Guideline adherence in bone-targeted treatment of cancer patients with bone metastases in Germany

Treatment of bone metastases from solid tumors with bone-modifying agents: a web survey of Italian oncologists investigating patterns of practice drug prescription and prevention of side effects

PURPOSE

Optimal use of bone-modifying agents (BMAs) in patients with bone metastases from solid tumors is uncertain in some aspects: the drug choice; the planned treatment duration and long-term therapy; the prevention and management of possible side effects, including renal toxicity, hypocalcaemia, and medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ).

METHODS

Italian oncologists were invited to fulfil a 24-question web survey about prescription of BMAs for bone metastases of breast cancer, prostate cancer, and other solid tumors. Prevention and management of side effects were also investigated.

RESULTS

Answers of 191 oncologists were collected. BMAs are usually prescribed at the time of diagnosis of bone metastases by 87.0% (breast cancer) and 76.1% (solid tumors except breast and prostate cancers) of oncologists; the decision is more articulated for prostate cancer (endocrine-sensitive versus castration-resistant). The creatinine level (32.3%), the availability of patient venous access (15.8%), and the type of primary neoplasm (13.6%) are the most reported factors involved in choice between bisphosphonates and denosumab. Zoledronic acid every 3 months was considered as a valid alternative to monthly administration by 94% of Italian oncologists. Oncologists reported a good confidence with measures aimed to prevent MRONJ, whereas uncertainness about prevention and management of hypocalcemia was registered.

CONCLUSION

Italian oncologists showed a high attitude in prescribing bisphosphonates or denosumab at the time of diagnosis of bone metastases, with a large application of preventive measures of side effects. Further studies are needed to investigate some controversial aspects, such as optimal drug treatment duration and long-term drug schedules.

[Osteoprotection in patients with bone metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC): real-world data from Germany, presented by d-uo]

INTRODUCTION

Patients with bone metastasis due to prostate cancer often present allover reduced bone mineral density. Additionally, patients with bone metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have a relevant risk for skeletal-related events (SRE). We herein present real-world data (RWD) regarding osteoprotection in mCRPC patients with bone metastasis treated by German urologists in private practice.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a questionnaire-based study including members of d-uo ("Deutsche Uro-Onkologen", German uro-oncologists). All patients with histologically confirmed prostate cancer seen at least once in the surveyed urology practice between July 2019 and June 2020 were included. Questions included start, type and duration of osteoprotection as well as supplementation with calcium and vitamin D.

RESULTS

Between July 2019 and June 2020, a total of 3,692 patients with prostate cancer were seen at least once in 15 urology practices. There were 410 mCRPC patients (11.1%) with bone metastasis. Osteoprotection with denosumab or a bisphosphonate to prevent SRE was applied in 274/410 mCRPC patients (66.4%) with bone metastasis. In patients receiving osteoprotection, denosumab was chosen for 67.9% of patients and a bisphosphonate was chosen for 32.1%. Supplementation with calcium and vitamin D was performed in 93.4% of the patients. The median duration of treatment was 25.3 months for denosumab compared with 39.6 months for bisphosphonates.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with mCRPC with bone metastasis received osteoprotection in 2/3 of cases. Of these, 2/3 received denosumab and 1/3 received a bisphosphonate. The majority of patients were also treated with calcium and vitamin D. According to guideline recommendations regarding osteoprotection in mCRPC patients with bone metastasis, our RWD data showed some lack of guideline adherence.

Immunoglobulin substitution in patients with secondary antibody deficiency in chronic lymphocytic leukemia and multiple myeloma: a representative analysis of guideline adherence and infections

INTRODUCTION

In secondary immunodeficiency, immunoglobulin replacement therapy (IgRT) is recommended by guidelines (GL) for patients with IgG level < 4 g/l and more than 3 infections or a severe infection. IgRT may be appropriate if IgG level < 4 g/l and/or 1-3 less severe infections (≤ grade 2).

