Changes in bone mineral density during and after 3 years' use of tamoxifen or toremifene

Toremifene in the treatment of breast cancer

Although more widespread screening and routine adjuvant therapy has improved the outcome for breast cancer patients in recent years, there remains considerable scope for improving the efficacy, safety and tolerability of adjuvant therapy in the early stage disease and the treatment of advanced disease. Toremifene is a selective estrogen receptor modifier (SERM) that has been widely used for decades in hormone receptor positive breast cancer both in early and late stage disease. Its efficacy has been well established in nine prospective randomized phase III trials compared to tamoxifen involving more than 5500 patients, as well as in several large uncontrolled and non-randomized studies. Although most studies show therapeutic equivalence between the two SERMs, some show an advantage for toremifene. Several meta-analyses have also confirmed that the efficacy of toremifene is at least as good as that of tamoxifen. In terms of safety and tolerability toremifene is broadly similar to tamoxifen although there is some evidence that toremifene is less likely to cause uterine neoplasms, serious vascular events and it has a more positive effect on serum lipids than does tamoxifen. Toremifene is therefore effective and safe in the treatment of breast cancer. It provides not only a useful therapeutic alternative to tamoxifen, but may bring specific benefits.

Effects of toremifene versus tamoxifen on breast cancer patients: a meta-analysis

Toremifene and tamoxifen are both selective estrogen receptor modulators used in the treatment of breast cancer patients. Therefore, we carried out a meta-analysis to achieve a more precise evaluation of the effects of toremifene versus tamoxifen on breast cancer patients, including the efficacy and safety, and the effects on the uterus, lipids, and bone. Comprehensive literature searches were conducted using the electronic databases and reference lists to include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared toremifene with tamoxifen for breast cancer patients. Two reviewers independently selected studies and abstracted data. Data were analyzed by Review Manager, version 5.0. Twenty-three trials (7242 patients) were included. For early stage breast cancer, toremifene was associated with higher 5-year survival rates (OR 1.25, 95 % CI 1.04, 1.50), more vaginal discharge (OR 1. 32, 95 % CI 1.01, 1.73), a greater decrease in serum triglyceride levels (SMD -1.01, 95 % CI -1.89, -0.14), a smaller decrease in LDL cholesterol levels (SMD 0.45, 95 % CI 0.07, 0.84) and in bone mineral density in Ward's triangle (SMD -0.36, 95 % CI -0.71, -0.01), and a greater increase in HDL cholesterol levels (SMD 0.43, 95 % CI 0.08, 0.77) than tamoxifen. For advanced breast cancer patients, toremifene was associated with more vaginal bleeding (OR 0.45, 95 % CI 0.26, 0.80) and a greater decrease in serum triglyceride levels (SMD -1.15, 95 % CI -1.90, -0.39) than tamoxifen. Available evidence showed that toremifene could be an alternative option to tamoxifen for both early and advanced breast cancer patients. However, the methodological quality of the included studies was low. More rigorous RCTs are needed to confirm the results of this meta-analysis in the future.

A comparison of survival outcomes and side effects of toremifene or tamoxifen therapy in premenopausal estrogen and progesterone receptor positive breast cancer patients: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

In premenopausal women, endocrine adjuvant therapy for breast cancer primarily consists of tamoxifen alone or with ovarian suppressive strategies. Toremifene is a chlorinated derivative of tamoxifen, but with a superior risk-benefit profile. In this retrospective study, we sought to establish the role of toremifene as an endocrine therapy for premenopausal patients with estrogen and/or progesterone receptor positive breast cancer besides tamoxifen.

