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

Bisphosphonate Use Does Not Impact Survival in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Background/Aims

Bisphosphonates are increasingly recognized for their anti-neoplastic properties, which are the result of their action on the mevalonate pathway. Our primary aim was to investigate the association between bisphosphonate use and survival in patients with pancreatic cancer. Since statins also act on the mevalonate pathway, we also investigated the effect of the combined use of bisphosphonates and statins on survival.

Methods

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry (SEER)-Medicare linked database was used to identify patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) between 2007 and 2015. Kaplan-Meier models were used to examine the association between survival with bisphosphonate use alone and in combination with statins within 1 year prior to the diagnosis of PDAC. Propensity score matching analysis and Cox-proportional hazard models were used to determine the association between overall survival with bisphosphonate use alone and combined with statins, after adjusting for relevant confounders, such as the Charlson comorbidity index score, stage, treatment, sociodemographic characteristics, and propensity score.

Results

In total, 13,639 patients with PDAC were identified, and 1,203 (8.82%) used bisphosphonates. There was no difference in the mean survival duration between bisphosphonate users (7.27 months) and nonusers (7.25 months, p=0.61). After adjustment for confounders, bisphosphonate use was still not associated with improved survival (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.93 to 1.08; p=0.96). Combined bisphosphonate and statin use was also not associated with improved survival (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.87 to 1.07; p=0.48) after adjustment for confounders.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that the use of bisphosphonates, whether alone or in combination with statins, does not confer a survival advantage in patients with PDAC. (Gut Liver 2021;15-790)

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Benefits of Bisphosphonate Therapy: Beyond the Skeleton

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Recent evidence from clinical trials and observational studies raises the possibility that bisphosphonate use might confer a lower risk of cardiovascular disease and cancer, resulting in a mortality benefit. This review summarizes clinical and preclinical studies examining the non-skeletal effects of bisphosphonates.

RECENT FINDINGS

Data from clinical trials are conflicting regarding whether or not bisphosphonates have beneficial effects on mortality, cardiovascular events, or cancer incidence. No clinical trials have assessed these outcomes as primary endpoints, and most trials were shorter than 4 years. Observational data suggest that bisphosphonate users may have lower mortality, delayed progression of vascular calcification and atherosclerotic burden, and reduced incidence of breast and colorectal cancer compared to non-users. Preclinical studies confirm that bisphosphonates can be taken up by macrophages and monocytes, and nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates have the ability to disrupt the mevalonate pathway within these cells. In this manner, bisphosphonates exert anti-atherogenic and anti-cancer effects. Bisphosphonates also appear to exert protective effects on vascular smooth muscle cells and endothelial cells and may have direct cytotoxic effects on cancer cells. The balance of evidence does not support bisphosphonate treatment for the primary purpose of improving non-skeletal outcomes, although appropriately designed controlled trials that further explore this possibility are both justified and required. Patients with skeletal indications for bisphosphonate therapy can be reassured that these agents are not associated with increased mortality, cardiovascular disease, or cancer incidence.

Bisphosphonates Zometa and Fosamax Synergize with Metformin to Prevent AOM-Induced Colon Cancer in F344 Rat Model

