Bone density and structure in healthy postmenopausal women treated with exemestane for the primary prevention of breast cancer: a nested substudy of the MAP.3 randomised controlled trial

Changes in bone mineral density at 3 years in postmenopausal women receiving anastrozole and risedronate in the IBIS-II bone substudy: an international, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Aromatase inhibitors prevent breast cancer in postmenopausal women at high risk of the disease but are associated with accelerated bone loss. We assessed effectiveness of oral risedronate for prevention of reduction in bone mineral density (BMD) after 3 years of follow-up in a subset of patients in the IBIS-II trial.

METHODS

The double-blind IBIS-II trial recruited 3864 healthy, postmenopausal women at increased risk of breast cancer and randomly allocated them oral anastrozole (1 mg/day) or matched placebo. 1410 (36%) postmenopausal women were then enrolled in a bone substudy and stratified at baseline according to their lowest baseline T score at spine or femoral neck (stratum I: T score at least -1·0; stratum II: T score at least -2·5 but less than -1·0; stratum III: T score less than -2·5 but greater than -4·0). Women in stratum I were monitored only; women in stratum III were all given risedronate (35 mg/week). Women in stratum II were randomly assigned (1:1) to risedronate (35 mg/week) or matched placebo by use of a block randomisation schedule via a web-based programme. The primary outcome of this per-protocol analysis (done with all women with a baseline and 3 year DXA assessment) was the effect of risedronate versus placebo for osteopenic women in stratum II randomly allocated to anastrozole (1 mg/day). Secondary outcomes included effect of anastrozole (1 mg/day) on BMD in women not receiving risedronate (strata I and II) and in osteoporotic women who were all treated with risedronate (stratum III). The trial is ongoing, but no longer recruiting. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN31488319.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 2, 2003, and Sept 30, 2010, 150 (58%) of 260 women in stratum II who had been randomly allocated to anastrozole and either risedronate or placebo had baseline and 3 year assessments. At the lumbar spine, 3 year mean BMD change for the 77 women receiving anastrozole/risedronate was 1·1% (95% CI 0·2 to 2·1) versus -2·6% (-4·0 to -1·3) for the 73 women receiving anastrozole/placebo (p<0·0001). For the total hip, 3 year mean BMD change for women receiving anastrozole/risedronate was -0·7% (-1·6 to 0·2) versus -3·5% (-4·6 to -2·3) for women receiving anastrozole/placebo (p=0·0001). 652 (65%) of 1008 women in strata I and II who were not randomly allocated to risedronate had both baseline and 3 year assessments. Women not receiving risedronate in stratum I and II who received anastrozole (310 women) had a significant BMD decrease after 3 years of follow-up compared with women who received placebo (342 women) at the lumbar spine (-4·0% [-4·5 to -3·4] vs -1·2% [-1·7 to -0·7], p<0·0001) and total hip (-4·0% [-4·4 to -3·6] vs -1·8% [-2·1 to -1·4], p<0·0001). 106 (79%) of 149 women in stratum III had a baseline and a 3 year assessment. The 46 women allocated to anastrozole had a modest BMD increase of 1·2% (-0·1 to 2·6) at the spine compared with a 3·9% (2·6 to 5·2) increase for the 60 women allocated to placebo (p=0·006). For the total hip, a small 0·3% (-0·9 to 1·5) increase was noted for women allocated anastrozole compared with a 1·5% (0·5 to 2·5) increase for women allocated placebo, but the difference was not significant (p=0·12). The most common adverse event reported was arthralgia (stratum I: 94 placebo and 114 anastrozole; stratum II: 39 placebo/placebo, 25 placebo/risedronate, 34 anastrozole/placebo, and 34 anastrozole/risedronate; stratum III: 21 placebo/risedronate, 17 anastrozole/risedronate). Other adverse events included hot flushes, alopecia, abdominal pain, and back pain.

INTERPRETATION

Risedronate counterbalances the effect of anastrozole-induced bone loss in osteopenic and osteoporotic women and might be offered in combination with anastrozole treatment to provide an improved risk-benefit profile.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK (C569/A5032), National Health and Medical Research Council Australia (GNT300755, GNT569213), Sanofi-Aventis, and AstraZeneca.

