High prevalence of vertebral fractures in women with breast cancer starting aromatase inhibitor therapy

Management of cancer treatment-induced bone loss in patients with breast and hormone sensitive prostate cancer: AIOM survey

PURPOSE

Cancer treatment-induced bone loss is a side effect of hormonal therapy that can severely affect patients' quality of life. The aim of this survey was to obtain an updated picture of management of bone health in patients with breast cancer undergoing adjuvant hormonal therapy and in patients with hormone sensitive prostate cancer according to Italian oncologists.

METHODS

Our survey was made up of 21 multiple-choice questions: the first part dealt with the respondents' characteristics, while the second with management of bone health in the described setting. An invitation to complete the survey was sent by e-mail to 2336 oncologists, members of Italian Association of Medical Oncology, in October 2022.

RESULTS

Overall, 121 (5.2%) Italian oncologists completed the survey. In most cases (57%) the oncologist personally took charge of the management of bone health in patients at risk for cancer treatment-induced bone loss. At the beginning of hormonal therapy, most respondents reported to require bone health diagnostic exams, such as dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (89%), repeated with different timing. Main reported reasons (not mutually exclusive) for prescribing antiresorptive drugs were modifying fracture risk (87%), densitometry values (75%) or prognosis (34%). Answers about the management of antiresorptive therapy were heterogeneous.

CONCLUSION

A heterogeneous approach on the management of cancer treatment-induced bone loss in Italy arises from this survey. This scenario highlights the need for a major consensus of the Italian scientific community on the diagnostic and therapeutic approach of cancer treatment-induced bone loss and for a greater awareness of this topic among Italian oncologists.

Modeling and simulation of bone cells dynamic behavior under the late effect of breast cancer treatments

Breast Cancer (BC) treatments have been proven to interfere with the health of bones. Chemotherapy and endocrinal treatment regimens such as tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors are frequently prescribed for women with BC. However, these drugs increase bone resorption and reduce the Bone Mineral Density (BMD), thus increasing the risk of bone fracture. In the current study, a mechanobiological bone remodeling model has been developed by coupling cellular activities, mechanical stimuli, and the effect of breast cancer treatments (chemotherapy, tamoxifen, and aromatase inhibitors). This model algorithm has been programmed and implemented on MATLAB software to simulate different treatment scenarios and their effects on bone remodeling and also predict the evolution of Bone Volume fraction (BV/TV) and the associated Bone Density Loss (BDL) over a period of time. The simulation results, achieved from different combinations of Breast Cancer treatments, allow the researchers to predict the intensity of each combination treatment on BV/TV and BMD. The combination of chemotherapy, tamoxifen, and aromatase inhibitors, followed by the combination of chemotherapy and tamoxifen remain the most harmful regimen. This is because they have a strong ability to induce the bone degradation which is represented by a decrease of 13.55% and 11.55% of the BV/TV value, respectively. These results were compared with the experimental studies and clinical observations which showed good agreement. The proposed model can be used by clinicians and physicians to choose the most appropriate combination of treatments, according to the patient's case.

Low-Magnitude Mechanical Signals Combined with Zoledronic Acid Reduce Musculoskeletal Weakness and Adiposity in Estrogen-Deprived Mice

Combination treatment of Low-Intensity Vibration (LIV) with zoledronic acid (ZA) was hypothesized to preserve bone mass and muscle strength while reducing adipose tissue accrual associated with complete estrogen (E ₂ )-deprivation in young and skeletally mature mice. Complete E ₂ -deprivation (surgical-ovariectomy (OVX) and daily injection of aromatase inhibitor (AI) letrozole) were performed on 8-week-old C57BL/6 female mice for 4 weeks following commencement of LIV administration or control (no LIV), for 28 weeks. Additionally, 16-week-old C57BL/6 female E ₂ -deprived mice were administered ±LIV twice daily and supplemented with ±ZA (2.5 ng/kg/week). By week 28, lean tissue mass quantified by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry was increased in younger OVX/AI+LIV(y) mice, with increased myofiber cross-sectional area of quadratus femorii. Grip strength was greater in OVX/AI+LIV(y) mice than OVX/AI(y) mice. Fat mass remained lower in OVX/AI+LIV(y) mice throughout the experiment compared with OVX/AI(y) mice. OVX/AI+LIV(y) mice exhibited increased glucose tolerance and reduced leptin and free fatty acids than OVX/AI(y) mice. Trabecular bone volume fraction and connectivity density increased in the vertebrae of OVX/AI+LIV(y) mice compared to OVX/AI(y) mice; however, this effect was attenuated in the older cohort of E ₂ -deprived mice, specifically in OVX/AI+ZA mice, requiring combined LIV with ZA to increase trabecular bone volume and strength. Similar improvements in cortical bone thickness and cross-sectional area of the femoral mid-diaphysis were observed in OVX/AI+LIV+ZA mice, resulting in greater fracture resistance. Our findings demonstrate that the combination of mechanical signals in the form of LIV and anti-resorptive therapy via ZA improve vertebral trabecular bone and femoral cortical bone, increase lean mass, and reduce adiposity in mice undergoing complete E ₂ -deprivation. One Sentence Summary: Low-magnitude mechanical signals with zoledronic acid suppressed bone and muscle loss and adiposity in mice undergoing complete estrogen deprivation.

TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE

Postmenopausal patients with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer treated with aromatase inhibitors to reduce tumor progression experience deleterious effects to bone and muscle subsequently develop muscle weakness, bone fragility, and adipose tissue accrual. Bisphosphonates (i.e., zoledronic acid) prescribed to inhibit osteoclast-mediated bone resorption are effective in preventing bone loss but may not address the non-skeletal effects of muscle weakness and fat accumulation that contribute to patient morbidity. Mechanical signals, typically delivered to the musculoskeletal system during exercise/physical activity, are integral for maintaining bone and muscle health; however, patients undergoing treatments for breast cancer often experience decreased physical activity which further accelerates musculoskeletal degeneration. Low-magnitude mechanical signals, in the form of low-intensity vibrations, generate dynamic loading forces similar to those derived from skeletal muscle contractility. As an adjuvant to existing treatment strategies, low-intensity vibrations may preserve or rescue diminished bone and muscle degraded by breast cancer treatment.

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.

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.

Large Lytic Defects Produce Kinematic Instability and Loss of Compressive Strength in Human Spines: An in Vitro Study

BACKGROUND

In patients with spinal metastases, kinematic instability is postulated to be a predictor of pathologic vertebral fractures. However, the relationship between this kinematic instability and the loss of spinal strength remains unknown.

METHODS

Twenty-four 3-level thoracic and lumbar segments from 8 cadaver spines from female donors aged 47 to 69 years were kinematically assessed in axial compression (180 N) and axial compression with a flexion or extension moment (7.5 Nm). Two patterns of lytic defects were mechanically simulated: (1) a vertebral body defect, corresponding to Taneichi model C (n = 13); and (2) the model-C defect plus destruction of the ipsilateral pedicle and facet joint, corresponding to Taneichi model E (n = 11). The kinematic response was retested, and compression strength was measured. Two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to test the effect of each model on the kinematic response of the segment. Multivariable linear regression was used to test the association between the kinematic parameters and compressive strength of the segment.

RESULTS

Under a flexion moment, and for both models C and E, the lesioned spines exhibited greater flexion range of motion (ROM) and axial translation than the control spines. Both models C and E caused lower extension ROM and greater axial, sagittal, and transverse translation under an extension moment compared with the control spines. Two-way repeated-measures analysis revealed that model E, compared with model C, caused significantly greater changes in extension and torsional ROM under an extension moment, and greater sagittal translation under a flexion moment. For both models C and E, greater differences in flexion ROM and sagittal translation under a flexion moment, and greater differences in extension ROM and in axial and transverse translation under an extension moment, were associated with lower compressive strength of the lesioned spines.

CONCLUSIONS

Critical spinal lytic defects result in kinematic abnormalities and lower the compressive strength of the spine.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This experimental study demonstrates that lytic foci degrade the kinematic stability and compressive strength of the spine. Understanding the mechanisms for this degradation will help to guide treatment decisions that address inferred instability and fracture risk in patients with metastatic spinal disease.

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.

The effects of adjuvant endocrine therapy on bone health in women with breast cancer

