawn. With exemestane plus triptorelin, median reductions from baseline E2, E1, and E1S levels were consistently ≥ 95%, resulting in significantly lower levels than with tamoxifen plus triptorelin at all time points. Among patients on exemestane plus triptorelin, 25%, 24%, and 17% had an E2 level greater than 2.72 pg/mL at 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. Baseline factors related to on-treatment E2 level greater than 2.72 pg/mL were no prior chemotherapy (P = .06), higher body mass index (P = .05), and lower follicle-stimulating hormone and luteinizing hormone (each P < .01).

CONCLUSION

During the first year, most patients on exemestane plus triptorelin had E2 levels below the defined threshold of 2.72 pg/mL, consistent with levels reported in postmenopausal patients on aromatase inhibitors, but at each time point, at least 17% of patients had levels greater than the threshold.

Breast Cancer: Conventional Diagnosis and Treatment Modalities and Recent Patents and Technologies

Breast cancer is the most prevalent cancer among women worldwide. However, increased survival is due to the dramatic advances in the screening methods, early diagnosis, and breakthroughs in treatments. Over the course of the last decade, many acquisitions have taken place in this critical field of research in the pharmaceutical industry. Advances in molecular biology and pharmacology aided in better understanding of breast cancer, enabling the design of smarter therapeutics able to target cancer and respond to its microenvironment efficiently. Patents and research papers investigating diagnosis and treatment strategies for breast cancer using novel technologies have been surveyed for the past 15 years. Various nanocarriers have been introduced to improve the therapeutic efficacy of anticancer drugs, including liposomes, polymeric micelles, quantum dots, nanoparticles, and dendrimers. This review provides an overview of breast cancer, conventional therapy, novel technologies in the management of breast cancer, and rational approaches for targeting breast cancer.

HIGHLIGHTS

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide. However, survival rates vary widely, optimistically heading toward a positive trend. Increased survival is due to the drastic shift in the screening methods, early diagnosis, and breakthroughs in treatments.Different strategies of breast cancer classification and staging have evolved over the years. Intrinsic (molecular) subtyping is essential in clinical trials and well understanding of the disease.Many novel technologies are being developed to detect distant metastases and recurrent disease as well as to assess response to breast cancer management.Intensive research efforts are actively ongoing to take novel breast cancer therapeutics to potential clinical application.Most of the recent research papers and patents discuss one of the following strategies: the development of new drug entities that specifically target the breast tumor cells; tailor designing a novel carrier system that can multitask and multifunction as a drug carrier, targeting vehicle and even as a diagnostic tool, direct conjugation of a therapeutic drug moiety with a targeting moiety, diagnostic moiety or pharmacokinetics altering moiety; or the use of innovative nontraditional approaches such as genetic engineering, stem cells, or vaccinations.

Understanding response and resistance to oestrogen deprivation in ER-positive breast cancer

Oestrogens (E) and oestrogen receptor alpha (ERα) play fundamental roles in the development and progression of more than three-quarters of breast cancers (BC). The ability to influence the natural history of BC by hormonal manipulation is well established and endocrine therapies represent the cornerstone of systemic management for women with ERα-positive disease. Endocrine agents abrogate oestrogenic signalling through distinct and incompletely overlapping mechanisms, either impeding the transcriptional activity of ERα or diminishing E-synthesis. In post-menopausal women, E-production is chiefly attributable to the enzymatic conversion of androgens in extra-gonadal tissues by the cytochrome P-450 superfamily member aromatase. Greater understanding of steroid biosynthesis has underpinned rational drug design and pharmacological development of potent and specific aromatase inhibitors (AIs). Contemporary agents induce profound E-suppression in post-menopausal women and are first-line neo-adjuvant, adjuvant and metastatic therapies, with greater efficacy and tolerability than tamoxifen. The principal qualifier for endocrine treatment, including AIs, remains ERα expression. However, it is increasingly apparent that ERα expression is not synonymous with sensitivity to treatment and insufficient to account for the considerable heterogeneity of response. Better predictive biomarkers of de novo resistance are required to improve patient selection and identify those poor-responders who may benefit from alternative or additional systemic treatment from the outset. Among patients who do respond well initially, many relapse during their clinical course and there is also an unmet need for biomarkers of acquired resistance. The majority of women who relapse on AIs continue to express functional ERα which remains a legitimate target for second-line endocrine therapy. Understanding and overcoming acquired resistance to AIs requires a greater appreciation of ERα biology and the mechanisms though which E-dependence can be subverted. In this article, we review the impact of therapeutic E-deprivation on the natural history of ERα-positive breast cancer. Consideration is given to established and emerging biomarkers and/or determinants of response and resistance to E-deprivation. In vitro and in vivo evidence of the molecular mechanisms underpinning the transition from sensitivity to resistance are reviewed in the context of current models of ERα activity and their potential translational relevance.

