Palliative pamidronate treatment in patients with bone metastases from breast cancer

Bisphosphonate therapy for patients with breast carcinoma

Bisphosphonates have become well established in the treatment of patients with metastatic bone disease, although the optimal use of these agents has not been defined clearly. Randomized, controlled trials have demonstrated that treatment with intravenous pamidronate can significantly reduce the rate of skeletal-related events in patients with bone metastases from myeloma or advanced breast carcinoma. To date, there are few data from controlled, randomized studies to support the use of bisphosphonates in patients with bone metastases from malignancies other than breast carcinoma and myeloma. The optimal duration of treatment is unknown. Recent data have demonstrated that prolonged treatment is tolerated well, with no obvious toxicity. Generally, treatment is continued irrespective of the development of skeletal-related events and until there is a substantial decline in performance status. The widespread use of bisphosphonates will have major financial implications. Retrospective studies have suggested that the cost-effectiveness ratio is high for patients with advanced breast carcinoma. These ratios may be improved by targeting therapy to patients at high risk of developing complications from skeletal metastatic disease. Among patients with skeletal metastases from breast carcinoma, a recent retrospective analysis demonstrated that patients with disease confined to the skeleton were at greater risk of pathologic fractures compared with patients who had additional extraosseous disease. It is interesting to note that approximately two-thirds of patients with advanced breast carcinoma in the randomized trials of intravenous pamidronate had disease confined to the skeleton. The use of markers of bone turnover to identify patients who are most likely to benefit from bisphosphonate therapy or to identify patients who will respond to such therapy is the subject of further investigation. There are conflicting data on the use of bisphosphonates as an adjuvant therapy. Currently, such treatment should occur only as part of a clinical trial. Bisphosphonates can be used to prevent bone loss as a result of therapy for malignant disease, e.g., premature menopause in patients with early breast carcinoma.

The effect of the bisphosphonate ibandronate on breast cancer metastasis to visceral organs

Bisphosphonate (BPs), specific inhibitors of osteoclastic bone resorption, are widely used therapeutic agents for bone metastases in breast cancer patients. Nevertheless, the effects of BPs on visceral metastases are controversial. Here we specifically studied the effects of the BP ibandronate on visceral metastases of breast cancer using two animal models. In the first set of experiments, we examined the effects of ibandronate on lung metastasis using 4T1 mouse mammary tumor that developed pulmonary and bone metastases following orthotopic inoculation in syngeneic female Balb/c mice. In the second set of experiments, we examined the effects of ibandronate on adrenal metastasis using a clone of the MDA-MB-231 (MDA-231) human breast cancer (MDA-231AD cells) that developed adrenal and bone metastases following intracardiac inoculation in female nude mice. These breast cancer cells were stably transfected with a firefly luciferase cDNA to facilitate quantification of the metastatic tumor burden in visceral organs. Ibandronate (4 microg/day, sc, daily) was given either after metastases were established (therapeutic administration) or at the time of tumor cell inoculation (preventative administration). In both models with each protocol, ibandronate reproducibly reduced bone metastases, establishing that BPs are effective pharmacological agents for the treatment of bone metastases in breast cancer. In the 4T1 model, neither the preventative nor therapeutic administration of ibandronate caused any effects on lung metastases. In the MDA-231 model, the preventative administration of ibandronate significantly increased adrenal metastases. However, no increase in the adrenal metastases was observed when an anti-cancer agent doxorubicin was co-administered. Therapeutic administration of ibandronate showed no effects on the adrenal metastases. Our results suggest that BPs cause no adverse effects on visceral metastases when administered in the manners that breast cancer patients usually receive.

The role of bisphosphonates in breast cancer management: review article

Bone metastases are a common problem in the management of breast cancer and are associated with considerable morbidity. Bone pain, hypercalcaemia, fractures and cord compression all occur requiring interventions such as analgesia, radiotherapy and surgery. Bisphosphonates are drugs that are active in the bone microenvironment. Their effects on osteoclasts are well described: they potently inhibit osteoclast mediated bone resorption by delaying the maturation of immature osteoclasts and by directly inducing osteoclast apoptosis. It has been known for some time that bisphosphonates, in combination with intravenous rehydration, effectively treat hypercalcaemia associated with solid malignancies. It has now been demonstrated In clinical trials in breast cancer patients that regular bisphosphonate administration reduces the morbidity associated with osteolytic skeletal metastases. There is an emerging suggestion from clinical trial work that bisphosphonates may be able to reduce or delay the development of skeletal metastases although this remains controversial as the three published trials present conflicting results. The more potent third-generation bisphosphonates, such as zoledronate, are now being tested for each of these indications with promising results and may replace other bisphosphonates in the future. Laboratory studies have recently demonstrated that bisphosphonates have direct cytotoxic effects against breast cancer cells in vitro, inducing apoptosis and preventing adhesion to bone. This adds support to the hypothesis that bisphosphonates may have a genuine beneficial effect in the adjuvant setting.

Ibandronate treatment decreases the effects of tumor-associated lesions on bone density and strength in the rat

Bisphosphonate treatment is beneficial against symptoms of metastatic bone disease, although less is known about the effect of preventative treatment schedules. We investigated the effect of various treatment regimens of the bisphosphonate, ibandronate (IB), on the preservation of bone quality in a rat model of tumor-induced osteolysis. Osteolytic Walker 256 (W256) carcinosarcoma cells were implanted into the left femur of female Sprague-Dawley rats, resulting in a 10% reduction in bone mineral density (BMD), a 16% reduction in bone density (BD), and a 26% reduction in failure load compared with the right femur 28 days after implantation. IB was administered subcutaneously in five different treatment schedules: (1) IB PRE-POST received IB for 26 days, prior to implantation of W256 cells in the medullary canal of the femur, and for 28 additional days after surgery; (2) IB PRE-POST SHAM received the same IB administration, but with a sham operation; (3) IB PRE received IB injections before W256 cell insertion only; (4) IB PRE-0 received IB injections for 26 days and was then killed to serve as a time zero control; and (5) IB POST received sham injection with saline before W256 cell insertion, and then received IB injections for 28 days until killing. Controls (TUMOR ONLY) received sham injections with saline prior to W256 cell insertion, and then for 28 additional days until killing. We used dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) to measure distal femur BMD and bone mineral content (BMC), peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT) to measure distal femur BD, and torsion testing to obtain torsional failure load. Combined preventative and interventional IB treatment best preserved bone mass and strength, although all treatment schedules resulted in significant improvement compared with untreated controls (TUMOR ONLY). The possibility of reducing or even preventing skeletal morbidity in cancer patients with a high risk of developing metastatic spreading to bone is exciting, and warrants further exploration.

Bisphosphonates for the relief of pain secondary to bone metastases

BACKGROUND

Bisphosphonates form part of standard therapy for hypercalcemia and the prevention of skeletal events in some cancers. However, the role of bisphosphonates in pain relief for bony metastases remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of bisphosphonates for the relief of pain from bone metastases.