In women with oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive early breast cancer, oestradiol is important for breast cancer development and progression. Endocrine therapy prevents the deleterious effects of oestradiol in breast tissue by systemically depleting oestradiol concentration (aromatase inhibitors) or preventing its local action in breast tissue (selective oestrogen receptor modulators i.e. tamoxifen), thereby improving oncological outcomes. Use of aromatase inhibitors in postmenopausal women and ovarian function suppression with either tamoxifen or aromatase inhibition in premenopausal women, consequent to systemic oestradiol depletion, exerts detrimental effects on skeletal health. The oestradiol-deficient state causes increased bone remodelling and a negative bone balance. This results in bone loss, microstructural deterioration and bone fragility predisposing to fractures. Similar effects are also seen with tamoxifen in premenopausal women. In contrast, use of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women appears to exert protective effects on bone but studies on fracture risk are inconclusive. The longevity of women with ER-positive breast cancer treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy emphasises the need to mitigate the adverse skeletal effects of these therapies in order to maximise benefit. In general, fractures are associated with increased morbidity, mortality and are a high socioeconomic burden. Whilst the efficacy of antiresorptive therapy in preventing bone mineral density loss in postmenopausal women has been established, further clinical trial evidence is required to provide guidance regarding fracture risk reduction, when to initiate and stop treatment, choice of agent and optimal management of bone health in premenopausal women receiving endocrine therapy. In addition, potential oncological benefits of antiresorptive therapies will also need to be considered.

Baseline bone health status in multi-ethnic South African postmenopausal breast cancer patients at initiation of aromatase inhibitor therapy: A descriptive study

Introduction

Osteoporosis (OP) risk factor assessment and bone mineral density (BMD) testing are frequently omitted at baseline in aromatase inhibitor (AI) studies, which may lead to misinterpretation of AI associated bone loss. The present study describes bone health of South African postmenopausal women of predominantly Mixed Ancestry, prior to AI treatment.

Methods

This descriptive baseline study, nested in a prospective AI cohort study, included postmenopausal women with endocrine sensitive breast cancer, aged 50 to 80 years. A baseline questionnaire documented demographic-, medical-, lifestyle- and fracture history. Body weight was assessed clinically, and body composition and BMD measured via dual energy absorptiometry (DXA). Data was analysed in STATA 14 using descriptive and inferential statistics.

Results

101 participants were recruited, with a mean age of 61±7 years. Nearly a third (n = 32) of women at baseline fulfilled global criteria for bone protection (BMD T-score ≥-2SD (n = 18); BMD T-score -1.5SD to < -2SD with risk factors (n = 14). Lower body weight, body mass index (BMI), fat mass index and lean mass index were significantly associated with the participants with a BMD measurement in keeping with a diagnosis of OP (p <0.001). Low vitamin D was present in 93% of the cohort tested (n = 95), whilst deficient vitamin D status (<20ng/ml) was documented in 52 women (55%).

Conclusions

In this study, a third of postmenopausal women considered for AI therapy fulfilled international criteria for bone protective pharmacological intervention. This emphasizes the need for clinical risk and BMD assessment in postmenopausal breast cancer patients at baseline. Body composition and bone health associations highlight bone fragility associated with lower body weight.

Bone health in women with breast cancer

Women with early, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer are treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy, using aromatase inhibitors or selective estradiol receptor modulators such as tamoxifen, to deprive breast tissue from the deleterious effects of estradiol action, hence improving long-term prognosis. Aromatase inhibitors and, in premenopausal women, tamoxifen accelerate bone loss and increase fracture risk. Therefore, all women commencing endocrine therapy need a targeted work-up to assess the baseline fracture risk, and monitoring of bone health during endocrine therapy should be individualized based on this baseline risk. While high-level evidence specific to early breast cancer is lacking, non-pharmacologic measures to maintain optimal bone health such as weight-bearing exercise and calcium and vitamin D sufficiency should be implemented in all women. Antiresorptive treatment should be initiated in all women with preexisting fragility fractures (including vertebral morphometric fractures) and should be considered in women with areal bone mineral density (BMD) T-scores < -2.0 (or Z-scores in women aged <50 years) or those experiencing rapid bone loss (≥5% per year), taking into consideration the baseline BMD and other risk factors for fracture. Further clinical trial evidence is required to provide definitive guidance regarding criteria to initiate antiresorptive treatment, choice of agents, and duration of treatment, taking into account potential oncologic benefits of antiresorptive therapy on breast cancer-related outcomes.

The impact of an exercise program on quality of life in older breast cancer survivors undergoing aromatase inhibitor therapy: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the impact of an exercise program on quality of life in older breast cancer survivors undergoing aromatase inhibitor therapy.

METHODS

Older breast cancer survivors were randomized into two groups: combined training: resistance + aerobic exercise program for nine months (n = 18) or control group (n = 18). Quality of life was assessed by the questionnaires SF36, EORTC QLQ-C30, and EORTC QLQ-BR23 at baseline, and at three, six, and nine months. The exercise group performed 40 min of resistance exercises on machines followed by 30 min of aerobic training on a treadmill 3x/wk. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to compare the groups over time.