Insights on adjuvant endocrine therapy for premenopausal and postmenopausal breast cancer

In 2005, cancer accounted for 13% of all deaths worldwide. Breast cancer is the number-one cause of cancer-related death among women in the USA, affecting 178,480 of them in 2007. As 75% of tumors in postmenopausal women and half in premenopausal women express estrogen receptor, endocrine therapy plays a significant role as a systemic treatment. Robust datasets have demonstrated the impact of tamoxifen in reducing breast cancer recurrence and mortality, regardless of the age of the patient. Other estrogen-deprivation strategies, such as aromatase inhibitors in postmenopausal women and luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists in premenopausal women, are being increasingly used for estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. This review discusses basic principles regarding endocrine therapy, the need for accurate estrogen receptor testing and the role of menopause in therapy selection.

Exemestane in the prevention setting

Aromatase inhibitors are well-established therapies in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant and metastatic settings for breast cancer. In adjuvant trials, this class of drugs has shown preventative properties by decreasing the rate of contralateral breast cancer. Recently, the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group MAP.3 study evaluated exemestane as a breast cancer prevention agent for women with specified higher risks of developing breast cancer. We review the history of exemestane and evaluate the available evidence of its use for breast cancer prevention.

New and translational perspectives of oestrogen deprivation in breast cancer

Over the last 20 years, aromatase inhibitors have been developed to become a highly effective treatment strategy for treatment of hormone receptor positive breast cancer. Despite their success, poor response and resistance limit the effectiveness of these agents in up to 50% of patients. In recent years, studies using highly sensitive hormone assays have provided insight into the source of oestrogen production for the stimulation of oestrogen receptor positive breast cancer growth, suggesting that uptake from the circulation is likely to make a significant contribution to intratumoural oestradiol. To obtain insight into how tumours become resistant to oestrogen after aromatase inhibition, long term oestrogen deprivation of cultured cells has been used to mimic acquired resistance to aromatase inhibitors. This work has aided the selection of agents to rationally combine with aromatase inhibitors to combat resistance. Molecular profiling using genome-wide approaches has shed new light on the heterogeneity of responses to oestrogen deprivation and predictors of resistance in vivo. Testing new agents and combinations in short-term pre-surgical studies using biomarkers such as Ki67 is critical for increasing the rate at which new rational combinations can be assessed for efficacy.

An in vitro model showing adaptation to long-term oestrogen deprivation highlights the clinical potential for targeting kinase pathways in combination with aromatase inhibition

Aromatase inhibitors (AI) have improved the treatment of oestrogen receptor positive (ER+) breast cancer. Despite the efficacy of these agents over 40% of patients relapse with endocrine resistant disease. Here we describe an in vitro model of acquired resistance to long-term oestrogen deprivation (LTED). The LTED cells retain expression of the ER and appear hypersensitive to oestrogen as a result of altered kinase activity. Furthermore analysis of temporal changes in gene expression during the acquisition of resistance highlight growth factor receptor pathways as key mediators of this adaptive process.

Impact of body mass index on the efficacy of endocrine therapy in premenopausal patients with breast cancer: an analysis of the prospective ABCSG-12 trial

PURPOSE

Aromatase inhibitors are effective as endocrine treatment for patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. According to the hypothesis that overweight patients have higher levels of aromatase enzyme availability, we investigated the influence of body mass index (BMI) on the efficacy of adjuvant endocrine therapy in premenopausal patients in a retrospective analysis of the Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group (ABCSG) 12 trial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

ABCSG-12 examined the efficacy of ovarian suppression using goserelin (3.6 mg subcutaneously every 28 days) in combination with anastrozole or tamoxifen with or without zoledronic acid (4 mg intravenously every 6 months) in premenopausal women with endocrine-responsive breast cancer. BMI was calculated using the prospectively collected data on patients' height and weight at study entry. BMI categories have been differentiated according to the WHO definition.

RESULTS

Overweight patients treated with anastrozole had a 60% increase in the risk of disease recurrence (hazard ratio [HR], 1.60; 95% CI, 1.06 to 2.41; P = .02) and more than a doubling in the risk of death (HR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.17 to 3.92; P = .01) compared with normal weight patients treated with anastrozole. In the overweight group, patients treated with anastrozole had a nearly 50% increase in the risk of disease recurrence (HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 0.93 to 2.38; P = .08) and a three-fold increase in the risk of death (HR, 3.03; 95% CI, 1.35 to 6.82; P = .004) compared with patients treated with tamoxifen.

CONCLUSION

BMI significantly impacts on the efficacy of anastrozole plus goserelin in premenopausal patients with breast cancer, probably through influencing aromatase availability and/or ovarian suppression by goserelin.