SEARCH STRATEGY

MEDLINE (1966-1999), EMBASE (1980-1999), CancerLit (1966-1999), the Cochrane library (Issue 1, 2000) and the Oxford Pain Database were searched using the strategy devised by the Cochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care Group with additional terms 'diphosphonate', 'bisphosphonate', 'multiple myeloma' and 'bone neoplasms'. (Last search: January 2000).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials of bisphosphonates compared with open, blinded, or different doses/types of bisphosphonates in cancer patients were included where pain and/or analgesic consumption were outcome measures. Studies where pain was reported only by observers were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Article eligibility, quality assessment and data extraction were undertaken by both reviewers. The proportions of patients with pain relief at 4, 8 and 12 weeks were assessed. The proportion of patients with analgesic reduction, the mean pain score, mean analgesic consumption, adverse drug reactions, and quality of life data were compared as secondary outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty randomized controlled studies (21 blinded, four open and five active control) with a total of 3682 subjects were included. For each outcome, there were few studies with available data. For the proportion of patients with pain relief (eight studies) pooled data showed benefits for the treatment group, with an NNT at 4 weeks of 11[95% CI 6-36] and at 12 weeks of 7 [95% CI 5-12]. In terms of adverse drug reactions, the NNH was 16 [95% CI 12-27] for discontinuation of therapy. Nausea and vomiting were reported in 24 studies with a non-significant trend for greater risk in the treatment group. One study showed a small improvement in quality of life for the treatment group at 4 weeks. The small number of studies in each subgroup with relevant data limited our ability to explore the most effective bisphosphonates and their relative effectiveness for different primary neoplasms.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence to support the effectiveness of bisphosphonates in providing some pain relief for bone metastases. There is insufficient evidence to recommend bisphosphonates for immediate effect; as first line therapy; to define the most effective bisphosphonates or their relative effectiveness for different primary neoplasms. Bisphosphonates should be considered where analgesics and/or radiotherapy are inadequate for the management of painful bone metastases.

Actions of bisphosphonates in animal models of breast cancer

The skeleton is the most common site of breast cancer metastases. These bone metastases are usually osteolytic and cause significant morbidity. Bisphosphonates, potent inhibitors of bone resorption, reduce skeletal morbidity in breast cancer patients with bone metastases. Animal studies with bisphosphonates are crucial to understanding the mechanisms by which these compounds affect bone and tumor cells in vivo. Such animal models of breast cancer that are used to test the efficacy of bisphosphonates are discussed. These studies may offer insight into the treatment of other tumor types that frequently metastasize to bone.

Bisphosphonates for breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Bone is the most common site of metastatic disease associated with breast cancer, and affects more than half of women during the course of their disease. Bone metastases are a significant cause of morbidity due to pain, pathological fractures, hypercalcaemia and spinal cord compression, and contribute to mortality. Bisphosphonates, which inhibit osteoclast-mediated bone resorption, are standard care for tumour-associated hypercalcaemia, and have been shown to reduce bone pain, improve quality of life, and to delay skeletal events and reduce their number in patients with multiple myeloma. Several randomized controlled trials have evaluated the role of bisphosphonates in breast cancer.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review was to identify, describe and summarize high-quality evidence regarding the effect of bisphosphonates on skeletal events, bone pain, quality of life and survival in women with early and advanced breast cancer.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Randomized controlled trials were identified in the specialized register maintained by the secretariat of the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group (the search was applied to the databases Medline, Central/CCTR, Embase, CancerLit, and included handsearches from a number of other relevant sources). See: Cochrane Collaboration Collaborative Review Group in Breast Cancer search strategy.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials evaluating skeletal events in women with metastatic breast cancer and in women with early breast cancer comparing: 1. treatment with a bisphosphonate with the same treatment without a bisphosphonate 2. treatment with one bisphosphonate with treatment with a different bisphosphonate.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies were selected by two independent reviewers. Studies fulfilling the eligibility criteria were evaluated for quality, particularly concealment of allocation to randomized groups. Data were extracted from the published papers or abstracts independently by the two primary reviewers for each of the specified endpoints (skeletal events, bone pain, quality of life and survival). Data on skeletal events and survival were presented as numbers of events, risk ratios and ratios of event rates. Meta-analyses were based on the fixed-effects model (Mantel-Haenszel). Subjective qualitative ratings were used to summarize the quality of life and pain data.

MAIN RESULTS

From 37 reports considered in detail after screening of the 117 reports identified by our search, 19 randomized studies were included. In eight studies that included 1962 women with advanced breast cancer and existing bone metastases, bisphosphonates reduced the risk of developing a skeletal event by 14% (RR 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80-0.91; P < 0.00001). This effect was more modest, but still highly significant if episodes of hypercalcaemia were excluded (6 studies, 1553 women, RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.81-0.96; P = 0.004). For intravenous pamidronate the reduction in the risk of skeletal event was greatest with a dosage of 90 mg (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.69-0.87). Oral bisphosphonates reduced the risk of a skeletal event by 17% (pooled RR 0.83; 95% CI 0.73-0.94, P = 0.004). Oral clodronate reduced the risk of a skeletal event by 16% in women with advanced breast cancer and clinically evident bone metastases (pooled RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.72-0.98; P = 0.03). Compared with placebo or no bisphosphonate, with bisphosphonates the skeletal event rate was lower in all of eight studies (median reduction of 30%, range 20-48%); statistically significant reductions were reported in six trials (three intravenous pamidronate, two oral clodronate and one intravenous ibandronate). All studies of intravenous pamidronate and oral clodronate in women with advanced breast cancer and clinically evident bone metastases showed significant delays in the median time to a skeletal event. Event-free survival was reported to be longer in women receiving 6 mg of ibandronate compared with control women. Compared with placebo or no bisphosphonate, with bisphosphonates significant improvements in pain were reported in four studies, and improvements in quality of life were reported in two studies. Treatment with bisphosphonates does not appear to affect survival in women with advanced breast cancer. Intravenous zolendronate (4 mg) appeared to have equivalent efficacy when compared with intravenous pamidronate in a single randomized double-blind study. In the three studies of bisphosphonates in 320 women with advanced breast cancer without clinically evident bone metastases, there was no significant reduction in the incidence of skeletal events (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.67-1.47; P > 0.9). In three studies of oral clodronate that included 1680 women with early breast cancer, there was borderline evidence of a reduction in the risk of developing skeletal metastases (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.55-0.98; P = 0.04), but there was significant heterogeneity among these studies (P = 0.035). Toxicity or adverse events were described in 14 of the 19 studies. In general, few adverse events were reported.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

In women with advanced breast cancer and clinically evident bone metastases, the use of bisphosphonates (oral or intravenous) in addition to hormone therapy or chemotherapy, when compared with placebo or no bisphosphonates, reduces the risk of developing a skeletal event and the skeletal event rate, as well as increasing the time toskeletal event. Bisphosphonates may also reduce bone pain in women with advanced breast cancer and clinically evident bone metastases. In women with early breast cancer the effectiveness of oral clodronate in reducing the incidence of bone metastases remains an open question for research.