Longitudinal changes of trabecular bone score after estrogen deprivation: effect of menopause and aromatase inhibition

PURPOSE

To examine the effects of the menopausal transition and treatment with aromatase inhibitors (AI) on trabecular bone score (TBS, a newly proposed index of bone architecture derived from DXA vertebral scans) and vertebral bone mineral density (BMD).

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study on 29 women who became postmenopausal during a mean follow-up of 2.9 years (MP group) and 34 women treated with AI during a mean follow-up of 2.1 years (AI group). BMD was measured by DXA and TBS with a specific software.

RESULTS

TBS decreased after menopause, but the change was significantly lower than that of the lumbar BMD (-4.6 vs. -6.8 %; mean difference: 2.2 %; p = 0.016). An even larger difference was observed in the AI group (-2.1 vs. -5.9 %; mean difference: 3.8 %; p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The decrease of TBS induced by menopause or treatment with AI is significantly lower than that of lumbar BMD.

Aromatase inhibitors associated musculoskeletal disorders and bone fractures in postmenopausal breast cancer patients: a result from Chinese population

As the prognosis of early breast cancer patients improves, the long-term safety of aromatase inhibitors (AIs) is increasingly important. In the present study, we retrospectively investigated the incidences of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) and bone fractures in a cohort of Chinese postmenopausal patients with breast cancer. Data of postmenopausal patients with breast cancer were collected. Among which, 70 patients received AIs therapy (median follow-up of 32.5 months), 52 patients received tamoxifen (TAM), and 89 patients received no endocrine therapy (NE). Baseline characteristics, incidence of MSDs and bone fractures were analyzed and compared. When compared with NE group (40.4 %, 36/89), more patients in AIs group developed MSDs (72.9 %, 51/70, adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 3.30, 95 % confidence interval (CI) = 1.59-6.88, P = 0.001). But no difference was found between TAM group (36.5 %, 19/52, AOR = 0.70, 95 % CI = 0.32-1.52, P = 0.372) and NE group. About 39.7 months after initial AIs therapy, nine patients in AI group developed bone fractures in different sites, and the bone fracture rate was significantly increased (12.9 %, 9/70, adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) = 20.08, 95 % CI = 1.72-234.08, P = 0.017) in comparison with NE group (1.1 %, 1/89). Moreover, the bone fracture rate of TAM group was not different from NE group (1.9 %, 1/52, AHR = 2.64, 95 % CI = 0.14-48.73, P = 0.513). AIs therapy may induce increased rates of MSDs and bone fractures in Chinese population of postmenopausal breast cancer patients, whereas TAM therapy did not help reduce the incidences of MSDs and bone fractures.

Breast cancer risk assessment, prevention, and the future

Today breast cancer remains a major public health problem, although reducing its risk is now an achievable medical objective. Risk-assessment models may be used in estimating a woman's risk for developing breast cancer and to direct suitable candidates for preventive therapy. Researchers are attempting to enhance individualized risk assessment through incorporation of phenotypic biomarkers. Individual selective estrogen receptor modulators have been approved for breast cancer risk reduction, and other drug categories are being studied. It is critical that obstetrician-gynecologists be familiar with the evolving science of the risk assessment of breast cancer as well as interventional and surveillance strategies.

Quality of life in MAP.3 (Mammary Prevention 3): a randomized, placebo-controlled trial evaluating exemestane for prevention of breast cancer

PURPOSE

Exemestane, a steroidal aromatase inhibitor, reduced invasive breast cancer incidence by 65% among 4,560 postmenopausal women randomly assigned to exemestane (25 mg per day) compared with placebo in the National Cancer Institute of Canada (NCIC) Clinical Trials Group MAP.3 (Mammary Prevention 3) trial, but effects on quality of life (QOL) were not fully described.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Menopause-specific and health-related QOL were assessed by using the four Menopause-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (MENQOL) domains and the eight Medical Outcomes Study Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) scales at baseline, 6 months, and yearly thereafter. MENQOL questionnaire completion was high (88% to 98%) in both groups at each follow-up visit. Change scores for each MENQOL and SF-36 scale, calculated at each assessment time relative to baseline, were compared by using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Clinically important worsened QOL was defined as a MENQOL change score increase of more than 0.5 (of 8) points and an SF-36 change score decrease of more than 5 (of 100) points from baseline.