Optimal adjuvant endocrine therapy for early breast cancer

Adjuvant endocrine therapy substantially reduces tumor recurrence and mortality in pre- and post-menopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer but is ineffective in women with hormone receptor-negative tumors. Tamoxifen has been the standard adjuvant endocrine therapy for both pre- and post-menopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer and remains the standard of care for premenopausal women. In addition to tamoxifen, ovarian ablation by surgery or radiotherapy remains an option for selected premenopausal women and trials are evaluating the role of ovarian function suppression using luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists. For postmenopausal women, aromatase inhibitors are more effective than tamoxifen therapy and aromatase inhibitors and tamoxifen are regarded as standards of care. Prolonging adjuvant endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women by the sequencing of aromatase inhibitors and tamoxifen can improve outcomes further. Adjuvant endocrine therapy will probably be used for longer durations in selected postmenopausal women.

Adjuvant endocrine therapy for perimenopausal women with early breast cancer

Adjuvant treatment with aromatase inhibitors (AIs) improves outcomes in postmenopausal women with hormone-sensitive early breast cancer compared with tamoxifen. However, AIs should not be used in premenopausal women because they can paradoxically increase estrogen secretion and may therefore stimulate tumor progression. In perimenopausal women undergoing treatment for breast cancer, it can be difficult to determine true menopausal status because adjuvant chemotherapy, tamoxifen, and gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues can induce transient (or permanent) ovarian suppression. How can one determine whether these women are truly postmenopausal and therefore candidates for AI therapy? A panel of experts in the field of endocrine therapy in breast cancer met in Dubrovnik, Croatia, on October 23, 2006, to discuss this clinical dilemma. This report summarizes the conclusions and recommendations that arose from this discussion.

Aromatase inhibitors: past, present and future in breast cancer therapy

Estrogen has been implicated in promoting breast cancer in a majority of women. Endocrine therapy controlling estrogen production has been the guiding principle in treating breast cancer for more than a century. A greater understanding of this disease at a molecular level has led to the development of molecules that inhibit estrogen production by inhibiting the aromatase enzyme, that is the primary source of estrogen in postmenopausal women. This review examines the evolution of aromatase inhibitor (AI) based therapies over the past three decades. The third generation aromatase inhibitors (anastrozole, letrozole and exemestane), which have been found to be extremely specific and effective in an adjuvant/neoadjuvant/extended adjuvant setting are discussed from a biochemical and clinical perspective. A comprehensive discussion of the past, present, and future of aromatase inhibitors is conducted in this review.

Letrozole: present and future role in the treatment of breast cancer

State of the art hormonal therapy for women with breast cancer has evolved over the last few years. Tamoxifen used to be the gold standard for adjuvant treatment of postmenopausal women with hormone-sensitive early breast cancer and also for patients with metastatic disease in whom hormonal manipulation was considered, but the introduction of third generation aromatase inhibitors has changed this concept. This article discusses the clinical implications of recent trials with one of the aromatase inhibitors letrozole, including pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data as well as recent data on relative benefits and side effects compared with other available hormonal agents. Relevant ongoing clinical-translational trials evaluating this agent are also discussed.

Achievements in systemic therapies in the pregenomic era in metastatic breast cancer

Over the last decades, the introduction of several new agents into clinical practice has significantly improved disease control and obtained some, albeit rare, survival benefits in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Despite these results, the choice of treatment for the majority of patients is still empirically based, since the only two predictive factors with level 1 evidence for clinical use are hormonal receptor status for endocrine therapy and HER-2 status for trastuzumab therapy. Important improvements in the endocrine therapy of both pre- and postmenopausal women with hormone-responsive disease have been achieved. For premenopausal women, ovarian function suppression with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogs combined with tamoxifen has become the standard treatment, although aromatase inhibitors plus ovarian function suppression are under evaluation. In postmenopausal patients, aromatase inhibitors have proved to be superior to standard endocrine therapies in either first- or second-line treatment and a novel antiestrogen compound, fulvestrant, has been introduced in clinical practice. Chemotherapy remains the treatment of choice for hormone unresponsive or resistant patients. Anthracyclines and taxanes have been used either alone or in combination as first-line chemotherapy, but with the more frequent use of these agents in the adjuvant setting, new standards are needed for first-line chemotherapy, and new and more efficacious treatments are required. In the subgroup of patients with tumors that overexpress HER-2, the use of trastuzumab alone or in combination with chemotherapy has modified the natural history of these tumors, even if only about one out of two patients obtains a clinical response. In this review we summarize the main achievements and the currently available treatment options for patients with MBC.

Luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists in premenopausal hormone receptor-positive breast cancer

Ovarian function suppression for the treatment of premenopausal breast cancer was first used in the late 19th century. Traditionally, ovarian function suppression had been accomplished irreversibly via irradiation or surgery, but analogues of the luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LH-RH) have emerged as reliable and reversible agents for this purpose, especially the LH-RH agonists. Luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone antagonists are in earlier stages of development in breast cancer and are not currently in clinical use. Luteinizing hormonereleasing hormone agonists act by pituitary desensitization and receptor downregulation, thereby suppressing gonadotrophin release. Limited information is available comparing the efficacies of the depot preparations of various agonists, but pharmacodynamic studies have shown comparable suppressive capabilities on estradiol and luteinizing hormone. At present, only monthly goserelin is Food and Drug Administration-approved for the treatment of estrogen receptor-positive, premenopausal metastatic breast cancer in the United States. Luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists have proven to be as effective as surgical oophorectomy in premenopausal advanced breast cancer. They offer similar outcomes compared with tamoxifen, but the endocrine combination appears to be more effective than LH-RH agonists alone. In the adjuvant setting, LH-RH agonists versus no therapy reduce the annual odds of recurrence and death in women aged>50 years with estrogen receptor-positive tumors. Luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists alone or in combination with tamoxifen have shown disease-free survival rates similar to chemotherapy with CMF (cyclophosphamide/methotrexate/5-fluorouracil). Outcomes of chemotherapy with or without LH-RH agonists are comparable, though a few trials favor the combination in young premenopausal women (aged<40 years). Adjuvant LH-RH agonists with or without tamoxifen might be as efficacious as tamoxifen alone, and the additional benefit from chemotherapy is unclear. Adequately powered studies are now studying the relative merits of combining adjuvant tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitors with ovarian function suppression, the additional benefits of adding ovarian function suppression to chemotherapy, and the need for adjuvant chemotherapy for women treated with combined ovarian function suppression and anti-estrogen therapy.

Combined ovarian ablation and aromatase inhibition as first-line therapy for hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer in premenopausal women: report of three cases

Aromatase inhibitors have become well established for the treatment of postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer and for adjuvant hormonal therapy for primary breast cancer. Benefit of aromatase inhibition has not yet been extended to premenopausal women. Ovarian ablation by oophorectomy, ovarian radiation or hormonal suppression is the initial recommended treatment for hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer in premenopausal women. The addition of tamoxifen improves the benefit of ovarian ablation/ovarian suppression. Addition of aromatase inhibitors to luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogs has been reported to significantly decrease circulating estrogens and produce tumor responses in only a very small number of patients over the last 15 years. We treated three premenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer with combined oophorectomy or ovarian irradiation and anastrozole. One patient remained free of progression for 4 years, while the other two remained free of progression for more than 5 and 3 years, respectively. We also note that monthly zoledronic acid for 4 years produced sclerosis of vertebral body metastasis. We conclude that combined ovarian ablation and aromatase inhibition is a feasible treatment modality that deserves more attention and further investigation for hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer in premenopausal women.

The biology of steroid hormones and endocrine treatment of breast cancer

Recognition of the role of oestrogens in the stimulation of breast tumour growth has led to the development of several therapies based on endocrine intervention. Endocrine agents are currently used as a treatment for steroid receptor-positive breast cancer and more recently as a preventative measure in high-risk populations. Accurate quantification of resulting steroid hormonal profiles is essential to the understanding of the biological action and efficacy of these agents. In premenopausal women GnRH agonists suppress ovarian oestrogen synthesis and reduce oestradiol to close to postmenopausal levels. GnRH agonists used in combination with an aromatase inhibitor suppress levels even further. In contrast, tamoxifen can lead to markedly enhanced levels. In postmenopausal women aromatase inhibitors can achieve an almost complete inhibition of the aromatase enzyme.

Aromatase inhibitors for therapy of advanced breast cancer

In postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer, numerous phase III trials have been performed comparing the third-generation non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors (NS-AIs) anastrozole and letrozole and the steroidal AI (S-AI) exemestane in the "first-line" setting against tamoxifen and in the "second-line" setting against megestrol acetate. In both settings, the AIs were at least as efficacious or superior in some endpoints with a preferable toxicity profile including a lower incidence of thrombotic events. Relatively small differences in potency between the three AIs have been identified and it has not been demonstrated that these differences have clinical implications. The recent establishment of the value of AIs in the adjuvant setting for postmenopausal women will impact on their utilization in advanced disease. In premenopausal women the third-generation AIs have not been studied as monotherapy and there is a paucity of data in combination with ovarian function suppression in the advanced disease setting. The main area of future investigations for the AIs in premenopausal women will be in the adjuvant therapy setting in combination with suppression of ovarian function.

