Osteoporotic fracture risk in women with breast cancer treated with aromatase inhibitors: a health insurance claims database study in Japan

BACKGROUND

Hormone therapy with aromatase inhibitors (AIs) for estrogen receptor-dependent breast cancer may expose patients to an increased osteoporosis risk. This study was performed to estimate fracture risk in women with breast cancer to whom AIs were prescribed in Japan.

METHODS

This retrospective study used data from the Japanese Medical Data Vision database. Women with breast cancer prescribed AIs over a 12-month period were identified and matched to women not prescribed AIs using a propensity score. Fracture rates were estimated by a cumulative incidence function and compared using a cause-specific Cox hazard model. The proportion of women undergoing bone density tests was retrieved.

RESULTS

For all fractures sites combined, cumulative fracture incidence at 10 years was 0.19 [95%CI: 0.16-0.22] in women prescribed AIs and 0.18 [95%CI: 0.15-0.21] without AIs. AI prescription was not associated with any changes in risk (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.08 [95%CI: 0.99-1.17] p = 0.08). Women prescribed AI more frequently underwent bone density testing (31.9% [95% CI: 31.2%; 32.6%] versus 2.2% [95% CI: 2.0%; 2.4%]).

CONCLUSIONS

The anticipated association between AI exposure and osteoporotic fracture risk in Japanese women with breast cancer was not seen clearly.

Bone mineral density fall during aromatase inhibitor treatment may predict lower breast cancer recurrence

PURPOSE

Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) are associated with reduction in bone mineral density (BMD). The use of bone strengthening agents zoledronic acid and denosumab are associated with improved breast cancer outcomes for post-menopausal patients treated with AIs. This study investigates whether change in BMD with AI therapy is associated with breast cancer recurrence.

METHODS

A cohort of patients treated at a single institution diagnosed with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer with baseline BMD and subsequent BMD test while receiving adjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy were studied. Demographic, treatment and outcome data was obtained. Simple and multiple linear regression analysis was performed to investigate predictors of annual percent BMD change at the LS and hip. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards modelling were undertaken to investigate predictors of breast cancer recurrence.

RESULTS

353 patients eligible patients were identified. In multivariate analysis of lumbar spine BMD change, the difference between those in quartile 1, which showed the greatest reduction in BMD, and quartile 3, with substantially less reduction, was significant (HR = 3.02, 95% CI 1.15-7.90 p = 0.025). Hip BMD reduction was also not significantly associated with breast cancer recurrence. The two quartiles with the least reduction in hip BMD showing a non-significant reduced risk of recurrence relative to the quartile with the greatest (p = 0.10).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest an association may exist between lumbar spine BMD change and breast cancer recurrence for patients treated with adjuvant AI. Further research is required to determine whether BMD change can be utilised as a biomarker.

The recent progress of endocrine therapy-induced osteoporosis in estrogen-positive breast cancer therapy

Breast cancer is a significant global health concern, and the discovery of endocrine therapy has played a crucial role in the treatment of estrogen-positive breast cancer. However, these therapies are often associated with osteoporosis-related adverse events, which increase the risk of fractures in breast cancer patients and can result in limited mobility and reduced quality of life. Previous studies have shown that osteoporosis is essential side effects of the breast cancer therapy, although the exact mechanisms remain mostly unclear. Current clinical treatments, such as bisphosphonates, cause side effects and may impact the therapeutic response to endocrine drugs. In this review, we explore the likelihood of endocrine therapy-induced osteoporosis in estrogen-positive breast cancer therapy and discuss the involved mechanisms as well as the therapeutic potential of drugs and drug combination strategies.

Fracture risk and assessment in adults with cancer

Individuals with cancer face unique risk factors for osteoporosis and fractures. Clinicians must consider the additive effects of cancer-specific factors, including treatment-induced bone loss, and premorbid fracture risk, utilizing FRAX score and bone mineral densitometry when available. Pharmacologic therapy should be offered as per cancer-specific guidelines, when available, or local general osteoporosis guidelines informed by clinical judgment and patient preferences. Our objective was to review and summarize the epidemiologic burden of osteoporotic fracture risk and fracture risk assessment in adults with cancer, and recommended treatment thresholds for cancer treatment-induced bone loss, with specific focus on breast, prostate, thyroid, gynecological, multiple myeloma, and hematopoietic stem cell transplant. This narrative review was informed by PubMed searches to July 25, 2022, that combined terms for cancer, stem cell transplantation, fracture, bone mineral density (BMD), trabecular bone score, FRAX, Garvan nomogram or fracture risk calculator, QFracture, prediction, and risk factors. The literature informs that cancer can impact bone health in numerous ways, leading to both systemic and localized decreases in BMD. Many cancer treatments can have detrimental effects on bone health. In particular, hormone deprivation therapies for hormone-responsive cancers such as breast cancer and prostate cancer, and hematopoietic stem cell transplant for hematologic malignancies, adversely affect bone turnover, resulting in osteoporosis and fractures. Surgical treatments such as hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy for gynecological cancers can also lead to deleterious effects on bone health. Radiation therapy is well documented to cause localized bone loss and fractures. Few studies have validated the use of fracture risk prediction tools in the cancer population. Guidelines on cancer-specific treatment thresholds are limited, and major knowledge gaps still exist in fracture risk and fracture risk assessment in patients with cancer. Despite the limitations of current knowledge on fracture risk assessment and treatment thresholds in patients with cancer, clinicians must consider the additive effects of bone damaging factors to which these patients are exposed and their premorbid fracture risk profile. Pharmacologic treatment should be offered as per cancer-specific guidelines when available, or per local general osteoporosis guidelines, in accordance with clinical judgment and patient preferences.

Review of bone health in women with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer receiving endocrine therapy

In estrogen-receptor-positive tumors, adjuvant endocrine therapy has been shown to be highly beneficial for both overall and disease-free survival. Estradiol is key in regulating bone and mineral physiology, and several studies found a strong correlation between these therapies and the risk of fractures. Since these therapies are often given for 5 through 10 years, the timing for bisphosphonates or denosumab initiation seems essential to managing bone metabolism. However, gray zones and discrepancies between guidelines remain as to the best threshold when to start antiresorptive treatment, or whether antiresorptive treatment should be administered to every woman undergoing adjuvant endocrine therapy, independent of their risk factors for fractures. Treatment options and strategies should be discussed at the start of hormone adjuvant therapy to come to a shared decision with the patient, with the final aim of reducing the risk of future fractures as much as possible. This review will cover present guidelines and literature on antiresorptive treatment in this setting, to provide clinicians with useful clues for managing these patients.

