Adjuvant endocrine therapy plus zoledronic acid in premenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer: 5-year follow-up of the ABCSG-12 bone-mineral density substudy

Approach to Bone Health in the Patient With Breast Cancer

Treatment for breast cancer, including endocrine therapies, can contribute to bone loss and increase the risk of osteoporosis and fractures. Management of bone health in patients with cancer is often coordinated between oncologists, endocrinologists, and primary care physicians. In this article, we discuss the approach to screening for fracture risk among patients initiating treatments for breast cancer and recommendations for lifestyle modifications to optimize bone health. We will review 3 indications for pharmacologic bone-targeted therapies: prevention of cancer treatment-induced bone loss, adjuvant therapy to reduce recurrence, and management of bone metastases.

Cancer treatment-induced bone loss

Cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTBL) is associated with anti-tumor treatments, including endocrine therapies, chemotherapeutic treatments, radiotherapy, glucocorticoids, and tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Osteoporosis, characterized by the loss of bone mass, can increase the risk of fractures, leading to mortality and long-term disability, even after cancer remission. Cancer and osteoporosis have marked clinical and pathogenetic similarities. Both have a multifactorial etiology, affect the geriatric population, and markedly influence quality of life. Lifestyle management, including calcium and vitamin D supplementation, is recommended but the supporting evidence is limited. Oral and injectable bisphosphonates are effective for osteoporosis and malignant bone disease. Bisphosphonates increase bone mineral density (BMD) in patients with CTBL. Denosumab is also used in the management of CTBL; in clinical trials, it improved BMD and reduced the risk of fracture. Currently, there are no bone anabolic therapies for patients with cancer. Appropriate therapies are necessary to maintain optimal bone health, particularly in patients at heightened risk.

Bone-active drugs in premenopausal women with breast cancer under hormone-deprivation therapies

BACKGROUND

Bone health management in premenopausal women with breast cancer (BC) under hormone-deprivation therapies (HDTs) is often challenging, and the effectiveness of bone-active drugs is still unknown.

METHODS

This retrospective multicenter study included 306 premenopausal women with early BC undergoing HDTs. Bone mineral density (BMD) and morphometric vertebral fractures (VFs) were assessed 12 months after HDT initiation and then after at least 24 months.

RESULTS

After initial assessment, bone-active drugs were prescribed in 77.5% of women (151 denosumab 60 mg/6 months, 86 bisphosphonates). After 47.0 ± 20.1 months, new VFs were found in 16 women (5.2%). Vertebral fracture risk was significantly associated with obesity (odds ratio [OR] 3.87, P = .028), family history of hip fractures or VFs (OR 3.21, P = .040], chemotherapy-induced menopause (OR 6.48, P < .001), preexisting VFs (OR 25.36, P < .001), baseline T-score less than or equal to -2.5 standard deviation (SD) at any skeletal site (OR 4.14, P = .036), and changes at lumbar and total hip BMD (OR 0.94, P = .038 and OR 0.88, P < .001, respectively). New VFs occurred more frequently in women untreated compared to those treated with bone-active drugs (14/69, 20.8% vs 2/237, 0.8%; P < .001) and the anti-fracture effectiveness remained significant after correction for BMI (OR 0.03; P < .001), family history of fractures (OR 0.03; P < .001), chemotherapy-induced menopause (OR 0.04; P < .001), and preexisting VFs (OR 0.01; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Premenopausal women under HDTs are at high risk of VFs in relationship with high BMI, densitometric diagnosis of osteoporosis, preexisting VFs, and family history of osteoporotic fractures. Vertebral fractures in this setting might be effectively prevented by bisphosphonates or denosumab.

Endocrine consequences of breast cancer therapy and survivorship

Breast cancer survivorship is increasing, due to earlier diagnosis of the disease and more effective therapies. Long-term endocrine sequelae, including early menopause, bone health, fertility implications and menopausal symptoms, are important survivorship issues. Ovarian failure is common with chemotherapy and options for preserving fertility in young women include ovarian suppression during chemotherapy and oocyte or embryo cryopreservation before chemotherapy. Tamoxifen as adjunct therapy in premenopausal women leads to ovarian stimulation, sometimes ovulation and occasionally pregnancy with important teratogenic implications. Aromatase inhibitor therapy with or without gonadotrophin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist leads to profound bone loss and anti-resorptive therapy is advised to prevent fracture. Tamoxifen acts to preserve bone in postmenopausal women but not premenopausal women. Pregnancy is not discouraged in young women with early breast cancer, even to the point of pausing adjunct therapy in order to conceive. However, menopausal hormone therapy is discouraged even years later. Non-hormonal therapy for menopausal symptoms in breast cancer survivors is available but, in some cases, estrogen-containing therapy may be worthy of consideration for quality of life in the informed patient.

Multicenter Study on the Frequency of Low Bone Mineral Density in Young Women With Breast Cancer and Associated Factors

INTRODUCTION

Young women with breast cancer (BC) may experience bone mineral density (BMD) loss secondary to cancer treatment effects on estrogen levels. Studies assessing BMD in BC patients have had a limited representation of young women. This multicenter retrospective study analyzed the frequency of low BMD and associated factors in this age group.

METHODS

Women diagnosed with stage 0-III BC at ≤40 years, treated with chemotherapy and/or endocrine therapy between 2010 and 2020 at 5 Mexican BC referral centers were eligible. Demographic, clinical and treatment data were collected, as well as bone dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) results. Low BMD was defined as lumbar or femoral neck T-score < -1.0 or Z-score ≤ -2.0.

RESULTS

A total of 1259 patients were included; median age at diagnosis was 36 years (21-40). Overall, 93% received chemotherapy and 65% endocrine therapy (tamoxifen was received at some point by 61%, aromatase inhibitors by 17%, and GnRH agonists/bilateral oophorectomy by 21%). DEXA scans were documented in 254 (20%), of which 163 (64%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 58%-70%) had a low BMD report. Low BMD was associated with receiving aromatase inhibitors (Odds ratio [OR] 1.92; 95% CI 1.13-3.24), and GnRH agonists/bilateral oophorectomy (OR 2.25; 95% CI 1.21-4.21).

CONCLUSION

The suboptimal frequency of BMD monitoring observed displays an alarming disregard for bone health in young patients. Thus, a high proportion of women with low BMD are potentially being missed and precluded from the opportunity to receive timely interventions. Particular focus should be put on BMD monitoring among patients treated with aromatase inhibitors, GnRH agonists or bilateral oophorectomy.

Bone-modifying agents for reducing bone loss in women with early and locally advanced breast cancer: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Bisphosphonates and receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappa B ligand (RANKL)-inhibitors are amongst the bone-modifying agents used as supportive treatment in women with breast cancer who do not have bone metastases. These agents aim to reduce bone loss and the risk of fractures. Bisphosphonates have demonstrated survival benefits, particularly in postmenopausal women.

OBJECTIVES

To assess and compare the effects of different bone-modifying agents as supportive treatment to reduce bone mineral density loss and osteoporotic fractures in women with breast cancer without bone metastases and generate a ranking of treatment options using network meta-analyses (NMAs).