Novel therapeutic approaches to cancer patients with bone metastasis

Bone metastases are a common event in advanced cancer. Breast, lung, prostate and thyroid neoplasms have striking osteotropism. Bone metastatic cancer may be associated with catastrophic consequences for the patients. Therefore, new strategies are warranted in order to reduce the incidence of bone metastases and to palliative established skeletal disease. External beam radiation therapy, endocrine treatments, chemotherapy, bisphosphonates and radioisotopes are all important. Bisphosphonates have become the treatment of choice for tumor-induced hypercalcaemia and more recently they have been used alone or in combination with cytotoxic agents in the palliative treatment of patients with bone metastases. The results are encouraging. Currently, new bisphosphonates that are a hundred times more powerful with respect to clodronate and pamidronate are under investigation. The treatment of metastases to bone and mechanisms of pain relief after radiation therapy are poorly understood. Up to date, there are not standard criteria for the irradiation of bone metastases and bone pain relief may be reached using a variety of fractionation schemes. Radionuclide therapy is the systemic use of radioisotopes for bone pain. It is currently regarded as suitable for comparison with wide-field irradiation, but appears to have major disadvantages in terms of pain relief and toxicity.

Long-term impact of chemotherapy-induced ovarian failure on bone mineral density (BMD) in premenopausal breast cancer patients. The effect of adjuvant clodronate treatment

We present the 5-year results of the effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on bone mineral density (BMD) and the efficacy of clodronate in the prevention of bone loss in 73 premenopausal women with primary breast cancer. All patients were treated with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil (CMF) chemotherapy. The patients were randomised to oral clodronate 1600 mg daily for 3 years or to a control group. At 5 years, patients were divided into those with preserved menstruation and those with amenorrhoea. Changes in BMD correlated significantly with the menstrual function after chemotherapy. The change in the lumbar spine BMD at 3 and 5 years were +0.6 and -1.3% in the menstruating group and -7.5 and -10.4% in the amenorrhoeic group (P=0.0001 and 0.0001, respectively), and in femoral neck +1.7 and -0.3%, and -3.5 and -5.8% (P=0.002 and P=0.001, respectively). Three-year clodronate treatment significantly reduced the bone loss in the lumbar spine -3.0% compared with controls -7.4% at three years (P=0.003), but no significant difference was found in the femoral neck: -1.7% versus -2.8%, respectively (P=0.86). These differences between the study groups were still seen at 5 years: in the lumbar spine -5.8% versus -9.7% (P=0.008) and femoral neck -3.5% versus -5.1% (P=0.91). In conclusion, chemotherapy-induced ovarian failure in premenopausal women caused a temporary accelerated bone loss of the lumbar spine. Adjuvant clodronate treatment significantly reduced this bone loss. Two years after the termination of treatment, the bone loss was still significantly less in the clodronate group compared with the control group.

The role of bisphosphonates as adjuvant therapy for breast cancer

Bone is the most common site of distant recurrence in breast cancer. The development of skeletal metastases involves complex interactions between the cancer cells and the bone microenvironment. The presence of tumor in bone is associated with activation of osteoclasts, resulting in excessive bone resorption. Bisphosphonates are potent inhibitors of osteoclastic bone resorption with proven efficacy in reducing tumor-associated skeletal complications. Several studies have investigated the adjuvant, or preventive, use of these drugs in breast cancer. Laboratory experiments have shown that the development of bone metastases can be inhibited by bisphosphonates. Three randomized clinical trials of bisphosphonates in nonmetastatic breast cancer patients have yielded conflicting results with respect to development of osseous and visceral metastases and survival. Defining the potential role of these agents in adjuvant breast cancer treatment requires further investigation in randomized, large-scale, multicenter clinical trials. The data available to date provide a strong impetus for continued clinical and laboratory work with bisphosphonates in breast cancer.

Bone disease in myeloma

The major clinical manifestation of multiple myeloma results from osteolytic bone destruction. The only currently Food and Drug Administration-approved drug for the treatment of the bony complications of multiple myeloma is monthly intravenous pamidronate at a dose of 90 mg infused over 4 hours. Recent studies have shown the safety of 2-hour infusions. A randomized trial comparing pamidronate to placebo continued to show benefits throughout the 21-month trial. Although the duration of therapy has not been firmly determined, it is likely that discontinuation of this drug will be met by enhanced bone loss and an increased risk of bony complications for these patients. Thus, it is recommended that the drug be continued indefinitely. Support for this recommendation also comes from the reduced bone density observed in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis following the withdrawal of bisphosphonate treatment. Recent attempts to give higher doses, more frequent infusions (every 2 weeks or less), or more rapid infusions (1 hour or less) of pamidronate have occasionally been associated with albuminuria and azotemia. These modifications should therefore be avoided. Importantly, the drug can be safely administered at 90 mg monthly to patients with poor renal function. The use of pamidronate for myeloma patients without lytic bone involvement or with Durie-Salmon stages I or II disease has not been evaluated. However, it is recognized that most patients with earlier stages of disease or without lytic bone involvement also develop bony complications. There is no reason to believe that these patients would not benefit from monthly intravenous infusions of pamidronate. The potential antimyeloma effect of this agent is another reason to administer this drug in these types of patients. Thus, it is our practice to administer monthly pamidronate to myeloma patients regardless of stage or bone involvement. However, trials evaluating oral bisphosphonates have produced inconsistent clinical results, probably as a result of the erratic and scanty poor absorption as well as poor oral tolerability of these drugs. Although these oral agents may be useful in some patients, it is impossible to identify which myeloma patients will benefit from orally administered bisphosphonates. The more potent nitrogen-containing bisphosphonate zoledronic acid more effectively reverses hypercalcemia of malignancy than pamidronate, and it appears promising in reducing bone loss in cancer patients. However, its efficacy in preventing skeletal complications is still being evaluated. Many other types of new agents are in early clinical trials, but their efficacy remains unproven at the present time.

Opioid poorly-responsive cancer pain. Part 3. Clinical strategies to improve opioid responsiveness

Some pain syndromes may be difficult to treat due to a poor response to opioids. This situation demands a range of alternative measures, including the use of adjuvant drugs with independent effects, such as antidepressants, sodium channel-blocking agents, steroids and anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs); drugs that reduce opioid side effects; and drugs that enhance analgesia produced by opioids, such as N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) antagonists, calcium channel antagonists, and clonidine. Other approaches, including opioid trials, neural blockade when necessary, and psychological interventions, also may be useful.

A Phase I, open label, dose ranging trial of intravenous bolus zoledronic acid, a novel bisphosphonate, in cancer patients with metastatic bone disease

BACKGROUND

Bone metastases typically are associated with osteolytic bone destruction, resulting in bone pain, pathologic fractures, spinal cord compression, and hypercalcemia. Bisphosphonates are potent inhibitors of normal and pathologic bone resorption and represent a significant therapeutic improvement in the management of patients with lytic bone metastases. Zoledronic acid is a new-generation, highly potent, nitrogen-containing bisphosphonate that to the authors knowledge is the most potent inhibitor of bone resorption currently in clinical trials. The objectives of the current study were to assess the safety and tolerability of increasing doses of zoledronic acid and to determine its activity with respect to reducing biochemical markers of bone resorption in cancer patients with bone metastases.

METHODS

Forty-four cancer patients with bone metastases or primary bone lesions were enrolled sequentially into 1 of 5 fixed ascending-dose treatment groups. Each patient received a single intravenous bolus injection of 1, 2, 4, 8, or 16 mg of zoledronic acid over 30-60 seconds. Patients were monitored for 8 weeks for the evaluation of clinical findings, adverse events, vital signs, electrocardiograms, markers of bone resorption, and urinary N-acetyl-beta-D-glucosaminidase.