RESULTS

Significant time x group interactions and moderate to high effect sizes were found for physical functioning, physical health, bodily pain, general health perception, vitality, social functioning, fatigue, sleep disturbance, body image, and upset by hair loss, favoring the exercise group.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated the potential benefits and high clinical relevance of exercise programs to improve quality of life in older breast cancer survivors undergoing aromatase inhibitor therapy.

Female Human Spines with Simulated Osteolytic Defects: CT-based Structural Analysis of Vertebral Body Strength

Purpose To evaluate a CT structural analysis protocol (SAP) for estimating the strength of human female cadaveric spines with lytic lesions. Materials and Methods Osteolytic foci was created in the middle vertebra of 44 thoracic and lumbar three-level segments from 11 female cadavers (age range, 50-70 years). The segments underwent CT by using standard clinical protocol and their failure strength was assessed at CT SAP. The spines were mechanically tested to failure in pure axial compression or in compression with torsion. The relationships of defect size, bone mineral density, and predicted failure load (at CT SAP) with measured vertebral strength were assessed with linear regression. Analysis of variance and Tukey test were used to evaluate the effect of region and mechanical test on spine strength. Results With axial compression, CT SAP predictions of vertebral strength correlated with the thoracic (r = 0.84; P < .001) and lumbar (r = 0.85; P < .001) segment-measured strength. Bone mineral density correlated with the lumbar (r = 0.64; P = .003) and thoracic (r, 0.51; P = .050) strength. At compression with torsion, CT SAP predictions of strength were moderately correlated with vertebral strength (r = 0.66; P = .018). At compression with torsion, bone mineral density was not correlated with spinal strength (thoracic and lumbar: r = 0.31 and r = 0.26, respectively; P = .539 and .610, respectively). The lytic focus size (range, 28%-41%) was not associated with vertebral strength. Conclusion CT SAP assessment of strength in vertebrae with lytic lesions correlated with the measured strength of female vertebral bodies. ^© RSNA, 2018 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

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.

Impact of an osteoporosis specialized unit on bone health in breast cancer survivals treated with aromatase inhibitors

OBJECTIVE

Considering the increased fracture risk in early breast cancer patients treated with aromatase inhibitors (AI), we assessed the impact of a preventive intervention conducted by a specialized osteoporosis unit on bone health at AI treatment start.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective cohort of postmenopausal women who started treatment with AI after breast cancer surgical/chemotherapy treatment and were referred to the osteoporosis unit for a comprehensive assessment of bone health. Bone densitometry and fracture screening by plain X-ray were performed at the baseline visit and once a year for 5 years.

RESULTS

The final record included 130 patients. At AI treatment start, 49% had at least one high-risk factor for fractures, 55% had osteopenia, and 39% osteoporosis. Based on the baseline assessment, 79% of patients initiated treatment with bisphosphonates, 88% with calcium, and 79% with vitamin D. After a median of 65 (50-77) months, 4% developed osteopenia or osteoporosis, and 14% improved their densitometric diagnosis. Fifteen fractures were recorded in 11 (8.5%) patients, all of them receiving preventive treatment (10 with bisphosphonates). During the follow-up period, patients with one or more high-risk factors for fracture showed a greater frequency of fractures (15% vs. 3%) and experienced the first fracture earlier than those without high-risk factors (mean of 99 and 102 months, respectively; P=0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

The preventive intervention of a specialized unit at the start of AI treatment in breast cancer survivors allows the identification of patients with high fracture risk and may contribute to preventing bone events in these patients.

Evaluation and management of skeletal disease in cancer care

Recently, there have been considerable advancements in cancer therapies thereby prolonging the life of cancer survivors. However, these recent advancements present new challenges in the management of bone disease in cancer survivors. Bone acts as a fertile soil for cancer seeding and bone health is often compromised because of increased inflammatory cytokines in cancer, direct cancer metastasis and toxic effects of anti-cancer therapies. This effect is more pronounced in elderly population who already have compromised bone mineral density leading to increased skeletal related events and bone pain. Timely diagnosis and effective interventions are essential for reducing bone-related morbidity in cancer survivors. Also, a complex interdependence exists between cancer related bone disease and tumor growth, creating a vicious circle of extensive bone destruction and cancer progression. Hence, maintenance of bone health and integrity plays a pivotal role in comprehensive cancer care. The bone-targeted treatments have been shown to preserve bone health, and modify the course of the underlying cancer. Management of long-term bone health requires a broad knowledge base that endocrinologists, oncologists and other care team members should be aware of. The manuscript highlights the skeletal effects of cancer, adjuvant therapies used for hormone-responsive cancers, chemotherapy induced bone loss and steps for accurate diagnosis and management of bone disease in cancer survivors by bridging the gaps in the comprehensive cancer care.