METHODS

Patients with early invasive breast cancer were selected from the breast tumor registries at the Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital (China). Premenopausal patients with endocrine responsive breast cancer who underwent standard therapy and adjuvant therapy with toremifene or tamoxifen were considered eligible. Patients with breast sarcoma, carcinosarcoma, concurrent contralateral primary breast cancer, or with distant metastases at diagnosis, or those who had not undergone surgery and endocrine therapy were ineligible. Overall survival and recurrence-free survival were the primary outcomes measured. Toxicity data was also collected and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Of the 810 patients reviewed, 452 patients were analyzed in the study: 240 received tamoxifen and 212 received toremifene. The median and mean follow up times were 50.8 and 57.3 months, respectively. Toremifene and tamoxifen yielded similar overall survival values, with 5-year overall survival rates of 100% and 98.4%, respectively (p = 0.087). However, recurrence-free survival was significantly better in the toremifene group than in the tamoxifen group (p = 0.022). Multivariate analysis showed that recurrence-free survival improved independently with toremifene (HR = 0.385, 95% CI = 0.154-0.961; p = 0.041). Toxicity was similar in the two treatment groups with no women experiencing severe complications, other than hot flashes, which was more frequent in the toremifene patients (p = 0.049). No patients developed endometrial cancer.

CONCLUSION

Toremifene may be a valid and safe alternative to tamoxifen in premenopausal women with endocrine-responsive breast cancer.

Bone health in a prospective cohort of postmenopausal women receiving aromatase inhibitors for early breast cancer

OBJECTIVE

Baseline bone health in postmenopausal women is poorly characterized in prospective series of early breast cancer (EBC) patients candidates to aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy. Our objective is to comprehensively evaluate bone health in a prospective clinical cohort of patients recruited prior to adjuvant AI therapy, with the aim of establishing potential AI impact on bone loss and fractures.

METHODS

From January 2006 to April 2010, we consecutively included 343 women with EBC who were about to start adjuvant AI therapy. Participants were assessed at baseline (before AI initiation) and at 3 months, with annual assessments thereafter. Bone mineral density (BMD), spine X-ray, bone metabolism (vitamin D [25(OH)D], bone turnover markers [BTM]), arthralgia and quality of life are measured.

RESULTS

Mean age was 61.9 years; 197 (57.4%) had been previously treated with tamoxifen; 145 (42.3%) were taking exemestane, 187 (54.5%) letrozole, and 11 (3.2%) anastrozole. Analysis of baseline data shows only 59 women (17.7%) had normal BMD; 200 (60.1%) had osteopenia and 74 (22.2%) had osteoporosis; 39 women (11.4%) had a prevalent fracture, 293 (89.1%) had 25(OH)D insufficiency (<30 ng/ml), and 61 (18.5%) severe deficiency (<10 ng/ml). Low 25(OH)D concentrations were associated with lower BMD and 233 (67.9%) participants had some degree of arthralgia.

CONCLUSIONS

Low bone mass, prevalent fractures and vitamin D insufficiency were highly prevalent among candidates to adjuvant AI for EBC. Therefore, it is crucial to assess BMD, prevalent fractures and 25(OH)D concentrations before starting AI therapy and during follow-up.

Pharmacology and clinical applications of selective estrogen receptor modulators

Compounds that can be described as selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) have expanded dramatically over the past two decades. The ability of SERMs to act as estrogens in certain tissues while remaining inert or acting as an anti-estrogen in other tissues has opened up opportunities for treating specific estrogen-modulated diseases without accepting the risk of systemic estrogen activity. SERM development has resulted in significant therapeutic advances for breast cancer, osteoporosis and potentially other diseases associated with the menopause. After the publication of the Women's Health Initiative, interest in compound selectivity that reduces menopausal symptoms while protecting bone, breast, uterus and the heart has increased. Future SERMs may also have a therapeutic profile that can be tailored to specific patient populations, including men. This review paper summarizes the characteristics of different SERMs from various pharmacological categories and the feasibility and scope of their use for a large range of disease/health conditions.

Cancer treatment-induced bone loss

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Patients treated for cancer may be at risk for osteoporosis and fracture. Evaluation and treatment of patients with cancer treatment-induced bone loss should lead to fewer fractures. This review will help clinicians learn to identify, evaluate and treat cancer patients at risk.