METHODS

This was a retrospective sample analysis representative for practices and hospitals in Germany. The treatments and infection data were collected from patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and multiple myeloma (MM). GL adherence (GLAD) was analyzed.

RESULTS

Data from 1086 patients (CLL 490, MM 596) were collected from 86 centers. Of all patients, 34.8% developed IgG deficiency during therapy (CLL 35.5%; MM 34.2%). IgRT was given in 23.5% of CLL and 14.4% of MM patients. GLAD in hypogammaglobulinemia and indication to IgRT was 23.3% of 86 CLL and 22.1% of 77 MM patients. Without GLAD, the hazard ratio (HR) for any infection was 4.49 (95% CI 3.72-5.42; p < 0.001) and for severe infections (grade ≥ 3) 10.64 (95% CI 7.54-15.00; p < 0.001). Significant independent risk factors for infections were a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index, IgG deficiency, and 3rd + line treatment, as well as therapy with BTK inhibitors or chemotherapy in CLL. Multivariable analysis showed a significantly lower risk of severe infections after start of IgRT with a HR of 0.47 (95% CI 0.28-0.77; p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Guideline adherence correlated with fewer and less severe infections but was low in patients with indication to IgRT. Risk factors for infection can be identified. Risk of severe infections was significantly lower in patients with IgRT.

Vitamin D Metabolites in Nonmetastatic High-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients with and without Zoledronic Acid Treatment after Prostatectomy

Simple Summary

Recent research on prostate cancer and vitamin D is controversial. We measured three vitamin D₃ metabolites in 32 selected prostate cancer patients after surgery at four time points over four years. Within a large European study, half of the patients were prophylactically treated with zoledronic acid (ZA); the others received a placebo. After the study start, all the patients daily took calcium and vitamin D₃. The development of metastasis was not affected by ZA treatment. While two vitamin D metabolites had higher values after the study’s start, with constant follow-up values, the 1,25(OH)₂-vitamin D₃ concentrations remained unchanged. The latter form was the only metabolite that was higher in the patients with metastasis as compared to those without bone metastasis. This result is surprising. However, it is too premature to discuss possible prognostic value yet. Our results should be confirmed in larger cohorts.

Abstract

There are limited and discrepant data on prostate cancer (PCa) and vitamin D. We investigated changes in three vitamin D₃ metabolites in PCa patients after prostatectomy with zoledronic acid (ZA) treatment regarding their metastasis statuses over four years. In 32 patients from the ZEUS trial, 25(OH)D₃, 24,25(OH)₂D₃, and 1,25(OH)₂D₃ were measured with liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry at four time points. All the patients received daily calcium and vitamin D₃. Bone metastases were detected in 7 of the 17 ZA-treated patients and in 5 of the 15 controls (without ZA), without differences between the groups (p = 0.725). While 25(OH)D₃ and 24,25(OH)₂D₃ increased significantly after the study’s start, with following constant values, the 1,25(OH)₂D₃ concentrations remained unchanged. ZA treatment did not change the levels of the three metabolites. 25(OH)D₃ and 24,25(OH)₂D₃ were not associated with the development of bone metastases. In contrast, 1,25(OH)₂D₃ was also higher in patients with bone metastasis before the study’s start. Thus, in high-risk PCa patients after prostatectomy, 25(OH)D₃, 24,25(OH)₂D₃, and 1,25(OH)₂D₃ were not affected by supportive ZA treatment or by the development of metastasis over four years, with the exception of 1,25(OH)₂D₃, which was constantly higher in metastatic patients. There might be potential prognostic value if the results can be confirmed.

