Negative Impact of Aromatase Inhibitors on Proximal Femoral Bone Mass and Geometry in Postmenopausal Women with Breast Cancer

Fracture risk and assessment in adults with cancer

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

Protective effect of bisphosphonate on the cortical bone at key locations of the femur in aromatase inhibitor-associated bone loss: A three-dimensional cortical bone mapping study

•

Aromatase inhibitor use was associated with cortical bone loss in the hip.

•

Bisphosphonate protected hip cortical bone against aromatase inhibitor use.

•

The effect was prominent at the superior femoral neck and greater trochanter.

Aromatase inhibitor treatment in breast cancer is associated with accelerated bone loss and an increased risk of fracture. Bisphosphonates (BPs) are the mainstay treatment of aromatase inhibitor-associated bone loss (AIBL), which might improve femoral bone at key locations prone to fracture. To test this hypothesis, we performed three-dimensional cortical bone mapping based on quantitative computed tomography (QCT) scans in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer who were receiving aromatase inhibitors. Data of subjects who had both baseline and at least one follow-up QCT at Severance Hospital (South Korea) between 2005 and 2015 were analyzed (BP users, n = 93; BP non-users, n = 203). After exclusion of BP users with low medication persistence (proportion of days covered: <50%), BP users and non-users were 1:1 matched (n = 54 for each group) in terms of age, lumbar spine volumetric bone mineral density (LSvBMD), femoral neck areal BMD (FNaBMD), and total hip areal BMD (THaBMD). During a median follow-up of 2.1 years, BP use attenuated bone loss in LSvBMD (+7.2% vs. −3.8%, p < 0.001), FNaBMD (+1.3% vs. −2.7%, p < 0.001), and THaBMD (-0.3% vs. −2.5%, p = 0.024). BP had a protective effect on cortical parameters of femoral bone: estimated cortical thickness (CTh) (+3.3% vs. + 0.1%, p = 0.007) and cortical mass surface density (CMSD, cortical mass per unit surface area was calculated by multiplying cortical BMD with CTh) (+3.4% vs. −0.3%, p < 0.001). CMSD increased by up to 15% at key locations such as the superior part of the femoral neck and greater trochanter. BP prevented the thinning of average CTh of the femoral neck (-1.4% vs. −6.1%, p < 0.001), particularly at the superior anterior quadrant of femoral neck (absolute difference: +12.8% point vs. non-users). Compared to BP non-users, BP users had improved cross-sectional moment of inertia (+4.4% vs. −0.7%, p = 0.001) and less increase in buckling ratio (+1.3% vs. + 7.5%, p < 0.001). In summary, BP use prevented cortical bone deficits observed in AIBL at key locations of the proximal femur.

Use of aromatase inhibitors in patients with breast cancer is associated with deterioration of bone microarchitecture and density

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate changes in bone density and architecture in postmenopausal women with breast cancer (BC) and use of aromatase inhibitor (AI).

METHODS

Thirty-four postmenopausal women with BC, without bone metastasis, renal function impairment and who were not receiving bone-active drugs were selected from a population of 523 outpatients treated for BC. According to the presence of hormonal receptors, HER2 and Ki67, seventeen had positive hormonal receptors and received anastrozole (AI group), and seventeen were triple-negative receptors (non-AI group), previously treated with chemotherapy. Areal bone mineral density (aBMD) and vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) analyses were performed by DXA; vBMD and bone microarchitecture were evaluated by HR-pQCT. Fracture risk was estimated using the FRAX tool.

RESULTS

No patient referred previous low-impact fracture, and VFA detected one moderate vertebral fracture in a non-AI patient. AI patients showed lower aBMD and BMD T-scores at the hip and 33% radius and a higher proportion of osteoporosis diagnosis on DXA (47%) vs non-AI (17.6%). AI group had significantly lower values for vBMD at the entire, cortical and trabecular bone compartments, cortical and trabecular thickness and BV/TV. They also had a higher risk for major fractures and for hip fractures estimated by FRAX. Several HR-pQCT parameters evaluated at distal radius and distal tibia were significantly associated with fracture risk.

CONCLUSION

AI is associated with alterations in bone density and microarchitecture of both the cortical and trabecular compartments. These findings explain the overall increase in fracture risk in this specific population.