SEARCH METHODS

We identified studies by electronically searching CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase until January 2023. We searched various trial registries and screened abstracts of conference proceedings and reference lists of identified trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing different bisphosphonates and RANKL-inihibitors with each other or against no further treatment or placebo for women with breast cancer without bone metastases.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies and certainty of evidence using GRADE. Outcomes were bone mineral density, quality of life, overall fractures, overall survival and adverse events. We conducted NMAs and generated treatment rankings.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-seven trials (35,163 participants) fulfilled our inclusion criteria; 34 trials (33,793 participants) could be considered in the NMA (8 different treatment options). Bone mineral density We estimated that the bone mineral density of participants with no treatment/placebo measured as total T-score was -1.34. Evidence from the NMA (9 trials; 1166 participants) suggests that treatment with ibandronate (T-score -0.77; MD 0.57, 95% CI -0.05 to 1.19) may slightly increase bone mineral density (low certainty) and treatment with zoledronic acid (T-score -0.45; MD 0.89, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.16) probably slightly increases bone mineral density compared to no treatment/placebo (moderate certainty). Risedronate (T-score -1.08; MD 0.26, 95% CI -0.32 to 0.84) may result in little to no difference compared to no treatment/placebo (low certainty). We are uncertain whether alendronate (T-score 2.36; MD 3.70, 95% CI -2.01 to 9.41) increases bone mineral density compared to no treatment/placebo (very low certainty). Quality of life No quantitative analyses could be performed for quality of life, as only three studies reported this outcome. All three studies showed only minimal differences between the respective interventions examined. Overall fracture rate We estimated that 70 of 1000 participants with no treatment/placebo had fractures. Evidence from the NMA (16 trials; 19,492 participants) indicates that treatment with clodronate or ibandronate (42 of 1000; RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.92; 40 of 1000; RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.86, respectively) decreases the number of fractures compared to no treatment/placebo (high certainty). Denosumab or zoledronic acid (51 of 1000; RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.01; 55 of 1000; RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.11, respectively) probably slightly decreases the number of fractures; and risedronate (39 of 1000; RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.16) probably decreases the number of fractures compared to no treatment/placebo (moderate certainty). Pamidronate (106 of 1000; RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.75 to 3.06) probably increases the number of fractures compared to no treatment/placebo (moderate certainty). Overall survival We estimated that 920 of 1000 participants with no treatment/placebo survived overall. Evidence from the NMA (17 trials; 30,991 participants) suggests that clodronate (924 of 1000; HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.17), denosumab (927 of 1000; HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.21), ibandronate (915 of 1000; HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.34) and zoledronic acid (925 of 1000; HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.14) may result in little to no difference regarding overall survival compared to no treatment/placebo (low certainty). Additionally, we are uncertain whether pamidronate (905 of 1000; HR 1.20, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.78) decreases overall survival compared to no treatment/placebo (very low certainty). Osteonecrosis of the jaw We estimated that 1 of 1000 participants with no treatment/placebo developed osteonecrosis of the jaw. Evidence from the NMA (12 trials; 23,527 participants) suggests that denosumab (25 of 1000; RR 24.70, 95% CI 9.56 to 63.83), ibandronate (6 of 1000; RR 5.77, 95% CI 2.04 to 16.35) and zoledronic acid (9 of 1000; RR 9.41, 95% CI 3.54 to 24.99) probably increases the occurrence of osteonecrosis of the jaw compared to no treatment/placebo (moderate certainty). Additionally, clodronate (3 of 1000; RR 2.65, 95% CI 0.83 to 8.50) may increase the occurrence of osteonecrosis of the jaw compared to no treatment/placebo (low certainty). Renal impairment We estimated that 14 of 1000 participants with no treatment/placebo developed renal impairment. Evidence from the NMA (12 trials; 22,469 participants) suggests that ibandronate (28 of 1000; RR 1.98, 95% CI 1.01 to 3.88) probably increases the occurrence of renal impairment compared to no treatment/placebo (moderate certainty). Zoledronic acid (21 of 1000; RR 1.49, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.58) probably increases the occurrence of renal impairment while clodronate (12 of 1000; RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.39) and denosumab (11 of 1000; RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.19) probably results in little to no difference regarding the occurrence of renal impairment compared to no treatment/placebo (moderate certainty).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When considering bone-modifying agents for managing bone loss in women with early or locally advanced breast cancer, one has to balance between efficacy and safety. Our findings suggest that bisphosphonates (excluding alendronate and pamidronate) or denosumab compared to no treatment or placebo likely results in increased bone mineral density and reduced fracture rates. Our survival analysis that included pre and postmenopausal women showed little to no difference regarding overall survival. These treatments may lead to more adverse events. Therefore, forming an overall judgement of the best ranked bone-modifying agent is challenging. More head-to-head comparisons, especially comparing denosumab with any bisphosphonate, are needed to address gaps and validate the findings of this review.

Denosumab Prevents Bone Loss and Microarchitectural Deterioration in Premenopausal Women With Breast Cancer Receiving Estradiol Suppression Therapy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

PURPOSE

Suppression of ovarian function and aromatase inhibition (AI) increases disease-free survival in premenopausal women with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive early-stage breast cancer but accelerates bone loss. We therefore hypothesized that suppressing bone remodeling using denosumab (DMAB) would prevent bone loss in these women.

METHODS

In a 12-month double-blind randomized trial, 68 women with ER-positive early-stage breast cancer commencing ovarian function suppression and AI were randomly assigned to 60 mg DMAB (n = 34) or placebo (PBO; n = 34) once every 6 months (at 0 and 6 months). Volumetric bone mineral density (BMD), microarchitecture, and estimated bone strength of the distal tibia and distal radius were measured using high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography, and spine and hip BMD were measured using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry at 0, 6, and 12 months. The primary end point and treatment effect was the mean adjusted between group difference (MAD; [95% CI]) in distal tibial total volumetric BMD over 12 months, with a single P value tested over all time points. The study is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (anzctr.org.au; identifier: ACTRN12616001051437).

RESULTS

Intention-to-treat analysis included all 68 randomly assigned women. Over 12 months, compared with PBO, DMAB prevented the decrease in distal tibial total BMD (MAD, 20.8 mg HA/cm3 [95% CI, 17.3 to 24.2]), cortical BMD (42.9 mg HA/cm3 [95% CI, 32.1 to 53.9]), trabecular BMD (3.32 mg HA/cm3 [95% CI, 1.45 to 5.20], P = .004), estimated stiffness (11.6 kN/m [95% CI, 7.6 to 15.6]), and failure load (563 N [95% CI, 388 to 736]). Findings were similar at the distal radius. Decreases in BMD at the lumbar spine (MAD, 0.13 g/cm2 [95% CI, 0.11 to 0.15]), total hip (0.08 g/cm2 [95% CI, 0.07 to 0.09], and femoral neck (0.06 g/cm2 [95% CI, 0.05 to 0.07]) were also prevented. All P < .001 unless otherwise noted.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with DMAB at commencement of estradiol suppression therapy preserves BMD, bone microarchitecture, and estimated strength, and is likely to increase fracture-free survival.

Ovarian Suppression: Early Menopause and Late Effects

OPINION STATEMENT

Around 90% of breast tumours are diagnosed in the early stage, with approximately 70% being hormone receptor-positive. The cornerstone of adjuvant therapy for early-stage hormone receptor-positive breast cancer is endocrine therapy, tailored according to disease stage, biological characteristics of the tumour, patient's comorbidities, preferences and age. In premenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, ovarian function suppression is a key component of the adjuvant endocrine treatment in combination with an aromatase inhibitor or tamoxifen. Moreover, it can be used during chemotherapy as a standard strategy for ovarian function preservation in all breast cancer subtypes. In the metastatic setting, ovarian function suppression should be used in all premenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer to achieve a post-menopausal status. Despite its efficacy, ovarian function suppression may lead to several side effects that can have a major negative impact on patients' quality of life if not properly managed (e.g. hot flashes, depression, cognitive impairment, osteoporosis, sexual dysfunction, weight gain). A deep knowledge of the side effects of ovarian function suppression is necessary for clinicians. A correct counselling in this regard and proactive management should be considered a fundamental part of survivorship care to improve treatment adherence and patients' quality of life.

Follow-up Bone Mineral Density Testing: 2023 Official Positions of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry

Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the gold standard method for measuring bone mineral density (BMD) which is most strongly associated with fracture risk. BMD is therefore the basis for the World Health Organization's densitometric definition of osteoporosis. The International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) promotes best densitometry practices and its official positions reflect critical review of current evidence by domain experts. This document reports new official positions regarding follow-up DXA examinations based on a systematic review of literature published through December 2022. Adoption of official positions requires consensus agreement from an expert panel following a modified RAND protocol. Unless explicitly altered by the new position statements, prior ISCD official positions remain in force. This update reflects increased consideration of the clinical context prompting repeat examination. Follow-up DXA should be performed with pre-defined objectives when the results would have an impact on patient management. Testing intervals should be individualized according to the patient's age, sex, fracture risk and treatment history. Incident fractures and therapeutic approach are key considerations. Appropriately ordered and interpreted follow-up DXA examinations support diagnostic and therapeutic decision making, thereby contributing to excellent clinical care. Future research should address the complementary roles of clinical findings, imaging and laboratory testing to guide management.

Estrogen deprivation effects of endocrine therapy in breast cancer patients: Incidence, management and outcome

Endocrine therapy is one of the standard adjuvant treatments to reduce the risk of recurrence and mortality in patients with hormone receptor positive early breast cancer. Despite its proven efficacy, ET side effects, which persist over time even if low grade, may deteriorate quality of life. During follow-up visits, emphasis is generally placed on the risk of disease recurrence, while the topic of ET side effects is commonly neglected and discussed only briefly. This could lead to poor adherence to therapy and early treatment discontinuation, resulting in worse survival outcomes. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the available evidence on the incidence and reporting of ET-related side effects (including vasomotor symptoms, musculoskeletal disorders and genitourinary syndrome of menopause, as well as fatigue, psychological and ocular disorders, dysmetabolic effects and loss of bone density) and of the pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies available to mitigate symptom burden.

