Bisphosphonate Use and the Risk of Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Published Literature

Tumor-Associated Macrophages: Key Players in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

Triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) refers to the subtype of breast cancer which is negative for ER, PR, and HER-2 receptors. Tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) refer to the leukocyte infiltrating tumor, derived from circulating blood mononuclear cells and differentiating into macrophages after exuding tissues. TAMs are divided into typical activated M1 subtype and alternately activated M2 subtype, which have different expressions of receptors, cytokines and chemokines. M1 is characterized by expressing a large amount of inducible nitric oxide synthase and TNF-α, and exert anti-tumor activity by promoting pro-inflammatory and immune responses. M2 usually expresses Arginase 1 and high levels of cytokines, growth factors and proteases to support their carcinogenic function. Recent studies demonstrate that TAMs participate in the process of TNBC from occurrence to metastasis, and might serve as potential biomarkers for prognosis prediction.

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.

Association Use of Bisphosphonates with Risk of Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Previous studies have investigated the association between the use of bisphosphonates and the development of breast cancer, which presented controversial results. Thus, this meta-analysis was conducted to summarize the current evidence of the association of bisphosphonate use with breast cancer risk.

Methods

A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, ISI Web of Knowledge, the Cochrane Library, and Embase from inception to March 2019 by two researches, who independently selected trials, retrieved relevant data, and assessed study quality. The summary relative risk (RR) for the use of bisphosphonates on the risks of developing breast cancer was calculated using a random-effect model.

Results

The present meta-analysis, which included four case-control studies, involving 55052 breast cancer cases, and seven retrospective cohort studies, involving 14641 breast cancer cases, assessed the effect of bisphosphonates on breast cancer risk. The random-effect model meta-analysis found a reduced risk of breast cancer with exposure to bisphosphonates with pooled RR of 0.87 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.80 to 0.94). The short-term use of bisphosphonates (<1 year) did not render significant alteration (RR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.82 to 1.03), while a significant 26% risk reduction of breast cancer was noted with long-term use (>1 year) (RR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.90). A protective effect of bisphosphonates was shown in contralateral breast cancer (RR = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.20 to 0.84). In terms of the type of bisphosphonates, a significant inverse relationship was noted for etidronate, with pooled RR of 0.87 (95% CI: 0.80 to 0.96).

Conclusion

This meta-analysis suggested that the use of bisphosphonates was associated with reduced risk of breast cancer, including contralateral breast cancer. Compared to other types of bisphosphonates, only etidronate showed a significant inverse relationship. Additionally, the long-term use (>1 year) of bisphosphonates was more significant in lowering breast cancer risk. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to verify this association. This trial is registered with PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42018105024) (registered on 29 August 2018).

The Belgian Bone Club 2020 guidelines for the management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women

PURPOSE

To provide updated evidence-based guidelines for the management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women in Belgium.

METHODS

The Belgian Bone Club (BBC) gathered a guideline developer group. Nine "Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome" (PICO) questions covering screening, diagnosis, non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatments, and monitoring were formulated. A systematic search of MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus was performed to find network meta-analyses, meta-analyses, systematic reviews, guidelines, and recommendations from scientific societies published in the last 10 years. Manual searches were also performed. Summaries of evidence were provided, and recommendations were further validated by the BBC board members and other national scientific societies' experts.

RESULTS

Of the 3840 references in the search, 333 full texts were assessed for eligibility, and 129 met the inclusion criteria. Osteoporosis screening using clinical risk factors should be considered. Patients with a recent (<2 years) major osteoporotic fracture were considered at very high and imminent risk of future fracture. The combination of bone mineral density measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and 10-year fracture risk was used to categorize patients as low or high risk. Patient education, the combination of weight-bearing and resistance training, and optimal calcium intake and vitamin D status were recommended. Antiresorptive and anabolic osteoporosis treatment should be considered for patients at high and very high fracture risk, respectively. Follow-up should focus on compliance, and patient-tailored monitoring should be considered.

CONCLUSION

BBC guidelines and 25 guideline recommendations bridge the gap between research and clinical practice for the screening, diagnosis, and management of osteoporosis.

Oral bisphosphonate use and lung cancer incidence among postmenopausal women

Background

Bisphosphonates are common medications for the treatment of osteoporosis in older populations. Several studies, including the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI), have found inverse associations of bisphosphonate use with risk of breast and endometrial cancer, but little is known about its association with other common malignancies. The objective of this study was to evaluate the association of bisphosphonate use on the incidence of lung cancer in the WHI.

