The effect of supportive pamidronate treatment on aspects of quality of life of patients with advanced breast cancer

Adjuvant bisphosphonates or RANK-ligand inhibitors for patients with breast cancer and bone metastases: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Bone-modifying agents like bisphosphonates and receptor activator of nuclear factor kappaβ ligand (RANK-L) inhibitors are used as supportive treatments in breast cancer patients with bone metastases to prevent skeletal-related events (SREs). Due to missing head-to-head comparisons, a network meta-analysis was performed to provide a hierarchy of these therapeutic options. Through a systematic literature search, 21 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were identified. To prevent SREs, the ranking through P-scores showed denosumab (RR: 0.62; 95%CI: 0.50-0.76), zoledronic acid (RR: 0.72; 95%CI: 0.61-0.84) and pamidronate (RR: 0.76; 95%CI: 0.67-0.85) to be significantly superior to placebo. Due to insufficient or heterogeneous data, overall survival, quality of life, pain response and adverse events were not able to be analyzed within the network. Although data were sparse on adverse events, the risk of significant adverse events appeared low. The results of this review can therefore be used to formulate clinical studies more precisely in order to standardise and focus on patient-relevant outcomes.

Role of Pamidronate Disodium in the Treatment of Metastatic Bone Disease

Aims and Background

Bone metastases are a common feature of advanced neoplastic disease and are considered to be among the most frequent causes of pain and complications in oncologic patients. The main objective of the treatment of such patients is to control their symptoms and improve their quality of life. Pamidronate disodium is a second-generation bisphosphonate capable of inhibiting bone resorption (particularly osteoclast activity) without affecting bone reminerali-zation. After a brief introduction concerning the pathophysiology of bone metastases and neoplastic bone pain, we herein present data on the clinical pharmacology and toxicity of bisphosphonates in general, and pamidronate in particular. We conclude by reviewing the literature on the use of pamidronate in phase II and III trials involving patients with metastatic bone disease.

Methods

The paper is based on a review of articles published between 1984 and 1997 selected from the Cancerline and Medline databases.

Results

In the considered phase II and III studies involving patients with bone metastases (breast cancer and multiple myeloma in particular), pamidronate proved to be efficacious in reducing the incidence of pain and skeletal complications, decreasing the excretion of metabolic markers of bone resorption and improving the quality of life. Intravenous infusions of 60-90 mg over a period of 2 hr every 3-4 weeks did not cause any significant toxic effects and was easily managed.

Conclusions

Pamidronate is a bisphosphonate that is efficacious in the treatment of symptomatic bone metastases and can be considered an important therapeutic option in association with systemic treatments, radiotherapy and normal supportive care, especially in patients with breast cancer and multiple myeloma. Further randomized studies are necessary to confirm the positive preliminary results in other neoplasms, analyze the cost/benefit ratio of the treatment, and verify the possibility that, in addition to being used for palliative purposes, pamidronate may also prevent or delay the appearance of bone metastases.

Bisphosphonates and other bone agents for breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Bone is the most common site of metastatic disease associated with breast cancer (BC). Bisphosphonates inhibit osteoclast-mediated bone resorption, and novel targeted therapies such as denosumab inhibit other key bone metabolism pathways. We have studied these agents in both early breast cancer and advanced breast cancer settings. This is an update of the review originally published in 2002 and subsequently updated in 2005 and 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of bisphosphonates and other bone agents in addition to anti-cancer treatment: (i) in women with early breast cancer (EBC); (ii) in women with advanced breast cancer without bone metastases (ABC); and (iii) in women with metastatic breast cancer and bone metastases (BCBM).

SEARCH METHODS

In this review update, we searched Cochrane Breast Cancer's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov on 19 September 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing: (a) one treatment with a bisphosphonate/bone-acting agent with the same treatment without a bisphosphonate/bone-acting agent; (b) treatment with one bisphosphonate versus treatment with a different bisphosphonate; (c) treatment with a bisphosphonate versus another bone-acting agent of a different mechanism of action (e.g. denosumab); and (d) immediate treatment with a bisphosphonate/bone-acting agent versus delayed treatment of the same bisphosphonate/bone-acting agent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and quality of the evidence. The primary outcome measure was bone metastases for EBC and ABC, and a skeletal-related event (SRE) for BCBM. We derived risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and the meta-analyses used random-effects models. Secondary outcomes included overall survival and disease-free survival for EBC; we derived hazard ratios (HRs) for these time-to-event outcomes where possible. We collected toxicity and quality-of-life information. GRADE was used to assess the quality of evidence for the most important outcomes in each treatment setting.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 44 RCTs involving 37,302 women.In women with EBC, bisphosphonates were associated with a reduced risk of bone metastases compared to placebo/no bisphosphonate (RR 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75 to 0.99; P = 0.03, 11 studies; 15,005 women; moderate-quality evidence with no significant heterogeneity). Bisphosphonates provided an overall survival benefit with time-to-event data (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.99; P = 0.04; 9 studies; 13,949 women; high-quality evidence with evidence of heterogeneity). Subgroup analysis by menopausal status showed a survival benefit from bisphosphonates in postmenopausal women (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.90; P = 0.001; 4 studies; 6048 women; high-quality evidence with no evidence of heterogeneity) but no survival benefit for premenopausal women (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.22; P = 0.78; 2 studies; 3501 women; high-quality evidence with no heterogeneity). There was evidence of no effect of bisphosphonates on disease-free survival (HR 0.94, 95% 0.87 to 1.02; P = 0.13; 7 studies; 12,578 women; high-quality evidence with significant heterogeneity present) however subgroup analyses showed a disease-free survival benefit from bisphosphonates in postmenopausal women only (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.91; P < 0.001; 7 studies; 8314 women; high-quality evidence with no heterogeneity). Bisphosphonates did not significantly reduce the incidence of fractures when compared to placebo/no bisphosphonates (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.08, P = 0.13, 6 studies, 7602 women; moderate-quality evidence due to wide confidence intervals). We await mature overall survival and disease-free survival results for denosumab trials.In women with ABC without clinically evident bone metastases, there was no evidence of an effect of bisphosphonates on bone metastases (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.43; P = 0.86; 3 studies; 330 women; moderate-quality evidence with no heterogeneity) or overall survival (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.09; P = 0.28; 3 studies; 330 women; high-quality evidence with no heterogeneity) compared to placebo/no bisphosphonates however the confidence intervals were wide. One study reported a trend towards an extended period of time without a SRE with bisphosphonate compared to placebo (low-quality evidence). One study reported quality of life and there was no apparent difference in scores between bisphosphonate and placebo (moderate-quality evidence).In women with BCBM, bisphosphonates reduced the SRE risk by 14% (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.95; P = 0.003; 9 studies; 2810 women; high-quality evidence with evidence of heterogeneity) compared with placebo/no bisphosphonates. This benefit persisted when administering either intravenous or oral bisphosphonates versus placebo. Bisphosphonates delayed the median time to a SRE with a median ratio of 1.43 (95% CI 1.29 to 1.58; P < 0.00001; 9 studies; 2891 women; high-quality evidence with no heterogeneity) and reduced bone pain (in 6 out of 11 studies; moderate-quality evidence) compared to placebo/no bisphosphonate. Treatment with bisphosphonates did not appear to affect overall survival (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.11; P = 0.85; 7 studies; 1935 women; moderate-quality evidence with significant heterogeneity). Quality-of-life scores were slightly better with bisphosphonates than placebo at comparable time points (in three out of five studies; moderate-quality evidence) however scores decreased during the course of the studies. Denosumab reduced the risk of developing a SRE compared with bisphosphonates by 22% (RR 0.78, 0.72 to 0.85; P < 0.001; 3 studies, 2345 women). One study reported data on overall survival and observed no difference in survival between denosumab and bisphosphonate.Reported toxicities across all settings were generally mild. Osteonecrosis of the jaw was rare, occurring less than 0.5% in the adjuvant setting (high-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For women with EBC, bisphosphonates reduce the risk of bone metastases and provide an overall survival benefit compared to placebo or no bisphosphonates. There is preliminary evidence suggestive that bisphosphonates provide an overall survival and disease-free survival benefit in postmenopausal women only when compared to placebo or no bisphosphonate. This was not a planned subgroup for these early trials, and we await the completion of new large clinical trials assessing benefit for postmenopausal women. For women with BCBM, bisphosphonates reduce the risk of developing SREs, delay the median time to an SRE, and appear to reduce bone pain compared to placebo or no bisphosphonate.