RESULTS

Zoledronic acid was safe and well tolerated at all dose levels tested. Commonly reported adverse events included bone pain, fever, anorexia, constipation, and nausea, which were experienced by a similar proportion of patients in each treatment group. Seven patients reported serious adverse events, none of which appeared to be related to the study drug. Zoledronic acid effectively suppressed biochemical markers of bone resorption, including the highly specific markers N-telopeptide and deoxypyridinoline, for up to 8 weeks in the 2-16-mg dose groups and for a shorter duration in the 1-mg group.

CONCLUSIONS

In the current study, zoledronic acid was safe and well tolerated and demonstrated potent inhibition of bone resorption. The authors believe it may improve the treatment of metastatic bone disease.

Adjuvant clodronate treatment does not reduce the frequency of skeletal metastases in node-positive breast cancer patients: 5-year results of a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

Bisphosphonates have effectively reduced the development and progression of bone metastases in advanced breast cancer. The aim of this study was to determine whether bone metastases could be prevented by adjuvant clodronate treatment in patients with primary breast cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between 1990 and 1993, 299 women with primary node-positive breast cancer were randomized to clodronate (n = 149) or control groups (n = 150). Clodronate 1,600 mg daily was given orally for 3 years. All patients received adjuvant therapy: premenopausal six cycles of CMF chemotherapy and postmenopausal antiestrogens (randomized to tamoxifen 20 mg or toremifene 60 mg/d for 3 years). Seventeen patients were excluded from the analyses because of major protocol violations. The final population was 282 patients. Intent-to-treat analyses were also performed for all major end points. The follow-up time was 5 years for all patients.

RESULTS

Bone metastases were detected equally often in the clodronate and control groups: 29 patients (21%) versus 24 patients (17%) (P: = .27). The development of nonskeletal recurrence was significantly higher in the clodronate group compared with controls: 60 patients (43%) versus 36 patients (25%) (P: = .0007). The overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rates were also significantly lower in the clodronate group than in the controls (OS, 70% v 83%, P: = .009; DFS, 56% v 71%, P: = .007, respectively). In multivariate analyses, clodronate remained significantly associated with DFS (P: = .009).

CONCLUSION

Adjuvant clodronate treatment does not prevent the development of bone metastases in node-positive breast cancer patients. However, clodronate seems to have a negative effect on DFS by increasing the development of nonskeletal metastases.

Antalgic treatment of pain associated with bone metastases

Pain from metastases of primitive cancer is the first symptom of disease in 15--20% of patients and remains the most common cause of cancer-related pain. 30--70% of patients have metastases at diagnosis, and 80% of them at the moment of death. Functional impairment of skeleton, neurologic symptoms, pathological fractures and pain are the most important indications for palliative treatment which should result in tumor regression, relief in cancer-related symptoms and maintainance of functional integrity. Bone metastases are treated with the systemic therapies including radiotherapy, hormonal manipulation, biphosphonates, calcitonin, surgical treatment, and chemotherapy. Conventional use of opioids or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs does not always produce satisfactory analgesic result in treated patients because of incidental and intermittent nature of pain and unacceptable side effects. Alternative strategies (peripheric and central nerve blocks, neurolysis) are frequently required. A proper use of different modalities of treatment enhances the probability of achieving relief of pain and maintaining an acceptable quality of life.

Using bisphosphonates to control the pain of bone metastases: evidence-based guidelines for palliative care

This work was undertaken by the Science Committee of the Association for Palliative Medicine of Great Britain and Ireland (APM) as a demonstration project in developing clinical guidelines relevant to palliative care from a pragmatic approach to literature review and grading of clinical evidence. CANCERLIT and Embase were searched for relevant papers written in English, published since 1980. Each study identified was rated against agreed criteria for levels of evidence. Most studies were not specifically designed to define speed of response, and were not undertaken in palliative care patients. Thus, careful reading and grading of each study was necessary. Sufficient evidence was identified to make recommendations for clinical practice in a palliative care population of patients, and areas for future research have been identified. Bisphosphonates appear to have a role in managing pain from metastases which has been refractory to conventional analgesic management and where oncological or orthopaedic intervention is delayed or inappropriate.

Palliation of bone metastases: a survey of patterns of practice among Canadian radiation oncologists

BACKGROUND

Palliative radiotherapy constitutes nearly 50% of the workload in radiotherapy. Surveys on the patterns of practice in radiotherapy have been published from North America and Europe. Our objective was to determine the current pattern of practice of radiation oncologists in Canada for the palliation of bone metastases.

METHOD

A survey was sent to 300 practicing radiation oncologists in Canada. Five case scenarios were presented. The first three were patients with a single symptomatic site: breast cancer patient with pelvic metastasis, lung cancer male with metastasis to L3 and L1, respectively. The last two were breast and prostate cancer patients with multiple symptomatic bone metastases.

RESULTS

A total of 172 questionnaires were returned (57%) for a total of 860 responses. For the three cases with a single painful bone metastasis, over 98% would prescribe radiotherapy. The doses ranged from a single 8 to 30 Gy in ten fractions. Of the 172 respondents, 117 (68%) would use the same dose fractionation for all three cases, suggesting that they had a standard dose fractionation for palliative radiotherapy. The most common dose fractionation was 20 Gy in five fractions used by 84/117 (72%), and 8 Gy in one fraction by 19/117 (16%). In all five case scenarios, 81% would use a short course of radiotherapy (single 8 Gy, 17%; 20 Gy in five fractions, 64%), while 10% would prescribe 30 Gy in ten fractions. For the two cases with diffuse symptomatic bone metastases, half body irradiation (HBI) and radionuclides were recommended more frequently in prostate cancer than in breast cancer (46/172 vs. 4/172, P<0. 0001; and 93/172 vs. 10/172, P<0.0001, respectively). Strontium was the most commonly recommended radionuclide (98/103=95%). Since systemic radionuclides are not readily available in our health care system, 41/98 (42%) of radiation oncologists who would recommend strontium were not familiar with the dose. Bisphosphonates were recommended more frequently in breast cancer than in prostate cancer 13/172 (8%) vs. 1/172 (0.6%), P=0.001.

CONCLUSION

Local field external radiotherapy remains the mainstay of therapy, and the most common fractionation for bone metastases in Canada is 20 Gy in five fractions compared with 30 Gy in ten fractions in the US. Despite randomized trials showing similar results for single compared with fractionated radiotherapy, the majority of us still advocate five fractions. The frequency of employing a single fractionation has not changed since the last national survey in 1992. Nearly 70% use a standard dose fractionation to palliate localized painful metastasis by radiotherapy, independent of the site of involvement or tumor type. The pattern of practice of palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases in Canada is different to that reported previously from the US. The reasons why the results of randomized studies on bone metastases have no impact on the patterns of practice are worth exploring.

Predictors of skeletal complications in patients with metastatic breast carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The high rate of incidence of skeletal complications in women with metastatic breast carcinoma appears to contribute significantly to their morbidity. Although recent trials have demonstrated the efficacy of bisphosphonates in preventing skeletal complications in selected patients, to the authors' knowledge the incidence rate of skeletal complications in an unselected population of women with metastatic breast carcinoma is unknown. The current study was designed to examine the incidence rate of skeletal complications in a large unselected group of women with metastatic breast carcinoma to determine predictors of these complications.