Proceedings of the 2023 Santa Fe Bone Symposium: Progress and Controversies in the Management of Patients with Skeletal Diseases

The Santa Fe Bone Symposium (SFBS) held its 23rd annual event on August 5-6, 2023, in Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA. Attendees participated in-person and remotely, representing many states and countries. The program included plenary presentations, panel discussions, satellite symposia, a Project ECHO workshop, and a session on healthcare policy and reimbursement for fracture liaison programs. A broad range of topics were addressed, including transitions of osteoporosis treatments over a lifetime; controversies in vitamin D; update on Official Positions of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry; spine surgery and bone health; clinical applications of bone turnover markers; basic bone biology for clinicians; premenopausal-, pregnancy-, and lactation-associated osteoporosis; cancer treatment induced bone loss in patients with breast cancer and prostate cancer; genetic testing for skeletal diseases; and an update on nutrition and bone health. There were also sessions on rare bone diseases, including managing patients with hypophosphatasia; treatment of X-linked hypophosphatemia; and assessment and treatment of patients with hypoparathyroidism. There were oral presentations of abstracts by endocrinology fellows selected from those who participated in the Santa Fe Fellows Workshop on Metabolic Bone Diseases, held the 2 days prior to the SFBS. These proceedings of the 2023 SFBS present the clinical highlights and insights generated from many formal and informal discussions in Santa Fe.

Endocrine Therapy for Surgeons: Practical Pearls for Managing Menopausal, Bone Loss and Sexual Adverse Effects

Breast cancer patients are living longer than ever before and as such the population of breast cancer survivors continues to grow. Approximately 80% of breast cancers are hormone receptor-positive (HR+) and most patients will receive neoadjuvant or adjuvant estrogen blockade, referred to as endocrine therapy. Although endocrine therapy reduces HR+ breast cancer recurrence by 30-50%, significant adverse effects pose a threat to treatment adherence. These adverse effects include vasomotor symptoms, colloquially referred to as hot flashes, bone loss, joint arthralgias, genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM), previously referred to as vaginal atrophy, and low libido. This review will present the evidence-based treatments available for each of these adverse effects, including clear treatment algorithms for GSM, which is often experienced by patients but overlooked by providers. The most important takeaway is to ask open-ended questions, encourage reporting of these symptoms, and refer patients to specialty providers as needed. Surgeons may be the first to encounter these symptoms, therefore it is critical to remain informed of the treatment options.

Systemic Therapy of Premenopausal Patients with Early Stage Hormone Receptor-Positive, HER2-Negative Breast Cancer - Controversies and Standards in Healthcare

In patients with existing ovarian function, there are some special aspects to adjuvant endocrine therapy in premenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative (HR pos./HER2 neg.) breast cancer. Treatment options include tamoxifen with or without a GnRH analog, and aromatase inhibitors with a GnRH analog. Furthermore, ovarian function is affected by previous chemotherapy. Both aromatase inhibitors (+GnRH analogs) and GnRH analogs in combination with tamoxifen are supposed to be indicated for patients at increased risk of recurrence. However, national and international guidelines and therapy recommendations do not provide a clear definition of intermediate or high risk; as a result, therapy decisions are often made for each patient on an individual basis. This is also reflected in the considerable variability at national and international levels, e.g., with regard to the use of aromatase inhibitors + GnRH analogs. This review summarizes the data on completed studies (e.g., SOFT, TEXT, EBCTCG meta-analyses) and the current multigene testing studies (TailorX, RxPonder, ADAPT), discusses the rationale for current studies (e.g., CLEAR-B), and looks ahead to future questions.

Managing a Long and Winding Road: Estrogen Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer

We review key topics in the management of estrogen receptor (ER)-positive human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer. The single biggest challenge in management of this disease is late relapse, and we review new methods for identifying which patients are at risk of late relapse and potential therapeutic approaches in clinical trials. CDK4/6 inhibitors have become a standard treatment option for high-risk patients in both the adjuvant setting and the first-line metastatic setting, and we review data on optimal treatment after progression on CDK4/6 inhibitors. Targeting the estrogen receptor remains the single most effective way of targeting the cancer, and we review the developments in new oral selective ER degraders that are becoming a standard of care in cancers with ESR1 mutations and potential future directions.

Bone health in breast cancer

Early breast cancer is among the most common cancers worldwide. Recent advances continue to improve outcomes and increase long-term survivorship. However, therapeutic modalities are deleterious for patients' bone health. While antiresorptive therapy may partially negate this, consequent reduction in rates of fragility fractures remains unproven. Selective prescription of bisphosphonates or denosumab may be an amicable middle ground. Recent evidence also suggests a possible role of osteoclast inhibitors as adjuvant therapy, but the evidence is modest at best. In this narrative clinical review, we explore the impact of various adjuvant modalities on bone mineral density and fragility fracture rates of early breast cancer survivors. We also review optimal patient selection for antiresorptive agents, their impact on rates of fragility fractures, and the possible role of these agents as adjuvant therapy.

Advances in the Management of Menopausal Symptoms, Fertility Preservation, and Bone Health for Women With Breast Cancer on Endocrine Therapy

In patients with hormone receptor-positive early-stage breast cancer, adjuvant endocrine treatment administered for up to 5-10 years after diagnosis significantly reduces the risk of recurrence and death. However, this benefit comes with the cost of short- and long-term side effects that may negatively affect patients' quality of life (QoL) and treatment adherence. Among them, the prolonged estrogen suppression associated with the use of adjuvant endocrine therapy in both premenopausal and postmenopausal women can induce life-altering menopausal symptoms, including sexual dysfunction. Moreover, a decrease in bone mineral density and an increased risk of fractures should be carefully considered and prevented whenever indicated. For young women diagnosed with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer with unfulfilled childbearing plans, several challenges should be addressed to manage their fertility and pregnancy-related concerns. Proper counseling and proactive management of these issues are critical components of survivorship and should be pursued from diagnosis through the breast cancer care continuum. This study aims to provide an updated overview of the available approaches for improving the QoL of patients with breast cancer receiving estrogen deprivation therapy, focusing on advances in the management of menopausal symptoms, including sexual dysfunction, fertility preservation, and bone health.

Management of cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) in patients with breast cancer or prostate cancer

Breast cancer and prostate cancer are sex hormone-dependent cancers, and estrogen or androgen suppression therapy is the standard treatment. Cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL): bone loss and osteoporosis have become important side effects of these therapies. To summarize the current evidences, (1) Endocrine therapy for breast cancer and prostate cancer is associated with a significant decrease in bone mineral density. (2) Aromatase inhibitors (AI) for breast cancer are associated with a significant increase in fractures, and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer is likely to be associated with an increase in fractures. (3) Administration of bisphosphonates and denosumab increases bone mass in patients undergoing endocrine therapy for breast cancer. Administration of bisphosphonates, denosumab, and SERMs increased bone mass in patients undergoing ADT therapy for prostate cancer. (4) Bisphosphonates and denosumab reduce fracture risk in patients on AI for breast cancer, and toremifene and denosumab in patients on ADT for prostate cancer.

What Is Known about Breast Cancer in Young Women?

Breast cancer (BC) is the second leading cause of cancer-related death in women under the age of 40 years worldwide. In addition, the incidence of breast cancer in young women (BCYW) has been rising. Young women are not the focus of screening programs and BC in younger women tends to be diagnosed in more advanced stages. Such patients have worse clinical outcomes and treatment complications compared to older patients. BCYW has been associated with distinct tumour biology that confers a worse prognosis, including poor tumour differentiation, increased Ki-67 expression, and more hormone-receptor negative tumours compared to women >50 years of age. Pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes such as BRCA1/2 are more common in early-onset BC compared to late-onset BC. Despite all these differences, BCYW remains poorly understood with a gap in research regarding the risk factors, diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment. Age-specific clinical characteristics or outcomes data for young women are lacking, and most of the standard treatments used in this subpopulation currently are derived from older patients. More age-specific clinical data and treatment options are required. In this review, we discuss the epidemiology, clinicopathologic characteristics, outcomes, treatments, and special considerations of breast cancer in young women. We also underline future directions and highlight areas that require more attention in future studies.

Managing Bone Health in Breast Cancer

OBJECTIVE

Osteoporosis is a common condition that can be caused or exacerbated by estrogen deficiency.

METHODS

This narrative review will discuss optimizing bone health in the setting of adjuvant endocrine treatments for hormone receptor-positive breast cancer and the current use of antiresorptive agents as adjuvant therapy and as bone modifying agents.

RESULTS

Adjuvant endocrine treatments for hormone receptor-positive breast cancer (tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors) affect bone health. The exact effect depends on the agent used and the menopausal state of the woman. Antiresorptive medications for osteoporosis, bisphosphonates and denosumab, lower the risk of bone loss from aromatase inhibitors. Use of bisphosphonates as adjuvant treatment in breast cancer, regardless of hormone receptor status, is increasing because of benefits seen to cancer relapse and survival.