A simple evaluation method for early detection of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the mandible using computed tomography

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to establish a simple method for the early detection of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ) using computed tomography (CT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

CT images of the mandible were obtained from a total of 20 patients with BRONJ and 20 control subjects. BRONJ was classified into 2 groups, with bone exposure (Stage 1-3 BRONJ) or without (Stage 0 BRONJ). In each patient, 15 transaxial CT images were selected and 30 configured regions of interest (ROI) were identified. The ANOVA test was applied to test the relationship between the severity of systemic risk factors.

RESULTS

Regarding the local status of the mandible, significant differences were observed among the Stage 0 BRONJ, Stage 1-3 BRONJ, non-BRONJ and control groups in the cancellous bone CT radiodensity values, but there were no significant differences between the Stage 0 and Stage 1-3 BRONJ groups. In the cortical bone widths, significant differences were observed only between BRONJ and the controls.

CONCLUSIONS

Measuring cancellous bone CT radiodensity value has the potential to be a simple and quantitative method to detect the early stages of BRONJ.

Biology of bone metastases

BACKGROUND

Bone metastases cause morbidity and mortality in multiple malignancies. In addition to portending a dire prognosis, bone metastases cause bone pain, fractures, hypercalcemia, spinal cord compression, and other nerve compression syndromes. Improved understanding of the mechanisms that predispose tumor metastases to bone is needed to improve patients' therapeutic options, maintain their quality of life, and improve their survival.

METHODS

This review discusses selected preclinical and clinical data regarding bone metastasis development and cytokine/molecular interactions predisposing to bone metastases formation. Potential interventions for reducing bone metastases are also described.

RESULTS

Biologic mechanisms resulting in metastases of tumor cells to bone are being studied. Among these are the RANKL pathway, osteoclast activation via cytokines (produced by tumor cell and cells in the bone microenvironment), interactions with transient and stromal cells in the bone microenvironment, and molecules such as PTHrP and endothelin-1. These molecules offer important opportunities for targeted interventions to decrease bone metastases-associated morbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge of the pathophysiology of bone and cancer is developing rapidly. Relationships among cancer cells, bone-derived cells, and cytokines provide opportunities for the development of new interventions. Therapy targeting osteoclast/osteoblast interactions has proven benefit for patients with bone metastases.

Bisphosphonates and other bone agents for breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Bone is the most common site of metastatic disease associated with breast cancer (BC). Bisphosphonates inhibit osteoclast-mediated bone resorption, and novel targeted therapies such as denosumab, inhibit key pathways in the vicious cycle of bone metastases.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of bisphosphonates on skeletal-related events (SREs), bone pain, quality of life (QoL), recurrence and survival in women with breast cancer with bone metastases (BCBM), advanced breast cancer (ABC) without clinical evidence of bone metastases and early breast cancer (EBC).To assess the effect of denosumab on SREs, bone pain and (QoL) in women with (BCBM).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Specialised Register maintained by the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group (CBCGSR), MEDLINE, EMBASE and the WHO International Cancer Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) on 30 April 2011. We conducted additional handsearching of journals and proceedings of key meetings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing: (a) bisphosphonates and control, or different bisphosphonates in women with BCBM; (b) denosumab and bisphosphonates in women with BCBM; (c) bisphosphonates and control in women with ABC; (d) bisphosphonates and control in women with EBC; and (e) early versus delayed bisphosphonate treatment in women with EBC.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (MW and NP) independently assessed the trials and extracted the data. We collected toxicity information from the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

