Exposure to bisphosphonates and risk of colorectal cancer: a population-based nested case-control study

The potential role of SNHG16/ miRNA-146a/ TRAF6 signaling pathway in the protective effect of zoledronate against colorectal cancer and associated osteoporosis in mouse model

Bone fracture as a consequence of colorectal cancer (CRC) and associated osteoporosis (OP) is considered a risk factor for increasing the mortality rate among CRC patients. SNHG16/ miRNA-146a/ TRAF6 signaling pathway is a substantial contributor to neoplastic evolution, progression, and metastasis. Here, we investigated the effect of zoledronate (ZOL) on the growth of CRC and associated OP in a mouse model. Thirty Balb/c mice were divided into Naïve, azoxymethane (AOM)/dextran sodium sulfate (DSS), and ZOL groups. Body weight and small nucleolar RNA host gene 16 (SNHG16) expression, microRNA-146a, and TRAF6 in bone, colon, and stool were investigated. Samples of colon and bone were collected and processed for light microscopic, immunohistochemical staining for cytokeratin 20 (CK20), nuclear protein Ki67 (pKi-67), and caudal type homeobox transcription factor 2 (CDx2) in colon and receptor activator of nuclear factor kB (RANK) and osteoprotegerin (OPG) in bone. A computerized tomography (CT) scan of the femur and tibia was studied. ZOL produced a significant decrease in the expression of SNHG16 and TRAF6 and an increase in miRNA-146a in the colon and bone. ZOL administration improved the histopathological changes in the colon, produced a significant decrease in CK20 and Ki-67, and increased CDx2 expressions. In bone, ZOL prevented osteoporotic changes and tumour cell invasion produced a significant decrease in RANK and an increase in OPG expressions, alongside improved bone mineral density in CT scans. ZOL could be a promising preventive therapy against colitis-induced cancer and associated OP via modulation expression of SNHG16, miRNA-146a, and TRAF6.

Bisphosphonates and risk of cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

It is unclear whether bisphosphonates are associated with risk of cancers. Therefore, this meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of bisphosphonates on overall cancers.

Methods

A search in Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases was conducted, from the inception date of each resource to September 26, 2019. The summarised effect estimates with 95% CIs were calculated using a random-effect model. Heterogeneity and publication bias were explored.

Results

Thirty-four articles were included in this study (4,508,261 participants; 403,196 cases). The results revealed that bisphosphonates significantly decreased the risk of colorectal cancer (RR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.81–0.98), breast cancer (RR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.82–0.93) and endometrial cancer (RR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.61–0.94), but no significant association was observed in all-cause cancer. Furthermore, nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates only had protective effects both on breast cancer (RR = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.90–0.99) and endometrial cancer (RR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.54–0.92). Non-nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates tended to increase the risk of liver cancer (RR = 2.14, 95% CI: 1.23–3.72) and pancreas cancer (RR = 1.75, 95% CI: 1.32–2.33).

Conclusion

Bisphosphonates are significantly associated with risk reduction of colorectal, breast and endometrial cancer, especially nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates. It should be noted that non-nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates might increase the risk of liver and pancreas cancer. Large prospective cohort studies are needed to find the causal association between bisphosphonates and risk of cancers.

Exposure to oral bisphosphonates and risk of gastrointestinal cancer

Few studies have explored the association of oral bisphosphonate exposure and gastrointestinal cancer within Asian populations. In this study, we investigated 45,397 Korean women from the nationwide population-based cohort from 2002 to 2013. Oral bisphosphonate exposure did not appear to be associated with elevated or reduced risk for gastrointestinal cancer.

INTRODUCTION

While several studies suggested increased risk in upper gastrointestinal (GI) cancer or reduced risk in colorectal cancer upon bisphosphonate exposure, the association is less explored within Asian populations. We investigated the effect of oral bisphosphonate exposure on the risk of GI cancers within a nationwide population-based cohort.

METHODS

This study used two separate cohorts. The first cohort included 45,397 women aged 60 years or older from the National Health Insurance Service-Health Screening Cohort during 2002-2013. Participants were classified into bisphosphonate users and non-users based on drug exposure during 2002-2007, and followed-up from the index date of January 1, 2008. The second cohort included 25,665 newly diagnosed osteoporosis patients who started taking oral bisphosphonate during 2003-2008. After 4 years of drug exposure period, patients were separated into quartiles based on cumulative oral bisphosphonate exposure. Participants were followed-up until December 31, 2013 for GI cancer, stomach cancer, and colorectal cancer. Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to assess the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the cancer risks.