CONCLUSION

Optimizing bone health in women with breast cancer during and after cancer treatment is informed by an understanding of breast cancer treatment and its skeletal effect.

Long-Term Outcomes of Adjuvant Denosumab in Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant aromatase inhibitors increase osteoporosis and fractures in patients with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer. We have previously reported outcomes of the ABCSG-18 (study 18 from the Austrian Breast & Colorectal Cancer Study Group) trial showing that adjuvant anti–receptor activator of nuclear factor-κB ligand denosumab treatment counteracts these adverse effects and may improve outcomes. We report here the final long-term outcomes. METHODS: ABCSG-18 is a prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial in which 3425 postmenopausal patients with early hormone receptor–positive breast cancer receiving aromatase inhibitor therapy were randomly assigned in 58 trial centers to receive either denosumab 60 mg or placebo administered subcutaneously every 6 months. The primary end point was the time to first clinical fracture after randomization. Secondary disease outcome–related end points were disease-free survival (DFS), bone metastasis–free survival (BMFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: For this final protocol-defined analysis, median follow-up is 8 years (interquartile range, 6 to 9.6 years). There were 309 versus 368 DFS events (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 0.97) in the denosumab versus the placebo group, respectively, resulting in an absolute 9-year DFS benefit of 3.5 percentage points (79.4 vs. 75.9%). Adjuvant denosumab improved BMFS by 2.5 percentage points (88.9 vs. 86.4%; hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.65 to 1.00) and OS by 1.0 percentage point (90.9 vs. 89.9%; hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.64 to 1.01). No new toxicities for this dose of adjuvant denosumab were observed. CONCLUSIONS: DFS, BMFS, and OS continued to show benefit in this final long-term analysis of ABCSG-18. There were no new toxicities. (Funded by Amgen; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00556374.)

Bone Metastasis of Breast Cancer: Molecular Mechanisms and Therapeutic Strategies

Bone metastasis is a common complication of many types of advanced cancer, including breast cancer. Bone metastasis may cause severe pain, fractures, and hypercalcemia, rendering clinical management challenging and substantially reducing the quality of life and overall survival (OS) time of breast cancer patients. Studies have revealed that bone metastasis is related to interactions between tumor cells and the bone microenvironment, and involves complex molecular biological mechanisms, including colonization, osteolytic destruction, and an immunosuppressive bone microenvironment. Agents inhibiting bone metastasis (such as bisphosphate and denosumab) alleviate bone destruction and improve the quality of life of breast cancer patients with bone metastasis. However, the prognosis of these patients remains poor, and the specific biological mechanism of bone metastasis is incompletely understood. Additional basic and clinical studies are urgently needed, to further explore the mechanism of bone metastasis and develop new therapeutic drugs. This review presents a summary of the molecular mechanisms and therapeutic strategies of bone metastasis of breast cancer, aiming to improve the quality of life and prognosis of breast cancer patients and provide a reference for future research directions.

Proceedings of the 2022 Santa Fe Bone Symposium: Current Concepts in the Care of Patients with Osteoporosis and Metabolic Bone Diseases

The 22^nd Annual Santa Fe Bone Symposium (SFBS) was a hybrid meeting held August 5-6, 2022, with in-person and virtual attendees. Altogether, over 400 individuals registered, a majority of whom attended in-person, representing many states in the USA plus 7 other countries. The SFBS included 10 plenary presentations, 2 faculty panel discussions, satellite symposia, Bone Health & Osteoporosis Foundation Fracture Liaison Service Boot Camp, and a Project ECHO workshop, with lively interactive discussions for all events. Topics of interest included fracture prevention at different stages of life; how to treat and when to change therapy; skeletal health in cancer patients; advanced imaging to assess bone strength; the state of healthcare in the USA; osteosarcopenia; vitamin D update; perioperative bone health care; new guidelines for managing primary hyperparathyroidism; new concepts on bone modeling and remodeling; and an overview on the care of rare bone diseases, including hypophosphatasia, X-linked hypophosphatemia, tumor induced osteomalacia, osteogenesis imperfecta, fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva, and osteopetrosis. The SFBS was preceded by the Santa Fe Fellows Workshop on Osteoporosis and Metabolic Bone Diseases, a collaboration of the Endocrine Fellows Foundation and the Osteoporosis Foundation of New Mexico. From the Workshop, 4 participating fellows were selected to give oral presentations at the bone symposium. These proceedings represent the clinical highlights of 2022 SFBS presentations and the discussions that followed, all with the aim of optimizing skeletal health and minimizing the consequences of fragile bones.

Effect of Denosumab Added to 2 Different nab-Paclitaxel Regimens as Neoadjuvant Therapy in Patients With Primary Breast Cancer: The GeparX 2 × 2 Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Adjuvant denosumab might improve disease-free survival in hormone receptor (HR)-positive primary breast cancer (BC). The optimal neoadjuvant nab-paclitaxel schedule in terms of efficacy and safety is unclear.

Objective

To determine whether adding denosumab to anthracycline/taxane-containing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) increases the pathological complete response (pCR) rate and which nab-paclitaxel schedule is more effective in the NACT setting.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The GeparX was a multicenter, prospective, open-label, phase 2b, 2 × 2 randomized clinical trial conducted by GBG and AGO-B at 38 German sites between February 2017 and March 2019. The analysis data set was locked September 4, 2020; analysis was completed November 13, 2020. Patients had unilateral or bilateral primary BC, stage cT2-cT4a-d or cT1c, with either clinically node-positive or pathologically node-positive or HR-negative disease, or Ki-67 proliferation index greater than 20%, or ERBB2 (formerly HER2)-positive BC.

Interventions

Patients were randomized to receive or not receive denosumab, 120 mg subcutaneously every 4 weeks for 6 cycles, and either nab-paclitaxel, 125 mg/m2 weekly for 12 weeks or days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks for 4 cycles (8 doses), followed by 4 cycles of epirubicin/cyclophosphamide, 90/600 mg/m2 (every 2 weeks or every 3 weeks). Carboplatin was given in triple-negative BC (TNBC), and trastuzumab biosimilar ABP980 plus pertuzumab was given in ERBB2-positive BC (ERBB2-positive substudy).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was pCR rates between arms for each randomization.

Results

A total of 780 female (n = 779) and male (n = 1) patients (median [range] age, 49.0 [22-80] years) were randomized to the 4 treatment groups. The pCR (ypT0 ypN0) rate was 41.0% (90% CI, 37%-45%) with denosumab vs 42.8% (90% CI, 39%-47%) (P = .58) without denosumab, irrespective of BC subtype. Nab-paclitaxel weekly resulted in a significantly (significance level of α = .10) higher pCR rate of 44.9% (90% CI, 41%-49%) vs 39.0% (90% CI, 35%-43%) (P = .06) with nab-paclitaxel days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks. The pCR rates for nab-paclitaxel schedules in subgroups were only significantly different for TNBC (60.4% vs 50.0%; P = .06). Grade 3 to 4 toxic effects did not differ with or without denosumab. Nonhematologic toxic effects of grade 3 to 4 were higher with nab-paclitaxel weekly (33.7% vs 24.1%; P = .004).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial, denosumab added to anthracycline/taxane-based NACT did not improve pCR rates. Nab-paclitaxel at a dosage of 125 mg/m2 weekly significantly increased the pCR rate compared with the days 1 and 8, every-3-weeks schedule overall and in TNBC, but generated higher toxicity.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02682693.

Treatment of Breast Cancer in Young Adults

Although breast cancer is rare and understudied in adults age 40 and younger, recent epidemiologic data show an increasing incidence of breast cancer among young women in the United States and ongoing inferior long-term outcomes. Given breast cancers arising at a young age are more likely to present at advanced stages and to have aggressive biology, multimodal treatments are often indicated. Elevated local recurrence risks and greater propensity for germline cancer predisposition mutations can impact local therapy choices. Recently, escalated systemic therapy regimens for triple-negative breast cancer incorporating immunotherapy, de-escalated anti-HER2 therapy, and emerging targeted agents, including CDK4/6 inhibitors and PARP inhibitors, for early-stage disease may be employed in younger and older patients alike, with some special considerations. Prognostic genomic signatures can spare low-risk young women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer adjuvant chemotherapy, but management of intermediate-risk patients remains controversial. Ovarian function suppression and extended endocrine therapy are improving outcomes in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, but treatment adherence is a particular problem for young patients. Young women may also face greater challenges in long-term survivorship, including impaired fertility, difficulties in psychosocial adjustment, and other treatment-related comorbidities. Consideration of these age-specific issues through dedicated multidisciplinary strategies is necessary for optimal care of young women with breast cancer.