METHODS

All women (n = 718) diagnosed with metastatic breast carcinoma between 1981-1991 at the study institution were studied retrospectively.

RESULTS

Greater than 50% of the women developed skeletal complications; among these women, 51% had > 1 complication. Approximately 80% of those with bone-limited disease at the time of diagnosis developed complications, as did 60% of those with bone and visceral disease and 21% of those with no bone disease. By univariate analysis, the site of initial metastatic disease, abnormal alkaline phosphatase, and a disease free interval of < 3 years were predictive of skeletal complications. Multivariate analysis revealed that bone involvement at the time of diagnosis was predictive of subsequent skeletal complications.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large retrospective study with extensive follow-up, skeletal complications were extremely common and repetitive, although complications predated patient death by >/= 1 year in the group of women presenting with any bone disease. The presence of bone disease at the time of initial presentation was predictive of skeletal complications. In this group of patients, the authors were unable to identify a subgroup with a low rate of skeletal complications.

Bisphosphonates and the prevention of metastasis: first evidences from preclinical and clinical studies

BACKGROUND

Bisphosphonates have been used successfully for many years in the treatment of hypercalcemia and to reduce skeletal-related complications of metastases. In the first years of bisphosphonate use, the efficacy of these substances was thought to lie purely in the inhibition of osteoclasts. However, there is recent evidence to suggest that an antitumor effect also may play a role. As well as having an apoptotic and antiproliferative effect on osteoclasts, bisphosphonates may exert a similar influence on macrophages and tumor cells.

METHODS

The current investigation summarizes all results published to date that deal with the potential antitumor properties of the bisphosphonates. On the one hand, these include results from basic research into the action mechanism and preventative models in animals. In addition, the results of initial clinical experience with metastasis prophylaxis with bisphosphonates in breast carcinoma patients are presented and interpreted.

RESULTS

Improvements in the survival time of certain subpopulations have been found in many Phase III studies with bisphosphonates to date, both in the setting of metastatic breast carcinoma and in multiple myeloma. Some preclinical studies showed that down-regulation of bone metabolism by bisphosphonates is associated with a lower incidence of bone metastases and destruction in animals, whereas activation is correlated with a higher number of metastases. However, varying results were found in animal experiments with regard to the effect of bisphosphonates on the incidence and growth pattern of nonosseous metastases. The results of three randomized studies in patients with primary breast carcinoma in which patients received 1600 mg clodronate orally have now been evaluated and presented. All three studies arrived at different results. Because the dose was identical in all three studies, the differing results can only be either random or methodologic (inclusion criteria, sample size, etc.).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the results are very promising but need confirmation in further studies. At the moment, we have more open than answered questions. First, it is unclear whether this type of adjuvant therapy with bisphosphonates should be given continually by the oral route, or whether an intravenous interval therapy could produce the same results. It is also uncertain whether the doses used in a palliative setting are optimal or whether lower doses might also suffice. The optimum period of adjuvant treatment is also subject to debate. What is clear, however, is that confirmation of the initial clinical results will open a new chapter in the treatment of malignant tumors.

Bisphosphonates in the adjuvant treatment of cancer: experimental evidence and first clinical results. International Bone and Cancer Study Group (IBCG)

Several animal models, as well as a number of cell culture experiments, indicate a prophylactic effect of bisphosphonates in respect of subsequent bone metastasis. Moreover, in preliminary clinical trials involving patients with advanced breast cancer and local or remote metastases, biophosphonates produced a reduction in new skeletal metastases. This overview summarizes and discusses the results of the latest investigations. It opens with a section on the pathophysiology of bone metastasis, which is followed by a report on animal models and first studies of bisphosphonate treatment as a new approach in systemic adjuvant therapy.

Treatment of metastatic bone disease in breast cancer: bisphosphonates

Like other metastases, bone metastases in breast cancer patients are not only a sign of the incurable nature of the underlying disease, but are also associated with specific complications. In particular, bone pain and pathological fractures impair the quality of life of those affected. Any treatment concept must, therefore, place the highest priority on preventing or reducing skeletal complications. There are two treatment options--local and systemic. Local therapy includes radiotherapy as well as surgical and orthopedic measures. The four pillars of systemic treatment are hormone therapy, chemotherapy, antiresorptive therapy with bisphosphonates, and treatment with centrally and/or peripherally acting analgesics. A precondition for successful treatment is close cooperation between medical/clinical oncologists, radiotherapists, surgeons/orthopedists, gynecologists, pain specialists, and endocrinologists (in the presence of a hypercalcemic syndrome). Patients with breast cancer associated solely with osseous metastasis may live for a number of years. It is, therefore, all the more important to start appropriate therapeutic measures early. Bisphosphonates play a particularly valuable role, since their main effect lies in the prevention of skeletal complications. Rather than replacing antineoplastic therapy, this class of substances supplements other treatments. Once started, bisphosphonate therapy should be given for the remainder of the patient's life, even in the event of osseous progression.

American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline on the role of bisphosphonates in breast cancer. American Society of Clinical Oncology Bisphosphonates Expert Panel

PURPOSE

To determine clinical practice guidelines for the use of bisphosphonates in the prevention and treatment of bone metastases in breast cancer and their role relative to other therapies for this condition.

METHODS

An expert multidisciplinary panel reviewed pertinent information from the published literature and meeting abstracts through May 1999. Additional data collected as part of randomized trials and submitted to the United States Food and Drug Administration were also reviewed, and investigators were contacted for more recent information. Values for levels of evidence and grade of recommendation were assigned by expert reviewers and approved by the panel. Expert consensus was used if there were insufficient published data. The panel addressed which patients to treat and when in their course of disease, specific drug delivery issues, duration of therapy, management of bony metastases with other therapies, and the public policy implications. The guideline underwent external review by selected physicians, members of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Health Services Research Committee, and the ASCO Board of Directors.

RESULTS

Bisphosphonates have not had an impact on the most reliable cancer end point: overall survival. The benefits have been reductions in skeletal complications, ie, pathologic fractures, surgery for fracture or impending fracture, radiation, spinal cord compression, and hypercalcemia. Intravenous (IV) pamidronate 90 mg delivered over 1 to 2 hours every 3 to 4 weeks is recommended in patients with metastatic breast cancer who have imaging evidence of lytic destruction of bone and who are concurrently receiving systemic therapy with hormonal therapy or chemotherapy. For women with only an abnormal bone scan but without bony destruction by imaging studies or localized pain, there is insufficient evidence to suggest starting bisphosphonates. Starting bisphosphonates in patients without evidence of bony metastasis, even in the presence of other extraskeletal metastases, is not recommended. Studies of bisphosphonates in the adjuvant setting have yielded inconsistent results. Starting bisphosphonates in patients at any stage of their nonosseous disease, outside of clinical trials, despite a high risk for future bone metastasis, is currently not recommended. Oral bisphosphonates are one of several options which can be used for preservation of bone density in premenopausal patients with treatment-induced menopause. The panel suggests that, once initiated, IV bisphosphonates be continued until evidence of substantial decline in a patient's general performance status. The panel stresses that clinical judgment must guide what is a substantial decline. There is no evidence addressing the consequences of stopping bisphosphonates after one or more adverse skeletal events. Symptoms in the spine, pelvis, or femur require careful evaluation for spinal cord compression and pathologic fracture before bisphosphonate use and if symptoms recur, persist, or worsen during therapy. The panel recommends that current standards of care for cancer pain, analgesics and local radiation therapy, not be displaced by bisphosphonates. IV pamidronate is recommended in women with pain caused by osteolytic metastasis to relieve pain when used concurrently with systemic chemotherapy and/or hormonal therapy, since it was associated with a modest pain control benefit in controlled trials.