We included thirty-four RCTs. In nine studies (2806 patients with BCBM), comparing bisphosphonates with placebo or no bisphosphonates, bisphosphonates reduced the SRE risk by 15% (risk ratio (RR) 0.85; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 0.94; P = 0.001). This benefit was most certain with intravenous (i.v.) zoledronic acid (4 mg) (RR 0.59; 95% CI 0.42 to 0.82); i.v. pamidronate (90 mg) (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.69 to 0.87); and i.v. ibandronate (RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.67 to 0.96). A direct comparison of i.v. zoledronic acid and i.v. pamidronate confirmed at least equivalent efficacy in a single large study. In three studies (3405 patients with BCBM), compared with bisphosphonates, subcutaneous (s.c.) denosumab was more effective in reducing the risk of SREs (RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.72 to 0.85; P < 0.00001).Bisphosphonates reduced the SRE rate in 12 studies (median reduction 28%, range 14% to 48%), with statistically significant reductions reported in 10 studies. Women with BCBM treated with bisphosphonates showed significant delays in the median time to SREs. Compared with placebo or no bisphosphonates, treatment with bisphosphonates significantly improved bone pain in six out of eleven studies. Improvements in global QoL with bisphosphonates compared to placebo were reported in two out of five studies (both ibandronate studies). Treatment with bisphosphonates did not appear to affect survival in women with BCBM. Compared to i.v. zoledronic acid, denosumab also significantly reduced the SRE rate, delayed the time to SREs and prolonged the time in developing pain for patients with no or mild pain at baseline; but there was no difference in survival between patients treated with denosumab and zoledronic acid.Bisphosphonates in women with ABC without clinically evident bone metastases did not reduce the incidence of bone metastases, or improve survival in three studies (320 patients).In seven studies (7847 patients with EBC), currently there is no evidence supporting bisphosphonates in reducing the incidence of bone metastases compared to no bisphosphonates (RR 0.94; 95% CI 0.82 to 1.07; P = 0.36). In three studies (2190 patients with EBC), early bisphosphonate treatment also did not significantly reduce the incidence of bone metastases compared to delayed bisphosphonate treatment (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.40 to 1.33; P = 0.31). Currently, there is insufficient evidence to make a conclusion about the role of adjuvant bisphosphonates in reducing visceral metastases, locoregional recurrence and total recurrence, or improving survival. There was strong heterogeneity in EBC studies examining the outcomes of total recurrence and survival.Reported toxicity was generally mild. Renal toxicity and osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) have been identified as potential problems with bisphosphonate use. ONJ was reported at similar rates for patients on denosumab compared to zoledronic acid. This highlighted a need for maintaining good oral care, prior to and during treatment, for patients who received long-term bone agents.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In women with clinically evident BCBM, bisphosphonates (oral and i.v.) and denosumab (s.c.) reduced the risk of developing SREs, as well as delaying the time to SREs. Some bisphosphonates may also reduce bone pain and may improve QoL. The optimal timing and duration of treatment for patients with BCBM remains uncertain. There is currently insufficient evidence to support the routine use of bisphosphonates as adjuvant treatment for patients with EBC. However, a number of large clinical trials investigating bisphosphonates in EBC have completed accrual and are awaiting results.

Quality of life measurement in bone metastases: A literature review

Quality of life (QOL) has become an important consideration in the care of patients with bone metastases as prevalence, incidence and patient survival are on the rise. As a result, more interventional studies now measure patient’s QOL as a meaningful endpoint. However, well-developed bone metastases specific quality of life instruments are lacking. A literature review was conducted to better understand the nature of QOL instruments used in bone metastases trials. A total of 47 articles evaluating QOL in patients with bone metastases were identified. Twenty-five different instruments were used to evaluate QOL with study-designed questionnaires and the EORTC QLQ-C30 being most commonly employed. Many studies used more than one scale or instrument to measure QOL. This makes it difficult to compare QOL in bone metastases patients across studies and come to any formal conclusions. Therefore, this review demonstrates the need to develop a bone module that can be used across countries in future clinical trials.

Health-related quality of life in breast cancer patients: a bibliographic review of the literature from 1974 to 2007

Background

Quality of life in patients with breast cancer is an important outcome. This paper presents an extensive overview on the topic ranging from descriptive findings to clinical trials.

Methods

This was a bibliographic review of the literature covering all full publications that appeared in English language biomedical journals between 1974 and 2007. The search strategy included a combination of key words 'quality of life' and 'breast cancer' or 'breast carcinoma' in titles. A total of 971 citations were identified and after exclusion of duplicates, the abstracts of 606 citations were reviewed. Of these, meetings abstracts, editorials, brief commentaries, letters, errata and dissertation abstracts and papers that appeared online and were indexed ahead of publication were also excluded. The remaining 477 papers were examined. The major findings are summarized and presented under several headings: instruments used, validation studies, measurement issues, surgical treatment, systemic therapies, quality of life as predictor of survival, psychological distress, supportive care, symptoms and sexual functioning.

Results

Instruments-Several valid instruments were used to measure quality of life in breast cancer patients. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and its breast cancer specific complementary measure (EORTC QLQ-BR23) and the Functional Assessment Chronic Illness Therapy General questionnaire (FACIT-G) and its breast cancer module (FACIT-B) were found to be the most common and well developed instruments to measure quality of life in breast cancer patients. Surgery-different surgical procedures led to relatively similar results in terms of quality of life assessments, although mastectomy patients compared to conserving surgery patients usually reported a lower body image and sexual functioning. Systemic therapies-almost all studies indicated that breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy might experience several side-effects and symptoms that negatively affect their quality of life. Adjuvant hormonal therapies also were found to have similar negative impact on quality of life, although in general they were associated with improved survival. Quality of life as predictor of survival-similar to known medical factors, quality of life data in metastatic breast cancer patients was found to be prognostic and predictive of survival time. Psychological distress-anxiety and depression were found to be common among breast cancer patients even years after the disease diagnosis and treatment. Psychological factors also were found to predict subsequent quality of life or even overall survival in breast cancer patients. Supportive care-clinical treatments to control emesis, or interventions such as counseling, providing social support and exercise could improve quality of life. Symptoms-Pain, fatigue, arm morbidity and postmenopausal symptoms were among the most common symptoms reported by breast cancer patients. As recommended, recognition and management of these symptoms is an important issue since such symptoms impair health-related quality of life. Sexual functioning-breast cancer patients especially younger patients suffer from poor sexual functioning that negatively affect quality of life.

Conclusion

There was quite an extensive body of the literature on quality of life in breast cancer patients. These papers have made a considerable contribution to improving breast cancer care, although their exact benefit was hard to define. However, quality of life data provided scientific evidence for clinical decision-making and conveyed helpful information concerning breast cancer patients' experiences during the course of the disease diagnosis, treatment, disease-free survival time, and recurrences; otherwise finding patient-centered solutions for evidence-based selection of optimal treatments, psychosocial interventions, patient-physician communications, allocation of resources, and indicating research priorities were impossible. It seems that more qualitative research is needed for a better understanding of the topic. In addition, issues related to the disease, its treatment side effects and symptoms, and sexual functioning should receive more attention when studying quality of life in breast cancer patients.

Effectiveness of bisphosphonates on bone pain and quality of life in breast cancer patients with metastatic bone disease: a review

INTRODUCTION

Almost all patients with breast cancer and bone metastases suffer bone pain. Many receive bisphosphonate therapy only when the pain becomes unbearable or there is a direct threat of skeletal complications.