Mechanisms of resistance to aromatase inhibitors

Aromatase inhibitors are rapidly becoming the first choice for hormonal treatment of steroid receptor positive breast cancer in postmenopausal women. An understanding of the resistance mechanisms to these agents is, therefore, important for the appropriate delivery of treatment to responsive patients and the rational development of new agents targeted at the resistance pathways. De novo resistance appears to be a quantitative rather than qualitative phenomenon with virtually all oestrogen receptor positive tumours showing an anti-proliferative response to the aromatase inhibitor anastrozole. While the expression of type 1 growth factor receptors reduces response to tamoxifen this appears to have little detrimental effect on response to aromatase inhibitors. Studies of acquired resistance in vitro have indicated that acquisition of hypersensitivity to oestrogenic stimulation is a key mechanism that is dependent on enhanced cross-talk of growth factor and oestrogen signaling pathways. Collection of resistant biopsy tissues from patients is important to determine if this mechanism is clinically relevant.

American Society of Clinical Oncology technology assessment on the use of aromatase inhibitors as adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: status report 2004

PURPOSE

To update the 2003 American Society of Clinical Oncology technology assessment on adjuvant use of aromatase inhibitors.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on results from multiple large randomized trials, adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer should include an aromatase inhibitor in order to lower the risk of tumor recurrence. Neither the optimal timing nor duration of aromatase inhibitor therapy is established. Aromatase inhibitors are appropriate as initial treatment for women with contraindications to tamoxifen. For all other postmenopausal women, treatment options include 5 years of aromatase inhibitors treatment or sequential therapy consisting of tamoxifen (for either 2 to 3 years or 5 years) followed by aromatase inhibitors for 2 to 3, or 5 years. Patients intolerant of aromatase inhibitors should receive tamoxifen. There are no data on the use of tamoxifen after an aromatase inhibitor in the adjuvant setting. Women with hormone receptor-negative tumors should not receive adjuvant endocrine therapy. The role of other biomarkers such as progesterone receptor and HER2 status in selecting optimal endocrine therapy remains controversial. Aromatase inhibitors are contraindicated in premenopausal women; there are limited data concerning their role in women with treatment-related amenorrhea. The side effect profiles of tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors differ. The late consequences of aromatase inhibitor therapy, including osteoporosis, are not well characterized.

CONCLUSION

The Panel believes that optimal adjuvant hormonal therapy for a postmenopausal woman with receptor-positive breast cancer includes an aromatase inhibitor as initial therapy or after treatment with tamoxifen. Women with breast cancer and their physicians must weigh the risks and benefits of all therapeutic options.

Facts and Controversies in Systemic Treatment of Metastatic Breast Cancer

The management of metastatic breast cancer remains an important and controversial issue. The systemic therapy, comprising endocrine, cytotoxic and biological agents, can be administered sequentially or in combination. Few drugs or combinations provide a significant improvement in survival and, therefore, in the great majority of cases, treatment is given with a palliative intent. With the exception of first-line therapy, for which general agreement exists, currently there is no consensual standard of care. This review will summarize the current knowledge and outline the controversial issues related to systemic therapy of metastatic breast cancer, with emphasis on treatment tailoring. The potential role of tumor molecular profile(s) in the selection of patients that could benefit the most from each strategy/agent will be discussed.

Oestrogen suppression--lessons from clinical studies

In few, if any, areas of cancer research has "translational research" played a role such as the one it has played in the development of endocrine therapy. Thus, much of the understanding of the mechanisms of action of different therapies has been achieved by developing novel hypotheses based on clinical observations. Ovarian ablation was developed as an empirical therapy long before characterization of oestrogen disposition or detection of the oestrogen receptor. The first-generation aromatase inhibitor, aminoglutethimide, was implemented as a strategy to achieve a 'medical adrenalectomy' and was discovered as an aromatase inhibitor subsequent to clinical observations. Currently, observations such as the lack of cross-resistance between aromatase inhibitors and inactivators and the diverse effects from combined therapy using tamoxifen in concert with hormonal suppression in pre- and post-menopausals are provoking interesting questions for further research.

Biological rationale for endocrine therapy in breast cancer

Oestrogens are heavily implicated in the risk to, and progression of, breast cancer. Therapeutic strategies targeted at the oestrogenic stimulus to the breast and hormone-sensitive breast cancers are extremely attractive measures both to prevent the disease and to treat established tumours. The present review outlines the biological rationale for such endocrine therapy and traces the evolution whereby irreversible surgical procedures have been replaced by potent and specific drugs. In particular, the development of the latest generation of agents which inhibit oestrogen biosynthesis (aromatase inhibitors) is considered by defining the central role of the aromatase enzyme, its regulation and contribution to circulating and tumour endogenous oestrogens. The nature of response and resistance which may be elicited following the use of endocrine therapy is also described as this may determine the optimal use of aromatase inhibitors and, more generally, anti-hormone therapy in the management of women at high risk to, or with, breast cancer.