Skeletal health in breast cancer survivors

Although some risk factors for breast cancer might be protective for osteoporosis, several cross-sectional studies have reported, nevertheless, that patients with breast cancer have a lower bone mass and potentially a higher incidence of fractures than expected. In any case, it appears that patients with breast cancer are not protected from osteoporosis, which provides further support for the recommendation that bone health is assessed after a diagnosis of breast cancer. Most adjuvant therapies will lead to increased bone loss and a higher fracture rate. Among the adjuvant therapy options for premenopausal patients with breast cancer, endocrine therapy (ovarian suppression) and chemotherapy can result in cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) of up to 10% at the lumbar spine after one year. Antiresorptive therapies prevent CTIBL in premenopausal women with breast cancer. Most of the evidence demonstrating the efficacy of bisphosphonates in the prevention of CTIBL is derived from clinical trials with zoledronic acid. The addition of zoledronic acid 4mg per six months to adjuvant endocrine therapy maintained and even increased bone mass during a 3-year treatment period and significantly improved disease-free survival in a population of young women who underwent menopause due to the adjuvant treatment. The major contributor to bone loss in the adjuvant treatment of breast cancer in postmenopausal women is the use of aromatase inhibitors (AIs). Oncology trials have underestimated the fracture risk in the setting of AI-induced bone loss. In the ABCSG-18 study, the only trial in which fracture incidence was the primary endpoint, the rate of clinical fractures was close to 10% after 3 years in the placebo group on AIs only. Bisphosphonates and denosumab at osteoporosis treatment doses can counteract AI-induced bone loss. In the ABCSG-18 trial, treatment with denosumab 60mg injection every 6 months reduced the risk of first clinical fracture relative to placebo by 50%. Current guidelines recommend antiresorptive therapy in patients with a baseline T score of <-2.0 or with two or more clinical risk factors for fracture. These recent guidelines will need to be updated, as similar significant protective effects were seen in women with either normal or low bone mass. Moreover, a formal meta-analysis of individual patient data from more than 18,000 women in 26 randomized trials of adjuvant zoledronic acid or clodronate treatment for early breast cancer revealed that bisphosphonates significantly reduced the risk of first distant recurrence in bone and the risk of breast cancer mortality, at least in postmenopausal women. Even though the increased risk of fracture during adjuvant treatment for breast cancer in postmenopausal women is notable, an enhanced risk of fracture in long-term survivors of breast cancer remains under debate. The most recent studies suggest that Caucasian breast cancer survivors do not have a significantly increased risk of osteoporotic fracture over the long term.

Morphometric vertebral fractures in breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy: A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

The impact of long-term adjuvant therapy with aromatase inhibitors (AIs) on vertebral fracture (VF) risk is still unclear.

OBJECTIVE

In this cross-sectional study, we explored the prevalence and determinants of VFs in breast cancer (BC) patients before and during AI therapy. Each woman underwent a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) to evaluate bone mineral density (BMD) and identify VFs by a quantitative morphometric approach. Blood samples were collected to measure serum hormone and calcium levels.

RESULTS

We consecutively included 263 postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early BC. One-hundred-sixty-nine women were AI-naïve, and 94 were AI-treated. AI-treated patients had lower BMD at total hip (p=0.01) and lumbar spine (p=0.03), higher serum vitamin D (p<0.001) and parathyroid hormone (p=0.006) values as compared to AI-naïve patients. The prevalence of VFs was 18.9% in AI-naïve patients, and 31.2% in those assessed during AI therapy (odds ratio 1.90, 95% CI 1.1-3.5, p=0.03). In AI-naïve patients, VFs were associated with older age (p=0.002) and lower BMD values at femoral neck (p=0.04) and total hip (p=0.007), whereas VFs occurred without association with any parameter analyzed in AI-treated patients. In AI-treated group, the prevalence of VFs was not significantly different between patients with osteoporosis and those with normal BMD (36.7% vs. 20.0%; p=0.31).

CONCLUSIONS

In women with early BC, AI therapy is associated with high prevalence of radiological VFs, which were shown to be independent of BMD values during the adjuvant treatment. These findings may be clinically relevant since they may lead to a change in management of AI-induced skeletal fragility. Specifically, the results of this study provide a rationale for performing a morphometric evaluation of VFs in all women undergoing treatment with AIs.