RESULTS

Compared to bisphosphonate non-users, no significant risk difference was observed among bisphosphonate users on GI (HR 1.06; 95% CI 0.87-1.28), stomach (HR 1.11; 95% CI 0.85-1.47) and colorectal cancers (HR 1.04; 95% CI 0.79-1.37). Among bisphosphonate users, increasing doses of bisphosphonate exposure was not associated with elevated or reduced risk for GI cancer (p for trend 0.573).

CONCLUSION

Oral bisphosphonate use did not appear to be associated with elevated or reduced risk for GI cancers.

Oral bisphosphonates and colorectal cancer

Use of oral bisphosphonates has been associated with a decreased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), but the association may be related to residual confounding by healthy lifestyle or body mass index (BMI). Therefore, we conducted a prospective nested case-control study within the Kaiser Permanente, Northern California health system cohort. In total, 12,505 CRC cases were individually matched to 599,534 controls. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using conditional logistic regression models with adjustment for important covariates extracted from the database. Participants who had ever used oral bisphosphonates were less likely than non-users to be diagnosed with CRC (OR 0.82; 95% CI: 0.74, 0.89). Colon and rectum site-specific associations were similar to the overall association. A stronger inverse association for ever use of bisphosphonates was observed for men (OR 0.63; 95% CI: 0.47, 0.85), however when stratified by previous lower endoscopy, the association was only observed in the participants who did not have a previous lower endoscopy (OR 0.73 (0.64, 0.83)). In conclusion, we found that oral bisphosphonate use was associated with a decreased odds of CRC, however this association may be due to residual confounding by BMI or another confounder.

Prevention of Colorectal Neoplasia

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related morbidity and mortality worldwide. There are well-established screening protocols involving fecal testing, radiographic, and endoscopic evaluations that have led to decreased incidence and mortality of CRC in the United States. In addition to screening for CRC, there is interest in preventing colorectal neoplasia by targeting the signaling pathways that have been identified in the pathway of dysplasia progressing to carcinoma. This review will detail the efficacy of multiple potential preventative strategies including lifestyle changes (physical activity, alcohol use, smoking cessation, and obesity); dietary factors (dietary patterns, calcium, vitamin D, fiber, folate, and antioxidants and micronutrients); and chemopreventive agents (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, statins, metformin, bisphosphonates, and postmenopausal hormonal therapy).

Oral Bisphosphonates and Improved Survival of Breast Cancer

Purpose: Bisphosphonates are used for treatment or prevention of osteoporosis and of bone metastases. The use of oral bisphosphonates was suggested to be associated with reduced risk of developing breast cancer, and their positive influence on breast cancer survival was only demonstrated with third-generation bisphosphonates. We studied the association of use of oral bisphosphonates after breast cancer diagnosis on overall and breast cancer survival.Experimental Design: A nested case-control analysis was performed using data from the population-based Breast Cancer in Northern Israel Study (BCINIS). Participants were postmenopausal women with newly diagnosed breast cancer insured by Clalit. Use of second-generation bisphosphonates (alendronate and/or risedronate) was identified using computerized prescription records. The analysis was restricted to women who did not use bisphosphonates prior to diagnosis.Results: In a cohort of 3,731 postmenopausal women with breast cancer, followed up for an average of 70 months, there were 799 cases of death which were matched to 15,915 control periods of living breast cancer cases. Use of bisphosphonates after diagnosis for at least 18 months was significantly more common among survivors than among their matched controls who died, adjusted for tumor stage/grade (overall survival: OR = 0.63, 0.41-0.96, P = 0.03; breast cancer-specific survival: OR = 0.28, 0.09-0.91, P = 0.035). A similar advantageous effect, but statistically underpowered, was found in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, ER-negative, and HER2neu-positive tumors.Conclusions: The use of oral bisphosphonates, by postmenopausal, probably osteoporotic, women initiated after diagnosis of breast cancer was associated with a significant improvement in overall and breast-specific odds of survival. Clin Cancer Res; 23(7); 1684-9. ©2016 AACR.