DISCUSSION

However, clinical trial data demonstrate that bisphosphonates offer significant and sustained relief from bone pain and can also improve quality of life in patients with metastatic breast cancer.

CONCLUSION

Moreover, new treatment schedules using high dose bisphosphonates can offer rapid relief of acute, severe bone pain.

Quality of Life Assessment of Randomized Controlled Trials

Aims and Background

According to the USA Food and Drug Administration, quality of life (QOL) and/or survival are a priority for new anticancer drug approval. This study was performed to review approaches to QOL in randomized controlled clinical trials (RCCTs) and to survey the use of such measures in trials.

Material and Methods

A literature survey was carried out using the Medline/Medscape, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Ovid databases. Included in the survey were all publications in the set period (from 1966 to June 2005) with “quality of life” in the title or in the abstract in the field of “randomized, controlled clinical trials”. Each trial was evaluated according to the level of importance of QOL as a measure of outcome (primary, important and secondary) and was analyzed using the quality scoring system reported by Nicolucci et al. with some items regarding QOL.

Results

Four hundred and five RCCT articles in the oncology setting were found. Fifty-six of the 405 (13.8%) publications had QOL as primary end point. The overall quality score of these trials ranged from 40% to 100%, with a median overall score of 80%. The overall score was correlated with the year of publication (P = 0.007), the type of journal (P = 0.05), the presence of a biostatistician among the authors (P = 0.001), and the number of participating institutions (P = 0.009).

Conclusions

More attention to QOL in all components of RCCTs (design, choice of instruments, data management and processing) is required from both clinicians and statisticians.

Bisphosphonates for breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Bone is the most common site of metastatic disease associated with breast cancer affecting 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

To assess 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 using the specialized register maintained by 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 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

Twenty one randomized studies were included. All studies in advanced breast cancer included women with clinically evident bone metastases (osteolytic and/or mixed osteolytic/osteoblastic) by plain xray and/or radionucleotide bone scans. In nine studies that included 2189 women with advanced breast cancer and existing bone metastases, bisphosphonates reduced the risk of developing a skeletal event by 17% (RR 0.83; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78-0.89; P < 0.00001). This effect was more modest, but still highly significant if episodes of hypercalcaemia were excluded (10 studies, 2656 women, RR 0.85; 95% CI 0.79-0.91 P = 0.0001). Overall, intravenous bisphosphonates reduce the risk of developing a skeletal event by 17 % (95% CI 0.78-0.89) compared with oral bisphosphonates, which reduce the risk of developing a skeletal event by 16 % (95% CI 0.76-0.93). Of the currently available bisphosphonates, 4 mg IV zolendronate reduces the risk of developing a skeletal event by 41% (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.42-0.82), compared with 33 % by 90 mg IV pamdronate (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.69-0.87), 18 % by 6 mg IV ibandronate (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.67-1.00), 14 % by 50mg oral ibandronate (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.73-1.02) and 16 % by 1600 mg oral clodronate (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72-0.98). Compared with placebo or no bisphosphonate, with bisphosphonates the skeletal event rate was lower in all of 12 studies in women with clinically evident bone metastases (median reduction of 29%, range 14-48%); statistically significant reductions were reported in 10 trials (four intravenous pamidronate, two oral clodronate, one intravenous ibandronate and two oral ibandronate, a single intravenous zolendronate study). Studies of intravenous zolendronate, 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 also reported to be longer in women receiving 6 mg of ibandronate compared with controls. Compared with placebo or no bisphosphonate, with bisphosphonates significant improvements in bone pain were reported in seven studies (90 mg iv pamidronate, 4 mg iv zolendronate, 6 mg iv ibandronate, 1600 mg oral clodronate and 50 mg oral ibandronate). Eight studies tested the effect of bisphosphonates compared with placebo on patient-rated quality of life using a referenced scale. Improvements in global quality of life were reported in only the three studies of iv and oral ibandronate. Treatment with bisphosphonates does not appear to affect survival in women with advanced breast cancer. Intravenous zolendronate (4 mg) appeared to be as effective as pamidronate (90mg) when directly compared in a single randomized double-blind study, based on the risk of developing a skeletal related event, the median time to first skeletal event and skeletal morbidity rate (events per year). Updated re-evaluation of the primary data in the overall population, by multiple event analysis using the method of Anderson-Gill, showed a reduction in the risk of developing any skeletal complication (including hypercalcamia) of 20 % (zolendronate 4 mg compared with pamidronate 90 mg, RR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 - 0.97, p = 0.025), suggesting a possible advantage of zolendronate 4 mg compared with pamidronate 90 mg. 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 = 0.97). In the three studies of oral clodronate that included 1653 women with early breast cancer, there was no statistically significant evidence of reduction in the risk of developing skeletal metastases (RR 0.82; 95% CI 0.66-1.01; P = 0.07), or of visceral metastases (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.80-1.12, p = 0.53). However there was evidence of improved survival (RR 0.82; 95% CI 0.69-0.97, p = 0.02). However there was statistically significant heterogeneity among these studies and a random effects meta-analysis emphasizes the uncertainty of this finding (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.45 - 1.25; p = 0.19). Toxicity or adverse events were described in 18 of the 21 studies. In general, few serious adverse events were reported. Toxicity associated with bisphosphonates is generally mild and infrequent. Renal toxicity is the main issue with intravenous zolendronate and is dose (8 mg) and infusion time related (< 15 minutes). With daily oral calcium (500 mg) and vitamin D (300-400IU) no significant renal impairment or hypocalcamia was observed with a 15 minute infusion of 4 mg IV zolendronate compared with 90 mg pamidronate. Monitoring of renal function with every cycle of zolendronate was undertaken in all studies and is recommended in practice. No significant renal toxicity was observed with intravenous pamidronate or ibandronate. Mild gastrointestinal toxicity is the main toxicity with oral clodronate and oral ibandronate.

AUTHORS' 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 to skeletal event. Some bisphosphonates may also reduce bone pain in women with advanced breast cancer and clinically evident bone metastases and may improve global quality of life. The optimal timing of initiation of bisphosphonate therapy and duration of treatment is uncertain. In women with early breast cancer the effectiveness of bisphosphonates remains an open question for research.