CONCLUSION

Bisphosphonates provide a meaningful supportive but not life-prolonging benefit to many patients with bone metastases from cancer. Further research is warranted to identify clinical predictors of when to start and stop therapy, to integrate their use with other treatments for bone metastases, to identify their role in the adjuvant setting in preventing bone metastases, and to better determine their cost-benefit consequences.

Antitumour effects of bisphosphonates: first evidence and possible mechanisms

Bisphosphonates have been used successfully for many years in the treatment of hypercalcaemia and to reduce skeletal complications of metastases. In the first years of bisphosphonate use the efficacy of these substances was thought to lie purely in the inhibition of osteoclasts. However, there is recent evidence to suggest that an antitumour effect may also play a role. As well as having an apoptotic and antiproliferative effect on osteoclasts, bisphosphonates may exert a similar influence on macrophages and tumour cells. Whether this effect (at low doses) also plays a role in vivo remains unclear and requires further investigation. Improvements in the survival time of certain subpopulations have been found in many phase III studies with bisphosphonates to date, both in the setting of metastatic breast cancer and in multiple myeloma. However, because survival time in subgroups of patients was neither a primary nor a secondary objective in these studies, these advantages could only be seen as important pointers for future studies. Some preclinical studies have shown that down-regulation of bone metabolism by bisphosphonates is associated with a lower incidence of bone metastases and destruction in animals, whereas activation is correlated with a higher number of metastases. However, varying results were found in animal experiments with regard to the effect of bisphosphonates on the incidence and growth pattern of non-osseous metastases. The results of 3 randomised studies in patients with primary breast cancer who received clodronate 1600 mg/day orally have now been evaluated and presented. All 3 studies arrived at different results. In the Heidelberg study there was a reduction in both osseous and non-osseous metastases, whereas in a much larger study performed in Great Britain, Canada and Scandinavia there was a reduction only in the incidence of skeletal metastases. A third study from Finland found no effect on bone metastases, but an increase in the number of visceral metastases and a deterioration in overall survival. Because the dosage was identical in all 3 studies, the differing results can only be either random or methodological (for example inclusion criteria or sample size). Overall, the results are very promising, but there is a need for further studies.

New Treatment Strategy for Bone Metastases from Breast Cancer

Breast cancer patients frequently develop bone metastasis. Parathyroid hormone-related protein, an osteoclast activating factor, might be necessary for tumorto erode bone and grow at skeletal site. Bisphosphonates have an affinity for bone and are potent inhibitors of osteoclastic bone resorption. In light of this,53 patients with bone metastasis from breast cancer were treated with chemoendocrine(mainly high-dose medroxyprogesterone acetate as the endocrine therapy) therapy + bisphosphonate (pamidronate, Aredia (R)). During the previous 6 years (median 27 months), 53 breast cancer patients with bone metastasis were treated with pamidronate + chemoendocrine therapy. The regimen consisting of pamidronate + chemoendocrine agent was administered to 27 patients as a post relapse first-line regimen and to the remaining 26 cases, which failed first- or second-line treatment as a second or third line regimen. As a result of the combination therapy, sclerotic changes were observed in the osteolytic lesions in 31 of the 53 patients (59%). The effect on the osteolytic lesions did not correlate with the duration of disease free interval, estrogen receptor (ER) status, presence/absence of previous therapy or number of " hot spot(s) ] on bone scintigraphy. Lessening of pain from the bone metastasis was achieved in 83% of the patients after 3 months of pamidronate administration. Pamidronate + chemoendocrine therapy seems highly promising.

The effect of two different doses of oral clodronate on pain in patients with bone metastases

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of low dose oral clodronate in palliation of pain arising from bone metastases (BM) and to determine the optimal oral clodronate dose which inhibits osteolysis caused by tumor. Fifty patients with bone pain caused by BM were included in this study. All were receiving antitumor chemotherapy or hormonal therapy. The patients were randomized into three groups according to the dose of clodronate. Groups A and B were given 800 mg/d and 1600 mg/d of oral clodronate respectively for 3 months. Group C was the control group. The effect of clodronate in pain palliation was evaluated with pain score, performance status, and changes in analgesic use. The effect on osteolysis was examined with urinary calcium, hydroxyproline (OHP) and serum cross-linked carboxyterminal telopeptide region of type I collagen (ICTP) levels. Group A contained 16 patients, and groups B and C contained 17 patients each. After 3 months use of oral clodronate, significant decrease in the pain score of groups A and B was noted when compared to group C (P = 0.024 and P = 0.007, respectively). The analgesic use of 11 patients in group A (69%) and 8 patients in group B (47%) was decreased, but only the decrease in group A was statistically significant (P = 0.038). Pain score increased in 5 patients in group C (29%), and 3 patients in groups A (19%) and B (18%) each. Urinary calcium, OHP and serum ICTP levels increased in group C and decreased in groups A and B, but only the decrease of urinary calcium levels of group B was significant (P = 0.003). In conclusion, low dose (800 mg/d) oral clodronate seems to be as effective as standard dose (1600 mg/d) in palliation of bone pain secondary to BM.

Hypercalcemia

OBJECTIVES

To provide a review of hypercalcemia of malignancy, including the incidence, pathophysiology, signs and symptoms, treatment, and nursing interventions.

DATA SOURCES

Research studies, review articles, proceedings from nursing conferences, and book chapters.

CONCLUSIONS

Hypercalcemia of malignancy is difficult to diagnose because the signs and symptoms are similar to those experienced by patients with end-stage cancers. Knowing the cancers and histologic cell types that are at high risk for hypercalcemia assists in early diagnosis and treatment. Treatment decisions must consider potential benefits and their risks and affect on quality of life.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Hypercalcemia of malignancy as a metabolic oncologic emergency requires accurate assessment and rapid intervention. Early recognition by the patient, family, and health care professionals can result in improved quality of life.

Differential Patterns of Bone Turnover in Relation to Bone Pain and Disease Extent in Bone in Cancer Patients with Skeletal Metastases

Background: The alteration of the bone microenvironment as a consequence of skeletal metastases is poorly understood. The aim of this study was to search for patterns of bone markers in relation to primary tumor type, bone pain, and number of sites involved in patients with bone metastases.

Methods: We studied 323 patients with bone metastases from various primary malignancies. We sequentially measured the serum concentrations of bone alkaline phosphatase [by an electrophoretic technique (BALP)], carboxy-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen (ICTP), calcium (CaS), intact parathyroid hormone (PTH), and the fasting urinary excretion of calcium (Ca:Cr). Immunoradiometric serum bone alkaline phosphatase (I-BALP) and urinary excretion of deoxypyridinoline (DPYD) were also assessed in the 175 cases. Data were analyzed as a function of bone pain (assessed by a validated pain questionnaire), the number of radiographically confirmed sites of bone involvement, and the most frequent primary tumor types: breast cancer (BC; 124 patients), prostate cancer (PC; 90 patients), and non-small cell lung cancer (LC; 49 patients).