Influence of letrozole and anastrozole on total body aromatization and plasma estrogen levels in postmenopausal breast cancer patients evaluated in a randomized, cross-over study

PURPOSE

To compare the effects of the two novel, potent, nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors anastrozole and letrozole on total-body aromatization and plasma estrogen levels.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Twelve postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive, metastatic breast cancer were treated with anastrozole 1 mg orally (PO) and letrozole 2.5 mg PO once daily, each given for a time interval of 6 weeks in a randomized sequence. Total-body aromatization was determined before treatment and at the end of each treatment period using a dual-label isotopic technique involving isolation of the metabolites with high-performance liquid chromatography. Plasma levels of estrone (E(1)), estradiol (E(2)), and estrone sulfate (E(1)S) were determined in samples obtained before each injection using highly sensitive radioimmunoassays.

RESULTS

Pretreatment aromatase levels ranged from 1.68% to 4.27%. On-treatment levels of aromatase were detectable in 11 of 12 patients during treatment with anastrozole (mean percentage inhibition in the whole group, 97.3%) but in none of the 12 patients during treatment with letrozole (> 99.1% suppression in all patients; Wilcoxon, P =.0022, comparing the two drug regimens). Treatment with anastrozole suppressed plasma levels of E(1), E(2), and E(1)S by a mean of 81.0%, 84.9%, and 93.5%, respectively, whereas treatment with letrozole caused a corresponding decrease of 84.3%, 87.8% and 98.0%, respectively. The suppression of E(1) and E(1)S was found to be significantly better during treatment with letrozole compared with anastrozole (P =.019 and.0037, respectively).

CONCLUSION

This study revealed letrozole (2.5 mg once daily) to be a more potent suppressor of total-body aromatization and plasma estrogen levels compared with anastrozole (1 mg once daily) in postmenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer.

Combination endocrine therapy in the management of breast cancer

Combination endocrine therapy has long been sought after as a means to better treat breast cancer. Agents that suppress estrogen production are given with agents that suppress estrogenic activity at the cellular level. Historically, these combinations have resulted in initial improvements in response rates, but relapse-free and overall survival were not significantly improved. Also, the increased toxicity seen with these regimens was limiting. New endocrine therapies with more potent activity and less toxicity have led to a resurgence of this idea in the management of breast cancer. Complete estrogen blockade has been compared with single-agent treatments in many different settings. The endocrine effects of this type of therapy are intriguing, but apparently do not readily predict a clinical advantage. The combination of an aromatase inhibitor and an antiestrogen, despite pharmacokinetic interactions, may prove to be beneficial. Results from ongoing trials are eagerly awaited to further address this question in postmenopausal breast cancer patients. For premenopausal breast cancer patients the options are more complex. Clinical outcomes with leutinizing hormone releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists plus aromatase inhibitors are limited to very small phase II studies and are not clearly superior to single-agent therapy. Clinical data in the metastatic setting with premenopausal patients favor the use of an LHRH agonist with tamoxifen over the use of an LHRH agonist alone. However, a similar comparison with tamoxifen alone is lacking with only one trial including this as a treatment arm. Adjuvant therapy with this combined endocrine approach (LHRH agonist plus antiestrogen) has been more extensively studied, but lacks crucial comparisons necessary for making complex treatment decisions. Hopefully, through investigative diligence and ingenuity this issue can be adequately understood. However, many exciting new agents are on the horizon that offer hope to further advance the progress made to date although further confounding the questions already answered.

Premenopausal Breast Cancer

Modern treatment of premenopausal breast cancer is based on well-established prognostic and predictive factors for disease outcome such as nodal status, hormone receptor expression, tumour size, tumour grading and patient age. The development of strategies according to such individual risk profiles has resulted in significant improvements both in overall and disease-free survival. An abundant number of new prognostic and predictive factors in addition to those already mentioned may help to increase our understanding of the biology of breast cancer and to individualize therapy in premenopausal patients. Although less than 10% of patients directly benefit, it is estimated that approximately each year the life of more than 4000 women in Germany will be saved or prolonged by adjuvant treatment. Whether dose intensive modifications and new antineoplastic drugs can improve disease outcome will be clarified when ongoing studies have increased observation time. At present, hormone ablation via surgical, radiotherapeutical or drug-induced castration in addition to selective estrogen response modifiers (SERM), such as tamoxifen, with or without chemotherapy remains the cornerstone of adjuvant treatment in premenopausal patients with breast cancer. In advanced disease, new highly effective hormonal and other target-oriented antineoplastic agents with few adverse effects have been recently introduced. However, overall survival in metastatic disease remains poor, even when intensive or high-dose chemotherapy is used. Special attention must be given to longer follow up and potential toxic long-term adverse effects of therapy when new regimens are applied in clinical trials.