Improved quality of life after long-term treatment with the bisphosphonate ibandronate in patients with metastatic bone disease due to breast cancer

Bone metastases occur in most women with advanced breast cancer and can lead to considerable morbidity and a rapid deterioration in the patient's quality of life. It was the aim of the present study to assess changes in quality of life and bone pain due to intravenous (i.v.) ibandronate, a potent third-generation bisphosphonate. In a phase III randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients with bone metastases due to breast cancer, 466 women were randomised to receive placebo, 2 mg ibandronate or 6 mg ibandronate for up to 96 weeks. Treatment was administered i.v. at 3- or 4-weekly intervals. Clinical endpoints included the incidence of adverse events, quality of life (assessed using the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Scale - Core 30 questionnaire (QLQ-C30)), and bone pain (assessed on a 5-point scale from 0=none to 4=intolerable). Ibandronate was generally well tolerated. Compared with baseline measurements, the bone pain score was increased at the last assessment in both the placebo and 2 mg ibandronate groups, but was significantly reduced in the patients receiving 6 mg ibandronate (-0.28+/-1.11, P < 0.001). A significant improvement in quality of life was demonstrated for patients treated with ibandronate (P < 0.05) for all global health status. Overall, at the last assessment, the 6 mg ibandronate group showed significantly better functioning compared with placebo (P = 0.004), and had significantly better scores on the domains of physical, emotional, and social functioning, and in global health status (P < 0.05). Significant improvements in the symptoms of fatigue and pain were also observed in the 6 mg ibandronate group. I.v. ibandronate treatment leads to significant improvements in quality of life, and is an effective and well-tolerated palliative treatment in patients with bone metastases due to breast cancer.

Clinical and economic issues in the treatment of advanced breast cancer with bisphosphonates

An ideal palliative therapy for bone metastases would successfully reduce skeletal complications in several thousands of breast cancer patients. Second- and third-generation bisphosphonates are effective in reducing the overall skeletal complication rate and the time to first skeletal complication. Nevertheless, not enough evidence supports their benefit on quality of life. Furthermore, bisphosphonates are expensive (up to 775 US dollars per month, 2002 value) and cost-effectiveness evaluations have been limited to pamidronate (pamidronic acid). In economic evaluations of pamidronate, resulting incremental dollar per quality-adjusted life year gained ranged from cost savings to 108,000 US dollars per quality-adjusted life year. The data were quite sensitive to quality-of-life estimates and country-specific cost values. Because of the wide range of the cost-effectiveness ratio, it is uncertain whether the universal prescription of bisphosphonates in this setting represents an efficient use of healthcare resources. Probably, country- and drug-specific policies might increase the efficiency of this treatment. Further outcomes research is required to assess these agents more fully.

Clinical efficacy of bisphosphonate therapy for bone metastasis from breast cancer

Bisphosphonates inhibit osteoclastic bone resorption and are being used as treatment for bone metastases from breast cancer. Intravenous bisphosphonate therapy can significantly reduce skeletal related events (SREs) when administered concurrently with chemotherapy or endocrine therapy. In addition, intravenous bisphosphonate monotherapy is also able to alleviate cancer induced bone pain, and to improve bone metastases in some patients. Oral bisphosphonates are not routinely used for the treatment of bone metastases due to their low bioavailability. However, minodronate, a bisphosphonate 100-fold more potent than pamidronate, is now in phase II clinical studies in Japan, and may alter the role of oral bisphosphonates in the treatment of bone metastasis from breast cancer. The ASCO guidelines recommend that patients with osteolytic bone metastases be treated not with bisphosphonate monotherapy, but with concurrent bisphosphonate and systemic therapy. In addition, it is also recommended that current standards of care for cancer pain, analgesics and radiotherapy, should not be replaced with bisphosphonate therapy.

Health-related quality-of-life measurement in randomized clinical trials in breast cancer--taking stock

Measurement of health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) in randomized clinical trials in breast cancer has become common. In this review, we take stock of the contribution that HRQOL measurement in breast cancer clinical trials makes to clinical decision making regarding selection of optimal treatment. A series of MEDLINE searches was conducted to identify all randomized trials in breast cancer that included self-reported HRQOL or psychosocial outcomes. A total of 256 citations were identified that included HRQOL or psychosocial outcomes in breast cancer patients, and 66 of these involved randomized clinical trials of treatment. These 66 reports of breast cancer clinical trials of treatment are discussed in this review. Forty-six of the trials evaluated biomedical interventions, and 20 evaluated psychosocial interventions. Among the biomedical trials, eight trials evaluated HRQOL in primary management of breast cancer, seven trials evaluated HRQOL in adjuvant therapy of breast cancer patients, 20 trials involved metastatic breast cancer, eight trials involved symptom control/supportive care, and three trials evaluated different approaches to investigation or follow-up of breast cancer patients. Among the psychosocial trials, 13 trials evaluated HRQOL in adjuvant therapy of breast cancer patients, and their partners or spouses, six trials involved metastatic breast cancer, and one trial focused on symptom control. We found that the contribution of HRQOL measurement to clinical decision making depended on the clinical setting. In primary management of breast cancer, where medical outcomes of several treatment options are equivalent, HRQOL measurement provided added information for clinical decision making beyond that of traditional medical outcomes. In trials in the adjuvant setting, HRQOL measurement did not influence clinical decision making. In metastatic disease, HRQOL outcomes provided little information beyond that obtained from traditional medical outcomes, including toxicity. In the symptom control/supportive care setting, results of HRQOL questionnaires targeting specific symptoms (e.g., emesis) guided treatment decisions. In psychosocial intervention trials, psychosocial and/or HRQOL measurements often provided the only outcome information; therefore, selection of instruments that captured attributes likely to be altered by the intervention was essential. Until results of ongoing trials in breast cancer are available, caution is recommended in initiating new HRQOL studies unless treatment equivalency is expected, or unless the HRQOL questions target unique or specific issues that can only be addressed through patient self-report, including outcomes of psychosocial interventions.

Strategies for management of prostate cancer-related bone pain

Prostate cancer is one of the most common malignancies and a leading cause of cancer-related death in men worldwide. In the majority of cases, prostate cancer metastases to the skeleton, in which case cancer-related bone pain becomes a major cause of morbidity. Androgen ablation is the treatment of choice for securing regression of skeletal metastases in the majority of cases. Intermittent androgen ablation is an attractive alternative, aimed at minimising adverse effects of hormone deprivation but also potentially delaying hormone-refractoriness. The development of hormone-refractoriness is heralded by a significant increase in morbidity largely because of escalating bone pain caused by the progression of the metastatic process. Skillful use of analgesics is initially successful but eventually fails to control symptoms. Localised metastases are best treated with local radiotherapy that is rapidly effective. Over the last few years, it has become clear that therapeutic modalities using bone-seeking radionuclides or bisphosphonates have been effective in the palliation of prostate cancer-related bone pain, although not affecting survival. The main limiting factor with the use of radionuclides is bone marrow suppression, also a feature of the very late stages of prostate cancer. Bisphosphonates do not carry this disadvantage. Results of large double-blind, placebo-controlled studies should be awaited, however, before advocating the widespread use of these agents in the management of patients with prostate cancer and skeletal metastases.