Osteoporotic Vertebral Fractures as Part of Systemic Disease

Our understanding of the genetic control of skeletogenesis and bone remodeling is expanding, and normally, bone resorption and bone formation are well balanced through regulation by hormones, growth factors, and cytokines. Osteoporosis is considered a systemic disease characterized by low bone mass and microarchitectural deterioration of bone tissue. Consequent increased bone fragility results in higher fracture risk. The most common osteoporotic fractures are located in the spine, and they form a significant health issue. A large variety of systemic diseases are associated with risk of osteoporotic vertebral fractures, illustrating its multifactorial etiology. Prevalences of these conditions vary from common to extremely rare, and incidence peaks differ according to etiology. This review appreciates different aspects of osteoporotic vertebral fractures as part of systemic disease, including genetic, immunologic, inflammatory, metabolic, and endocrine pathways. It seems impossible to be all-comprehensive on this topic; nevertheless, we hope to provide a reasonably thorough overview. Plenty remains to be elucidated in this field, identifying even more associated diseases and further exposing pathophysiological mechanisms underlying osteoporotic vertebral fractures.

Adjuvant denosumab in breast cancer (ABCSG-18): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant endocrine therapy compromises bone health in patients with breast cancer, causing osteopenia, osteoporosis, and fractures. Antiresorptive treatments such as bisphosphonates prevent and counteract these side-effects. In this trial, we aimed to investigate the effects of the anti-RANK ligand antibody denosumab in postmenopausal, aromatase inhibitor-treated patients with early-stage hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

METHODS

In this prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, postmenopausal patients with early hormone receptor-positive breast cancer receiving treatment with aromatase inhibitors were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either denosumab 60 mg or placebo administered subcutaneously every 6 months in 58 trial centres in Austria and Sweden. Patients were assigned by an interactive voice response system. The randomisation schedule used a randomly permuted block design with block sizes 2 and 4, stratified by type of hospital regarding Hologic device for DXA scans, previous aromatase inhibitor use, and baseline bone mineral density. Patients, treating physicians, investigators, data managers, and all study personnel were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was time from randomisation to first clinical fracture, analysed by intention to treat. As an additional sensitivity analysis, we also analysed the primary endpoint on the per-protocol population. Patients were treated until the prespecified number of 247 first clinical fractures was reached. This trial is ongoing (patients are in follow-up) and is registered with the European Clinical Trials Database, number 2005-005275-15, and with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00556374.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 18, 2006, and July 22, 2013, 3425 eligible patients were enrolled into the trial, of whom 3420 were randomly assigned to receive denosumab 60 mg (n=1711) or placebo (n=1709) subcutaneously every 6 months. Compared with the placebo group, patients in the denosumab group had a significantly delayed time to first clinical fracture (hazard ratio [HR] 0·50 [95% CI 0·39-0·65], p<0·0001). The overall lower number of fractures in the denosumab group (92) than in the placebo group (176) was similar in all patient subgroups, including in patients with a bone mineral density T-score of -1 or higher at baseline (n=1872, HR 0·44 [95% CI 0·31-0·64], p<0·0001) and in those with a bone mineral density T-score of less than -1 already at baseline (n=1548, HR 0·57 [95% CI 0·40-0·82], p=0·002). The patient incidence of adverse events in the safety analysis set (all patients who received at least one dose of study drug) did not differ between the denosumab group (1366 events, 80%) and the placebo group (1334 events, 79%), nor did the numbers of serious adverse events (521 vs 511 [30% in each group]). The main adverse events were arthralgia and other aromatase-inhibitor related symptoms; no additional toxicity from the study drug was reported. Despite proactive adjudication of every potential osteonecrosis of the jaw by an international expert panel, no cases of osteonecrosis of the jaw were reported. 93 patients (3% of the full analysis set) died during the study, of which one death (in the denosumab group) was thought to be related to the study drug.

INTERPRETATION

Adjuvant denosumab 60 mg twice per year reduces the risk of clinical fractures in postmenopausal women with breast cancer receiving aromatase inhibitors, and can be administered without added toxicity. Since a main side-effect of adjuvant breast cancer treatment can be substantially reduced by the addition of denosumab, this treatment should be considered for clinical practice.

FUNDING

Amgen.