Oral bisphosphonates and colon cancer: an update

Bisphosphonates (BPs) are widely used as the main treatment for osteoporosis. In vitro and animal studies suggest that use of BPs may have a potential for colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention. Safety and efficacy in terms of osteoporosis prevention have only been evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of relatively short duration (3-5 years), with smaller extension studies. The evidence for a benefit beyond 5 years is limited and intake of BPs has not shown any relationship with CRC in intervention studies. Observational studies and meta-analysis have shown unchanged or decreased risk of CRC. BPs used for treatment and prevention of osteoporosis should not be applied for prevention of CRC in clinical practice.

Primary prevention of colorectal cancer: Myth or reality?

Colorectal cancer incidence has been rising strongly in parallel with economic development. In the past few decades, much has been learned about the lifestyle, dietary and medication risk factors for this malignancy. With respect to lifestyle, compelling evidence indicates that prevention of weight gain and maintenance of a reasonable level of physical activity can positively influence in lowering the risk. Although there is controversy about the role of specific nutritional factors, consideration of dietary pattern as a whole appears useful for formulating recommendations. Though quite often recommended, the role for many supplements, including omega-3, vitamin D, folate, and vitamin B6, remains unsettled. Only calcium and vitamin D supplementation appear to add a modest benefit, particularly in those with a low daily intake. With regard to chemoprevention, medications such as aspirin and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and postmenopausal hormonal replacement for women might be associated with substantial reductions in colorectal cancer risk, though their utility is affected by their side effect profile. However, the role of agents such as statins, bisphosphonates and antioxidants have yet to be determined. Ultimately, primary prevention strategies focusing on modifying environmental, lifestyle risk factors, and chemopreventive drugs are options that have already been tested, and may impact on colon cancer incidence.

Exposure to bisphosphonates and risk of colorectal cancer

Animal and in vitro studies suggest that the use of bisphosphonates (BPs) may be associated with reduced risk for colorectal cancer (CRC). However, results from these studies have been inconsistent. The aim of our study was to review and summarize the evidence provided by longitudinal studies on the association between BP use and CRC risk A comprehensive literature search for articles published up to October 2012 was performed. Prior to performing a meta-analysis, the studies were evaluated for publication bias and heterogeneity. Relative risks (RRs) or odds ratios were calculated. Six reports (four case-control studies and two cohort studies) published between 2010 and 2012 were identified. There was evidence of an association between any use of BPs and CRC risk using a fixed-effects model (RR = 0.80, 95% confidence interval = 0.74, 0.85) and a random-effects model (RR = 0.80, 95% confidence interval = 0.71, 0.90). However, we did not observe any evidence of a trend with increasing duration of use. Our findings indicate that there is evidence of an association between any use of BP and reduced CRC risk. However, this subject deserves further investigation.

Bisphosphonate use and risk of colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

A growing body of evidence suggests that bisphosphonates may have chemopreventive potential against colorectal cancer. Our aim was to examine this association through a meta-analysis of observational studies.

METHODS

A comprehensive search for relevant articles published up to October 2012 was performed, reviews of each study were conducted and data were abstracted. Prior to meta-analysis, the studies were evaluated for publication bias and heterogeneity. Pooled relative risk (RR) estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the random effects and the fixed effects models. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were also performed.

RESULTS

Eight large population-based epidemiological studies (one case-control, two nested case-control analyses within a cohort and five cohort studies), involving more than 630 000 participants, contributed to the analysis. We found no evidence of publication bias. However, significant heterogeneity was detected among the cohort studies. The analysis revealed a significant protective association between bisphosphonate use and colorectal cancer risk (fixed RR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.80, 0.90, random RR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.75, 0.96). When the analysis was stratified into subgroups according to study design, the association was inverse in both case-control and cohort studies, but only in the former was it statistically significant. The sensitivity analysis confirmed the stability of our results. Furthermore, we found evidence for a dose effect; Long term bisphosphonate use was associated with a 27% decrease in the risk of developing colorectal cancer as compared with non-use (RR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.57, 0.93).

CONCLUSION

Our findings support a protective effect of bisphosphonates against colorectal cancer. However, further evidence is warranted.

The effect of bisphosphonates on the risk of endometrial and ovarian malignancies

OBJECTIVE

The use of bisphosphonates has been associated with reduced risk and improved survival of breast and colorectal malignancies. This study was aimed at studying the effects of bisphosphonates on gynecological cancers.