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.

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.

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.

The effects of chronic medical conditions on work loss and work cutback

Although work performance has become an important outcome in cost-of-illness studies, little is known about the comparative effects of different commonly occurring chronic conditions on work impairment in general population samples. Such data are presented here from a large-scale nationally representative general population survey. The data are from the MacArthur Foundation Midlife Development in the United States (MIDUS) survey, a nationally representative telephone-mail survey of 3032 respondents in the age range of 25 to 74 years. The 2074 survey respondents in the age range of 25 to 54 years are the focus of the current report. The data collection included a chronic-conditions checklist and questions about how many days out of the past 30 each respondent was either totally unable to work or perform normal activities because of health problems (work-loss days) or had to cut back on these activities because of health problems (work-cutback days). Regression analysis was used to estimate the effects of conditions on work impairments, controlling for sociodemographics. At least one illness-related work-loss or work-cutback day in the past 30 days was reported by 22.4% of respondents, with a monthly average of 6.7 such days among those with any work impairment. This is equivalent to an annualized national estimate of over 2.5 billion work-impairment days in the age range of the sample. Cancer is associated with by far the highest reported prevalence of any impairment (66.2%) and the highest conditional number of impairment days in the past 30 (16.4 days). Other conditions associated with high odds of any impairment include ulcers, major depression, and panic disorder, whereas other conditions associated with a large conditional number of impairment days include heart disease and high blood pressure. Comorbidities involving combinations of arthritis, ulcers, mental disorders, and substance dependence are associated with higher impairments than expected on the basis of an additive model. The effects of conditions do not differ systematically across subsamples defined on the basis of age, sex, education, or employment status. The enormous magnitude of the work impairment associated with chronic conditions and the economic advantages of interventions for ill workers that reduce work impairments should be factored into employer cost-benefit calculations of expanding health insurance coverage. Given the enormous work impairment associated with cancer and the fact that the vast majority of employed people who are diagnosed with cancer stay in the workforce through at least part of their course of treatment, interventions aimed at reducing the workplace costs of this illness should be a priority.

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.

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.

The potential role of bisphosphonates as adjuvant therapy in the prevention of bone metastases

BACKGROUND

Bisphosphonates (BPs) reduce bone resorption rates by inhibiting osteoclast function, although direct antineoplastic effects and poorly understood effects on bone pain also may occur. Within the family of BPs there are more similarities in pharmacologic effects than differences, although side effect profiles, rates of oral absorption, and potency do differ. Oral clodronate and intravenous pamidronate reduce skeletal complications in patients with bone metastases from breast carcinoma (as well as in myeloma). Uncontrolled trials of prostate carcinoma also suggest clinical benefit.

METHODS

Animal studies show that BPs can reduce the rate of development of bone metastases (for example, in Walker 256 carcinoma), but there is little evidence of an effect at nonosseous sites. The hypothesis that the growth of subclinical osseous metastases is augmented by products of bone resorption (a "vicious cycle") and may be diminished by a local reduction of these substances has led to trials of BPs involving patients with no clinical evidence of bone metastases. These trials are critically assessed in this review.

RESULTS

In patients with recurrent breast carcinoma but no overt bone metastases, oral clodronate reduced the number of diagnosed bone metastases; but the number of patients who had relapses in bone, though smaller, was not significantly different from the number among patients who took placebo. In a trial of oral pamidronate, no effect was seen, but compliance was a problem because of gastrointestinal side effects. Patients treated for operable breast carcinoma have four or five times the normal rate of vertebral fracture, and BPs do reduce the rate of bone loss. Three adjuvant clodronate trials have been reported. The first, an open-label controlled trial (Diel et al.), showed a reduction in osseous and nonosseous recurrences and an increase in disease free and overall survival with 2 years of clodronate. A second open-label trial (Saarto et al.) of similar size involving lymph node positive breast carcinoma patients showed no effect on the rate of bone metastasis relapse and a deleterious effect on relapse rates of nonosseous metastases with 3 years of clodronate. A third placebo-controlled trial involving 1079 patients reported, in an interim analysis, a reduction in osseous metastases during treatment with 2 years of clodronate, but no effect on nonosseous metastases or survival.

CONCLUSIONS

A confirmatory clinical trial is required for two interrelated reasons: 1) scientifically, it is important to demonstrate that an agent that has its dominant effect on a normal tissue cell, the osteoclast, can influence the growth of neoplastic cells; and 2) from the perspective of patient care, it must be unequivocally shown that a reduction in the rate of osseous recurrence translates into an improvement in disease free survival or an improvement in quality of life through reduction of adverse skeletal events. The National Surgical Adjuvant Breast Project has committed to conducting this study and including women with operable breast carcinoma.

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.

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.

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.

The use of quality of life data in clinical practice

A large amount of quality of life (QoL) information has been and is being collected in the oncology setting but it is unclear how such data influence decisions about the management of individual patients. A questionnaire designed specifically for the study was mailed to 260 senior oncologists to investigate how QoL data are being used outside the context of cancer clinical trials; replies were received from 154 (59%). Approximately 80% believed QoL information should be collected prior to the commencement of treatment, but less than 50% actually did so. Similarly, less than 50% assessed QoL as a method of monitoring the responses to treatment even when the treatment goal was palliation. The barriers to collecting such data were time and resource constraints, perceived lack of an appropriate instrument and a belief that QoL assessments were unnecessary. Other than making a subjective assessment based on examination and history, 73 (47%) used either standardized questionnaires or a system derived in their unit to assess the QoL of their patients. Given an appropriate instrument the majority believed that QoL data could be collected on a routine basis. The main barriers to collecting QoL data are logistic and the challenge remains to develop a method of collecting and analysing QoL information in a manner which enhances decision making.

Efficacy of pamidronate in reducing skeletal complications in patients with breast cancer and lytic bone metastases. Protocol 19 Aredia Breast Cancer Study Group

BACKGROUND

Bisphosphonates such as pamidronate disodium inhibit osteoclast-induced bone resorption associated with cancer that has metastasized to bone.