Results: Serum BALP and I-BALP correlated with the number of radiologically identified blastic bone lesions. BALP and I-BALP were more frequently increased in PC (72% for both measurements) than in BC (50% and 60%, respectively) or LC (3% and 5%, respectively; P &lt;0.001 for BALP and P = 0.001 for I-BALP). ICTP and DPYD values did not differ among PC, BC, and LC, but they did show a direct relationship with the disease extent in bone (P &lt;0.001). CaS and Ca:Cr did not vary significantly according to the bone tumor burden. Bone pain directly correlated with ICTP (P &lt;0.001), DPYD (P = 0.002), CaS (P &lt;0.002), and Ca:Cr (P = 0.001), whereas the relationship was inverse for serum PTH (P = 0.002). When patients were stratified according to the primary tumor, ICTP correlated with the bone pain in all subsets (P &lt;0.005, &lt;0.005, and &lt;0.001 for BC, PC, and LC, respectively), as did CaS and Ca:Cr in LC patients (P = 0.01 and 0.02, respectively) but not in PC and BC patients.

Conclusions: The patterns of bone turnover markers differ among the primary tumor types. Both resorption and formation markers reflect the number of radiographically identified sites of bone metastases, whereas resorption markers and serum calcium but not formation markers correlate with bone pain.

Oral clodronate in breast cancer patients with bone metastases: a randomized study

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the effect of the bisphosphonate clodronate on the occurrence of skeletal events (hypercalcaemia, fractures and radiotherapy) in breast cancer patients with bone metastases.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, controlled, clinical trial.

SETTING

A department of oncology in a university hospital.

SUBJECTS

One hundred patients who received firstline systemic antineoplastic treatment for metastatic breast cancer with bone involvement were randomized to receive clodronate as two 400 mg capsules twice a day for 2 years or no additional therapy.

RESULTS

In the clodronate group the number of skeletal events was reduced to 14 events in 48 evaluable patients as compared with 21 events in 51 evaluable control patients. The time to the first skeletal event was significantly longer in the clodronate group than in the control group (P = 0.015) and the most distinct difference was a lower occurrence of fractures in the clodronate group (P = 0.023). After 15 months the effect of clodronate tended to decline as the need for radiotherapy increased in the clodronate group compared with the control group (P = 0.069). Significant improvements in several quality-of-life aspects were seen in both groups during the first 6 months, but there was no significant difference between the groups. No effect was observed on time to radiologically evaluated disease progression in bone or on survival. The most frequent side-effects resulting in discontinuation of clodronate were nausea and diarrhoea.

CONCLUSION

Oral clodronate is associated with a temporary reduction of morbidity related to bone metastases in breast cancer patients.

Bisphosphonates in the Management of Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND: Bone is the most frequent site of metastasis in patients with breast cancer. Bone metastasis, particularly osteolytic bone destruction, is usually associated with significant morbidity and deterioration of quality of life. Bisphosphonates are specific inhibitors of osteoclast activity used in the treatment of hypercalcemia of malignancy and osteolytic bone disease. METHODS: We reviewed pertinent literature on the use of bisphosphonates therapy to treat metastatic breast cancer. RESULTS: The use of bisphosphonates in the management of osteolytic bone metastases results in improved palliation of symptoms. Use of these agents in the adjuvant setting may help to prevent bone metastases. CONCLUSIONS: Bisphosphonates represent an effective palliative treatment when combined with chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for the management of osteolytic bone metastases. Identifying the exact mechanism of action requires further investigation to better define the possibility of a direct antitumor effect. The role of bisphosphonates in the adjuvant setting is still controversial, pending the results of large randomized trials.

Bisphosphonates in the treatment of malignant bone disease

Tumor-induced osteolysis or lytic bone disease is mediated by osteoclast activation. Osteoclasts can be activated directly by products produced by tumors or indirectly through other nonmalignant cells. By reducing osteoclastic activity, bisphosphonates inhibit bone resorption. Since these agents were shown effective in treating other diseases associated with increased bone resorption, including cancer-related hypercalcemia and Paget's disease of bone, studies have been initiated to explore the use of bisphosphonates in patients with osteolytic bone metastases. Recent large randomized double-blind studies show the efficacy of these agents in reducing skeletal complications in patients with bone metastases from both breast cancer and multiple myeloma.

Pamidronate reduces skeletal morbidity in women with advanced breast cancer and lytic bone lesions: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Protocol 18 Aredia Breast Cancer Study Group

PURPOSE

To assess whether pamidronate can reduce the frequency of skeletal morbidity in women with lytic bone metastases from breast cancer treated with hormone therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Three hundred seventy-two women with breast cancer who had at least one lytic bone lesion and who were receiving hormonal therapy were randomized to receive 90 mg of pamidronate or placebo as a 2-hour intravenous infusion given in double-blind fashion every 4 weeks for 24 cycles. Patients were evaluated for skeletal complications: pathologic fractures, spinal cord compression, irradiation of or surgery on bone, or hypercalcemia. The skeletal morbidity rate (the ratio of the number of skeletal complications to the time on trial) was the primary efficacy variable. Bone pain, use of analgesics, quality of life, performance status, bone tumor response, and biochemical parameters were also evaluated.

RESULTS

One hundred eighty-two patients who received pamidronate and 189 who received placebo were assessable. The skeletal morbidity rate was significantly reduced at 12, 18, and 24 cycles in patients treated with 90 mg of pamidronate (P = .028, .023, and .008, respectively). At 24 cycles, the proportion of patients having had any skeletal complication was 56% in the pamidronate group and 67% in the placebo group (P = .027). The time to the first skeletal complication was longer for patients receiving pamidronate than for those given placebo (P = .049). There was no statistical difference in survival or in objective bone response rate. Pamidronate was well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with 90 mg of pamidronate as a 2-hour intravenous infusion every 4 weeks in addition to hormonal therapy significantly reduces skeletal morbidity from osteolytic metastases.

Defining and analysing symptom palliation in cancer clinical trials: a deceptively difficult exercise

The assessment of symptom palliation is an essential component of many treatment comparisons in clinical trials, yet an extensive literature search revealed no consensus as to its precise definition, which could embrace relief of symptoms, time to their onset, duration, degree, as well as symptom control and prevention. In an attempt to assess the importance of these aspects and to compare different methods of analysis, we used one symptom (cough) from a patient self-assessment questionnaire (the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist) in a large (>300 patient) multicentre randomized clinical trial (conducted by the Medical Research Council Lung Cancer Working Party) of palliative chemotherapy in small-cell lung cancer. The regimens compared were a two-drug regimen (2D) and a four-drug regimen (4D). No differences were seen between the regimens in time of onset of palliation or its duration. The degree of palliation was strongly related to the initial severity: 90% of the patients with moderate or severe cough at baseline reported improvement, compared with only 53% of those with mild cough. Analyses using different landmark time points gave conflicting results: the 4D regimen was superior at 1 month and at 3 months, whereas at 2 months the 2D regimen appeared superior. When improvement at any time up to 3 months was considered, the 4D regimen showed a significant benefit (4D 79%, 2D 60%, P = 0.02). These findings emphasize the need for caution in interpreting results, and the importance of working towards a standard definition of symptom palliation. The current lack of specified criteria makes analysis and interpretation of trial results difficult, and comparison across trials impossible. A standard definition of palliation for use in the analysis of clinical trials data is proposed, which takes into account aspects of onset, duration and degree of palliation, and symptom improvement, control and prevention.