Patients and methods

The association between oral bisphosphonate use and lung cancer risk was examined in 151 432 postmenopausal women enrolled into the WHI in 1993–1998. At baseline and during follow-up, participants completed an inventory of regularly used medications including bisphosphonates.

Results

After a mean follow-up of 13.3 years, 2511 women were diagnosed with incident lung cancer. There was no evidence of a difference in lung cancer incidence between oral bisphosphonate users and never users (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.91; 95% confidence intervals, 0.80–1.04; P = 0.16). However, an inverse association was observed among those who were never smokers (hazard ratio = 0.57, 95% confidence interval, 0.39–0.84; P < 0.01).

Conclusion

In this large prospective cohort of postmenopausal women, oral bisphosphonate use was associated with significantly lower lung cancer risk among never smokers, suggesting bisphosphonates may have a protective effect against lung cancer. Additional studies are needed to confirm our findings.

Association Between Drug Treatments for Patients With Osteoporosis and Overall Mortality Rates: A Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Previous studies have reported that drug treatments, particularly treatment with bisphosphonates, is associated with reduced overall mortality rates in addition to decreased fracture risk. If so, drug treatments should be recommended for this reason alone, regardless of a patient's risk of fracture.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether randomized clinical trials demonstrate that treatment with bisphosphonates, particularly zoledronate, is associated with reduced mortality rates.

DATA SOURCES

Science Direct, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials of drug treatments for osteoporosis published after 2009 and published or in press before April 19, 2019. Conference abstracts from annual osteoporosis society meetings were also included in the search.

STUDY SELECTION

Included studies were clinical trials that (1) were randomized and placebo-controlled; (2) studied drug treatments with proven antifracture efficacy; (3) used agents at the approved dose for treatment of osteoporosis; and (4) had a duration of 1 year or more. Abstracts from the literature searches were reviewed for inclusion and exclusion criteria, and mortality rate data were abstracted from the article by 1 researcher and validated by a second. A total of 2045 records were screened; 38 (1.8%) were included in the meta-analyses.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) checklist was followed for abstracting data and assessing data quality and validity. Data were pooled using random-effects models, and between-study variability was assessed using the I2 index. The risk of bias for each study was assessed, and funnel plots and Egger and Begg statistics were used to evaluate publication bias.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Associations of all drug treatments, particularly bisphosphonate and zoledronate treatments, with overall mortality.

RESULTS

Of 38 clinical trials that included 101 642 unique participants, 38 were included in the meta-analyses of all drug treatments (45 594 participants randomized to placebo; 56 048 to treatment); 21 clinical trials, of bisphosphonate treatments (20 244 participants randomized to placebo; 22 623 to treatment); and 6 clinical trials, of zoledronate treatments (6944 participants randomized to placebo; 6926 to treatment). No significant association was found between all drug treatments for osteoporosis and overall mortality rate (risk ratio [RR], 0.98; 95% CI, 0.91-1.05; I2 = 0%). Clinical trials of bisphosphonate treatment (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.86-1.04) showed no significant association with overall mortality. Also, clinical trials of zoledronate treatment (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.68-1.13) showed no association with overall mortality rate; however, evidence existed for heterogeneity of the results (I2 = 48.2%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Results of this meta-analysis suggest that bisphosphonate treatment may not be associated with reduced overall mortality rates in addition to decreased fracture risk and should only be recommended to reduce fracture risk. Additional trials are needed to clarify whether treatment with zoledronate reduces mortality rates.

Bisphosphonates and primary breast cancer risk: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis involving 963,995 women

Importance

Prevention of primary breast cancer (BCa) in women is of great public health importance. The existing results from observational epidemiologic studies focused on the association between bisphosphonates and primary BCa risk have been inconsistent.

Objective

To update this systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effect of bisphosphonates on primary BCa risk.

Data sources

We comprehensively searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane libraries, ProQuest, and Web of Science through June 25, 2018 for relevant studies.

Study selection

Epidemiological studies that assessed the effect of bisphosphonates on the risk of primary BCa in women.

Data extraction and synthesis

We reported this meta-analysis according to the PRISMA guidelines. Available multivariable-adjusted effect estimates and corresponding 95% CIs were pooled with a random-effects model.

Main outcomes and measures

The prespecified main outcome was the risk of primary BCa.