Osteoporosis and HIV Infection

Life expectancy of people living with HIV (PLWH) is now close to that of the HIV-uninfected population. As a result, age-related comorbidities, including osteoporosis, are increasing in PLWH. This narrative review describes the epidemiology of bone fragility in PLWH, changes of bone features over the course of HIV infection and their determinants, as well as the available evidence regarding the management of osteoporosis in PLWH. The risk of fracture is higher and increases about 10 years earlier compared to the general population. The classical risk factors of bone fragility are very widespread and are major determinants of bone health in this population. The majority of bone loss occurs during virus replication and during immune reconstitution at antiretroviral therapies (ART) initiation, which both increase osteoclast activity. Abnormalities in bone formation and mineralization have also been shown in histomorphometric studies in untreated PLWH. Measurement of bone mineral density (BMD) is the first line tool for assessing fracture risk in postmenopausal women, men above 50 years, and other HIV-infected patients with clinical risk factors for osteoporosis. FRAX underestimates fracture probability in PLWH. In case of indication for anti-osteoporotic drug, bisphosphonates remain the reference option. Calcium and vitamin D supplementation should be considered as ART initiation, since it may attenuate bone loss at this stage. Bone-protective ART regimens improve BMD compared to other regimens, but to a lesser extent than bisphosphonate, and without available data on their influence on the incidence of fracture.

Early-Onset Osteoporosis

Osteoporosis is a skeletal disorder with enhanced bone fragility, usually affecting the elderly. It is very rare in children and young adults and the definition is not only based on a low BMD (a Z-score < - 2.0 in growing children and a Z-score ≤ - 2.0 or a T-score ≤ - 2.5 in young adults) but also on the occurrence of fragility fractures and/or the existence of underlying chronic diseases or secondary factors such as use of glucocorticoids. In the absence of a known chronic disease, fragility fractures and low BMD should prompt extensive screening for secondary causes, which can be found in up to 90% of cases. When fragility fractures occur in childhood or young adulthood without an evident secondary cause, investigations should explore the possibility of an underlying monogenetic bone disease, where bone fragility is caused by a single variant in a gene that has a major role in the skeleton. Several monogenic forms relate to type I collagen, but other forms also exist. Loss-of-function variants in LRP5 and WNT1 may lead to early-onset osteoporosis. The X-chromosomal osteoporosis caused by PLS3 gene mutations affects especially males. Another recently discovered form relates to disturbed sphingolipid metabolism due to SGMS2 mutations, underscoring the complexity of molecular pathology in monogenic early-onset osteoporosis. Management of young patients consists of treatment of secondary factors, optimizing lifestyle factors including calcium and vitamin D and physical exercise. Treatment with bone-active medication should be discussed on a personalized basis, considering the severity of osteoporosis and underlying disease versus the absence of evidence on anti-fracture efficacy and potential harmful effects in pregnancy.

Personalizing Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy for Early-Stage Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer

Endocrine therapy has undergone major changes in the past few years, and is no longer a "one- size- fits- all" prescription. This article discussed some of the new developments and directions.

Secondary Osteoporosis

Osteoporosis is a global public health problem, with fractures contributing to significant morbidity and mortality. Although postmenopausal osteoporosis is most common, up to 30% of postmenopausal women, > 50% of premenopausal women, and between 50% and 80% of men have secondary osteoporosis. Exclusion of secondary causes is important, as treatment of such patients often commences by treating the underlying condition. These are varied but often neglected, ranging from endocrine to chronic inflammatory and genetic conditions. General screening is recommended for all patients with osteoporosis, with advanced investigations reserved for premenopausal women and men aged < 50 years, for older patients in whom classical risk factors for osteoporosis are absent, and for all patients with the lowest bone mass (Z-score ≤ -2). The response of secondary osteoporosis to conventional anti-osteoporosis therapy may be inadequate if the underlying condition is unrecognized and untreated. Bone densitometry, using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, may underestimate fracture risk in some chronic diseases, including glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis, type 2 diabetes, and obesity, and may overestimate fracture risk in others (eg, Turner syndrome). FRAX and trabecular bone score may provide additional information regarding fracture risk in secondary osteoporosis, but their use is limited to adults aged ≥ 40 years and ≥ 50 years, respectively. In addition, FRAX requires adjustment in some chronic conditions, such as glucocorticoid use, type 2 diabetes, and HIV. In most conditions, evidence for antiresorptive or anabolic therapy is limited to increases in bone mass. Current osteoporosis management guidelines also neglect secondary osteoporosis and these existing evidence gaps are discussed.

Dilemmas in the Management of Osteoporosis in Younger Adults

Osteoporosis in premenopausal women and men younger than 50 years is challenging to diagnose and treat. There are many barriers to optimal management of osteoporosis in younger adults, further enhanced by a limited research focus on this cohort. Herein we describe dilemmas commonly encountered in diagnosis, investigation, and management of osteoporosis in younger adults. We also provide a suggested framework, based on the limited available evidence and supported by clinical experience, for the diagnosis, assessment, and management of osteoporosis in this cohort. © 2021 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

The Relationship Between Bone and Reproductive Hormones Beyond Estrogens and Androgens

Reproductive hormones play a crucial role in the growth and maintenance of the mammalian skeleton. Indeed, the biological significance for this hormonal regulation of skeletal homeostasis is best illustrated by common clinical reproductive disorders, such as primary ovarian insufficiency, hypothalamic amenorrhea, congenital hypogonadotropic hypogonadism, and early menopause, which contribute to the clinical burden of low bone mineral density and increased risk for fragility fracture. Emerging evidence relating to traditional reproductive hormones and the recent discovery of newer reproductive neuropeptides and hormones has deepened our understanding of the interaction between bone and the reproductive system. In this review, we provide a contemporary summary of the literature examining the relationship between bone biology and reproductive signals that extend beyond estrogens and androgens, and include kisspeptin, gonadotropin-releasing hormone, follicle-stimulating hormone, luteinizing hormone, prolactin, progesterone, inhibin, activin, and relaxin. A comprehensive and up-to-date review of the recent basic and clinical research advances is essential given the prevalence of clinical reproductive disorders, the emerging roles of upstream reproductive hormones in bone physiology, as well as the urgent need to develop novel safe and effective therapies for bone fragility in a rapidly aging population.

Ovarian Function Suppression With Luteinizing Hormone-Releasing Hormone Agonists for the Treatment of Hormone Receptor-Positive Early Breast Cancer in Premenopausal Women

Chemotherapy and endocrine therapies are mainstays of treatment for early and advanced hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancer. In premenopausal women with HR+ tumors, the benefits of adding ovarian function suppression (OFS) to endocrine therapy have been debated. Consequently, for many years, tamoxifen monotherapy has been the standard of care for endocrine treatment in the adjuvant setting. Recent studies have, however, provided new evidence that, in some premenopausal patients, OFS in combination with tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitors (AIs) can significantly increase survival versus tamoxifen alone. Luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists (LHRHa), including goserelin, triptorelin, and leuprorelin, achieve OFS through sustained suppression of the release of follicle-stimulating hormone and luteinizing hormone from the pituitary. In turn, this suppresses production and secretion of estradiol, an ovarian hormone that supports cancer cell growth, survival, and proliferation. In this review, we discuss the clinical evidence supporting the addition of LHRHa to adjuvant endocrine therapies, including tamoxifen and AIs, for premenopausal women with breast cancer. We also discuss the role of LHRHa use in combination with adjuvant chemotherapy to preserve ovarian function and fertility in young patients with breast cancer. Finally, we discuss important practical aspects of the use of LHRHa in breast cancer treatment, including side-effects, patient adherence to treatment, and the use of slow-release, long-acting drug formulations.

Management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women: the 2021 position statement of The North American Menopause Society

OBJECTIVE

To review evidence regarding osteoporosis screening, prevention, diagnosis, and management in the past decade and update the position statement published by The North American Menopause Society (NAMS) in 2010 regarding the management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women as new therapies and paradigms have become available.

DESIGN

NAMS enlisted a panel of clinician experts in the field of metabolic bone diseases and/or women's health to review and update the 2010 NAMS position statement and recommendations on the basis of new evidence and clinical judgement. The panel's recommendations were reviewed and approved by the NAMS Board of Trustees.