METHODS

The Cancer in the Ovary and Uterus Study (CITOUS) is a case-control study of newly diagnosed cases of gynecological malignancies and age/clinic/ethnic-group matched population controls. The use of bisphosphonates prior to, and following, diagnosis was assessed in 424 cases of ovarian and endometrial cancers and 341 controls, all postmenopausal at recruitment, enrolled in Clalit Health Services (CHS), using pharmacy records.

RESULTS

The use of bisphosphonates for more than 1 year prior to diagnosis was associated with a significantly reduced risk of ovarian cancer (OR=0.49, 95% CI: 0.26-0.93) and endometrial cancer (OR=0.39, 95% CI: 0.24-0.63). The association with endometrial cancer (OR=0.48, 0.27-0.84) remained statistically significant after adjustment for a variety of putative effect modifiers (RR=0.48, 0.26-0.89). The association with ovarian cancer remained significant when adjusted to statin use (0.46, 0.23-0.90) but not for other modifiers (0.58, 0.29-1.18). A strong negative association was found in an adjusted model for the use of either bisphosphonates or statins for more than 1 year (0.40, 0.23-0.68).

CONCLUSION

The use of bisphosphonates, with or without statins, for more than 1 year before diagnosis was associated with reduced risk of endometrial and ovarian cancers.

Beyond aspirin-cancer prevention with statins, metformin and bisphosphonates

Cancer risk reduction using pharmacological means is an attractive modern preventive approach that supplements the classical behavioural prevention recommendations. Medications that are commonly used by large populations to treat a variety of common, non-cancer-related, medical situations are an attractive candidate pool. This Review discusses three pharmacological agents with the most evidence for their potential as cancer chemopreventive agents: anti-hypercholesterolaemia medications (statins), an antidiabetic agent (metformin) and antiosteoporosis drugs (bisphosphonates). Data are accumulating to support a significant negative association of certain statins with cancer occurrence or survival in several major tumour sites (mostly gastrointestinal tumours and breast cancer), with an augmented combined effect with aspirin or other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Metformin, but not other hypoglycaemic drugs, also seems to have some antitumour growth activity, but the amount of evidence in human studies, mainly in breast cancer, is still limited. Experimental and observational data have identified bisphosphonates as a pharmacological group that could have significant impact on incidence and mortality of more than one subsite of malignancy. At the current level of evidence these potential chemopreventive drugs should be considered in high-risk situations or using the personalized approach of maximizing individual benefits and minimizing the potential for adverse effects with the aid of pharmacogenetic indicators.

Oral bisphosphonate use and colorectal cancer incidence in the Women's Health Initiative

Bisphosphonates are widely prescribed to increase bone density in postmenopausal women with osteopenia or osteoporosis. Aminobisphosphonates have numerous anticancer properties and reduce bone metastases in cancer patients. Several studies, including the Women's Health Initiative (WHI), have found that use of oral bisphosphonates is associated with reduced risk of developing breast cancer, but less is known about associations with other common malignancies in women such as colorectal cancer (CRC). A few case-control and retrospective cohort studies have reported decreased risk of CRC among bisphosphonate users. In contrast, a prospective cohort study found no association. We evaluated the association between oral bisphosphonate use and CRC incidence in 156,826 postmenopausal women, ages 50 to 79 years, who participated in WHI clinical trials and observational study. A detailed health interview was conducted at baseline, and bisphosphonate use was ascertained from an inventory of regularly used medications at baseline and over follow-up. A total of 1931 women were diagnosed with incident invasive CRC during a median follow-up of 12 years. Alendronate was the most commonly used bisphosphonate, accounting for >90% of the total person-years of use. The association between oral bisphosphonate use and CRC risk did not reach statistical significance (hazard ratio [HR] from multivariable-adjusted models = 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-1.07; p = 0.19). Furthermore, we did not observe greater risk reductions for women with longer duration of use. Uncontrolled confounding may explain why previous studies have observed an association.

Bisphosphonates are associated with reduced risk of colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide. Several preclinical and observational studies have shown that bisphosphonates may have chemopreventive effects against CRC. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all studies evaluating the effect of bisphosphonates on the risk of CRC.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of Medline, Embase, and Web of Science through August 2012 and manually reviewed the literature. Studies were included if they met the following criteria: (1) evaluated and clearly defined exposure to bisphosphonates, (2) reported CRC outcomes, and (3) reported relative risks or odds ratio (OR) or provided sufficient data for their estimation. Summary OR estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using the random-effects model. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed with the Cochran's Q and I(2) statistic.