Adherence to bone health guidelines in patients with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer: Status and clinical impact in a Swiss cohort experience

Aim

In patients with postmenopausal hormone receptor-positive breast cancer (ER + eBC), aromatase inhibitors (AIs) are widely used for effective relapse prevention. However, AIs reduce bone density and increase bone-related events (BREs). Alongside calcium and vitamin D3 supplementation, bisphosphonates and denosumab are well-known options for improving outcomes in bone health and breast cancer prognosis. This study aimed to evaluate the practice patterns of bone health guideline-based management in real-world patients with ER + eBC.

Material and methods

In total, 68 patients with ER + eBC treated between 2009 and 2014 at the University Hospital Basel were included in this retrospective cohort study. Chart reviews were analyzed. Baseline, clinicopathological, treatment, and BRE data were extracted. Each patient was specifically reviewed for therapy adherence to the Swiss bone health guidelines (Swiss Association against Osteoporosis 2010 [SVGO]).

Results

The mean patient age was 66.5 (range, 56–74) years, all post-menopausal. The most frequent tumor characteristics were tumor size of pT1–pT2 (N = 53, 77.9%) and treatment with letrozole (N = 35, 51.5%), followed by tamoxifen as a switch strategy (N = 27, 40.3%). The median treatment time with AIs was 47 (range, 30–60) months. Five patients (7.8%) experienced a fracture during or after AI treatment. Moreover, 51 (75%) patients were treated according to the SVGO recommendations.

Conclusion

The fracture rate in our retrospective cohort was comparable to that in the larger phase III randomized trials. The adherence to bone health guidelines was satisfactory but still suboptimal. Clinicians should strictly adhere to the current bone health guidelines to ensure the best possible prevention of BREs and maintain bone health and cancer prognosis in patients with ER + eBC.

Initiation of bone-targeted agents in patients with bone metastases and breast or castrate-resistant prostate cancer actively treated in routine clinical practice in Europe

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend starting bone-targeted agents (BTA), such as zoledronic acid and denosumab, as soon as bone metastases (BMs) are definitively diagnosed in all patients with breast cancer (BC) or castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) whether they are symptomatic or not.

METHODS

Data were analyzed from 1364 patients with BC and 1161 patients with CRPC who had BMs and were receiving anti-cancer therapy in hospitals across six European countries (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK). The 731 physicians (medical oncologists or urologists) provided insights in the decision-making factors driving their management of bone health for these patients, and the patient medical records indicated how these decisions were reflected in routine clinical practice.

RESULTS

Within three months of a BM diagnosis, 74% of BC and 51% of CRPC patients had initiated treatment with a BTA. Around 12% of BC and 23% of CRPC patients did not receive a BTA following BM diagnosis. Irrespective of the tumour type (BC or CRPC), most physicians prescribed either denosumab or zoledronic acid as first BTA therapy. Physicians reported bone pain as a major decision-making factor to initiate a BTA. The presence of bone complications at BM diagnosis and bone pain at BM diagnosis were found to be significant predictive factors for a BTA initiation, irrespective of tumour type.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) guidance on bone protection irrespective of symptomatic disease, not all patients with BMs received a BTA following a BM diagnosis. This suggests that clinical judgements and patients' communication of their pain to their physicians contributed to the decision to prescribe bone protection therapy in cancer patients.

Medication adherence with denosumab in patients with bone metastases from solid tumors treated in routine clinical settings: a retrospective study

PURPOSE

To describe (non)adherence with denosumab among patients with solid tumors and bone metastases.

METHODS

This retrospective, observational study pooled data from two completed prospective, multicenter cohort studies (X-TREME; Study 240) in adult patients with bone metastases from primary breast, prostate, lung, kidney, or other solid cancer types and administered denosumab 120 mg in routine clinical practice in Germany and Central and Eastern Europe. The studies were conducted between May 2012 and May 2017; pooled analysis was completed in August 2021. Medication adherence was described according to a three-component consensus taxonomy: initiation (first-ever administration ≤ 90 days from bone metastasis diagnosis), implementation (actual vs prescribed dosing; optimal implementation = regular/consistent dosing), and persistence (≤ 60-day gap between administrations at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months). Descriptive analyses were conducted for each cancer type.