Prevention and treatment of bone fragility in cancer patient

It is well known that fractures increase the risk of morbidity and mortality. The various mechanisms responsible for bone loss in cancer patients may have a different impact depending on the characteristics of the clinical case and correlates with the therapies used, or caused by the therapies used against cancer. Some hormonal treatments cause hypogonadism, event which contributes to the progressive loss of bone mass. This is detectable in patients with breast cancer receiving determines that estrogen-deprivation and in men with prostate cancer with therapies that determine androgen deprivation. Chemotherapy treatments used in cancer patients have reduced bone mass. In addition, low bone mass is detectable in patients with lymphoma treated with corticosteroids or radiation or alkylating agents. In premenopausal patients suffering from breast cancer, treatment with cytotoxic therapy or ablation of ovarian function, can lead to an 8% reduction in bone mineral density at the spine and 4% in the femur. With a chemotherapy regimen in CMF, the reduction of BMD is 6.5%; this bone loss is not recovered after discontinuation of therapy. Tamoxifen given for five years reduces bone remodeling and cause a 32% increase in the risk of osteoporotic fractures when used in premenopausal. After menopause, tamoxifen has a protective effect on bone mass, with a reduced risk of new fractures. Aromatase inhibitors in post-menopausal women, depending on the formulation can cause different effects on the reduction of BMD and fracture risk. We have in fact steroids, exemestane and nonsteroidal, letrozole and anastrozole. Patients at increased risk of fragility fractures should undergo preventive therapies as soon as possible after tests performed for the study of bone health. They can be used DEXA and the FRAX algorithm, which can define a secondary osteoporosis. Prevention and treatment of the increased risk of osteoporotic fracture is to maintain adequate levels of calcium and vitamin D. Bisphosphonates and denosumab are used for the management of bone remodeling and bone loss induced by cancer treatments. Bisphosphonates also have anti-tumor effects per se, which are expressed in potentially prevent the development of bone metastases. In men with metastatic prostate cancer and which is induced androgen deprivation, it is usefully used denosumab 120 mg monthly or zoledronic acid 4 mg monthly.

Bone health history in breast cancer patients on aromatase inhibitors

A cross-sectional study was performed to assess bone health history among aromatase inhibitor (AI) users before breast cancer (BC) diagnosis, which may impact fracture risk after AI therapy and choice of initial hormonal therapy. A total of 2,157 invasive BC patients initially treated with an AI were identified from a prospective cohort study at Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC). Data on demographic and lifestyle factors were obtained from in-person interviews, and bone health history and clinical data from KPNC clinical databases. The prevalence of osteoporosis and fractures in postmenopausal AI users was assessed, compared with 325 postmenopausal TAM users. The associations of bone health history with demographic and lifestyle factors in AI users were also examined. Among all initial AI users, 11.2% had a prior history of osteoporosis, 16.3% had a prior history of any fracture, and 4.6% had a prior history of major fracture. Postmenopausal women who were taking TAM as their initial hormonal therapy had significantly higher prevalence of prior osteoporosis than postmenopausal AI users (21.5% vs. 11.8%, p<0.0001). Among initial AI users, the associations of history of osteoporosis and fracture in BC patients with demographic and lifestyle factors were, in general, consistent with those known in healthy older women. This study is one of the first to characterize AI users and risk factors for bone morbidity before BC diagnosis. In the future, this study will examine lifestyle, molecular, and genetic risk factors for AI-induced fractures.

Screening for osteoporosis after breast cancer: for whom, why and when

Osteoporosis and breast cancer are common diseases in postmenopausal women. Bone and the breast are both estrogenic dependent tissues and different surrogate markers for osteoporosis are opposite of those for the risk of breast cancer. In particular, numerous studies have reported a positive relationship between high bone mineral density (BMD) and a greater risk of breast cancer. On the other hand, most treatments in early breast cancer women including ovarian suppression treatments (chemotherapy, surgery or GnRH agonists) and aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy induce a profound and rapid suppression of estrogen levels thereby increasing the rate of bone loss. Nevertheless, their impact on the risk of fracture is still questionable, especially in postmenopausal women with no osteoporosis at baseline. The purpose of this minireview is to examine the relationship between breast cancer and the risk of fracture and to discuss a screening strategy for osteoporosis after breast cancer.

Fracture incidence after 3 years of aromatase inhibitor therapy

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to describe the fracture incidence and bone mineral density (BMD) evolution in a large cohort of post-menopausal women with breast cancer after 3 years of aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective, longitudinal study in real-life setting. Each woman had an extensive medical assessment, a biological evaluation, a BMD measurement, and systematic spinal X-rays at baseline and after 3 years of AI therapy. Women with osteoporosis at baseline (T-score < -2.5 and/or non-traumatic fracture history) were treated by oral weekly bisphosphonates.