Bone mineral density, osteopenia and osteoporosis among US adults with cancer

BACKGROUND

Bone mineral deficits are one of the most common complications in cancer survivors. However, there are no studies evaluating bone mineral density (BMD) and the prevalence of osteopenia and osteoporosis among patients with different types of cancers.

AIM

The objective was to assess BMD and evaluate the prevalence of osteopenia and osteoporosis among US adults with cancer.

DESIGN

A cross-section propensity score matching study.

METHODS

We extracted data from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey database from 2005 to 2018. We compared BMD in participants with and without cancer which was further analyzed according to cancer type. We conducted logistic regression to evaluate adjusted odds ratios of osteopenia and osteoporosis and determine risk factors for their development.

RESULTS

We found that BMD was significantly higher in participants without cancer than cancer patients. Furthermore, the median BMD of patients with breast cancer or skin cancer (including melanoma) was significantly lower than participants without cancer. People with breast, lung, genitourinary and skin cancers were more likely to incur osteopenia/osteoporosis than those without cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

BMD differs depending upon type in survivors. Individuals with a history of cancer have a poor understanding of osteoporosis and its risk factors. Understanding risk factors in patients with cancers identified in our study may be helpful for preventing osteoporosis and fractures and the development of screening guidelines.

Preventing late recurrence in hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer: a review

Late recurrences are a key challenge for patients with early-stage oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer, with the risk of disease relapse continuing steadily from 5 to more than 20 years after diagnosis. Five years of adjuvant endocrine therapy with tamoxifen or an aromatase inhibitor was shown many years ago to improve survival. More recently, the trials of extended adjuvant endocrine therapy for more than 5 years have shown a further small gain, but with an associated small risk of increased long-term toxicity including bone loss, cardiovascular impairment and impaired quality of life. This review describes the efficacy and safety of extended endocrine therapy, the optimal selection criteria for patient benefit and the potential for novel agents to improve long-term outcomes.

Quality of Life Interventions in Breast Cancer Survivors: State of the Art in Targeted Rehabilitation Strategies

Breast cancer is the most common malignant tumor and the most prevalent cause of mortality in women. Advances in early diagnosis and more effective adjuvant therapies have improved the long-term survival of these patients. Pharmacotherapies and intrinsic tumor-related factors may lead to a wide spectrum of treatment-related disabling complications, such as breast cancer-related lymphedema, axillary web syndrome, persistent pain, bone loss, arthralgia, and fatigue. These conditions have a detrimental impact on the health-related quality of life of survivors. Here, we sought to provide a portrait of the role that rehabilitation plays in breast cancer survivors. Particular emphasis has been placed on recovering function, improving independence in activities of daily living, and reducing disability. This complex scenario requires a precision medicine approach to provide more effective decision-making and adequate treatment compliance.

The effect of denosumab in breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant aromatase inhibitors: 36-month results

INTRODUCTION

Aromatase inhibitor (AI)-associated bone loss increases the risk of bone fracture and reduces patients' quality of life, making it a critical issue worldwide. We conducted a prospective non-randomized clinical trial (UMIN-CTR, UMIN 000016173) to assess the effect of denosumab on bone loss in patients treated with adjuvant AI and have previously reported the results at 12 and 24 months. This study aimed to present the results at 36 months of treatment with denosumab for osteopenia in breast cancer patients who were undergoing treatment with adjuvant AI; 36 months is the longest denosumab treatment period reported so far.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients received 60-mg denosumab subcutaneously every 6 months. Daily supplements containing 500-mg elemental calcium and at least 400 international units of vitamin D were highly recommended throughout the study period. The levels of bone mineral density (BMD) and bone turnover markers, serum tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase isoform 5b, and bone alkaline phosphatase were determined at baseline and 6, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months.

RESULTS

At 36 months, the bone mineral density of the lumbar spine, right femoral neck, and left femoral neck were found to increase by 8.8% (95% confidence interval CI 7.6-10.1), 4.3% (95% CI 3.0-5.5), and 3.1% (95% CI 2.1-4.1), respectively. No non-traumatic clinical fractures occurred in patients receiving AI and denosumab.

CONCLUSION

Twice-yearly administration of denosumab to the breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant AI, regardless of the skeletal site, resulted in consistent increases in BMD without severe adverse events at 36 months.

Bone health care in women with breast cancer

The aim of this article is to analyze and critically appraise the literature regarding optimal bone health care in women with breast cancer and, more specifically, to present (1) the causes of bone loss in breast cancer patients, (2) the appropriate screening for osteoporosis and fracture risk estimation, (3) optimal prevention and therapeutic strategies for osteoporosis and fractures, (4) the role of antiresorptive agents as adjuvant therapy for the prevention of bone metastases and increase of overall survival, and (5) current data on the possible use of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) in these patients. The objective is to provide a sound pathophysiological background along with evidence-based and practical recommendations for physicians managing such women.

French recommendations on strategies for preventing and treating osteoporosis induced by adjuvant breast cancer therapies

Standard adjuvant therapies for breast cancer such as chemotherapy or aromatase inhibitor and LH-RH agonist hormone therapy are associated with significant survival gains but also induce bone loss by aggravating the estrogen deprivation. The bone loss may be substantial, notably during early treatment, and occurs regardless of the baseline bone mineral density values. The objective of developing these recommendations was to achieve a practical consensus among various scientific societies, based on literature review, about osteoporosis prevention and treatment in these patients. The following scientific societies contributed to the work: Société Française de Rhumatologie (SFR), Groupe de Recherche et d'Information sur les Ostéoporoses (GRIO), Groupe Européen d'Etudes des Métastases Osseuses (GEMO), Association Francophone pour les Soins Oncologiques de Support (AFSOS), Société Française de Sénologie et de Pathologie Mammaire (SFSPM), Société Française de Radiothérapie Oncologique (SFRO). Drug prescription and reimbursement modalities in France were taken into account. These recommendations apply to postmenopausal women taking systemic chemotherapy and/or aromatase inhibitor therapy, non-postmenopausal women taking LH-RH agonist therapy, and non-postmenopausal women with persistent amenorrhea 1 year after chemotherapy completion. All women in these three categories should undergo an evaluation of bone health and receive interventions to combat risk factors for bone loss. Patients with a history of severe osteoporotic fracture and/or a T-score value <-2.5 should receive osteoporosis drug therapy. The FRAX® score should be used to guide treatment decisions in patients whose T-score is between -1 and -2.5. General osteoporosis prevention measures should be applied in patients without criteria for osteoporosis drug therapy, who should undergo bone mineral density measurements 18-24 months later if the baseline T-score is<-1 and 3-5 years later if the baseline T-score is>-1. The anti-tumor effect of bisphosphonates and denosumab was not considered when establishing these recommendations.