METHODS

Women with stage IV breast cancer who were receiving cytotoxic chemotherapy and had at least one lytic bone lesion were given either placebo or pamidronate (90 mg) as a two-hour intravenous infusion monthly for 12 cycles. Skeletal complications, including pathologic fractures, the need for radiation to bone or bone surgery, spinal cord compression, and hypercalcemia (a serum calcium concentration above 12 mg per deciliter [3.0 mmol per liter] or elevated to any degree and requiring treatment), were assessed monthly. Bone pain, use of analgesic drugs, performance status, and quality of life were assessed throughout the trial.

RESULTS

The efficacy of treatment was evaluated in 380 of 382 randomized patients, 185 receiving pamidronate and 195 receiving placebo. The median time to the occurrence of the first skeletal complication was greater in the pamidronate group than in the placebo group (13.1 vs. 7.0 months, P=0.005), and the proportion of patients in whom any skeletal complication occurred was lower (43 percent vs. 56 percent, P = 0.008). There was significantly less increase in bone pain (P=0.046) and deterioration of performance status (P=0.027) in the pamidronate group than in the placebo group. Pamidronate was well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Monthly infusions of pamidronate as a supplement to chemotherapy can protect against skeletal complications in women with stage IV breast cancer who have osteolytic bone metastases.

Bisphosphonates inhibit the adhesion of breast cancer cells to bone matrices in vitro

Bisphosphonates are used with increasing frequency in the management of skeletal complications in patients with breast cancer. In this paper, we have investigated whether bisphosphonates, besides their known beneficial effects on tumor-associated osteoclastic resorption, are capable of inhibiting breast cancer cell adhesion to bone matrix. For that we used two in vitro models for bone matrix (cortical bone slices and cryostat sections of trabecular bone from neonatal mouse tails). Four bone matrix-bound nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates (pamidronate, olpadronate, alendronate, and ibandronate) inhibited adhesion and spreading of breast cancer cells to bone dose-dependently, whereas etidronate and clodronate had little or no effect. Strikingly, the relative order of potency of the bisphosphonates in inhibiting the adhesion of cancer cells to cortical and trabecular bone corresponded to their relative antiresorptive potencies in vivo as well as their ranking in in vitro bone resorption assays with predictive value for their clinical efficacy. It appears that nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates alter selectively the adhesive properties of the extracellular bone matrix preventing the attachment of breast cancer cells to it. Besides the beneficial effects of bisphosphonates on tumor-induced osteoclastic resorption, the previously unrecognized effect presented in this paper makes these agents suitable for earlier pharmacologic intervention in patients with breast cancer at risk of developing bone metastases.

The role of bisphosphonates in the treatment of bone metastases--the U.S. experience

Frequent complications of bone metastases include pain, pathologic fracture, hypercalcemia and spinal cord compression. Lytic bone metastases result from excessive activation of osteoclasts by tumor-produced cytokines. Aredia (pamidronate) is a potent bisphosphonate that inhibits osteoclast activation. In two dose-seeking phase I trials in patients with breast cancer and prostate cancer, repeated intravenous infusion of Aredia was shown to be safe and effective in reducing bone resorption and pain. In a randomized phase III trial of 377 patients with multiple myeloma, Aredia was administered in a dosage of 90 mg i.v. every 4 weeks. Compared with placebo, treatment with Aredia was associated with a significant decrease in bone pain and in the incidence and time to development of all skeleton-related events. Data from two phase III breast cancer trials each involving 300 patients are now being analyzed. The newer bisphosphonates can safely be used together with standard anticancer therapy to provide effective palliation of symptoms caused by lytic bone metastases.

Does supportive pamidronate treatment prevent or delay the first manifestation of bone metastases in breast cancer patients?

The effect of pamidronate treatment on the first development of bone metastases was investigated in 124 patients with breast cancer, with either locally advanced disease (n = 33) or extraskeletal metastases (n = 91), but no bone metastases in a randomised, multicentre, open controlled study. Patients were assigned to treatment with oral pamidronate, 300 mg/day, (n = 65) or to a control group (n = 59). Tumour therapy was freely allowed. A first clinical event of skeletal morbidity occurred in 22% pamidronate and 20% control patients; unequivocal first radiological manifestation of bone metastases was found in 36% pamidronate and 27% control patients (n.s.). The actuarial risk of a first skeletal event was similar in both groups. Quality-of-life measurements of bone metastases-related aspects showed no differences between the two groups. 19 patients withdrew from the study because of gastrointestinal complaints attributed to pamidronate. We conclude that supportive oral pamidronate treatment (300 mg/day) does not prevent nor delay the development of bone metastases in breast cancer patients at risk.

Palliative medicine and the medical oncologist. Defining the purview of care

The fusion of palliative medicine and medical oncology, in practice and in education, can provide a better standard of patient care, reduce the risk of oncologist burnout, and increase the likelihood of patient family and physician satisfaction. There need be no gulf between these disciplines, and only together do they represent truly comprehensive cancer care. The realization of this fusion will require the participation of individual clinicians, program directors, and the policy makers for cancer centers, professional organizations, and the health care regulatory authorities. It is a logical next step in the evolution of medical oncology.

Pamidronate in patients with painful bone metastases, who failed initial treatment with hormones and/or chemotherapy

In an open prospective study. 40 patients with progressing painful bone metastases received 45 mg pamidronate by 1-h infusion every 3 weeks. A total of 27 patients (67%; 95% CI 53%-81%) experienced relief of pain as shown by the significant reduction of the bone pain score after three pamidronate administrations (from 2.25 +/- 0.64 to 1.15 +/- 0.36). Furthermore, 20 patients (60%) reduced their consumption of analgesics. We did not observe any objective response by skeletal radiological examination. In 11 patients presenting a skeletal progressive disease, bone pain improved, as well as their mobility score, but not their fatigue score. Treatment was well tolerated. Only 1 patient discontinued the treatment because of fever and cutaneous rash after the first administration. In conclusion, our results seem to confirm that pamidronate exerts a benefical effect on bone pain and mobility impairment in patients with painful osteolytic bone metastases.