RESULTS

The analysis included 1748 patients with solid tumors and bone metastases. Adherence with denosumab was generally high across the initiation, implementation, and persistence phases. Most patients experienced timely initiation (from 64.4% [kidney cancer] to 81.2% [breast cancer]) and optimal implementation (from 62.4% [lung cancer] to 72.5% [breast cancer]). The proportion of patients who were persistent with treatment at 6 months ranged from 41.4% (lung cancer) to 77.8% (prostate cancer).

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed variations by cancer type in the initiation, implementation, and persistence of denosumab in patients with solid tumors and bone metastases in routine clinical practice. Further cancer-specific studies are warranted to examine the determinants of (non)adherence with denosumab, and potential ways to improve medication adherence.

[Quality assurance for the treatment of muscle-invasive and metastasized bladder carcinoma in Germany : An initiative of the Working Groups Urological Oncology (AUO) and Internal Oncology (AIO) in the German Cancer Society (DKG)]

BACKGROUND

The S3-guideline on bladder cancer recommends radical cystectomy and cisplatin-based perioperative chemotherapy (POC) for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). Recommendation for metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC) is cisplatin-based or immuno-oncological (IO) treatment in platinum-ineligible patients (pts) or as 2nd-line therapy.

OBJECTIVES

Aim of the study was to obtain representative data on clinical routine treatment of MIBC and mUC in Germany.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A nationwide survey was performed to obtain data on stage-related patient volume in hospitals and office-based physicians. Based on these results, a representative sample of treatment data was collected retrospectively from pts with MIBC and mUC.

RESULTS

Data from 956 pts (MIBC 576; mUC: 380) were collected. Of the MIBC pts, 49.8% received a systemic therapy (80.4% of them received cisplatin/gemcitabine) and 50.2% were treated with a cystectomy without POC. Significant factors for cystectomy without POC were higher age > 75 years (odds ratio [OR] 4.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.01-8.11, p < 0.001) and platinum-ineligible pts (OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.30-3.59; p = 0.003). Treatment decision without interdisciplinary tumor board was also correlated with no POC (OR 2.43, 95% CI 1.65-3.61, p < 0.001). In mUC platinum-pretreated pts generally receive IO therapy (OR 12.07, 95% CI 6.94-21.82, p < 0.001). Other significant factors are positive PD-L1 status (OR 3.72, 95% CI 1.30-5.71, p < 0.001), higher age > 75 years (OR 2.83, 95% CI 1.43-5.73, p = 0.003) and platinum-ineligible pts (OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.30-5.71, p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

The "gold standard" cisplatin/gemcitabine is established in Germany if pts are treated with POC. Nonetheless half of the MIBC pts did not receive a POC, especially if the treatment decision is not discussed in a tumor board. In mUC IO therapy is established as 2nd-line therapy after a platinum-based treatment. Although the guideline recommendations are largely implemented, there is potential for optimization, especially in the establishment of interdisciplinary tumor boards.

Analysis of the Mechanism and Safety of Bisphosphonates in Patients with Lung Cancer and Bone Metastases

OBJECTIVE

To explore the mechanism and safety of bisphosphonates in patients with lung cancer and bone metastases.

METHOD

A total of 104 patients with lung cancer and bone metastases in our hospital were selected and randomly divided into two groups: control group (n = 54) and research group (n = 50). Chemotherapy was given to the control group, and the research group was treated with bisphosphonate drugs. The quality of life, HAMA, HAMD score, VAS score, treatment effect, serum calcium and KPS score, inflammatory factor levels, and immune function were compared between the two groups.