Bisphosphonates in bone diseases

Bisphosphonates are a class of drugs which are strongly attracted to the bone where they influence the calcium metabolism, mainly by inhibition of the osteoclast-mediated bone resorption. This property makes these compounds suited for the treatment of several diseases of the bone. In Paget's disease, several bisphosphonates can reduce bone pain and decrease the bone turnover 60-70%. Cyclical oral etidronate and daily oral alendronate both proved to reduce the vertebral fracture rate for postmenopausal osteoporotic woman, while most investigated bisphosphonates can increase spinal bone mass in osteoporosis. Bisphosphonates can help lowering serum calcium and reverse skeletal complications in malignancy mediated bone diseases. Oral and intravenous administration of therapeutic doses is relatively safe. In general, gastrointestinal disturbances are described most often and the oldest, least potent, bisphosphonate etidronate can induce osteomalacia. The various characteristics of bisphosphonates: physicochemical, biological, therapeutic and toxicological, vary greatly depending on the structure of the individual bisphosphonate. Even small changes in the structure can lead to enormous differences in potency. Overall, this class of drugs offers several prospects for the future.

Failure of oral pamidronate to reduce skeletal morbidity in multiple myeloma: a double-blind placebo-controlled trial. Danish-Swedish co-operative study group

In order to study whether oral bisphosphonate therapy might prevent or reduce skeletal-related morbidity in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who required chemotherapy, 300 patients were included in a randomized multi-centre trial. Patients were given oral pamidronate at a dose of 300 mg daily, or placebo, in addition to conventional intermittent melphalan/prednisolone (and in some cases alpha-interferon) treatment. With a median treatment duration of about 550d, no statistically significant reduction in skeletal-related morbidity (defined as bone fracture, related surgery, vertebral collapse, or increase in number and/or size of bone lesions) could be demonstrated. Pamidronate treatment also did not have any influence on patient survival or on the frequency of hypercalcaemia. However, in patients treated with pamidronate there were fewer episodes of severe pain (P=0.02) and a decreased reduction of body height of 1.5 cm (P= 0.02). The overall negative result of the study is attributed to the very low absorption of orally administered bisphosphonates in general.

A randomised phase II study of oral pamidronate for the treatment of bone metastases from breast cancer

47 patients with progressive, painful, predominantly lytic bone metastases from breast cancer were included in a randomised double-blind phase II trial comparing the effects of pamidronate 150 and 300 mg daily. Oral pamidronate produced either sclerosis or stabilisation of lytic metastases for at least 24 weeks in 5 of 24 and 3 of 23 patients at the 300 and 150 mg dose levels, respectively. Evidence of symptomatic improvement was observed in 5 of 22 (23%) and 7 of 22 (32%) patients for symptomatic disease at the respective doses. These improvements were accompanied by a reduction in the rate of bone resorption as shown by suppression (P = < 0.01) of urinary calcium and a non-significant fall in deoxypyridinoline. No obvious differences in efficacy were observed between the two dose levels. Gastrointestinal adverse events, principally comprising nausea and vomiting, were the most commonly reported side-effects leading to discontinuation of trial treatment in 4 of 24 and 2 of 23 patients at 300 and 150 mg dose levels, respectively. The poor tolerability of oral pamidronate coupled with the modest clinical effects reported here suggest that oral pamidronate will not replace the current strategy of regular intravenous infusions of pamidronate for the treatment of osteolytic bone disease.

Effects of the bisphosphonate olpadronate in patients with carcinoma of the prostate metastatic to the skeleton

Prostate cancer is predominantly associated with osteoblastic bone metastases, but an increase in bone resorption has been demonstrated consistently, both histologically and biochemically. For this reason, bisphosphonates, which effectively suppress bone resorption, have been used in patients with prostate cancer metastatic to the skeleton. We studied clinical and biochemical responses 5 days and 3 months after administration of the new, potent bisphosphonate, olpadronate, in 28 patients with prostate cancer and bone metastases. All patients received 4 mg of olpadronate intravenously daily for 5 days. No additional treatment was given to the first 12 patients, while treatment was continued with oral olpadronate 200 mg daily in the following 16 patients. Serum alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity was elevated in 93% of the patients and was positively correlated to urinary hydroxyproline excretion (r = 0.81, p < 0.0001), suggesting a coupling between bone formation and resorption. A rapid and significant suppression of bone resorption was observed in all patients after intravenous treatment. This was sustained for 4-6 weeks in all patients, but reversed thereafter in patients not receiving oral maintenance therapy. No significant changes in serum ALP activity were observed in either group during the 3 months of follow-up. At the start of treatment all patients had severe bone pain and 82% and 36% were using NSAIDs and/or opiates, respectively. Although clinical response was not a primary objective of the study, we observed that intravenous therapy was associated with a decrease in bone pain in 76% of patients and a reduction in the use of analgesics. At 3 months this response was generally sustained only in those patients who were maintained on continuous oral therapy (p < 0.05 compared with the group treated with intravenous olpadronate only). The clinical response thus appeared to parallel the biochemical changes in bone resorption.

Hypercalcaemia in patients with cancer: aetiology and treatment

Hypercalcaemia is one of the most common disorders occurring in patients with cancer and may have disabling symptoms. The mechanisms underlying hypercalcaemia associated with malignant disease, the symptoms attributable to and the treatment of this disorder are discussed in this paper.

Hematopoietic progenitor cell transplantation in breast cancer: current status and future directions

Breast cancer remains the second leading cause of cancer death despite numerous advances in medical science. In vitro, preclinical, and clinical trials have shown that chemotherapy dose intensity is an important component of therapy. Many clinical trials addressing the use of high-dose chemotherapy and hematopoietic cellular rescue have been conducted over the past decade. Early trials undertaken in heavily pretreated patients who had metastatic disease were associated with high treatment-related mortality rates; good response rates were noted but overall survivals were short. Subsequent technological advances, including the use of recombinant hematopoietic growth factors and peripheral blood progenitor cells as the source of cellular rescue, have dramatically lowered the morbidity and mortality of the procedure, as well as shortened hospital stay and markedly reduced cost. As a result, the high-dose chemotherapy approach has been used earlier in the disease course, both in patients with metastatic disease who were responding and in the adjuvant setting in patients at high risk for relapse. Results of many of these phase II trials are extremely encouraging, and phase III prospective, randomized trials comparing autotransplant to conventional approaches are currently under way. This review discusses past, current, and future initiatives of this modality. Included is a discussion of new preparative regimens, the addition of agents such as biochemical modifiers to enhance antitumor activity, and issues regarding timing of autotransplant, stem cell technology, use of allogeneic stem cells, and posttransplantation therapies.