RESULTS

Osteoporosis, especially prevalent in older postmenopausal women, increases the risk of fractures that can be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Postmenopausal bone loss, related to estrogen deficiency, is the primary contributor to osteoporosis. Other important risk factors for postmenopausal osteoporosis include advanced age, genetics, smoking, thinness, and many diseases and drugs that impair bone health. An evaluation of these risk factors to identify candidates for osteoporosis screening and recommending nonpharmacologic measures such as good nutrition (especially adequate intake of protein, calcium, and vitamin D), regular physical activity, and avoiding smoking and excessive alcohol consumption are appropriate for all postmenopausal women. For women at high risk for osteoporosis, especially perimenopausal women with low bone density and other risk factors, estrogen or other therapies are available to prevent bone loss. For women with osteoporosis and/or other risk factors for fracture, including advanced age and previous fractures, the primary goal of therapy is to prevent new fractures. This is accomplished by combining nonpharmacologic measures, drugs to increase bone density and to improve bone strength, and strategies to reduce fall risk. If pharmacologic therapy is indicated, government-approved options include estrogen agonists/antagonists, bisphosphonates, RANK ligand inhibitors, parathyroid hormone-receptor agonists, and inhibitors of sclerostin.

CONCLUSIONS

Osteoporosis is a common disorder in postmenopausal women. Management of skeletal health in postmenopausal women involves assessing risk factors for fracture, reducing modifiable risk factors through dietary and lifestyle changes, and the use of pharmacologic therapy for patients at significant risk of osteoporosis or fracture. For women with osteoporosis, lifelong management is necessary. Treatment decisions occur continuously over the lifespan of a postmenopausal woman. Decisions must be individualized and should include the patient in the process of shared decision-making.

Bone Health Outcomes from the International, Multicenter, Randomized, Phase 3, Placebo-Controlled D-CARE Study Assessing Adjuvant Denosumab in Early Breast Cancer

Introduction

D-CARE, an international, phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in women with early-stage breast cancer at high risk of disease recurrence, failed to meet its primary endpoint—improvement in bone metastasis-free survival (BMFS) with adjuvant denosumab vs placebo injections. As a result of the limitations of assessing BMFS, which includes relapse in bone with and without extraskeletal recurrences and deaths from any cause, the prespecified exploratory bone endpoints’ analysis may provide a more clinically meaningful effect of denosumab in this disease setting.

Methods

The study enrolled women (aged ≥ 18 years) with histologically confirmed stage II/III breast cancer. Patients treated with adjuvant/neoadjuvant chemotherapy meeting inclusion criteria were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either denosumab (120 mg) or placebo subcutaneously every 3–4 weeks for about 6 months and then every 3 months for a total treatment duration of 5 years. Five prespecified exploratory bone endpoints and post hoc subgroup analysis based on age (< 50 and ≥ 50 years) and menopause status (premenopausal and postmenopausal) were evaluated.

Results

Overall, 4509 women with early-stage breast cancer were assigned to receive denosumab (N = 2256) or placebo (N = 2253). The baseline demographics and clinical characteristics were comparable between the two arms. The hazard ratio (HR) for time to first bone metastasis was 0.82 (95% CI 0.66–1.02; p = 0.068), with HRs of 0.70 (95% CI 0.52–0.94; p = 0.018) for patients < 50 years old and 0.74 (95% CI 0.55–0.98; p = 0.038) for premenopausal patients, favoring the denosumab group. The HRs for time to first on-study fracture and time to first on-study skeletal-related event were 0.76 (95% CI 0.63–0.92; p = 0.004) and 0.52 (95% CI 0.35–0.78; p = 0.001), respectively, again favoring the denosumab group.

Conclusion

The exploratory bone endpoints indicate the benefits of denosumab treatment in patients with high-risk early breast cancer, supporting the expected bone health benefits contributed by denosumab.

Trial Registration Number

NCT01077154

Bisphosphonate Use Does Not Impact Survival in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Background/Aims

Bisphosphonates are increasingly recognized for their anti-neoplastic properties, which are the result of their action on the mevalonate pathway. Our primary aim was to investigate the association between bisphosphonate use and survival in patients with pancreatic cancer. Since statins also act on the mevalonate pathway, we also investigated the effect of the combined use of bisphosphonates and statins on survival.

Methods

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry (SEER)-Medicare linked database was used to identify patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) between 2007 and 2015. Kaplan-Meier models were used to examine the association between survival with bisphosphonate use alone and in combination with statins within 1 year prior to the diagnosis of PDAC. Propensity score matching analysis and Cox-proportional hazard models were used to determine the association between overall survival with bisphosphonate use alone and combined with statins, after adjusting for relevant confounders, such as the Charlson comorbidity index score, stage, treatment, sociodemographic characteristics, and propensity score.

Results

In total, 13,639 patients with PDAC were identified, and 1,203 (8.82%) used bisphosphonates. There was no difference in the mean survival duration between bisphosphonate users (7.27 months) and nonusers (7.25 months, p=0.61). After adjustment for confounders, bisphosphonate use was still not associated with improved survival (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.93 to 1.08; p=0.96). Combined bisphosphonate and statin use was also not associated with improved survival (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.87 to 1.07; p=0.48) after adjustment for confounders.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that the use of bisphosphonates, whether alone or in combination with statins, does not confer a survival advantage in patients with PDAC. (Gut Liver 2021;15-790)

Updated guidance on the management of cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) in pre- and postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer

INTRODUCTION

Adjuvant endocrine therapy induces bone loss and increases fracture risk in women with hormone-receptor positive, early-stage breast cancer (EBC). We aimed to update a previous position statement on the management of aromatase inhibitors (AIs) induced bone loss and now included premenopausal women.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search of the medical databases from January 2017 to May 2020 and assessed 144 new studies.

RESULTS

Extended use of AIs beyond 5 years leads to persistent bone loss in breast cancer extended adjuvant trials and meta-analyses. In addition to bone mineral density (BMD), vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) and trabecular bone score (TBS) were shown to independently predict fracture risk in real life prospective studies. FRAX® tool does not seem to be reliable for assessing fracture risk in CTIBL. In premenopausal women, there is strong evidence that intravenous zoledronate prevents bone loss but weak conflicting evidence on reducing disease recurrence from independent randomised controlled trials (RCTs). In postmenopausal women, the strongest evidence for fracture prevention is for denosumab based on a well-powered RCT while there is strong evidence for bisphosphonates (BPs) to prevent and reduce CTIBL but no convincing data on fractures. Adjuvant denosumab has failed to show anticancer benefits in a large, well-designed RCT.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Extended use of AIs and persistent bone loss from recent data reinforce the need to evaluate fracture risk in EBC women initiated on AIs. Fracture risk should be assessed with clinical risk factors and BMD along with VFA, but FRAX is not adapted to CTIBL. Anti-resorptive therapy should be considered in those with a BMD T-score < -2.0 SD or with ≥ 2 clinical risk factors including a BMD T-score < -1.0 SD. In premenopausal women, intravenous zoledronate is the only drug reported to prevent bone loss and may have additional anticancer benefits. In postmenopausal women, either denosumab or BPs can be prescribed for fracture prevention with pertinent attention to the rebound phenomenon after stopping denosumab. Adjuvant BPs, in contrast to denosumab, have shown high level evidence for reducing breast cancer recurrence in high-risk post-MP women which should be taken into account when choosing between these two.

New insights into the diagnosis and management of bone health in premature ovarian insufficiency

Premature ovarian insufficiency (POI), defined as a loss of ovarian function before the age of 40 years, is a life-changing diagnosis that has numerous long-term consequences. Musculoskeletal complications, including osteoporosis and fractures, are a key concern for women with POI. The risk of bone loss is influenced by the underlying etiology of POI, and the degree and duration of estrogen deficiency. A decline in muscle mass as a result of estrogen and androgen deficiency may contribute to skeletal fragility, but has not been examined in women with POI. This article aims to review musculoskeletal health in POI; summarize the traditional and novel modalities available to screen for skeletal fragility and muscle dysfunction; and provide updated evidence for available management strategies.

Final results of the randomized phase 2 LEO trial and bone protective effects of everolimus for premenopausal hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer

The phase 2 LEO study showed that everolimus (EVE) plus letrozole (LET) with ovarian suppression increased progression-free survival (PFS) in tamoxifen-exposed premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer with visceral metastases. Here we report final survival outcomes from the LEO study, and the results of exploratory analyses of bone turnover marker changes and bone-specific progressive disease. Patients who were exposed to or progressed on tamoxifen as adjuvant/palliative treatments were randomly assigned (2:1) to the EVE (leuprorelin + LET + EVE, n = 92) or LET (leuprorelin + LET, n = 45) arm. In a median 51-months of follow-up, the median PFS was 17.5 and 13.8 months in the EVE and LET arms, respectively (P = .245). Patients in the EVE arm with baseline visceral (median PFS 16.4 vs 9.5 months, P = .040) and bone (median PFS 17.1 vs 10.9, P = .003) metastases had greater PFS compared to the LET arm. No differences in overall survival (OS) were observed (median OS, 48.3 vs 50.8 months, P = .948). The 1-year cumulative incidences of bone-specific disease progression were 6.0% and 23.4% in the EVE and LET arms, respectively (hazard ratio 0.26, P < .001). Bone turnover markers at 6 and 12 weeks after treatment decreased in the EVE arm but were increased or stationary in the LET arm. Skeletal-related events occurred in 6.5% and 11.1% of patients in the EVE and LET arms, respectively. EVE + LET with ovarian suppression prolonged PFS in patients with baseline visceral or bone metastases and offered bone-protective effects in the overall study population. However, these clinical benefits did not translate into an OS benefit.