Results

In total, five cohort studies involving 657,558 women and 12,991 primary BCa patients, three population-based case-control studies involving 54,701 primary BCa cases and 237,962 healthy controls and two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 13,774 women and 165 primary BCa patients were included in this meta-analysis. Bisphosphonates were associated with a 12% decreased risk of primary BCa (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.83–0.94). However, when we analyzed study designs separately, the pooled results from observational studies were inconsistent with that from RCTs. The observed association of primary BCa risk with long-term use (≥1 year) of bisphosphonates seemed to be more robust and stronger than that of short-term use (<1 year) (RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.66–0.84; and 0.90; 95% CI, 0.84–0.97; respectively).

Conclusion

This meta-analysis adds to the body of evidence for an association between bisphosphonates and a significantly decreased risk of primary BCa. However, future large-scale RCTs are required to validate this concern.

Risk-reducing medications for primary breast cancer: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer is the most frequently occurring malignancy and the second cause of death for cancer in women. Cancer prevention agents (CPAs) are a promising approach to reduce the burden of breast cancer. Currently, two main types of CPAs are available: selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs, such as tamoxifen and raloxifene) and aromatase inhibitors (AIs, such as exemestane and anastrozole).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and acceptability of single CPAs for the prevention of primary breast cancer, in unaffected women, at an above-average risk of developing breast cancer.Using a network meta-analysis, to rank single CPAs, based on their efficacy and acceptability (an endpoint that is defined as the inverse of CPA-related toxicity).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), and ClinicalTrials.gov on 17 August 2018. We handsearched reference lists to identify additional relevant studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that enrolled women without a personal history of breast cancer but with an above-average risk of developing a tumor. Women had to be treated with a CPA and followed up to record the occurrence of breast cancer and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and conducted risk of bias assessments of the included studies, and assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. Outcome data included incidence of breast carcinoma (both invasive and in situ carcinoma) and adverse events (both overall and severe toxicity). We performed a conventional meta-analysis (for direct comparisons of a single CPA with placebo or a different CPA) and network meta-analysis (for indirect comparisons).

MAIN RESULTS

We included six studies enrolling 50,927 women randomized to receive one CPA (SERMs: tamoxifen or raloxifene, or AIs: exemestane or anastrozole) or placebo. Three studies compared tamoxifen and placebo, two studies compared AIs (exemestane or anastrozole) versus placebo, and one study compared tamoxifen versus raloxifene. The risk of bias was low for all RCTs.For the tamoxifen versus placebo comparison, tamoxifen likely resulted in a lower risk of developing breast cancer compared to placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 0.76; 3 studies, 22,832 women; moderate-certainty evidence). In terms of adverse events, tamoxifen likely increased the risk of severe toxicity compared to placebo (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.47; 2 studies, 20,361 women; moderate-certainty evidence). In particular, women randomized to receive tamoxifen experienced a higher incidence of both endometrial carcinoma (RR 2.26, 95% CI 1.52 to 3.38; high-certainty evidence) and thromboembolism (RR 2.10, 95% CI 1.14 to 3.89; high-certainty evidence) compared to women who received placebo.For the AIs versus placebo comparison, AIs (exemestane or anastrozole) reduced the risk of breast cancer by 53% (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.63; 2 studies, 8424 women; high-certainty evidence). In terms of adverse events, AIs increased the risk of severe toxicity by 18% (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.28; 2 studies, 8352 women; high-certainty evidence). These differences were sustained especially by endocrine (e.g. hot flashes), gastrointestinal (e.g. diarrhea), and musculoskeletal (e.g. arthralgia) adverse events, while there were no differences in endometrial cancer or thromboembolism rates between AIs and placebo.For the tamoxifen versus raloxifene comparison, raloxifene probably performed worse than tamoxifen in terms of breast cancer incidence reduction (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.43; 1 study, 19,490 women; moderate-certainty evidence), but its use was associated with lower toxicity rates (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.95; 1 study, 19,490 women; moderate-certainty evidence), particularly relating to incidence of endometrial cancer and thromboembolism.An indirect comparison of treatment effects allowed us to compare the SERMs and AIs in this review. In terms of efficacy, AIs (exemestane or anastrozole) may have reduced breast cancer incidence slightly compared to tamoxifen (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.98; 5 RCTs, 31,256 women); however, the certainty of evidence was low. A lack of model convergence did not allow us to analyze toxicity data.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For women with an above-average risk of developing breast cancer, CPAs can reduce the incidence of this disease. AIs appear to be more effective than SERMs (tamoxifen) in reducing the risk of developing breast cancer. AIs are not associated with an increased risk of endometrial cancer and thromboembolic events. However, long-term data on toxicities from tamoxifen are available while the follow-up toxicity data on unaffected women taking AIs is relatively short. Additional data from direct comparisons are needed to fully address the issues of breast cancer prevention by risk-reducing medications, with special regards to acceptability (i.e. the benefit/harm ratio).