RESULTS

Exemestane had small negative effects on women's self-reported vasomotor symptoms, sexual symptoms, and pain, which occurred mainly in the first 6 months to 2 years after random assignment. However, these changes represented only a small excess number of women being given exemestane with clinically important worsening of QOL at one time or another; specifically, 8% more in the vasomotor domain and 4% more each in the sexual domain and for pain. No other between-group differences were observed. Overall, slightly more women in the exemestane arm (32%) than in the placebo arm (28%) discontinued assigned treatment.

CONCLUSION

Exemestane given for prevention has limited negative impact on menopause-specific and health-related QOL in healthy postmenopausal women at risk for breast cancer.

Vitamin D in the cancer patient

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To briefly review recent work within the vitamin D and cancer field, whereas also providing context relating how these findings may impact clinical care and future research efforts.

RECENT FINDINGS

Vitamin D has now been convincingly shown both in vitro and in preclinical animal models to alter the differentiation, proliferation, and apoptosis of cancer cells. Whether vitamin D prevents cancer in humans or limits cancer progression, however, remain open questions. Epidemiologic and observational data relating circulating 25(OH)D levels and cancer risk suggest an inverse relationship for most cancers including breast, colorectal, leukemia and lymphoma, and prostate, although for each malignancy there also exist studies that have failed to demonstrate such an inverse relationship. Likewise, a more recent report failed to confirm a previously reported association of increased pancreatic cancer risk in patients with higher 25(OH)D levels. A large prospective study in which patients aged at least 50 years receive 2000 IU vitamin D3 daily for 5 years, with cancer as a primary endpoint, has recently been launched.

SUMMARY

Although much effort has attempted to delineate a causal relationship between vitamin D and a wide array of human cancers, we await large-scale randomized controlled trial data for definitive answers.

Effects of adjuvant exemestane versus anastrozole on bone mineral density for women with early breast cancer (MA.27B): a companion analysis of a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Treatment of breast cancer with aromatase inhibitors is associated with damage to bones. NCIC CTG MA.27 was an open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial in which women with breast cancer were assigned to one of two adjuvant oral aromatase inhibitors-exemestane or anastrozole. We postulated that exemestane-a mildly androgenic steroid-might have a less detrimental effect on bone than non-steroidal anastrozole. In this companion study to MA.27, we compared changes in bone mineral density (BMD) in the lumbar spine and total hip between patients treated with exemestane and patients treated with anastrozole.

METHODS

In MA.27, postmenopausal women with early stage hormone (oestrogen) receptor-positive invasive breast cancer were randomly assigned to exemestane 25 mg versus anastrozole 1 mg, daily. MA.27B recruited two groups of women from MA.27: those with BMD T-scores of -2·0 or more (up to 2 SDs below sex-matched, young adult mean) and those with at least one T-score (hip or spine) less than -2·0. Both groups received vitamin D and calcium; those with baseline T-scores of less than -2·0 also received bisphosphonates. The primary endpoints were percent change of BMD at 2 years in lumbar spine and total hip for both groups. We analysed patients according to which aromatase inhibitor and T-score groups they were allocated to but BMD assessments ceased if patients deviated from protocol. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00354302.

FINDINGS

Between April 24, 2006, and May 30, 2008, 300 patients with baseline T-scores of -2·0 or more were accrued (147 allocated exemestane, 153 anastrozole); and 197 patients with baseline T-scores of less than -2·0 (101 exemestane, 96 anastrozole). For patients with T-scores greater than -2·0 at baseline, mean change of bone mineral density in the spine at 2 years did not differ significantly between patients taking exemestane and patients taking anastrozole (-0·92%, 95% CI -2·35 to 0·50 vs -2·39%, 95% CI -3·77 to -1·01; p=0·08). Respective mean loss in the hip was -1·93% (95% CI -2·93 to -0·93) versus -2·71% (95% CI -4·32 to -1·11; p=0·10). Likewise for those who started with T-scores of less than -2·0, mean change of spine bone mineral density at 2 years did not differ significantly between the exemestane and anastrozole treatment groups (2·11%, 95% CI -0·84 to 5·06 vs 3·72%, 95% CI 1·54 to 5·89; p=0·26), nor did hip bone mineral density (2·09%, 95% CI -1·45 to 5·63 vs 0·0%, 95% CI -3·67 to 3·66; p=0·28). Patients with baseline T-score of -2·0 or more taking exemestane had two fragility fractures and two other fractures, those taking anastrozole had three fragility fractures and five other fractures. For patients who had baseline T-scores of less than -2·0 taking exemestane, one had a fragility fracture and four had other fractures, whereas those taking anastrozole had five fragility fractures and one other fracture.