RESULTS

We analyzed data from 6 population-based observational studies reporting 20,001 cases of CRC in 392,106 patients. A meta-analysis of these studies showed a statistically significant 17% reduction in CRC incidence with bisphosphonate use (unadjusted OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.76-0.90), with borderline heterogeneity across studies (Cochran's Q, P = .16; I(2) = 37%). This effect persisted after correcting for multiple covariates in individual studies (adjusted OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.74-0.98). When the analysis was restricted to women only, use of bisphosphonates was associated with a 16% reduction in CRC incidence, which bordered on statistical significance (n = 5 studies; adjusted OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.70-1.01). This chemopreventive effect of bisphosphonates was observed for proximal and distal colon cancers, as well as rectal cancer, independently.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on meta-analysis, bisphosphonate use is associated with a modest, but statistically significant, reduction in CRC risk.

Reduced risk of colorectal cancer with use of oral bisphosphonates: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The association between oral bisphosphonate (BP) intake and colorectal cancer (CRC) risk has been investigated in several recent studies with conflicting results. We summarized the evidence from the published studies in a categorical, dose-response meta-analysis.

METHODS

Relevant studies were identified by a search of MEDLINE and EMBASE databases through January 15, 2012. We included studies that reported effect size estimates with 95% CIs for the association between exposure to oral BPs and risk of CRC.

RESULTS

Three case-control studies with a total of 16,998 CRC cases and 108,197 controls and one cohort study with 94,405 individuals exposed to BPs and 283,181 unexposed to BPs were included in meta-analysis. The random effect model meta-analysis suggested reduced risk of CRC with exposure to oral BPs with pooled odds ratio (OR) of 0.87 (95% CI, 0.78 to 0.97). Significant inverse relationship was noted for 10 or more prescriptions categories, with pooled ORs of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.58 to 0.87). Similarly, the analysis for 1 to 3 years of use and more than 3 years of use of BPs suggested a significant inverse relationship, with pooled ORs of 0.76 (95% CI, 0.68 to 0.85) and 0.78 (95% CI, 0.61 to 0.99), respectively.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggests that the use of oral BPs at a dose of 10 or more prescriptions or 1 or more years of duration is associated with reduced risk of CRC. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to prove this association.

A prospective study of bisphosphonate use and risk of colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

Bisphosphonates are used for the treatment of bone metastases and have been associated with a lower risk of breast cancer. A recent case-control study showed an inverse association between bisphosphonate use and colorectal cancer. Data from prospective cohorts are lacking.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We prospectively examined the relationship between bisphosphonate use and risk of colorectal cancer among 86,277 women enrolled onto the Nurses Health Study (NHS). Since 1998, participants have returned biennial questionnaires in which they were specifically queried about the regular use of bisphosphonates. We used Cox proportional hazards models to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for risk of colorectal cancer.

RESULTS

Through 2008, we documented 801 cases of colorectal cancer over 814,406 person-years of follow-up. The age-adjusted HR for women who regularly used bisphosphonates was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.73 to 1.14) and was further attenuated after adjustment for other risk factors (multivariate HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.33). The risk was not influenced by duration of use (P(trend) = 0.79). Compared with nonusers, the multivariate-adjusted HRs of colorectal cancer were 1.24 (95% CI, 0.94 to 1.64) for women with 1 to 2 years of use, 1.16 (95% CI, 0.79 to 1.69) for 3 to 4 years of use, and 0.97 (95% CI, 0.60 to 1.56) for ≥ 5 years of use. There was no association between bisphosphonate use and colorectal cancer within strata of other risk factors.

CONCLUSION

In a large prospective cohort, we did not observe an association between long-term use of bisphosphonates and risk of colorectal cancer.

Potential therapeutic effects of oral bisphosphonates on the intestine

Bisphosphonates are the principal drugs prescribed for the prevention of osteoporotic fractures. They are bone specific but poorly absorbed. In oral formulations, almost 99% of the administered dose remains within the intestinal tract and reaches the small and large bowel. Although the nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates can irritate the distal esophageal/gastric mucosa, they improve drug-induced colitis in animal models and exhibit antitumor properties on intestinal cells in vitro. Several recent epidemiological studies provide evidence of a reduced risk of colorectal cancer in osteoporotic patients treated with oral bisphosphonates, notably alendronate. In this review, we will explore the possible mechanisms of action underlying these effects and raise the question of whether these agents might be used in the chemoprophylaxis against colorectal cancer.