Stepwise estrogen suppression manipulating the estrostat

Estrogen suppression is an effective endocrine treatment option in pre- as well as postmenopausal breast cancer patients. The fact that it produces clinical benefits not only in these two groups of patients that differ significantly with respect to plasma estrogen levels but also among patients with very low plasma estrogen levels due to previous hypophysectomy, adrenalectomy or treatment with first/second generation aromatase inhibitors, suggests estrogen deprivation to work independent of pretreatment plasma estrogen levels. Interestingly, in vitro studies have revealed MCF-7 cells to respond to estrogen deprivation by sensitization, causing maximum estradiol stimulation at a concentration 10(-5) to 10(-4) the concentration needed in wild-type cells. While results from recent phase III studies comparing novel aromatase inhibitors and inactivators to conventional therapy have suggested that a more effective hormone ablation may be translated into an improved clinical efficacy, the biochemical rationale for lack of complete cross-resistance between aromatase inhibitors and inactivators or aromatase inhibitors and megestrol acetate remains to be explained. Interestingly, patients becoming resistant to estrogen deprivation may still respond to estrogens administered in pharmacological doses. Future studies are warranted to explore alterations in gene expression and signaling mechanisms in response to different therapies in tumor tissue in vivo.

Aromatase inhibitors in the treatment and prevention of breast cancer

PURPOSE

The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the current clinical status and possible future applications of aromatase inhibitors in breast cancer.

METHODS

A review of the literature on the third-generation aromatase inhibitors was conducted. Some data that have been presented but not published are included. In addition, the designs of ongoing trials with aromatase inhibitors are outlined and the implications of possible results discussed.

RESULTS

All of the third-generation oral aromatase inhibitors--letrozole, anastrozole, and vorozole (nonsteroidal, type II) and exemestane (steroidal, type I)--have now been tested in phase III trials as second-line treatment of postmenopausal hormone-dependent breast cancer. They have shown clear superiority compared with the conventional therapies and are therefore considered established second-line hormonal agents. Currently, they are being tested as first-line therapy in the metastatic, adjuvant, and neoadjuvant settings. Preliminary results suggest that the inhibitors might displace tamoxifen as first-line treatment, but further studies are needed to determine this.

CONCLUSION

The role of aromatase inhibitors in premenopausal breast cancer and in combination with chemotherapy and other anticancer treatments are areas of future exploration. The ongoing adjuvant trials will provide important data on the long-term safety of aromatase inhibitors, which will help to determine their suitability for use as chemopreventives in healthy women at risk of developing breast cancer.

Resistance to endocrine therapy of breast cancer: recent advances and tomorrow's challenges

The role of endocrine therapy in early as well as advanced breast cancer cannot be overrated. Long-term tamoxifen exposure (5 years) in the adjuvant setting has been shown to be effective not only in improving relapse-free and overall survival but also in reducing the incidence of contralateral cancers. Promising results have been achieved in breast cancer prevention with use of antiestrogens. Novel aromatase inhibitors and inactivators have been found superior to conventional treatment in metastatic disease and are currently being evaluated in the adjuvant setting to improve relapse-free and overall survival. If potential health hazards from estrogen deprivation with regard to cardiovascular disease as well as bone metabolism can be addressed, adjuvant endocrine therapy may include such drugs in the future. However, while endocrine therapy of breast cancer has become more and more important in the clinic, the major problems in hormonal therapy are primary and acquired resistance to endocrine manipulations. The causes for endocrine resistance and possible ways to delay or avoid this phenomenon are only allusively understood. Elucidation of the mechanisms underlying endocrine resistance in vivo represents the key to improve our treatment strategies. Due to intense use of in vitro models and animal systems, many potential mechanisms of endocrine resistance have been described; however, our understanding of the problem of drug resistance in vivo remains limited. Hopefully, ongoing programs on translational research in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and palliative settings will provide information that will improve our understanding of the biology of endocrine resistance in vivo and, thus, provide us with a better rationale to improve early as well as late endocrine therapy in breast cancer patients. The present publication summarizes the state of the art with respect to endocrine resistance.

Pharmacology and clinical experience with exemestane

Since the introduction of the first generation aromatase inhibitor, aminoglutethimide, for breast cancer treatment 30 years ago, we now have at hand novel, potent and well-tolerated steroidal and non-steroidal compounds, allowing near complete inhibition of oestrogen synthesis. The third-generation aromatase inhibitor, or more accurately termed inactivator, exemestane, is a potent suppressor of oestrogen synthesis and is shown to be an effective antitumour agent in postmenopausal breast cancer patients. Exemestane has been shown to be effective in patients failing multiple endocrine regimens. A large randomised study has revealed that exemestane improves time-to-disease progression as well as overall survival compared with megestrol acetate as second-line therapy in patients failing tamoxifen. In current studies, exemestane is compared with tamoxifen as first-line therapy for metastatic disease. Sequential therapy with tamoxifen followed by exemestane is also being compared with tamoxifen monotherapy in the adjuvant setting. In addition, the drug may have potential for breast cancer prevention.