INTERPRETATION

Our results demonstrate that adjuvant treatment with aromatase inhibitors can be considered for breast cancer patients who have T-scores less than -2·0.

FUNDING

Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute, Pfizer, Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

Breast cancer prevention by antihormones and other drugs: where do we stand?

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide. The selective estrogen-receptor (ER) modulators tamoxifen and raloxifene are approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the preventive therapy of breast cancer. Other drugs have shown promise but need further assessment. In the present review, we present an update of the chemoprevention of ER-positive breast cancer and discuss the potential role of metformin and aspirin, 2 drugs other than the specific "antihormones."

Bone mineral density and circulating biomarkers in the BIG 1-98 trial comparing adjuvant letrozole, tamoxifen and their sequences

The purpose of the study is to determine the effects of the BIG 1-98 treatments on bone mineral density. BIG 1-98 compared 5-year adjuvant hormone therapy in postmenopausal women allocated to four groups: tamoxifen (T); letrozole (L); 2-years T, 3-years L (TL); and 2-years L, 3-years T (LT). Bone mineral density T-score was measured prospectively annually by dual energy X-ray absorption in 424 patients enrolled in a sub-study after 3 (n = 150), 4 (n = 200), and 5 years (n = 74) from randomization, and 1 year after treatment cessation. Prevalence of osteoporosis and the association of C-telopeptide, osteocalcin, and bone alkaline phosphatase with T-scores were assessed. At 3 years, T had the highest and TL the lowest T-score. All arms except for LT showed a decline up to 5 years, with TL exhibiting the greatest. At 5 years, there were significant differences on lumbar T-score only between T and TL, whereas for femur T-score, differences were significant for T versus L or TL, and L versus LT. The 5-year prevalence of spine and femur osteoporosis was the highest on TL (14.5 %, 7.1 %) then L (4.3 %, 5.1 %), LT (4.2 %, 1.4 %) and T (4 %, 0). C-telopeptide and osteocalcin were significantly associated with T-scores. While adjuvant L increases bone mineral density loss compared with T, the sequence LT has an acceptable bone safety profile. C-telopeptide and osteocalcin are useful markers of bone density that may be used to monitor bone health during treatment. The sequence LT may be a valid treatment option in patients with low and intermediate risk of recurrence.

Breast cancer and osteoporosis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Over the past few years, a number of studies have examined the relationship between breast cancer and osteoporosis, the effect of breast cancer treatment on bone health, and the effect of osteoporosis therapies on aromatase inhibitor-induced bone loss and breast cancer recurrence. New guidelines have been released on the prevention of osteoporotic fractures in women with breast cancer who are on aromatase inhibitors for adjuvant therapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Despite common factors linking high bone mineral density and increased risk of breast cancer, women with breast cancer are not protected from osteoporosis or osteoporotic fractures. Recent data suggest that aromatase inhibitors have a detrimental effect on bone mineral density and can increase the risk of fractures. Bisphosphonate therapy not only preserves aromatase inhibitor-induced bone loss, but may also improve disease-free survival and decrease risk of death in select women with breast cancer (i.e., postmenopausal women).

SUMMARY

Osteoporosis and breast cancer are common in women, especially in postmenopausal women. Current guidelines suggest that we need to pay special attention to those on aromatase inhibitors to prevent adverse bone outcomes.

Changes in bone mineral density in men starting androgen deprivation therapy and the protective role of vitamin D

SUMMARY

Androgen deprivation therapy in 80 men was associated with declines in bone mineral density (BMD), which were greatest in the first year, and in the lumbar spine compared to controls. Vitamin D use was associated with improved BMD in the lumbar spine and in the first year.

INTRODUCTION

Decreased BMD is a common side effect of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), leading to increased risk of fractures. Although loss of BMD appears to be greatest within the first year of starting ADT, there are few long-term studies of change in BMD, and risk factors for bone loss are not well-characterized.