Recent observational studies suggest that bisphosphonates (BP) and antidiabetic drugs are associated with colorectal cancer risk reduction. Hence, we evaluated the colorectal cancer preventive effects of BPs (zometa and fosamax), individually and when combined with metformin, in azoxymethane-induced rat colon cancer model. Rat (30/group) were randomized and treated subcutaneously with azoxymethane to induce colorectal cancer. Dietary intervention with zometa or fosamax (0, 20, or 100 ppm) or metformin (1,000 ppm) or the combinations (zometa/fosamax 20 ppm plus metformin 1,000 ppm) began 4 weeks after azoxymethane treatment, at premalignant lesions stage. Rats were killed 40 weeks post drug intervention to assess colorectal cancer preventive efficacy. Dietary zometa (20 ppm) inhibited noninvasive adenocarcinomas multiplicity by 37% (P < 0.03) when compared with control diet fed group. Fosamax at 20 ppm and 100 ppm significantly reduced adenocarcinoma incidence (P < 0.005) and inhibited the noninvasive adenocarcinoma multiplicities by 43.8% (P < 0.009) and 60.8% (P < 0.004), respectively, compared with the group fed control diet. At 1,000 ppm dose, metformin failed to suppress colon adenocarcinoma formation. However, the lower dose combinations of zometa or fosamax with metformin resulted in significant inhibition of noninvasive adenocarcinoma by 48% (P < 0.006) and 64% (P < 0.0002), and invasive adenocarcinoma by 49% (P < 0.0005) and 38% (P < 0.006), respectively. Biomarker analysis of combination drug-treated tumors showed a decrease in cell proliferation with increased apoptosis when compared with untreated tumors. Overall, our results suggest that the combination of low doses of zometa or fosamax with metformin showed synergistic effect and significantly inhibited colon adenocarcinoma incidence and multiplicity.

Effects of Zoledronate on Cancer, Cardiac Events, and Mortality in Osteopenic Older Women

We recently showed that zoledronate prevented fractures in older women with osteopenia (hip T-scores between -1.0 and -2.5). In addition to fewer fractures, this study also suggested that women randomized to zoledronate had fewer vascular events, a lower incidence of cancer, and a trend to lower mortality. The present analysis provides a more detailed presentation of the adverse event data from that study, a 6-year, double-blind trial of 2000 women aged >65 years recruited using electoral rolls. They were randomly assigned to receive four infusions of either zoledronate 5 mg or normal saline at 18-month intervals. Supplements of vitamin D, but not calcium, were provided. There were 1017 serious adverse events in 443 participants in the placebo group, and 820 events in 400 participants in those randomized to zoledronate (relative risk = 0.90; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.00). These events included fractures resulting in hospital admission. Myocardial infarction occurred in 39 women (43 events) in the placebo group and in 24 women (25 events) in the zoledronate group (hazard ratio 0.60 [95% CI, 0.36 to 1.00]; rate ratio 0.58 [95% CI, 0.35 to 0.94]). For a prespecified composite cardiovascular endpoint (sudden death, myocardial infarction, coronary artery revascularization, or stroke) 69 women had 98 events in the placebo group, and 53 women had 71 events in the zoledronate group (hazard ratio 0.76 [95% CI, 0.53 to 1.08]; rate ratio 0.72 [95% CI, 0.53 to 0.98]). Total cancers were significantly reduced with zoledronate (hazard ratio 0.67 [95% CI, 0.51 to 0.89]; rate ratio 0.68 [95% CI, 0.52 to 0.89]), and this was significant for both breast cancers and for non-breast cancers. Eleven women had recurrent or second breast cancers during the study, all in the placebo group. The hazard ratio for death was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.40 to 1.06; p = 0.08), and 0.51 (95% CI, 0.30 to 0.87) in those without incident fragility fracture. These apparent beneficial effects justify further appropriately powered trials of zoledronate with these nonskeletal conditions as primary endpoints. © 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Risk of colorectal cancer in users of bisphosphonates: analysis of population-based electronic health records

The use of bisphosphonates has been associated with a decrease in the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) in observational studies, but with controversial results and difficult to interpret because of routine concomitant use of calcium and vitamin D. We aimed to assess the association between CRC risk and outpatient exposure to antiosteoporotic drugs using a large cohort with prescription data in Catalonia. A case-control study was performed using the Information System for Development of Primary Care Research (SIDIAP) which is a primary care medical record database that has linked data on reimbursed medication. The study included 25,836 cases with an incident diagnosis of CRC between 2010 and 2015 and 129,117 matched controls by age (± 5 years), sex and healthcare region. A multivariable model was built adjusting for known risk factors and comorbidities that were significantly associated to CRC in the dataset, and a propensity score for bisphosphonates. Tests for interaction for multiple drug use and stratified analysis for tumour location were prospectively planned. Overall 18,230 individuals (11.5%) were users of bisphosphonates. A significant but modest protective effect on CRC was observed for bisphosphonates (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.91-0.99), that was no longer significant when adjusted for calcium and vitamin D (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.93-1.03). Bisphosphonates, however, showed a dose-response effect with duration of use even when adjusted for calcium and vitamin D (OR for use > 40 months: 0.90, 95% CI 0.81-1.00, P value for trend: 0.018). The use of bisphosphonates was associated with a modest decrease in the risk of CRC, but this effect was essentially explained by concomitant use of calcium or vitamin D. The observed protective effect was stronger for long durations of use, which deserves further study.