RESULT

The quality of life in both groups was significantly increased (P < 0.05). The HAMA and HAMD scores of the research group decreased significantly than those of the control group after treatment (P < 0.05). The VAS scores of the two groups were significantly reduced (P < 0.05). The effective rates of treatment in the control group and the research group were 81.5% and 96.0%, respectively. Serum calcium was significantly decreased, and KPS score was significantly increased at weeks 1 and 6 after treatment, and the change was more obvious in the research group (P < 0.05). The levels of inflammatory factors in the two groups were significantly reduced, and the immune indicators were significantly increased.

CONCLUSION

Bisphosphonates have good effect on patients with lung cancer and bone metastases, which can improve anxiety and depression, reduce pain score, improve serum calcium level and immune function, and reduce inflammatory response. Therefore, bisphosphonate drug therapy is worth widely used.

Risk evaluation of denosumab and zoledronic acid for medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw in patients with bone metastases: a propensity score-matched analysis

PURPOSE

This study evaluated the risk of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) in patients with cancer who received denosumab or zoledronic acid (ZA) for treating bone metastasis.

METHODS

The medical records of patients were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who did not undergo a dental examination at baseline were excluded. The primary endpoint was a comparison of the risk of developing MRONJ between the denosumab and ZA groups. Propensity score matching was used to control for baseline differences between patient characteristics and compare outcomes for both groups.

RESULTS

Among the 799 patients enrolled, 58 (7.3%) developed MRONJ. The incidence of MRONJ was significantly higher in the denosumab group than in the ZA group (9.6% [39/406] vs. 4.8% [19/393], p = 0.009). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis revealed that denosumab treatment (hazard ratio [HR], 2.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.65-5.25; p < 0.001) and tooth extraction after starting ZA or denosumab (HR, 4.26; 95% CI, 2.38-7.44; p < 0.001) were significant risk factors for MRONJ. Propensity score-matched analysis confirmed that the risk of developing MRONJ was significantly higher in the denosumab group than in the ZA group (HR, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.17-5.01; p = 0.016).

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest that denosumab poses a significant risk for developing MRONJ in patients treated for bone metastasis, and thus these patients require close monitoring.

Quality of life and pain in patients with metastatic bone disease from solid tumors treated with bone-targeted agents- a real-world cross-sectional study from Switzerland (SAKK 95/16)

Background

Bone-targeted agents (BTAs) are widely used in the management of patients with bone metastases from solid tumors. Knowledge of the impact of their routine care use on patient-reported pain and bone pain-related quality of life (QoL) is limited.

Methods

This real world, cross-sectional study enrolled patients over a 3-month period through oncologists across Switzerland. Patients were ≥ 18 years, had solid tumors and at least one bone metastasis, and received routine care for bone metastases. Physicians provided data on BTA-related practices, risk of bone complications and BTA regimen. Patients completed questionnaires about pain (BPI-SF), general and bone pain-related QoL (FACT-G, FACT-BP) and treatment satisfaction (FACIT-TS-G).

Results

Eighteen sites recruited 417 patients. Based on the FACT-BP, 42% of the patients indicated not having bone pain. According to the BPI-SF, 28% reported no, 43% mild, 14% moderate, and 15% severe pain, respectively. Patients not treated with a BTA had better overall QoL (FACT-G: p = 0.031) and bone pain-related QoL (FACT-BP, p = 0.007) than those treated with a BTA. All pain and other QoL scales did not differ between groups. Patients perceived at ‘low risk of bone complications’ by their physician not receiving a BTA reported less pain and better QoL than those considered at ‘low risk’ but receiving BTA treatment or those considered at ‘high risk’ regardless of BTA treatment. Overall satisfaction with the treatment was good; almost 50% of patients reporting that they were completely satisfied.

Conclusions

Overall, pain and QoL did not differ according to BTA treatment or physicians’ risk perception. Patient with low risks not receiving BTA treatment reported least pain and highest QoL scores. These results may suggest that treating physicians assess bone complication risk appropriately and treat patients accordingly, but they need to be confirmed by objective determination of longitudinal skeletal complication risk.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-021-07903-8.