Complete estrogen blockade for the treatment of metastatic and early stage breast cancer

Complete estrogen blockade has long been sought as a more effective means of controlling breast cancer compared with single agent endocrine therapy. This approach may be accomplished through the use of agents which reduce estrogen production combined with agents that prevent the activity of estrogen at the cellular level. For prostate cancer, another hormonally responsive malignancy, this approach has not been successful at improving survival compared with that achieved with single agent therapy. Preclinical information is contradictory for many promising combinations and may not reflect the true nature of in vivo interaction between agents. For premenopausal patients with metastatic breast cancer, the combination of a luteinising hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist and tamoxifen is clearly effective, but whether the combination is more effective than either single agent is still controversial. Similar response rates and overall survival were reported with goserelin or goserelin plus tamoxifen by Jonat et al. in 1 randomised, prospective study, but the addition of tamoxifen improved time to progression. A second trial comparing buserelin plus tamoxifen with either single agent reported superior efficacy in terms of response rates, disease-free survival and overall survival with combination therapy. A meta-analysis of 4 randomised trials making similar comparisons, demonstrated significant improvement in median overall survival, progression-free survival, response rate, and duration of response with the combination of a LHRH agonist (goserelin or buserelin) and tamoxifen in premenopausal breast cancer patients with metastatic disease. For postmenopausal women with metastatic breast cancer, the addition of an aromatase inhibitor to tamoxifen has yet to be prospectively compared to single agent therapy. Use of endocrine combinations in the treatment of early stage breast cancer is under investigation. Preliminary results of some of the ongoing adjuvant therapy trials indicate that the combination of a LHRH agonist and tamoxifen may have similar efficacy to cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil chemotherapy in premenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive tumour. Addition of LHRH agonist therapy in premenopausal patients with estrogen receptor-positive tumour who had maintained the ovarian function following chemotherapy [cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin (adriamycin), fluorouracil, and tamoxifen], also led to a reduction in the risk of recurrence. These studies have identified a sub-population of patients who may benefit from the addition of combination endocrine therapy. Overall, the issue is quite complex and the data from many ongoing trials are still awaited with anticipation to further delineate the role of complete estrogen deprivation in this disease.

Vorozole results in greater oestrogen suppression than formestane in postmenopausal women and when added to goserelin in premenopausal women with advanced breast cancer

The high potency and selectivity of new aromatase inhibitors has translated to greater efficacy and improved tolerability in comparison with established second-line hormonal agents for advanced breast cancer in phase III clinical trials. Two pharmacological studies are reported which assess the use of one of these inhibitors, vorozole, in combination or comparison with well-established methods of oestrogen deprivation in pre and postmenopausal patients. When combined with the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) goserelin in 10 premenopausal patients, vorozole markedly enhanced the suppression of serum levels of oestrone, oestradiol and, oestrone sulphate beyond that achieved by goserelin alone (by a mean 74%, 83%, and 89%, respectively). The combination was well-tolerated and had no significant effects on androgen levels. Vorozole was compared with formestane in 13 postmenopausal women and serum oestrone, oestradiol, and oestrone sulphate levels were suppressed by 47%, 30%, and 70%, respectively, more by vorozole than by the steroidal aromatase inhibitor. Again the tolerability was excellent. The plasma oestrogen levels in the postmenopausal patients on vorozole were lower than in the premenopausal patients on goserelin plus vorozole, indicating that ovarian oestrogen synthesis may be relatively resistant to aromatase inhibition, even during GnRHa treatment. Thus, in both pre and postmenopausal patients substantially greater suppression of oestrogen can be achieved by vorozole compared with alternative approaches. Existing clinical-pharmacological correlates suggest that these increases in pharmacological effectiveness may result in enhanced clinical effectiveness.

LHRH agonist treatment of breast cancer and gynecological malignancies: a review

Since 1982 LHRH agonists have been used as a treatment modality in patients with disseminated breast cancer and gynecologic malignancies, based on the assumption of steroid dependence of these cancers. They have been successfully used in the treatment of premenopausal women with breast cancer; response rates reported are 31-63%. Less optimistic results have been reported in postmenopausal breast cancer patients as well as in the treatment of women suffering from ovarian cancer. Response rates for treatment of postmenopausal breast- and ovarian cancer patients appear to be up to 22% and 29%, respectively. Studies using LHRH agonists to treat endometrial and cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia are still rare and, until now, no data about the efficacy of LHRH agonists in treating these malignancies have been reported. This paper reviews clinically important studies of LHRH agonists, including a rationale for the use of LHRH agonists in breast cancer and gynecological cancer treatment. In view of the changed endocrine state in postmenopausal women on the one hand and alterations in endocrine metabolism in breast cancer tissue on the other hand, it is concluded that it might be more effective to use a combination of LHRH agonists and other endocrine modalities to treat disseminated breast cancer and gynecological malignancies.