Oral bisphosphonates and colorectal cancer

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

Bisphosphonates as potential adjuvants for patients with cancers of the digestive system

Best known for their anti-resorptive activity in bone, bisphosphonates (BPs) have generated interest as potential antineoplastic agents given their pleiotropic biological effects which include antiproliferative, antiangiogenic and immune-modulating properties. Clinical studies in multiple malignancies suggest that BPs may be active in the prevention or treatment of cancer. Digestive tract malignancies represent a large and heterogeneous disease group, and the activity of BPs in these cancers has not been extensively studied. Recent data showing that some BPs inhibit human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER) signaling highlight a potential therapeutic opportunity in digestive cancers, many of which have alterations in the HER axis. Herein, we review the available evidence providing a rationale for the repurposing of BPs as a therapeutic adjunct in the treatment of digestive malignancies, especially in HER-driven subgroups.

Oral bisphosphonates and colon cancer: an update

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

The carcinogenicity of alendronate in patients with osteoporosis: evidence from cohort studies

Context

Alendronate may relate to the incidence of cancers, especially esophageal and colon cancer. But the results are inconsistent in different studies.

Objective

To quantify the association between the use of alendronate and the occurrence of different types of cancer.

Data Sources

We searched Embase, Pubmed, CENTRAL, SIGLE and clinicaltrials.gov, up to 2014 June.

Study Selection

Cohort studies reporting association between alendronate or bisphosphonate therapy including alendronate in patients with osteoporosis and risk of cancer were selected by two authors.

Data Extraction

Two authors independently extracted the data. The Chi-square test and the I-square test were used for testing heterogeneity between studies.

Data Synthesis

Eight cohort studies were included in the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis result manifested that alendronate significantly increased the incidence of lung cancer (HR 1.23, 95%CI 1.03 to 1.47, P value = 0.03), nevertheless, there was no significant difference after we excluded either Lee’s 2012 study (HR 1.17, 95%CI 0.95 to 1.44, P value = 0.13) or Chiang’s 2012 study (HR 1.47, 95%CI 1 to 2.17, P value = 0.05). For the incidence of colorectal cancer, no significant difference occurred (HR 0.91, 95%CI 0.74 to 1.13, P value = 0.39), but there was a positive relationship when we used fixed model (HR 0.85, 95%CI 0.78 to 0.93, P value = 0.004). For the incidence of liver cancer, there was no significant difference (HR 1.36, 95%CI 0.9 to 2.04, P value = 0.14), however, the result changed after we excluded Chiang’s 2012 study (HR 1.69, 95%CI 1.03 to 2.77, P value = 0.04). There was no significant difference in other types of cancer.

Conclusion

Based on current evidences, alendronate therapy may be associated with a high risk of lung cancer, may with an excess risk of liver cancer, a low risk of colorectal and no related risk of other cancers.

Monocyte subpopulations in angiogenesis

Growing understanding of the role of the tumor microenvironment in angiogenesis has brought monocyte-derived cells into focus. Monocyte subpopulations are an increasingly attractive therapeutic target in many pathologic states, including cancer. Before monocyte-directed therapies can be fully harnessed for clinical use, understanding of monocyte-driven angiogenesis in tissue development and homeostasis, as well as malignancy, is required. Here, we provide an overview of the mechanisms by which monocytic subpopulations contribute to angiogenesis in tissue and tumor development, highlight gaps in our existing knowledge, and discuss opportunities to exploit these cells for clinical benefit.