METHODS

Men aged 50+ with nonmetastatic prostate cancer starting continuous ADT were enrolled in a prospective longitudinal study. BMD was determined by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry at baseline and yearly for 3 years. Matched controls were men with prostate cancer not receiving ADT. Multivariable regression analysis examined predictors of BMD loss.

RESULTS

Eighty ADT users and 80 controls were enrolled (mean age 69 years); 52.5 % had osteopenia and 8.1 % had osteoporosis at baseline. After 1 year, in adjusted models, ADT was associated with significant losses in lumbar spine BMD compared to controls (-2.57 %, p = 0.006), with a trend towards greater declines at the total hip (p = 0.09). BMD changes in years 2 and 3 were much smaller and not statistically different from controls. Use of vitamin D but not calcium was associated with improved BMD in the lumbar spine in year 1 (+6.19 %, p < 0.001) with smaller nonsignificant increases at other sites (+0.86 % femoral neck, +0.86 % total hip, p > 0.10) primarily in the first year.

CONCLUSIONS

Loss of BMD associated with ADT is greatest at the lumbar spine and in the first year. Vitamin D but not calcium may be protective particularly in the first year of ADT use.

Osteoporosis and cancer

Cancer is a major risk factor for bone loss and fractures. This is due both to direct effects of cancer cells on the skeleton and to deleterious effects of cancer-specific therapies on bone cells. Marked improvements in survival for many cancers mean that strategies to limit bone loss and reduce fracture risk must be incorporated into the care plans for nearly all patients with cancer. The vast majority of effort thus far has focused on bone loss in patients with breast and prostate cancers, with comparatively few studies in other malignancies. Antiresorptive therapies have proven nearly universally effective for limiting bone loss in cancer patients, although few studies have been powered sufficiently to include fractures as primary endpoints, and patients are frequently neither identified nor treated according to published guidelines. Nonpharmacologic approaches to limit falls, particularly in elderly patients, are also likely important adjunctive measures for most cancer patients.

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.

Use of Pharmacologic Interventions for Breast Cancer Risk Reduction: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline

Purpose

To update the 2009 American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline on pharmacologic interventions for breast cancer (BC) risk reduction.

Methods

A systematic review of randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses published from June 2007 through June 2012 was completed using MEDLINE and Cochrane Collaboration Library. Primary outcome of interest was BC incidence (invasive and noninvasive). Secondary outcomes included BC mortality, adverse events, and net health benefits. Guideline recommendations were revised based on an Update Committee's review of the literature.

Results

Nineteen articles met the selection criteria. Six chemoprevention agents were identified: tamoxifen, raloxifene, arzoxifene, lasofoxifene, exemestane, and anastrozole.

Recommendations

In women at increased risk of BC age ≥ 35 years, tamoxifen (20 mg per day for 5 years) should be discussed as an option to reduce the risk of estrogen receptor (ER) –positive BC. In postmenopausal women, raloxifene (60 mg per day for 5 years) and exemestane (25 mg per day for 5 years) should also be discussed as options for BC risk reduction. Those at increased BC risk are defined as individuals with a 5-year projected absolute risk of BC ≥ 1.66% (based on the National Cancer Institute BC Risk Assessment Tool or an equivalent measure) or women diagnosed with lobular carcinoma in situ. Use of other selective ER modulators or other aromatase inhibitors to lower BC risk is not recommended outside of a clinical trial. Health care providers are encouraged to discuss the option of chemoprevention among women at increased BC risk. The discussion should include the specific risks and benefits associated with each chemopreventive agent.

Androgens and prostate cancer; pathogenesis and deprivation therapy

Although androgen receptor signaling is critical for prostate cancer growth and survival, evidence supporting a favorable risk-benefit ratio of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is currently limited to men with high-risk or metastatic disease. This is in part because ADT has been associated with a number of constitutional and somatic side effects, consistent with the widespread tissue expression of sex steroid receptors. ADT is the most common contemporary cause of severe hypogonadism, and men receiving this therapy represent a unique model of severe sex steroid deficiency with a defined time of onset. This review will present an update on the role of ADT in the treatment of prostate cancer, will summarize recent evidence regarding ADT-associated adverse effects with particular emphasis on cardiometabolic and musculoskeletal health, and will provide recommendations for further research.