RECENT FINDINGS

Survivors of childhood cancers and patients made hypogonadal by treatment for breast or prostate cancer are clearly at risk for osteoporosis and fracture. Use of aromatase inhibitors rather than tamoxifen for breast cancer will likely lead to more osteoporosis. Bisphosphonates prevent bone loss in many patients at risk.

SUMMARY

For many cancer patients, treatment with calcium, vitamin D, and bisphosphonates will likely decrease the consequences of cancer treatment-induced bone loss, namely fractures.

Bone health in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer: How protective is tamoxifen?

Breast cancer is a leading threat to women's health. Tamoxifen, the most successful selective estrogen receptor modulator, has been used in hormonal therapy for three decades. Along with its therapeutic effect on breast cancer, tamoxifen also demonstrates potential benefits for bone health. However, the extent and quality of such benefits have not been systematically evaluated. We conducted a comprehensive literature search and identified 27 peer-reviewed articles investigating the relationship between tamoxifen and bone health in postmenopausal women with early stage breast cancer. The majority of studies reported that tamoxifen therapy alone protected against the loss of spinal bone mineral density. The bones in the hip also benefited from tamoxifen treatment while there was no evidence demonstrating tamoxifen's protection against bone loss in arms. When tamoxifen was combined with chemotherapy, it was found to partially prevent or reverse the bone loss resulting from chemotherapy. Patients with a history of hormone replacement therapy experienced bone loss while patients without the history had increased bone mineral density during tamoxifen therapy. Despite an apparent impact of tamoxifen on bone mineral density, the few available studies of tamoxifen and bone fractures appear to suggest no protective effect but an increase in fracture incidence. More investigation is necessary to clarify the discrepancy between bone mineral density and fracture in postmenopausal breast cancer patients treated with tamoxifen.

Differential effects of selective oestrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) tamoxifen, ospemifene and raloxifene on human osteoclasts in vitro

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Several selective oestrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) with oestrogen agonist effects in bone cells and without increased risk of breast and endometrial cancer have been developed. Here, we have investigated the effects of different types of SERMs on osteoclast differentiation, bone resorption and apoptosis in vitro.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

Human peripheral blood-derived CD14+ monocytes were cultured on bovine bone slices in the presence of RANKL, M-CSF, TNF-alpha and dexamethasone for seven days. Also, CD14+ monocytes were co-cultured either with human SaOS-2 or MG-63 osteosarcoma cells, in the presence of parathyroid hormone. Osteoclast cultures were treated with different SERMs. TRACP+ multinucleated cells and C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen were used as markers for osteoclast formation and bone resorption, respectively.

KEY RESULTS

In CD14+ monocyte cultures, tamoxifen directly inhibited human osteoclast formation and bone resorption, while raloxifene and ospemifene had no inhibitory effect. In the co-cultures either with SaOS-2 or MG-63 cells, ospemifene and raloxifene as well as tamoxifen inhibited osteoclast formation in a concentration-dependent manner. The inhibitory effect was associated with an increased production of osteoprotegerin. The anti-oestrogen ICI 182 780 completely reversed the effects of these SERMs.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

Tamoxifen had an oestrogen receptor dependent, direct, inhibitory effect on human osteoclast differentiation and bone resorption, whereas ospemifene and raloxifene required osteoblastic cells to achieve a similar inhibition. The effects of ospemifene and raloxifene were mediated by oestrogen receptors by a mechanism involving paracrine induction of osteoprotegerin in cultures with osteoblast derived osteosarcoma cells.

Cancer-treatment-induced bone loss, part 1

PURPOSE

The pathophysiology, frequency, sequelae, diagnosis, and treatment of cancer-treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) are discussed.