Bone health during endocrine therapy for cancer

Preservation of bone health remains a long-term clinical challenge in patients with breast and prostate cancer. Osteoporosis, defined by a loss of bone mass and microarchitecture, often results in fragility fractures that are typically associated with a high socioeconomic burden. Endocrine therapy, a mainstay treatment in the management of patients with hormone-sensitive breast and prostate cancer in the adjuvant setting, commonly exerts adverse effects on the musculoskeletal system and is associated with an increased risk of osteoporosis and fractures. Adjuvant use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues, which can also be used in metastatic disease, in combination with tamoxifen in premenopausal women, and aromatase inhibitors in postmenopausal women with hormone-sensitive breast cancer, causes rapid bone loss and fragility fractures. By contrast, selective oestrogen receptor modulators, such as tamoxifen, have bone-protective effects in postmenopausal women. In men with castration-sensitive prostate cancer, androgen deprivation is achieved with drugs that lower gonadotropin levels, and these drugs can be combined with androgen receptor antagonists. These therapies induce a high bone turnover with rapid bone loss that is reminiscent of the changes occurring in early menopause and result in an increased risk of fracture. In this Review, we describe how adjuvant endocrine therapies of breast and prostate cancer impair bone health and outline evidence from randomised controlled trials of strategies to reduce risk of fracture.

Lumbar Scoliosis in Patients With Breast Cancer: Prevalence and Relationship With Breast Cancer Treatment, Age, Bone Mineral Density, and Body Mass Index

Objective

To identify the prevalence of lumbar scoliosis in breast cancer patients and to investigate the potential risk factors of lumbar scoliosis.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was performed in breast cancer patients aged more than 40 years who underwent dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scanning between January 2014 and December 2014. We divided the patients into control and experimental groups in order to investigate the influence of breast cancer treatment. The curvature of the lumbar spine was measured by using the Cobb method on a DEXA scan. Scoliosis was defined by the presence of a curvature 10° or larger. The variables, including age, bone mineral density (BMD), body mass index (BMI), and breast cancer treatments, were also obtained from the medical chart. Prevalence of lumbar scoliosis was evaluated, and it was compared between the two groups. The relationships between lumbar scoliosis and these variables were also investigated.

Results

Lumbar scoliosis was present in 16 out of our 652 breast cancer patients. There was no difference in the prevalence of lumbar scoliosis between the control group (7/316) and the experimental group (9/336) (p=0.70). According to the logistic regression analysis, lumbar scoliosis had no significant association with operation, chemotherapy, hormone therapy, BMI, and BMD (p>0.05). However, age showed a significant relationship with prevalence of lumbar scoliosis (p<0.001; odds ratio, 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.054–1.170).

Conclusion

Prevalence of lumbar scoliosis in patients with breast cancer was 2.45%. Lumbar scoliosis had no association with breast cancer treatments, BMD, and BMI. Age was the only factor related to the prevalence of lumbar scoliosis.

Postmenopausal Breast Cancer, Aromatase Inhibitors, and Bone Health: What the Surgeon Should Know

Breast cancer, as the most common malignancy in women, remains a major public health issue despite countless advances across decades. Endocrine therapy is the cornerstone of treatment of the hormone-sensitive subtype of breast cancer. The use of aromatase inhibitors (AIs) in the postmenopausal women has extended the survival beyond that of Tamoxifen, but harbors a subset of side effects, most notably accelerated bone loss. This, however, does not occur in all women undergoing treatment. It is vital to identify susceptible patients early, to limit such events, employ early treatment thereof, or alter drug therapy. International trials on AIs, predominantly performed in North American and European females, provide little information on what to expect in women in developing countries. Here, surgeons often prescribe and manage endocrine therapy. The prescribing surgeon should be aware of the adverse effect of the endocrine therapy and be able to attend to side effects. This review highlights clinical and biochemical factors associated with decrease in bone mineral density in an, as yet, unidentified subgroup of postmenopausal women. In the era of personalized medical care, appropriate management of bone health by surgeons based on these factors becomes increasingly important.

Management of Aromatase Inhibitor-Associated Bone Loss (AIBL) in postmenopausal women with hormone sensitive breast cancer: Joint position statement of the IOF, CABS, ECTS, IEG, ESCEO IMS, and SIOG

BACKGROUND

Several guidelines have been reported for bone-directed treatment in women with early breast cancer (EBC) for averting fractures, particularly during aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy. Recently, a number of studies on additional fracture related risk factors, new treatment options as well as real world studies demonstrating a much higher fracture rate than suggested by randomized clinical controlled trials (RCTs). Therefore, this updated algorithm was developed to better assess fracture risk and direct treatment as a position statement of several interdisciplinary cancer and bone societies involved in the management of AI-associated bone loss (AIBL).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A systematic literature review identified recent advances in the management of AIBL. Results with individual agents were assessed based on trial design, size, follow-up, and safety.

RESULTS

Several fracture related risk factors in patients with EBC were identified. Although, the FRAX algorithm includes fracture risk factors (RF) in addition to BMD, it does not seem to adequately address the effects of AIBL. Several antiresorptive agents can prevent and treat AIBL. However, concerns regarding compliance and long-term safety remain. Overall, the evidence for fracture prevention is strongest for denosumab 60 mg s.c. every 6 months. Additionally, recent studies as well as an individual patient data meta-analysis of all available randomized trial data support additional anticancer benefits from adjuvant bisphosphonate treatment in postmenopausal women with a 34% relative risk reduction in bone metastasis and 17% relative risk decrease in breast cancer mortality that needs to be taken into account when advising on management of AIBL.