Bone-modifying Agents (BMAs) in Breast Cancer

Bone-modifying agents (BMAs) are mainstays in breast cancer and prevent and treat osteoporosis in early-stage disease and reduce skeletal metastases complications in advanced disease. There is some evidence to support that BMA also prevents skeletal metastases and improves overall survival. Bone loss occurs with chemotherapy-induced ovarian failure, gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, and aromatase inhibitors. In some women, the bone loss will be of sufficient magnitude to increase the risks of osteoporosis or fractures. Recommended steps in osteoporosis prevention or treatment include risk factor assessment, taking adequate amounts of calcium and vitamin D3, and periodic evaluations with dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scanning. If clinically indicated by the T-scores and fracture-risk prediction algorithms treat with oral, IV bisphosphonates or subcutaneous denosumab (DEN). Zoledronic acid (ZA) or DEN reduces skeletal metastases complications, including pathological fracture, spinal cord compression, or the necessity for radiation or surgery to bone. Also, both of these drugs have the side-effect of osteonecrosis at a similar incidence. Monthly administration of ZA or DEN is standard, but several recent randomized trials show noninferiority between ZA monthly and every 3-month ZA. Every 3-month ZA is a new standard of care. Similar trials of the schedule of DEN are ongoing. ZA anticancer effect is only in postmenopausal women or premenopausal women rendered postmenopausal by GnRH agonists or bilateral oopherectomy. High-risk women, either postmenopausal or premenopausal, receiving GnRH/oopherctomy should consider adjuvant ZA. There are insufficient data to support DEN in this setting. Herein, this narrative review covers the mechanism of action of BMA, randomized clinical trials, and adverse events, both common and rare.

Phase III Randomized Trial of Bisphosphonates as Adjuvant Therapy in Breast Cancer: S0307

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant bisphosphonates, when given in a low-estrogen environment, can decrease breast cancer recurrence and death. Treatment guidelines include recommendations for adjuvant bisphosphonates in postmenopausal patients. SWOG/Alliance/Canadian Cancer Trials Group/ECOG-ACRIN/NRG Oncology study S0307 compared the efficacy of three bisphosphonates in early-stage breast cancer.

METHODS

Patients with stage I-III breast cancer were randomly assigned to 3 years of intravenous zoledronic acid, oral clodronate, or oral ibandronate. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS) with overall survival as a secondary outcome. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

A total of 6097 patients enrolled. Median age was 52.7 years. Prior to being randomly assigned, 73.2% patients indicated preference for oral vs intravenous formulation. DFS did not differ across arms in a log-rank test (P = .49); 5-year DFS was 88.3% (zoledronic acid: 95% confidence interval [CI] = 86.9% to 89.6%), 87.6% (clodronate: 95% CI = 86.1% to 88.9%), and 87.4% (ibandronate: 95% CI = 85.6% to 88.9%). Additionally, 5-year overall survival did not differ between arms (log rank P = .50) and was 92.6% (zoledronic acid: 95% CI = 91.4% to 93.6%), 92.4% (clodronate: 95% CI = 91.2% to 93.5%), and 92.9% (ibandronate: 95% CI = 91.5% to 94.1%). Bone as first site of recurrence did not differ between arms (P = .93). Analyses based on age and tumor subtypes showed no treatment differences. Grade 3/4 toxicity was 8.8% (zoledronic acid), 8.3% (clodronate), and 10.5% (ibandronate). Osteonecrosis of the jaw was highest for zoledronic acid (1.26%) compared with clodronate (0.36%) and ibandronate (0.77%).

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence of differences in efficacy by type of bisphosphonate, either in overall analysis or subgroups. Despite an increased rate of osteonecrosis of the jaw with zoledronic acid, overall toxicity grade differed little across arms. Given that patients expressed preference for oral formulation, efforts to make oral agents available in the United States should be considered.

Cancer Treatment-Induced Bone Loss (CTIBL): State of the Art and Proper Management in Breast Cancer Patients on Endocrine Therapy

OPINION STATEMENT

About 70-80% of early breast cancer (BC) patients receive adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) for at least 5 years. ET includes in the majority of cases the use of aromatase inhibitors, as upfront or switch strategy, that lead to impaired bone health. Given the high incidence and also the high prevalence of BC, cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) represents the most common long-term adverse event experimented by patients with hormone receptor positive tumours. CTIBL is responsible for osteoporosis occurrence and, as a consequence, fragility fractures that may negatively affect quality of life and survival expectancy. As recommended by main international guidelines, BC women on aromatase inhibitors should be carefully assessed for their fracture risk at baseline and periodically reassessed during adjuvant ET in order to early detect significant worsening in terms of bone health. Antiresorptive agents, together with adequate intake of calcium and vitamin D, should be administered in BC patients during all course of ET, especially in those at high risk of osteoporotic fractures, as calculated by tools available for clinicians. Bisphosphonates, such as zoledronate or pamidronate, and anti-RANKL antibody, denosumab, are the two classes of antiresorptive drugs used in clinical practice with similar efficacy in preventing bone loss induced by aromatase inhibitor therapy. The choice between them, in the absence of direct comparison, should be based on patients' preference and compliance; the different safety profile is mainly related to the route of administration, although both types of drugs are manageable with due care, since most of the adverse events are predictable and preventable. Despite advances in management of CTIBL, several issues such as the optimal time of starting antiresorptive agents and the duration of treatment remain unanswered. Future clinical trials as well as increased awareness of bone health are needed to improve prevention, assessment and treatment of CTIBL in these long-term survivor patients.

Musculoskeletal Health in Premature Ovarian Insufficiency. Part Two: Bone

Accelerated bone loss and muscle loss coexist in women with premature ovarian insufficiency (POI), but there are significant gaps in our understanding of musculoskeletal health in POI. This review describes estrogen signaling in bone and its role in skeletal health and disease. Possible mechanisms contributing to bone loss in different forms of POI and current evidence regarding the utility of available diagnostic tests and therapeutic options are also discussed. A literature review from January 2000 to March 2020 was conducted to identify relevant studies. Women with POI experience significant deterioration in musculoskeletal health due to the loss of protective effects of estrogen. In bone, loss of bone mineral density (BMD) and compromised bone quality result in increased fracture risk; however, tools to assess bone quality such as trabecular bone score (TBS) need to be validated in this population. Timely initiation of HRT is recommended to minimize the deleterious effects of estrogen deficiency on bone in the absence of contraindications; however, the ideal estrogen replacement regimen remains unknown. POI is associated with compromised bone health, regardless of the etiology. Ongoing research is warranted to refine our management strategies to preserve bone health in women with POI.

Correlation between bone mineral density and endometrial thickness over time in women with breast cancer history

As the efficacy of chemotherapy and adjuvant endocrine therapy for breast cancer increase, the quality-of-life to cancer survivors could be more important issue in strategies of breast cancer treatment. Bone health has become more compelling in care of breast cancer survivor than ever before. This retrospective study was aimed to evaluate factors relating to the change in BMD and to ascertain the correlation between changes in BMD and EMT of women with breast cancer in follow-up. Records of 164 women who underwent surgery for breast cancer were reviewed in this study. The basal characteristics included parity, menopausal state, medication with vitamin D, bisphosphonate, selective estrogen modulator (SERM), aromatase inhibitor (AI), gonadotrophin releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa), chemotherapy, radiotherapy, cancer type including positivity of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor and HER2, combined the other gynecologic disease or the other origin cancer. At initial and follow-up visit, all subjective were checked with BMD, endometrial thickness (EMT). The mean age was 52.1 ± 8.5 years old and overall interval between initial and follow-up visits were 17.6 ± 7.5 month in this study. The BMDs of L1-4 (1.040 ± 0.166 g/cm2 vs 1.070 ± 0.181 g/cm2, p < 0.001), femur neck (0.850 ± 0.121 g/cm2 vs 0.870 ± 0.136 g/cm2, p < 0.001), and femur total (0.902 ± 0.132 g/cm2 vs 0.915 ± 0.138 g/cm2, p < 0.001) at follow-up visit were significantly lower than those at initial visit. The change in BMDs of L1-4 (ΔBMDL1-4, r = 0.353, p < 0.001, and r = 0.228, p = 0.003), femur neck (ΔBMDNeck, r = 0.198, p = 0.011, and r = 0.282, p < 0.001), femur total (ΔBMDTotal, r = 0.294, p < 0.001, and r = 0.327, p < 0.001) had positive correlation with age and the change in EMT (ΔEMT). After age correction, ΔEMT had positive correlation with ΔBMDNeck (r = 0.245, p = 0.002) and ΔBMDTotal (r = 0.273, p < 0.001). ΔBMDL1-4 and ΔBMDNeck differed according to menopausal state (p < 0.001 and p = 0.035), bisphosphonate (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001), and GnRHa (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001). In follow-up of women with history of breast cancer, ΔEMT could be an alternative screening marker for BMD decrease.