Hospice and palliative care

The emergence of AIDS and the aging of the population, with the numerous malignant and debilitating maladies associated with growing older, have focused attention on the provision of cost-effective quality care by hospice and palliative care programs. Hospice and palliative care is a venerated system of care, which uses an interdisciplinary approach to address the medical, psychosocial, and spiritual issues that arise in the treatment of terminally ill patients. This interdisciplinary stratagem for symptom control is necessary to ensure that dying patients and their families are afforded dignity and quality of life through death and the period of familial bereavement. Although death is dominant in palliative situations, terminal care requires an affirmation of life and a recognition that dying is not an aberration of medical care but a natural and normal process. Palliative care, however, also requires a personal acceptance of death and an acknowledgment that dying does not denote a failure to provide good medical care but, rather, calls for an acquiescence that curative treatment is no longer feasible. Accordingly, the terminal state is an integral process and a time to reconcile differences so that patient and family may accept death with a minimum of physical, spiritual, and psychosocial anguish. This article discusses the various precepts cardinal to hospice and palliative care, including the philosophy of terminal care, the management of pain, the adverse effects of analgesic medications, the management of nonpain symptoms, the use of terminal sedation, and the stages of familial bereavement.

Opioid pharmacotherapy in the management of cancer pain: a survey of strategies used by pain physicians for the selection of analgesic drugs and routes of administration

BACKGROUND

This survey documents the strategies used by pain control physicians in the selection of opioid drugs and routes of administration in the management of inpatients referred to a cancer pain service.

METHODS

The following approaches were prospectively evaluated during the treatment of 100 consecutive inpatients: 1) the influence of the evaluation of the goals of care on decision making, 2) selection of opioid drugs, 3) indications for changing opioid drugs and the frequency with which this strategy is used, and 4) selection of route of administration.

RESULTS

Eighty of the 100 patients underwent a total of 182 changes in drug, route, or both drug and route before discharge or death. The major reasons for change were to improve the convenience of treatment regimen in the setting of adequate pain relief (31.4%), diminish side effects in the setting of controlled pain (25.0%), reduce the invasiveness of therapy in the setting of controlled pain (19.3%), and simultaneously improve pain control and reduce opioid toxicity (17.7%). When opioid toxicity was the reason for change, physicians changed the opioid drug in 71% of cases and the route in 29%. When convenience or invasiveness were targeted, the physicians changed the route in 61% of cases and the opioid in 39%. Forty-four patients required one or more change in the opioid, and 20 required 2 or more changes (range, 2-6 changes). At the time of discharge (n = 82), morphine was more commonly selected than hydromorphone or fentanyl (39% vs. 23% vs. 17%) and the routes of administration were oral (57%), transdermal (18%), intravenous (18%), subcutaneous (5%), and intraspinal (4%). Therapeutic changes were associated with improvement in physician-recorded pain intensity and a lower prevalence of cognitive impairment, hallucinations, nausea and vomiting, and myoclonus among patients who were discharged from the hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

These data illustrate the application of strategies for selections of opioid drugs and their route of administration that are recommended in current guidelines for the management of cancer pain.

Recent clinical trials of pain control: impact on quality of life

The understanding and treatment of pain is one of the oldest challenges for physicians, scientists and philosophers. Much of our present rationale of pain control is based on the Cartesian idea that pain mostly originates from external or internal noxious stimuli, which are transmitted to and interpreted in the brain. Consequently, removal (blocking) of the stimuli and modification of cerebral awareness have been the prime targets of analgesic interventions. Only recently has the relationship between pain and other physical, psychological and social aspects of illness been considered in the overall management plan. Most of the literature on pain control reveals the physical bias of measurement. Apart from simple but reliable tools such as visual analogue scales and Likert-type verbal scales, more sophisticated measures such as multidimensional pain inventories have also been used when it is necessary to characterise pain more specifically. In clinical studies, it is usual to ask the patient to report on his own pain, although proxy measures such as mobility, performance status and analgesic consumption are also often used. The hospice concept of "total pain", in which the psychological, social, spiritual and other aspects are emphasised, has been influential in our new approach to pain measurement. Particularly when it is chronic and related to advancing disease as in metastatic cancer, pain can interact significantly with many facets of daily living. A holistic model of quality of life in such patients should, therefore, include a multidimensional or modular assessment of these areas. Medical interventions themselves can affect quality of life in both positive and negative ways. Some side-effects may be so common as to be accepted as "normal", e.g. constipation or sedation with opioids: it is only by their careful evaluation, when comparing opioids with essentially similar analgesic potentials, that differential toxicities may be revealed. Simple recording of physical side-effects of drugs is really not sufficient, because analgesics as well as other therapies may be associated with mood changes and broader consequences for quality of life. Only in the past few years has quality of life been seriously addressed in palliation research. For example, standardised quality of life scales are now included almost routinely in oncological studies involving radiotherapy or chemotherapy by the Medical Research Council (MRC) of Great Britain. Trials of the new biphosphonates, which can reduce bone pain in metastatic cancer, have been enhanced by incorporating quality of life measures. Based on the experience from earlier efficacy/safety studies with the new transdermal route of drug delivery for the opioid fentanyl, important areas of life such as sleep and cognitive function have been addressed. Randomised controlled trials of analgesics which include quality of life endpoints are still rare, but should be encouraged as these represent the most rigorous way of evaluating new therapies. The current preoccupation with quality assurance in healthcare is directed, ultimately, to the delivery of a better quality of care, which should also be more cost-effective, for large populations. An important intermediate step towards that ideal is the collection of data on pain and other symptoms, but also validated quality of life parameters on well-defined groups. Only by widening the scope of analgesic studies to include these dimensions can we hope to define appropriate strategies for more rational healthcare.

Pamidronate: an unrecognized problem in gastrointestinal tolerability

Pamidronate (aminohydroxypropylidine bisphosphonate, APD) is an effective agent for treatment of Paget's disease of bone, and it has also been thought to be effective for treatment of osteoporosis. We desired to study a newer, time-release preparation of pamidronate, and carried out a placebo-controlled, double-masked study of postmenopausal osteoporosis. The original formulation was in a rapidly dissolving gelatin capsule. We encountered four episodes of esophagitis in 49 enrolled patients. We therefore discontinued treatment with this preparation and later began the study again using a standard tablet preparation. We encountered an additional case of erosive esophagitis in 1 patient of 40 receiving this tablet preparation. No patient was receiving concomitant medication which could cause esophagitis. Two of the patients gave a past history of hiatal hernia and 1 gave a history of gastric ulcer 27 years previously. The diagnosis of esophagitis was confirmed in all cases by endoscopy. Healing of the esophagitis promptly ensued after discontinuation of the pamidronate and the use of antacid medication.