CONCLUSIONS

In all patients initiating AI treatment, fracture risk should be assessed and recommendation with regard to exercise and calcium/vitamin D supplementation given. Bone-directed therapy should be given to all patients with a T-score<-2.0 or with a T-score of <-1.5 SD with one additional RF, or with ≥2 risk factors (without BMD) for the duration of AI treatment. Patients with T-score>-1.5 SD and no risk factors should be managed based on BMD loss during the first year and the local guidelines for postmenopausal osteoporosis. Compliance should be regularly assessed as well as BMD on treatment after 12 - 24 months. Furthermore, because of the decreased incidence of bone recurrence and breast cancer specific mortality, adjuvant bisphosphonates are recommended for all postmenopausal women at significant risk of disease recurrence.

Clinical utility of exemestane in the treatment of breast cancer

Breast cancer is the most prevalent cancer in women, causing a significant mortality worldwide. Different endocrine strategies are available for the treatment of hormone-sensitive breast cancer, including antiestrogen tamoxifen and fulvestrant, as well as third-generation aromatase inhibitors (AIs), such as letrozole, anastrozole, and exemestane. In this review, we will focus on exemestane, its clinical use, and its side effects. Exemestane is a steroidal third-generation AI now used in all treatment settings for breast cancer. In the metastatic disease, it has been extensively investigated as the first-, second-, and further-line treatment and it is now registered for the treatment of postmenopausal women with advanced estrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer whose disease has progressed following antiestrogen therapy. A potential lack of cross-resistance with nonsteroidal AIs has been described, giving additional therapeutic opportunities in sequences of endocrine agents. Exemestane is also approved for the adjuvant treatment of postmenopausal early breast cancer, either as upfront monotherapy for 5 years, as a switch following 2–3 years of tamoxifen, or as extended therapy beyond 5 years of adjuvant treatment. New promising data also showed a beneficial effect in young premenopausal early breast cancer patients, when administered together with ovarian suppression. Interesting results have also emerged when exemestane has been investigated as neodjuvant treatment as well as preventive agent in healthy women at high risk for breast cancer. Exemestane is generally well tolerated, with a side effect profile similar to that of other AIs, including menopausal symptoms, arthralgia, and bone loss. In conclusion, exemestane can be considered an effective and well-tolerated endocrine treatment option for all stages of breast cancer.

Status of adjuvant endocrine therapy for breast cancer

Adjuvant endocrine therapy reduces the risk of recurrence and death from breast cancer in women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer. Tamoxifen has been the standard therapy for decades, and this is still the case for pre-menopausal women. Ovarian suppression is of similar efficacy but currently there is no strong evidence for adding this to tamoxifen and the additional morbidity can be considerable. Results from two important trials addressing this issue are imminent. In post-menopausal women, aromatase inhibitors (AIs) (letrozole, anastrozole, or exemestane) are superior to tamoxifen in preventing recurrence but only letrozole has been shown to improve survival. The main gain is against high-risk cancers, and tamoxifen gives very similar benefit for low-risk disease. Traditionally, treatment has been given for around 5 years, but many women remain at risk of relapse for 10 years or more. The AIs, and more recently tamoxifen, have been shown to reduce further the risk of late recurrence in women still in remission after 5 years of tamoxifen if given for a further 5 years. The comparative benefits of these two options and the selection of patients most likely to benefit from long-term adjuvant endocrine therapy are important topics for further research, as is the optimum duration of AI therapy started upfront.

Effects of Exemestane and Tamoxifen treatment on bone texture analysis assessed by TBS in comparison with bone mineral density assessed by DXA in women with breast cancer

We performed an analysis of a substudy of the randomized Tamoxifen Exemestane Adjuvant Multinational trial to determine the effects of exemestane (EXE) and tamoxifen (TAM) adjuvant treatment on bone mineral density (BMD) measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry compared with the trabecular bone score, a novel grey-level texture measurement that correlates with 3-dimensional parameters of bone texture in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer for the first time. In total, 36 women were randomized to receive TAM (n = 17) or EXE (n = 19). Patients receiving TAM showed a mean increase of BMD in lumbar spine from baseline of 1.0%, 1.5%, and 1.9% and in trabecular bone score of 2.2%, 3.5%, and 3.3% at 6-, 12-, and 24-mo treatment, respectively. Conversely, patients receiving EXE showed a mean decrease from baseline in lumbar spine BMD of -2.3%, -3.6%, and -5.3% and in trabecular bone score of -0.9%, -1.7%, and -2.3% at 6-, 12-, and 24-mo treatment, respectively. Changes in trabecular bone score from baseline at spine were also significantly different between EXE and TAM: p = 0.05, 0.007, and 0.006 at 6, 12, and 24 mo, respectively. TAM induced an increase in BMD and bone texture analysis, whereas EXE resulted in decreases. The results were independent from each other.

Bisphosphonates in the adjuvant setting of breast cancer therapy--effect on survival: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The role of bisphosphonates (BP) in early breast cancer (BC) has been considered controversial. We performed a meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that appraised the effects of BP on survival in early BC.

Methods

RCTs were identified by searching the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE databases and conference proceedings. Hazard ratios (HRs) of overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and relative risks of adverse events were estimated and pooled.

Results

Thirteen trials met the inclusion criteria, evaluating a total of 15,762 patients. Meta-analysis of ten trials which reported OS revealed no statistically significant benefit in OS for BP (HR 0.89, 95% CI = 0.79 to 1.01). Meta-analysis of nine trials which reported the DFS revealed no benefit in DFS (HR 0.95 (0.81–1.12)). Meta-analysis upon menopausal status showed a statistically significant better DFS in the BP-treated patients (HR 0.81(0.69–0.95)). In meta-regression, chemotherapy was negatively associated with HR of survival.

Conclusions

Our meta-analysis indicates a positive effect for adjuvant BP on survival only in postmenopausal patients. Meta-regression demonstrated a negative association between chemotherapy use BP effect on survival. Further large scale RCTs are warranted to unravel the specific subgroups that would benefit from the addition of BP in the adjuvant setting.