The clinical application of high-resolution peripheral computed tomography (HR-pQCT) in adults: state of the art and future directions

High-resolution peripheral computed tomography (HR-pQCT) was developed to image bone microarchitecture in vivo at peripheral skeletal sites. Since the introduction of HR-pQCT in 2005, clinical research to gain insight into pathophysiology of skeletal fragility and to improve prediction of fractures has grown. Meanwhile, the second-generation HR-pQCT device has been introduced, allowing novel applications such as hand joint imaging, assessment of subchondral bone and cartilage thickness in the knee, and distal radius fracture healing. This article provides an overview of the current clinical applications and guidance on interpretation of results, as well as future directions. Specifically, we provide an overview of (1) the differences and reference data for HR-pQCT variables by age, sex, and race/ethnicity; (2) fracture risk prediction using HR-pQCT; (3) the ability to monitor response of anti-osteoporosis therapy with HR-pQCT; (4) the use of HR-pQCT in patients with metabolic bone disorders and diseases leading to secondary osteoporosis; and (5) novel applications of HR-pQCT imaging. Finally, we summarize the status of the application of HR-pQCT in clinical practice and discuss future directions. From the clinical perspective, there are both challenges and opportunities for more widespread use of HR-pQCT. Assessment of bone microarchitecture by HR-pQCT improves fracture prediction in mostly normal or osteopenic elderly subjects beyond DXA of the hip, but the added value is marginal. The prospects of HR-pQCT in clinical practice need further study with respect to medication effects, metabolic bone disorders, rare bone diseases, and other applications such as hand joint imaging and fracture healing. The mostly unexplored potential may be the differentiation of patients with only moderately low BMD but severe microstructural deterioration, which would have important implications for the decision on therapeutical interventions.

Analyses of the association between breast cancer and osteoporosis/fracture history: a cross-sectional study using KoGES HEXA data

We performed a nationwide, population-based cohort study to evaluate the risk of osteoporosis and osteoporotic fracture in patients with breast cancer using the data from Korean Genome and Epidemiology Study (KoGES) and concluded that Korean women with breast cancer had a higher risk of osteoporosis than healthy women, regardless of age.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the association between breast cancer and the occurrence of osteoporosis and osteoporotic fracture using data from the Korean Genome and Epidemiology Study (KoGES).

METHODS

Using the national KoGES health examinee (HEXA) data consisting of data from urban resident participants ≥ 40 years old, we extracted data for patients with breast cancer (n = 1080) and for control participants (n = 106,993); we then analyzed the occurrence of osteoporosis and osteoporotic fracture at baseline from 2004 to 2013 and during follow-up from 2012 to 2016. A logistic regression model was used to analyze the odds ratios (ORs) and the 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analysis was performed based on age (younger group aged ≤ 51 years old; older group aged ≥ 52 years old).

RESULTS

The ORs (95% CIs) for osteoporosis and osteoporotic fracture were 1.54 (95% CI = 1.28-1.84, P < 0.001) and 1.01 (95% CI = 0.82-1.23, P = 0.949), respectively, in the breast cancer group. In the subgroup analysis based on age, the ORs (95% CIs) for osteoporosis were 2.41 (95% CI = 1.70-3.43, P < 0.001) in the younger group and 1.33 (95% CI = 1.08-1.64, P = 0.007) in the older group of breast cancer patients. The ORs (95% CIs) for osteoporotic fracture were 1.15 (95% CI = 0.81-1.63, P = 0.441) in the younger group and 0.95 (95% CI = 0.74-1.21, P = 0.661) in the older group of breast cancer patients.

CONCLUSION

We concluded that Korean women with breast cancer had a higher risk of osteoporosis than healthy women, but the same finding was not observed for osteoporotic fracture, regardless of age.

Osteoporotic Fractures of the Spine, Hip, and Other Locations after Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy with Aromatase Inhibitors in Breast Cancer Patients: a Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) play an important role in the endocrine therapy of postmenopausal breast cancer patients, with a recent tendency to extend the duration of their use. However, AIs may increase the risk of osteoporotic bone fractures. This meta-analysis evaluated the risk of osteoporotic fractures of the hip, spine, and other locations in breast cancer patients using AIs.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search to identify randomized controlled clinical trials that investigated osteoporotic fractures in breast cancer patients on AI therapy. The main outcomes were the incidence and risk of osteoporotic fractures in general and of hip, vertebral, and non-vertebral fractures in AI users and controls.

RESULTS

The systematic review found a total of 30 randomized controlled trials including 117,974 participants. The meta-analysis showed a higher incidence of osteoporotic fracture in AI users: The crude risk ratio for all osteoporotic fractures was 1.35 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.29-1.42; P < 0.001), for hip fractures 1.18 (95% CI, 1.02-1.35; P < 0.001), for vertebral fractures 1.84 (95% CI, 1.36-2.49; P < 0.001), and for non-vertebral fractures 1.18 (95% CI, 1.02-1.35; P < 0.001), respectively, compared to the controls.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis suggested an increased risk of osteoporotic fractures for AI therapy in patients with breast cancer that was most expressed for vertebral fractures. Breast cancer patients on AIs need to be monitored for osteoporosis and osteoporotic fractures, and active prevention measures should be implemented.