SUMMARY

CTIBL is a long-term complication associated with cancer therapies that can directly or indirectly affect bone metabolism. Although CTIBL can occur in any patient receiving a cancer therapy known to cause bone loss, CTIBL is most common in patients with breast or prostate cancer who receive chemotherapy, hormone therapy, or surgical castration, as these can cause hypogonadism and induce bone loss. CTIBL causes bone fragility and an increased susceptibility to fractures; therefore, prevention, early diagnosis, and treatment of CTIBL are essential to decrease the risk of fracture. Bone loss occurs more rapidly and tends to be more severe in patients with CTIBL compared with those with normal age-related bone loss. Fractures of the hip, vertebra, and wrist are the fractures most commonly associated with bone loss. CTIBL is diagnosed by measuring bone mass using bone densitometry. Treatment of CTIBL consists of changing diet and lifestyle such as optimizing calcium and vitamin D intake, exercising, modifying behaviors known to increase the risk of CTIBL and pharmacologic therapy with hormone replacement therapy (HRT), selective estrogen-receptor modifiers (SERMs), calcitonin, or a bisphosphonate.

CONCLUSION

Early identification and treatment of CTIBL are essential to prevent fractures. Patients should be instructed to optimize calcium and vitamin D intake, exercise regularly, and modify lifestyle behaviors known to cause bone loss. Patients with CTIBL should be treated with an oral or i.v. bisphosphonate; SERMs or HRT may be an option in some patients if contraindications do not exist.

Bone mineral density and lipid changes during 5 years of follow-up in a study of prevention of breast cancer with toremifene in healthy, high-risk pre- and post-menopausal women

A double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled pilot study was initiated to evaluate the feasibility of chemoprevention with toremifene 60 mg/day in healthy women at high risk for breast cancer. Enrolment in the study was terminated earlier than planned because of slow patient accrual, although 13% of patients continued for 5 years. The revised efficacy outcomes were change in bone mineral density (BMD) from baseline at four skeletal sites, plus effects on serum lipids. In premenopausal women there was a trend for sustained increase in BMD during toremifene therapy after year 1 in lumbar spine. In postmenopausal women, toremifene had little or no effect on BMD trends. Levels of total and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol were largely unchanged from baseline in premenopausal women treated with toremifene but were often slightly lower than in the placebo group during follow-up. Total and LDL cholesterol levels declined slightly from baseline in the postmenopausal women and were, at several points during the first 3 years, significantly lower than in the corresponding placebo group (p < 0.01). We conclude that: (a) assessment of toremifene 60 mg/day in chemoprevention will require further clinical trials; (b) toremifene 60 mg/day has no substantive negative effects on BMD in pre- or postmenopausal women and may exert a minor favourable influence (in particular, the effects of toremifene 60 mg/day on BMD in premenopausal women may make the drug an attractive alternative to tamoxifen 20 mg/day for that patient subset); (c) lipid effects of toremifene 60 mg/day are, at minimum, neutral and may be modestly favourable for reducing cardiovascular risk.

Toremifene: an evaluation of its safety profile

Toremifene has been in clinical use for 8 years for the treatment of advanced hormone-sensitive breast cancer and the adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer. More than 350,000 patient treatment years have accumulated, sufficient to allow evaluation of its longer-term safety profile in comparison with tamoxifen and, where possible, with raloxifene and aromatase inhibitors. We reviewed all preclinical and clinical safety data from 1978 to 2004 and comparative clinical safety data between October 1995 and the end of 2004. Secondary endometrial cancer incidence was lower with toremifene than with tamoxifen and was similar to that with raloxifene. It is speculated that toremifene may unmask existing endometrial tumors rather than induce new events. The risk of stroke, pulmonary embolism, and cataract may be lower with toremifene than with tamoxifen and the risk of pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis lower than with raloxifene. Beneficial estrogen agonistic effects were equivalent to those of tamoxifen regarding bone mineral density and superior regarding lipid profiles.