Aromatase inhibitor adjuvant chemotherapy of breast cancer results in cancer therapy induced bone loss

Aromatase Inhibitors are anti-estrogen agents that have proven efficacy for adjuvant therapy of estrogen receptor positive breast cancer primarily in post menopausal women with estrogen receptor positive breast cancer but increase the risk of cancer therapy induced bone loss (CTIBL). Recent studies have shown the potential benefit of bisphosphonate therapy to play a dual role in the management of breast cancer. These studies provide evidence that bisphosphonate therapy in conjunction with aromatase inhibitors (AI), not only decreases the risk of osteoporosis but, in addition, may improve survival from breast cancer.

Effect of everolimus on bone marker levels and progressive disease in bone in BOLERO-2

BACKGROUND

Breast Cancer Trials of Oral Everolimus 2 (BOLERO-2), a phase III study in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer progressing despite nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor therapy, showed statistically significant benefits with adding everolimus to exemestane. Moreover, in preclinical studies, mammalian target of rapamycin inhibition was associated with decreased osteoclast survival and activity. Exploratory analyses in BOLERO-2 evaluated the effect of everolimus on bone marker levels and progressive disease in bone.

METHODS

Patients were treated with exemestane (25mg/day) and randomized (2:1) to everolimus (10mg/day; combination) or placebo (exemestane only). Exploratory endpoints included changes in bone turnover marker levels vs baseline and progressive disease in bone, defined as unequivocal progression of a preexisting bone lesion or the appearance of a new bone lesion.

RESULTS

Baseline disease characteristics were well balanced between arms (N = 724); baseline bisphosphonate use was not (43.9% combination vs 54.0% exemestane only). At a median of 18 months of follow-up, median progression-free survival (primary endpoint) was statistically significantly longer with the combination vs exemestane only (Cox proportional hazard ratio = 0.45, 95% confidence interval = 0.38 to 0.54; log-rank, 1-sided P < .0001). Bone marker levels at 6 and 12 weeks increased with exemestane only, as expected, but decreased with the combination. The cumulative incidence rate of progressive disease in bone was lower in the combination arm. Bone-related adverse events occurred with similar frequency in both arms (3.3% combination vs 4.2% exemestane only).

CONCLUSION

These exploratory analyses suggest that everolimus has beneficial effects on bone turnover and progressive disease in bone in patients receiving exemestane for hormone receptor-positive breast cancer progressing during/after nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor therapy.

Long-term efficacy and safety of exemestane in the treatment of breast cancer

Exemestane, a steroidal aromatase inhibitor, is licensed for postmenopausal patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer as second-line therapy in metastatic disease following antiestrogen failure and as part of sequential adjuvant therapy following initial tamoxifen. This study is a systematic literature review, evaluating exemestane in different clinical settings. The Ovid Medline (1948-2012), Embase (1980-2012), and Web of Science (1899-2012) databases were searched. Forty-two relevant articles covering randomized controlled trials were reviewed for efficacy and safety, and three for adherence. With regard to efficacy in metastatic disease, exemestane is superior to megestrol acetate after progression on tamoxifen. There is evidence for noninferiority to fulvestrant (following a prior aromatase inhibitor) and to nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors in the first-line setting. Combined use with everolimus is shown to be more efficacious than exemestane alone following previous aromatase inhibitor use. In the adjuvant setting, a switch to exemestane after 2-3 years of tamoxifen is superior to 5 years of tamoxifen. Exemestane is noninferior to 5 years of tamoxifen as upfront therapy, and may have a role as an extended adjuvant therapy. Used as neoadjuvant therapy, increased breast conservation is achievable. As chemoprevention, exemestane significantly reduces the incidence of breast cancer in "at-risk" postmenopausal women. Exemestane is associated with myalgias and arthralgias, as well as reduced bone mineral density and increased risk of fracture, which do not appear to persist at follow-up, with subsequent return to pretreatment values. Compared with tamoxifen, there is a reduced incidence of endometrial changes, thromboembolic events, and hot flashes. Limited evidence shows nonadherence in 23%-32% of patients. Evidence is growing in support of exemestane in all clinical settings. It is generally more efficacious and has a better safety profile than tamoxifen. How it compares with the nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors remains to be established. Further studies are required on adherence to ensure that maximum benefit is obtained.

Systematic review of bone health in older women treated with aromatase inhibitors for early-stage breast cancer

OBJECTIVES

To review data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluate adverse bone outcomes in older women using aromatase inhibitors (AIs) for early-stage hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

SETTING

International RCTs referenced in Medline and EMBASE databases through August 1, 2011.

PARTICIPANTS

Postmenopausal women with early-stage hormone receptor-positive breast cancer receiving adjuvant endocrine therapy.

MEASUREMENTS

Fracture rates and changes in bone turnover markers and bone mineral density.

RESULTS

Eleven RCTs were identified. The majority of trials included women with a mean age in the 60s; and women aged 75 and older and 80 and older were excluded from two studies. Fracture rates ranged from 0.9% to 11%, with AIs having a 1.5 times higher risk than tamoxifen or placebo. Fracture data were not systematically collected in many of these trials. In a small subpopulation of women, AIs were associated with higher markers of bone turnover and lower bone density. The relationship between age and fracture was not described.

CONCLUSION

AIs are associated with low bone density and high fracture risk in women with a mean age in their early 60s. There is a paucity of data describing the effect of baseline fracture risk factors, particularly age, and the longer-term effects on bone health in older women. Future research is needed regarding baseline fracture risk, interventions, and long-term effects on bone in this vulnerable population to inform management decisions to optimize AI duration and ensure quality of life after breast cancer.