Practical consensus recommendaton for adjuvant bone-modifying agents in breast cancer

Bone-modifying therapy is a primary research interest in breast cancer. Several features contribute to the importance of the bone environment in the management of breast cancer. Firstly, bone metastases represent the most common site of breast cancer metastases and secondly, the emergence of cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) among breast cancer survivors and patients is of increasing concern. In the adjuvant setting, bisphosphonates can be given to prevent and treat tumor therapy-induced bone loss in premenopausal and postmenopausal women and, owing to their beneficial effect on bone turnover, have also been evaluated for prevention of bone metastases occurrence. Expert oncologists discusses on the update on the approaches of Bone-modifying Agents and its treatment options. This expert group used data from published literature, practical experience and opinion of a large group of academic oncologists to arrive at this practical consensus recommendations for the benefit of community oncologists.

Oestrogen and zoledronic acid driven changes to the bone and immune environments: Potential mechanisms underlying the differential anti-tumour effects of zoledronic acid in pre- and post-menopausal conditions

Late stage breast cancer commonly metastasises to bone and patient survival averages 2-3 years following diagnosis of bone involvement. One of the most successful treatments for bone metastases is the bisphosphonate, zoledronic acid (ZOL). ZOL has been used in the advanced setting for many years where it has been shown to reduce skeletal complications associated with bone metastasis. More recently, several large adjuvant clinical trials have demonstrated that administration of ZOL can prevent recurrence and improve survival when given in early breast cancer. However, these promising effects were only observed in post-menopausal women with confirmed low concentrations of circulating ovarian hormones. In this review we focus on potential interactions between the ovarian hormone, oestrogen, and ZOL to establish credible hypotheses that could explain why anti-tumour effects are specific to post-menopausal women. Specifically, we discuss the molecular and immune cell driven mechanisms by which ZOL and oestrogen affect the tumour microenvironment to inhibit/induce tumour growth and how oestrogen can interact with zoledronic acid to inhibit its anti-tumour actions.

Breast Cancer and Microcalcifications: An Osteoimmunological Disorder?

The presence of microcalcifications in the breast microenvironment, combined with the growing evidences of the possible presence of osteoblast-like or osteoclast-like cells in the breast, suggest the existence of active processes of calcification in the breast tissue during a woman’s life. Furthermore, much evidence that osteoimmunological disorders, such as osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, or periodontitis influence the risk of developing breast cancer in women exists and vice versa. Antiresorptive drugs benefits on breast cancer incidence and progression have been reported in the past decades. More recently, biological agents targeting pro-inflammatory cytokines used against rheumatoid arthritis also demonstrated benefits against breast cancer cell lines proliferation, viability, and migratory abilities, both in vitro and in vivo in xenografted mice. Hence, it is tempting to hypothesize that breast carcinogenesis should be considered as a potential osteoimmunological disorder. In this review, we compare microenvironments and molecular characteristics in the most frequent osteoimmunological disorders with major events occurring in a woman’s breast during her lifetime. We also highlight what the use of bone anabolic drugs, antiresorptive, and biological agents targeting pro-inflammatory cytokines against breast cancer can teach us.

Osteoporosis: A Long-Term and Late-Effect of Breast Cancer Treatments

Simple Summary

Osteoporosis is a prevalent condition affecting 200 million individuals world-wide. Estimates are about one in three women will experience a fragility fracture of hip, spine or wrist. Common breast cancer treatments, such as aromatase inhibitors in postmenopausal women and chemotherapy-induced ovarian failure in premenopausal women, cause bone loss that in some women will lead to osteoporosis and fragility fractures. Fragility fractures cause morbidity and mortality and are entirely preventable. Prevention or treatment of osteoporosis includes lifestyle modifications (e.g., reducing smoking and excessive alcohol consumption, and increasing physical activity), taking calcium and vitamin D3, screening for osteoporosis with dual-energy absorptiometry, and treatment, if clinically indicated, with ether oral bisphosphonates, intravenous zoledronic acid, or subcutaneous denosumab. This chapter reviews the pathogenesis of osteoporosis, the magnitude of bone loss related to common breast cancer treatments, osteoporosis risk factor assessment and screening, and the specific drugs to treat or prevent osteoporosis.

Abstract

Osteoporosis is both a long-term effect (occurs during treatment and extends after treatment) and a late-effect (occurs after treatment ends) of breast cancer treatments. The worldwide prevalence of osteoporosis is estimated to be some 200 million patients. About one in three postmenopausal women will experience an osteoporotic (or fragility) fracture of the hip, spine, or wrist. breast cancer treatments, including gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, chemotherapy-induced ovarian failure (CIOF), and aromatase inhibitors (AIs), cause bone loss and increase the risks of osteoporosis. Also, breast cancer is a disease of aging, and most of the “one in eight” lifetime risks of breast cancer are in women in their sixth, seventh, and eighth decades. The majority of women diagnosed with breast cancers today will be long-term survivors and experience personal cures. It is the coalescence of osteoporosis with breast cancer, two common and age-related conditions that make osteoporosis relevant in women with breast cancer throughout the continuum from diagnosis, treatment, and survivorship. It is critical to remember that women (and men) will lose bone after age thirty years. However, only certain women will lose bone of sufficient magnitude to merit treatment with anti-osteoporosis drugs. The narrative review is intended for medical, surgical, radiation oncologists, and other mid-level providers, and provides an overview of bone loss and the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis.

Challenges in Preventing Bone Loss Induced by Aromatase Inhibitors

CONTEXT

Aromatase inhibitors have become a mainstay in the adjuvant treatment regimen in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. While many of these patients have an excellent long-term prognosis, adverse effects on bone represent an emerging complication of aromatase inhibitor treatment, resulting in substantial bone loss and fragility fractures. Treatment approaches to prevent aromatase inhibitor-induced bone loss typically consist of an antiresorptive approach with bisphosphonates or the RANKL antibody denosumab. However, different guidelines vary with respect to treatment thresholds, duration, and dosing. The choice of antiresorptive regime is further complicated by comorbidities and potential disease-modifying effects of individual agents.

OBJECTIVE

This review summarizes the evidence of how aromatase inhibitors affect bone health and provides an update of clinical approaches to preserve bone strength in affected women. (J Clin Endocrinol Metab XX: 0-0, 2020).

Eight pillars of oncorheumatology: Crossroads between malignancies and musculoskeletal diseases

ONCORHEUMATOLOGY

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MALIGNANCIES AND MUSCULOSKELETAL DISEASES: Oncorheumatology is the meeting point of tumor formation and rheumatic musculoskeletal diseases (RMD). Multiple interactions exist between these two medical specialties. One major field is the topic of malignancies associated with rheumatic diseases, while the other topic covers the development of musculoskeletal disease in cancer patients. Within the first group, secondary malignancies may be associated with rheumatic diseases. Mostly sustained inflammation is responsible for transition into cancer. Tumor-associated antigens (TAA) with adhesive properties are present on tumor cells. These molecules may also be expressed by inflammatory leukocytes and soluble TAA levels may be elevated in RMDs. There has been continuous debate with respect to the possible carcinogenicity of conventional and targeted antirheumatic drugs. Very recent data from registries suggest that neither biologics, nor JAK inhibitors increase cancer risk in arthritis patients. The issue of physiotherapy in rheumatic patients with recent or current cancer has also been controversial. Some modalities, primarily exercise, may be safely applied to patients with RMD and cancer. The second large topic includes paraneoplastic syndromes. Musculoskeletal paraneoplasias are triggered by tumor-derived mediators. These syndromes are sometimes slightly different from the classical RMDs. Various chemotherapies may also be associated with autoimmune side effects. Recently, these immune-related complications have also been observed in cancer patients treated with immune-checkpoint inhibitors. Sex hormone-deprivation therapies, such as aromatase inhibitors and anti-androgens are widely used for the treatment of breast and prostate cancer, respectively. These compounds may induce bone loss and lead to osteoporosis. Finally, primary and secondary malignancies of the musculoskeletal system may also interest rheumatologists. In this review, the clinical, practical aspects of these eight pillars of oncorheumatology will be discussed.