RESULTS

Among 497 women (mean age 63.8 ± 9.6 years) included in this study, 389 had a bone evaluation both at baseline and after 3 years of AI therapy: 267 women (mean age 61.2 ± 8.6) with no osteoporosis at baseline and 122 women (mean age 67.2 ± 9.1) with osteoporosis at baseline justifying a weekly oral bisphosphonate treatment. Women without bisphosphonates had a significant decrease in spine BMD (-3.5%, P < 0.01), neck BMD (-2.0%, P < 0.01), and total hip BMD (-2.1%, P < 0.01) over the 3 years but only 15 of them (5.6%) presented an incident vertebral or non-vertebral fracture. In osteoporotic women treated with bisphosphonates, spine and hip BMD were maintained at 3 years but 12 of them (9.8%) had an incident fracture. These fractured women were significantly older (74.1 ± 9.8 versus 66.5 ± 8.8) but also presented BMD loss during treatment suggesting poor adherence to bisphosphonate treatment.

CONCLUSION

This real-life study confirmed that AIs induced moderate bone loss and low fracture incidence in post-menopausal women without initial osteoporosis. In women with baseline osteoporosis and AI therapy, oral bisphosphonates maintain BMD but were associated with a persistent fracture risk, particularly in older women.

Cancer-associated bone disease

Bone is commonly affected in cancer. Cancer-induced bone disease results from the primary disease, or from therapies against the primary condition, causing bone fragility. Bone-modifying agents, such as bisphosphonates and denosumab, are efficacious in preventing and delaying cancer-related bone disease. With evidence-based care pathways, guidelines assist physicians in clinical decision-making. Of the 57 million deaths in 2008 worldwide, almost two thirds were due to non-communicable diseases, led by cardiovascular diseases and cancers. Bone is a commonly affected organ in cancer, and although the incidence of metastatic bone disease is not well defined, it is estimated that around half of patients who die from cancer in the USA each year have bone involvement. Furthermore, cancer-induced bone disease can result from the primary disease itself, either due to circulating bone resorbing substances or metastatic bone disease, such as commonly occurs with breast, lung and prostate cancer, or from therapies administered to treat the primary condition thus causing bone loss and fractures. Treatment-induced osteoporosis may occur in the setting of glucocorticoid therapy or oestrogen deprivation therapy, chemotherapy-induced ovarian failure and androgen deprivation therapy. Tumour skeletal-related events include pathologic fractures, spinal cord compression, surgery and radiotherapy to bone and may or may not include hypercalcaemia of malignancy while skeletal complication refers to pain and other symptoms. Some evidence demonstrates the efficacy of various interventions including bone-modifying agents, such as bisphosphonates and denosumab, in preventing or delaying cancer-related bone disease. The latter includes treatment of patients with metastatic skeletal lesions in general, adjuvant treatment of breast and prostate cancer in particular, and the prevention of cancer-associated bone disease. This has led to the development of guidelines by several societies and working groups to assist physicians in clinical decision making, providing them with evidence-based care pathways to prevent skeletal-related events and bone loss. The goal of this paper is to put forth an IOF position paper addressing bone diseases and cancer and summarizing the position papers of other organizations.

Aromatase inhibitors-induced bone loss in early breast cancer

Women with breast cancer have an increased prevalence and incidence of fractures. This increased risk of fracture has become most evident following the use of aromatase inhibitors (AIs) as standard adjuvant therapy. AI-induced bone loss occurs at more than twice the rate of physiologic postmenopausal bone loss. Moreover, peripheral quantitative computed tomography data indicate that effects of AIs on bone strength and on cortical bone have been substantially underestimated by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. All AIs have been associated with an increased fracture risk. The incidence of fractures is at least 33-43% higher in AI-treated patients than in tamoxifen-treated patients, and this increase in fracture risk is maintained at least for the duration of AI therapy. Over the last few years, clinical trials have established the effectiveness of bisphosphonates and denosumab to preserve and even increase bone mineral density (BMD) during adjuvant AIs. Most data have been obtained with zoledronic acid administered twice a year, which effectively maintains or increases BMD in women receiving AIs. In addition, zoledronic acid has been shown to delay disease recurrence and maybe prolong survival in women with hormone-responsive tumors, thereby providing an adjuvant antitumor benefit besides preserving BMD. It is likely that a combined fracture risk assessment will more accurately identify women with breast cancer who require bone protective therapy. The FRAX tool probably underestimates the net increase in fracture risk due to AI therapy. Recent guidelines for the prevention of AI-induced bone loss have adequately considered the presence of several established clinical risk factors for fractures, in addition to BMD, when selecting patients to be treated with inhibitors of bone resorption.