Aromatase inhibitor-associated bone loss and its management with bisphosphonates in patients with breast cancer

Postmenopausal women have an increased risk of osteopenia and osteoporosis due to loss of the bone-protective effects of estrogen. Disease-related processes may also contribute to the risk of bone loss in postmenopausal women with breast cancer. One of the most common and severe safety issues associated with cancer therapy for patients with breast cancer is bone loss and the associated increase in risk of fractures. This paper reviews the recent literature pertaining to aromatase inhibitor (AI)-associated bone loss, and discusses suggested management and preventative approaches that may help patients remain on therapy to derive maximum clinical benefit. A case study is presented to illustrate the discussion. We observed that AIs are in widespread use for women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer and are now recommended as adjuvant therapy, either as primary therapy or sequential to tamoxifen, for postmenopausal women. AIs target the estrogen biosynthetic pathway and deprive tumor cells of the growth-promoting effects of estrogen, and AI therapies provide benefits to patients in terms of improved disease-free survival. However, there is a concern regarding the increased risk of bone loss with prolonged AI therapy, which can be managed in many cases with the use of bisphosphonates and other interventions (eg, calcium, vitamin D supplementation, exercise).

Effects of exemestane and tamoxifen on hormone levels within the Tamoxifen Exemestane Adjuvant Multicentre (TEAM) trial: results of a German substudy

AIM

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of exemestane and tamoxifen on hormone levels in postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer within a Germany substudy of the Tamoxifen Exemestane Adjuvant Multinational (TEAM) trial.

METHODS

Within the TEAM trial, patients were randomized to receive adjuvant treatment with exemestane for 5 years or tamoxifen for 2.5-3 years followed by exemestane for 2-2.5 years. Serum levels of testosterone, dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate (DHEAS), sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG), follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) and parathyroid hormone (PTH)-intact were measured at screening and after 3, 6 and 12 months of treatment.

RESULTS

Data on hormone levels were available from 63 patients in the tamoxifen arm and 68 patients in the exemestane arm. Treatment with exemestane resulted in decreases from baseline in SHBG and PTH-intact levels, and increases from baseline in testosterone, DHEAS and FSH levels. Tamoxifen treatment resulted in increases from baseline in SHBG and PTH-intact, whereas levels of testosterone and FSH decreased and DHEAS levels did not change. At all time points assessed, the absolute change from baseline was significantly different between tamoxifen and exemestane for testosterone, SHBG, FSH and PTH-intact (all p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Exemestane and tamoxifen had statistically significantly different effects on hormone levels, including testosterone, SHBG, FSH and PTH-intact.

Early breast cancer in the older woman

Care of the older woman with early breast cancer is of particular importance to both the oncologist and geriatrician because of both the prevalence of the disease in this population as well as the subtleties necessary in individualizing treatment decisions. In general, older women are able to tolerate many of the same modalities of treatment for early breast cancer as younger women, but special consideration must be given to future life expectancy, comorbidities, and other elements that might be identified using a CGA. Both short-term and long-term side effects of cancer therapies can be clinically important in the older woman, and appropriate screening and support for these toxicities are necessary.

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.

Aging and osteoporosis in breast and prostate cancer

As people with cancer survive longer, and as the US population ages, skeletal effects of cancer treatment are becoming more pronounced. This is particularly true for breast and prostate cancer survivors because of the high average age of patients with these malignancies, the propensity of older adults in general toward the development of osteoporosis, and the wide use of therapeutic agents in these cancers that negatively impact bone health. Various therapies used in the treatment and prevention of cancer may cause decreases in bone mineral density and an increased risk of debilitating fracture, even in the absence of bone metastases. Aging is both a baseline risk factor in the development of osteoporosis and bony fracture, as well as a predictor of poor outcome after fracture. A variety of mechanisms may be responsible for the development of bone loss in patients with breast or prostate cancer. Cytotoxic chemotherapy may directly exert long-term toxic effects on bone. Chemotherapy and endocrine therapy can induce hypogonadism, leading to an increased rate of bone loss. The risk of skeletal events in older adults due to cancer therapy should be appreciated by all oncologists, geriatricians, and internists. The following review may serve as a guide to the skeletal side effects of cancer therapy in older adults with breast or prostate cancer, how to screen for treatment-related bone loss, and how to best prevent and/or treat skeletal events.

Denosumab in breast cancer

Bone destruction is mediated by osteoclasts, whose formation, function, and survival requires the receptor activator of NF-kB ligand (RANKL). Denosumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody to RANKL, thereby inhibiting osteoclast-mediated bone destruction, and blocks the vicious cycle of cancer-mediated bone disease. In breast cancer patients with bone metastases, denosumab was superior to zoledronic acid in delaying time to first on-study skeletal-related event (SRE; HR=0.82; P=0.01 superiority) and time to first and subsequent on-study SREs (HR=0.77; P=0.001). Overall survival, disease progression, and serious adverse events were similar between groups.

Effects of exemestane, anastrozole and tamoxifen on bone mineral density and bone turnover markers in postmenopausal early breast cancer patients: results of N-SAS BC 04, the TEAM Japan substudy

BACKGROUND

Use of aromatase inhibitors in women with postmenopausal breast cancer accompanies risks of bone loss. We evaluated changes in bone mineral density (BMD) and bone turnover markers in patients treated with exemestane, anastrozole or tamoxifen for hormone-sensitive postmenopausal early breast cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Sixty-eight patients enrolled in the Tamoxifen Exemestane Adjuvant Multinational Japan bone substudy were randomly assigned to receive tamoxifen, exemestane or anastrozole. During a 2-year study period, lumbar spine BMD was measured using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, and urinary type I collagen cross-linked N-telopeptide (NTX) and serum bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (BAP) were also measured.

RESULTS

BMD at 2 years of treatment was higher in tamoxifen patients compared with exemestane and anastrozole patients; however, the intergroup difference was not significant (p = 0.2521 and p = 0.0753, respectively). BMD was higher in exemestane patients compared with anastrozole patients; however, the intergroup difference was not significant (p = 0.7059 and p = 0.8134, respectively). NTX and BAP were significantly lower in tamoxifen patients compared with exemestane and anastrozole patients at 1 and 2 years of treatment (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Tamoxifen may provide better bone protection compared with exemestane or anastrozole. The effect of exemestane and anastrozole on bone loss may be comparable in Japanese postmenopausal women.

Adjuvant tamoxifen and exemestane in early breast cancer (TEAM): a randomised phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Aromatase inhibitors improved disease-free survival compared with tamoxifen when given as an initial adjuvant treatment or after 2-3 years of tamoxifen to postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer. We therefore compared the long-term effects of exemestane monotherapy with sequential treatment (tamoxifen followed by exemestane).