Genetic polymorphism at Val80 (rs700518) of the CYP19A1 gene is associated with aromatase inhibitor associated bone loss in women with ER + breast cancer

PURPOSE

Polymorphisms in the CYP19A1 (aromatase) gene have been reported to influence disease-free survival and the incidence of musculoskeletal complaints in patients taking aromatase inhibitors (AIs) for estrogen receptor positive (ER+) breast cancer. Bone loss and fractures are well-recognized complications from AI therapy. The objective of this study is to determine the influence of polymorphisms in the CYP19A1 gene on bone loss among patients taking aromatase inhibitors for ER+ breast cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The subjects consisted of 97 postmenopausal women with ER+ breast cancer who were initiated on third-generation AIs. Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry at baseline and at 6 and 12 months. Twenty-four hour urine N-telopeptide (NTX) was measured by Elisa and serum estradiol was measured by ultrasensitive radioimmunoassay at baseline, and at 6 months. Genotyping was done by Taqman SNP allelic discrimination assay.

RESULTS

Women with the AA genotype for the rs700518 (G/A at Val(80)) developed significant bone loss at the lumbar spine and the total hip at 12 months relative to patients carrying the G allele (GA/GG); both p = 0.03. There was a borderline greater increase in urinary NTX in those with the AA genotype compared to patients with the G allele, p = 0.05; but no significant difference in changes in estradiol levels among the genotypes.

CONCLUSION

Patients with the AA genotype for the rs700518 polymorphism in the CYP19A1 gene are at risk for AI-associated bone loss and deserve close follow-up during long-term AI therapy.

Chemoprevention of breast cancer

The development of pharmacologic agents for the prevention of breast cancer is a significant milestone in medical and laboratory research. Despite these advances, the endorsement of preventive options has become challenging and complex, as physicians are expected to counsel and tailor their recommendations using a personalized approach taking into account medical comorbidities, degree of risk and patient preferences. This article provides a comprehensive overview of the major breast cancer prevention trials, review of the pharmacologic options available for breast cancer prevention, and strategies for integrating chemoprevention of breast cancer in high-risk women into clinical practice.

Exemestane: one part of the chemopreventive spectrum for ER-positive breast cancer

Development of drugs to prevent breast cancer has focused largely on anti-estrogenic agents, leading to approval by the US FDA of two such agents for this purpose: tamoxifen and raloxifene. However, the uptake of these drugs by high-risk women and their primary care physicians has been limited, due in large part to a perceived unfavorable risk:benefit balance. The current focus is on aromatase inhibitors, which appear to have more acceptable side effects in addition to being more efficacious in reducing breast cancer risk in high-risk women. The placebo-controlled phase III MAP.3 trial tested the AI exemestane in high-risk women and documented a 65% relative reduction in total and a 73% reduction in ER-positive breast cancers in the intervention compared to the placebo group. Toxicities centered around musculoskeletal side effects, but in the relatively short 35-month median follow-up period, these did not impair quality-of-life. A bone study nested within MAP.3 demonstrated significant decreases in bone mineral density (BMD) and in structural parameters of bone quality. The strengths and weaknesses of preventive exemestane as evaluated in the MAP.3 trial are discussed as are relevant areas for future consideration: influence of obesity, alternative dosing, and biomarker use in phase III prevention trials of aromatase inhibitors.

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.

Histomorphometric and microarchitectural analyses using the 2 mm bone marrow trephine in metastatic breast cancer patients-preliminary results

BACKGROUND

Bone-targeted agents are widely used for the treatment of osteoporosis, the prevention of cancer-therapy induced bone loss, and for reducing the risk of skeletal related events in patients with metastatic disease. Despite widespread use, relatively little is known about the in vivo effect of these agents on bone homeostasis, bone quality, and bone architecture in humans. Traditionally bone quality has been assessed using a transiliac bone biopsy with a 7 mm "Bordier" core needle. We examined the possibility of using a 2 mm "Jamshidi" core needle as a more practical and less invasive method to assess bone turnover and potentially other tumor effects.

METHODS

A pilot study on the feasibility of assessing bone quality and microarchitecture and tumor invasion using a 2 mm bone marrow trephine was conducted. Patients underwent a posterior trans-iliac trephine biopsy and bone marrow aspirate. Samples were analyzed for bone microarchitecture, bone density, and histomorphometry. The study plan was to accrue three patients with advanced breast cancer to assess the feasibility of the study before enrolling more patients.