Risk of Osteoporotic Fracture in Patients with Breast Cancer: Meta-Analysis

Background

The fracture risk induced by anti-estrogen therapy in patients with breast cancer remains controversial. The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis and systematic review to evaluate the risk of osteoporotic fracture in patients with breast cancer.

Methods

A systematic search was performed to identify studies that included any osteoporotic fracture (hip fracture and vertebral fracture) in patients breast cancer. Main outcome measures were occurrence and risk of osteoporotic fractures including hip and vertebral fractures in patients and controls.

Results

A systematic search yielded a total of 4 studies that included osteoporotic fracture outcomes in patients with breast cancer. Meta-analysis showed a higher risk of osteoporotic fracture in patients with breast cancer. Analysis of these 4 studies involving a total of 127,722 (23,821 cases and 103,901 controls) patients showed that the incidence of osteoporotic fractures was higher in the breast cancer group than in the control group. The pooled estimate of crude relative risk for osteoporotic fracture was 1.35 (95% confidence interval, 1.29-1.42; P<0.001).

Conclusions

Although studies were limited by a small number, results suggested a possible association between anti-estrogen therapy and increased risk of osteoporotic fractures in patients with breast cancer.

Association of Insulin Resistance with Lower Bone Volume and Strength Index of the Proximal Femur in Nondiabetic Postmenopausal Women

Background

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is associated with an increased risk of osteoporotic fracture despite relatively preserved bone mineral density (BMD). Although this paradox might be attributed to the influence of insulin resistance (IR) on bone structure and material properties, the association of IR with femur bone geometry and strength indices remains unclear.

Methods

Using data from the Cardiovascular and Metabolic Disease Etiology Research Center cohort study, we conducted a cross-sectional analysis among nondiabetic postmenopausal women. IR was estimated using the homeostasis model assessment of IR (HOMA-IR). Compartment-specific volumetric BMD (vBMD) and bone volume of proximal femur were measured using quantitative computed tomography. The compressive strength index (CSI), section modulus (Z), and buckling ratio of the femoral neck were calculated as bone strength indices.

Results

Among 1,008 subjects (mean age, 57.3 years; body mass index [BMI], 23.6 kg/m²), BMI, waist circumference, and vBMD of the femoral neck and total hip increased in a linear trend from the lowest (<1.37) to highest (≥2.27) HOMA-IR quartile (P<0.05 for all). The HOMA-IR showed an independent negative association with total bone volume (standardized β=−0.12), cortical volume (β=−0.05), CSI (β=−0.013), and Z (β=−0.017; P<0.05 for all) of the femoral neck after adjustment for age, weight, height, physical activity, and vitamin D and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels. However, the association between HOMA-IR and vBMD was attenuated in the adjusted model (femoral neck, β=0.94; P=0.548).

Conclusions

Elevated HOMA-IR was associated with lower cortical bone volume and bone strength indices in nondiabetic postmenopausal women, independent of age and body size.

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

BACKGROUND

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

PATIENTS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Long-term effect of aromatase inhibitors on bone microarchitecture and macroarchitecture in non-osteoporotic postmenopausal women with breast cancer

In non-osteoporotic postmenopausal women with breast cancer, aromatase inhibitors (AIs) negatively affected bone mineral density (BMD), lumbar spine trabecular bone score (TBS) as a bone microarchitecture index, and hip geometry as a bone macroarchitecture index.

INTRODUCTION

AIs increase the risk of fracture in patients with breast cancer. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the long-term skeletal effects of AIs in postmenopausal women with primary breast cancer.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective longitudinal observational study in non-osteoporotic patients with breast cancer who were treated with AIs for ≥3 years (T-score >-2.5). Patients with previous anti-osteoporosis treatment or those who were given bisphosphonate during AI treatment were excluded from the analysis. We serially assessed BMD, lumbar spine TBS, and hip geometry using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry.

RESULTS

BMD significantly decreased from baseline to 5 years at the lumbar spine (-6.15%), femur neck (-7.12%), and total hip (-6.35%). Lumbar spine TBS also significantly decreased from baseline to 5 years (-2.12%); this change remained significant after adjusting for lumbar spine BMD. The annual loss of lumbar spine BMD and TBS slowed after 3 and 1 year of treatment, respectively, although there was a relatively constant loss of BMD at the femur neck and total hip for up to 4 years. The cross-sectional area, cross-sectional moment of inertia, minimal neck width, femur strength index, and section modulus significantly decreased, although the buckling ratio increased over the treatment period (all P < 0.001); these changes were independent of total hip BMD.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term adjuvant AI treatment negatively influenced bone quality in addition to BMD in patients with breast cancer. This study suggests that early monitoring and management are needed in non-osteoporotic patients with breast cancer who are starting AIs.