METHODS

The Tamoxifen Exemestane Adjuvant Multinational (TEAM) phase 3 trial was conducted in hospitals in nine countries. Postmenopausal women (median age 64 years, range 35-96) with hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to open-label exemestane (25 mg once a day, orally) alone or following tamoxifen (20 mg once a day, orally) for 5 years. Randomisation was by use of a computer-generated random permuted block method. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS) at 5 years. Main analyses were by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00279448, NCT00032136, and NCT00036270; NTR 267; Ethics Commission Trial27/2001; and UMIN, C000000057.

FINDINGS

9779 patients were assigned to sequential treatment (n=4875) or exemestane alone (n=4904), and 4868 and 4898 were analysed by intention to treat, respectively. 4154 (85%) patients in the sequential group and 4186 (86%) in the exemestane alone group were disease free at 5 years (hazard ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·88-1·08; p=0·60). In the safety analysis, sequential treatment was associated with a higher incidence of gynaecological symptoms (942 [20%] of 4814 vs 523 [11%] of 4852), venous thrombosis (99 [2%] vs 47 [1%]), and endometrial abnormalities (191 [4%] vs 19 [<1%]) than was exemestane alone. Musculoskeletal adverse events (2448 [50%] vs 2133 [44%]), hypertension (303 [6%] vs 219 [5%]), and hyperlipidaemia (230 [5%] vs 136 [3%]) were reported more frequently with exemestane alone.

INTERPRETATION

Treatment regimens of exemestane alone or after tamoxifen might be judged to be appropriate options for postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive early breast cancer.

FUNDING

Pfizer.

Aromatase inhibitor therapy: toxicities and management strategies in the treatment of postmenopausal women with hormone-sensitive early breast cancer

Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) have been shown to reduce the risk of breast cancer recurrence and are widely used today as adjuvant therapy in women with early stage endocrine-responsive breast cancer. Aromatase inhibitors may be prescribed as initial hormonal therapy, sequentially following 2-3 years of tamoxifen, or as extended adjuvant therapy (following 5 years of tamoxifen). Aromatase inhibitors are generally well tolerated; however, certain side effects, particularly arthralgia/musculoskeletal symptoms and gynecologic effects, may result in poor adherence to treatment. Patients receiving adjuvant therapy with an AI should be counseled regarding possible side effects and the importance of completing treatment. Interventions to ameliorate side effects should be individualized based on symptoms, comorbid conditions, and pre-existing therapies. In addition, bone and cardiovascular health should be monitored during AI therapy. Prompt therapeutic management of common side effects associated with AIs may provide patients with the opportunity to receive the full benefit of their adjuvant hormonal treatment while minimizing toxicity.

The effect of exemestane and tamoxifen on bone health within the Tamoxifen Exemestane Adjuvant Multinational (TEAM) trial: a meta-analysis of the US, German, Netherlands, and Belgium sub-studies

PURPOSE

We performed a meta-analysis of three sub-studies of the randomized Tamoxifen Exemestane Adjuvant Multinational (TEAM) trial to determine the effects of exemestane and tamoxifen on bone health.

METHODS

Patients received exemestane or tamoxifen as adjuvant therapy for hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Bone mineral density (BMD) was assessed at baseline and after 12 and 24 months of treatment. Bone turnover markers were also measured.

RESULTS

Patients receiving tamoxifen showed a mean increase from baseline in lumbar spine BMD of 1.2% at month 12 and 0.2% at month 24. Patients receiving exemestane showed a mean decrease from baseline of 2.6% after 12 months and 3.5% after 24 months. There were significant differences in the changes in lumbar spine BMD between treatment groups (P < 0.0001 at both time points). Changes in BMD from baseline at the total hip were also significantly different between exemestane and tamoxifen (P < 0.05 at both time points). Bone turnover markers decreased from baseline with tamoxifen and increased with exemestane.

CONCLUSIONS

Exemestane resulted in decreases in BMD and increases in bone turnover markers. BMD increased and bone turnover markers decreased with tamoxifen.

Guidelines for Osteoprotection in Breast Cancer Patients on an Aromatase Inhibitor

Postmenopausal women are at an increased risk of osteopenia and osteoporosis due to the physiologic loss of the bone protective effects of estrogen. Additionally, disease-related risk factors also contribute to the increased fracture risk. To further complicate matters, one of the most common and severe safety issues associated with cancer therapies for breast cancer patients is bone loss and the associated increased risk of fractures. These facts underscore the need to carefully monitor bone mineral density in patients with endocrine-responsive breast cancer, and to consider adjuvant therapy that may help manage and/or prevent bone loss and fracture. Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) are now in widespread clinical use for women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer and have replaced tamoxifen as the gold standard of care. AIs target the estrogen biosynthetic pathway and deprive tumor cells of the growth-promoting effects of estrogen. These treatments provide significant benefit to patients in terms of improved disease-free and overall survival. Adversely, there is a concern of an increased risk of bone loss with prolonged therapy consequently leading to an increased fracture risk. This manuscript will review the recent literature pertaining to AI-associated bone loss and discuss suggested management and preventative approaches that may help patients remain on therapy to derive the most clinical benefits.

Bone continuum of cancer

Many patients with solid tumors, especially breast and prostate cancers, and with multiple myeloma will develop bone metastases or other skeletal complications. The management of bone loss and symptomatic bone metastases is an important issue in the care and maintenance of quality of life for these patients. Morbidity caused by skeletal complications include pain (bone metastases are known as the most common cause of cancer-related pain), hypercalcemia, pathologic fracture, compression of the spinal cord or cauda equine, and spinal instability. Currently, the only Food and Drug Administration-approved therapy for metastatic bone disease is bisphosphonate therapy. A greater understanding of the biomolecular pathways that govern the bone continuum of cancer has helped identify novel targets for drug development. New therapeutic options are currently being investigated for the treatments of bone loss and symptomatic bone metastases. Some of these new drugs and modalities are in advanced stages of clinical development and may soon reach the clinic.

Management of anastrozole-induced bone loss in breast cancer patients with oral risedronate: results from the ARBI prospective clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this multicenter, phase III, prospective open label clinical trial was to investigate the effect of risedronate (R) on bone mineral density (BMD) in postmenopausal, early breast cancer (BC) patients scheduled to receive anastrozole (A).