RESULTS

The procedure was well tolerated. The sample quality was excellent to analyze bone trabecular microarchitecture using both microCT and histomorphometry. Intense osteoclastic activity was observed in a patient with extensive tumor burden in bone despite intravenous bisphosphonate therapy.

DISCUSSION

Given the success of this study for assessing bone microarchitecture, bone density, and histomorphometry assessment using a 2 mm needle the study will be expanded beyond these initial three patients for longitudinal assessment of bone-targeted therapy.

HDAC7 inhibits osteoclastogenesis by reversing RANKL-triggered β-catenin switch

The bone-resorbing osteoclast is essential for skeletal remodeling, yet its deregulation contributes to diseases such as osteoporosis and cancer bone metastasis. Here we identify histone deacetylase 7 (HDAC7) as a key negative regulator of osteoclastogenesis and bone resorption using both in vitro cellular and molecular analyses and in vivo characterization of conditional HDAC7-knockout mice. Bone marrow osteoclast differentiation assays reveal that HDAC7 overexpression suppresses, whereas HDAC7 deletion enhances, osteoclastogenesis. Mechanistically, in the absence of receptor activator of nuclear factor κ-B ligand (RANKL), HDAC7 attenuates β-catenin function and cyclin D1 expression, thereby reducing precursor proliferation; upon RANKL activation, HDAC7 suppresses NFATc1 and prevents β-catenin down-regulation, thereby blocking osteoclast differentiation. Consequently, HDAC7 deletion in the osteoclast lineage results in a 26% reduction in bone mass (P = 0.003) owing to 102% elevated bone resorption (P = 0.01). These findings are clinically significant in light of the remarkable therapeutic potentials of HDAC inhibitors for several diseases such as cancer, diabetes, and neurodegeneration.

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.

Treatment-induced bone loss and fractures in cancer patients undergoing hormone ablation therapy: efficacy and safety of denosumab

Hormone ablation therapy (HALT) for breast or prostate cancer accelerates the development of osteoporosis in both men and women by causing estrogen deficiency, which increases the risk for fracture by promoting bone resorption mediated by osteoclasts. Denosumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody that inhibits osteoclast formation and function, increases bone mass in patients undergoing hormone ablation therapy. In the HALT study of 1,468 men with prostate cancer on androgen-deprivation therapy, denosumab significantly reduced the risk of new vertebral fractures, increased bone mineral density (BMD), and reduced markers of bone turnover. In a study of 252 women with breast cancer undergoing adjuvant aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy, denosumab increased BMD at 12 and 24 months, overall and in all patient subgroups. The overall rates of adverse events were similar to placebo. Clinicians should consider fracture risk assessment and therapies such as denosumab to increase bone mass in patients on hormone ablation therapy who are at high risk for fracture.

Clinical evaluation of local ocular toxicity in candidate anti-adenoviral agents in vivo

BACKGROUND

Adenovirus causes ophthalmological nosocomial infections. Although cidofovir may be used systemically for immunocompromised patients in disseminated adenoviral infections, no specific anti-adenoviral agent has been established for the treatment of adenoviral ocular infection. It has been reported that cidofovir may cause lacrimal duct obstruction when used locally. We have reported that zalcitabine and stavudine showed anti-adenoviral activity in vitro. We now evaluate the side effects of these agents in eyes and ocular adnexa in an animal model.

METHODS

Cidofovir, zalcitabine and stavudine 1% solutions and balanced salt solution were given as eye drops to healthy female Japanese albino rabbits 4 times a day for 14 days. Clinical scores in the conjunctiva and eyelid were recorded, and lacrimal irrigation was carried out. The diameter of the lacrimal canaliculus was scanned with an ultrasonograph. Histopathological analysis was carried out in the cidofovir group.

RESULTS

In the cidofovir group, significant narrowing of lacrimal canaliculus, redness of eyelids and conjunctival injection were observed, but no obstruction of the lacrimal duct was found. Histology showed eosinophils, suggesting an allergic inflammation. Although zalcitabine and stavudine induced eyelid redness and conjunctival injection, no change was observed in the lacrimal pathway.

CONCLUSIONS

These drugs may be possible candidates as eye drops for adenoviral conjunctivitis but further study is required to prove its safety.