METHODS

Pre-treatment BMD of 213 patients with hormone receptor-positive BC was evaluated at lumbar spine (LS) and hip (HP). Patients were categorized according to their baseline BMD T-score as being at low, moderate and high risk of osteoporosis. Low risk patients received anastrozole only (A), moderate risk were randomized to anastrozole +/- risedronate (A+/-R) administration and high risk patients received anastrozole + risedronate (A+R). Anastrozole was given at a dosage of 1 mg/day while oral risedronate was given at 35 mg/week. BMD was then assessed at 12 and 24 months. All patients received daily supplements of calcium (1000 mg/day) and vitamin D (400 IU/day).

RESULTS

At 24 months, in the moderate risk group, treatment with A+R resulted in a significant increase in BMD at LS and HP compared to treatment with A only (5.7% v -1.5%, Wilcoxon test P = 0.006, and 1.6% v -3.9% Wilcoxon test P = 0.037, respectively), while no significant difference was found at 12 months; 24.3% of the patients moved to normal BMD region. In the high risk group, a significant increase for LS was detected both at 12 and 24 months (6.3% and 6.6%, P < 0.001) but not for HP; BMD in 14% of patients improved to the osteopenic region. In the low risk group, a significant decrease of BMD was detected at 12 months for LS and HP (-5.3% P < 0.001 and -2.4% P < 0.001, respectively,); at 24 months, a significant decrease of BMD was detected only for LS (-2.5%, P < 0.001). However, 22% of patients became osteopenic and only 4% became osteoporotic.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of oral risedronate in post-menopausal breast cancer patients receiving anastrozole has a favorable effect on BMD. Patients with pre-treatment osteopenic to osteoporotic status should be treated with a combination of both therapies in order to avoid bone loss induced by aromatase inhibition. Patients with normal BMD before starting treatment with anastrozole have a very low risk to develop osteoporosis.

Switching from tamoxifen to aromatase inhibitors for adjuvant endocrine therapy in postmenopausal patients with early breast cancer

The third-generation aromatase inhibitors (AIs), including anastrozole, exemestane and letrozole, have demonstrated improved efficacy versus tamoxifen for the adjuvant endocrine treatment of postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. AIs can be used in several adjuvant endocrine settings: as upfront therapy, switch to an AI after 2-3years of tamoxifen or extended therapy following 5years of tamoxifen. In the switch setting, two different types of study designs have been utilized. One is a late randomization design which randomizes patients who are disease-free after 2-3years of tamoxifen to receive an AI versus continuation of tamoxifen. In contrast, an early randomization design randomizes all patients immediately after primary treatment and prior to starting tamoxifen. Efficacy benefits with AIs have been shown in several trials evaluating the late randomization strategy, including the Intergroup Exemestane Study, the Italian Tamoxifen Anastrozole trial and the Anastrozole-Nolvadex 95 trial. Similarly, early randomization studies, including the Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group-8 and the Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 trial, have demonstrated the effectiveness of receiving an AI after tamoxifen. Two trials are assessing an early switch strategy versus upfront AI therapy: the BIG 1-98 trial and the ongoing Tamoxifen Exemestane Adjuvant Multicentre trial are assessing switching from tamoxifen to an AI after 2-3years versus upfront AI therapy. This paper reviews studies that have investigated a switch strategy with AIs and considers the implications of these data on treatment choice for postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

Exemestane: a review of its use in postmenopausal women with breast cancer

Exemestane (Aromasin) is an orally active steroidal irreversible inactivator of the aromatase enzyme indicated as an adjuvant treatment in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive early-stage breast cancer following 2-3 years of adjuvant treatment with tamoxifen, and for the treatment of advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women whose disease has progressed following tamoxifen or other antiestrogen therapy. Exemestane is effective for the treatment of postmenopausal women with early-stage or advanced breast cancer. In early-stage disease, switching to exemestane for 2-3 years after 2-3 years of adjuvant tamoxifen treatment was more effective in prolonging disease-free survival than continuing tamoxifen therapy, although it was not associated with an overall survival benefit, except in those with estrogen receptor-positive or unknown receptor status disease when nodal status, hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and chemotherapy use were adjusted for. Moreover, preliminary data suggest that the efficacy of exemestane is generally no different to that of tamoxifen in the primary adjuvant treatment of early-stage breast cancer, although exemestane may be better in prolonging the time to distant recurrence. In advanced disease, exemestane showed equivalent efficacy to megestrol in patients with disease refractory to tamoxifen and an efficacy not significantly different from that of fulvestrant in those refractory to a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor. Available data, some of which are limited, suggest exemestane is also effective in the first-line hormonal treatment of advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women. Exemestane is generally well tolerated, although the potential bone fracture risk of the drug requires further investigation. Results from directly comparative trials indicating the efficacy, tolerability and bone fracture risk of exemestane relative to third-generation aromatase inhibitors and other agents in both early-stage and advanced disease, as well as the optimal sequence of endocrine therapies, are awaited with interest. In the meantime, switching to exemestane should be considered in postmenopausal women who have received 2-3 years of adjuvant tamoxifen treatment for early-stage breast cancer, and is an emerging treatment option for postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer refractory to one or more antiestrogen therapies.

The effect of exemestane or tamoxifen on markers of bone turnover: results of a German sub-study of the Tamoxifen Exemestane Adjuvant Multicentre (TEAM) trial

Adjuvant treatment of breast cancer with aromatase inhibitors has been associated with increased bone loss. In this study, postmenopausal patients with oestrogen receptor positive breast cancer were randomised to exemestane for 5 years or tamoxifen for 2-2.5 years, followed by exemestane for 2-2.5 years. Levels of bone formation markers (bone specific alkaline phosphatase, amino terminal propeptide of type I procollagen, osteocalcin), and the bone resorption marker (carboxyterminal crosslinked telopeptide of type I collagen), were assessed at baseline and after 3, 6 and 12 months of treatment. Exemestane (n=78) resulted in increases from baseline in all bone turnover marker levels at all timepoints. In contrast, levels of all bone marker turnovers decreased with tamoxifen (n=83). Differences between tamoxifen and exemestane were statistically significant for all bone turnover markers at all timepoints. In conclusion, exemestane results in increases in markers of bone formation and resorption, while decreases are observed with tamoxifen.