Risk reduction of endometrial and ovarian cancer after bisphosphonates use: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Recent epidemiological studies have investigated the associations between the use of bisphosphonates and the development of endometrial cancer and ovarian cancer; these studies have shown controversial results. Hence, this meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the changes in the risks of developing endometrial and ovarian cancers after using bisphosphonates based on current evidence.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was performed in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases through January 2017. The summary relative risk (RR) estimates for the effects of the use of bisphosphonates on the risks of developing endometrial and ovarian cancers were calculated using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included with a total of 6471 endometrial cancer cases (7 studies with 213,920 participants) and 6783 ovarian cancer cases (4 studies with 105,507 participants). This meta-analysis suggested that any use of bisphosphonates was associated with a significant 27% reduction in the risk of endometrial cancer (RR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.58-0.93, P = 0.012), but the reduction in the risk of ovarian cancer (RR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.58-1.14, P = 0.227) was not significant. The protective effects of the use of bisphosphonates against endometrial cancer are mainly found in postmenopausal women (RR = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.34-0.93, P = 0.012) or in those who have taken bisphosphonates for longer than 1 year (RR = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.35-0.93, P = 0.024).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggests that the use of bisphosphonates is associated with a reduction in the risk of endometrial cancer but not ovarian cancer.

Estradiol impairs the antiproliferative and proapoptotic effect of Zoledronic acid in hormone sensitive breast cancer cells in vitro

Background

Zoledronic acid (ZA) has antiresorptive effects and protects from bone metastasis in women with early breast cancer. In addition, in postmenopausal women with endocrine responsive breast cancer ZA prolongs DFS. The exact mechanism is still unclear. We have therefore investigated the effect of increasing concentrations of ZA in breast cancer cell lines in the absence or presence of estradiol to mimic the hormonal environment in vitro.

Materials and methods

Using assays for cell proliferation (EZ4U, BrdU) and cell death (Annexin/PI), we have analyzed the dose-dependent antiproliferative and pro-apoptotic effects of ZA in two hormone sensitive cell lines (MCF-7 and T47D) and a hormone insensitive, triple negative cell line (MDA-MB-231) in the presence of 0, 1 and 10 nM estradiol.

Results

In the absence of estradiol, ZA exerts dose-dependent antiproliferative and pro-apoptotic antitumor effects in both, hormone sensitive (MCF-7, T47D) and -insensitive (MDA-MB-231) breast cancer cell lines (p<0.0001). In the presence of estradiol, the antitumoral effect of ZA was significantly decreased only in the hormone sensitive MCF-7 and T47D cell lines (p = 0.0008 and p = 0.0008, respectively).

Conclusion

We have demonstrated that estradiol impairs the antiproliferative and proapoptotic effect of ZA in hormone sensitive, but not in hormone insensitive breast cancer cell lines. Our findings provide a possible explanation for the differential effect of ZA on DFS in pre- and postmenopausal patients with hormone sensitive early breast cancer, which has been demonstrated clinically. We further hypothesize that endocrine insensitive tumors such as triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) should benefit from ZA irrespective of their menopausal status.

Bisphosphonate use and the risk of breast cancer: a meta-analysis of observational studies

PURPOSE

To summarize current evidence of the association of bisphosphonate use with breast cancer risk, we used a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies to explore this issue.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted on PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. Pooled relative risk (RR) estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the random effects model.

RESULTS

Bisphosphonate use was associated with a 16% lower breast cancer risk (pool RR0.84, 95%CI 0.77-0.90, n = 8). A protective effect of bisphosphonate was found in cohort studies (RR 0.85, 95%CI 0.80-0.90, n = 4) and case-control studies (RR 0.78, 95%CI 0.64-0.96, n = 4).We also found that the use of bisphosphonate resulted in a statistically significant reduction in all breast cancer risk (RR 0.87, 95%CI 0.81-0.93) and greater reduction in invasive breast cancer risk (RR 0.78, 95%CI 0.68-0.91) and contralateral breast cancer risk (RR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.20-0.84).With respect to the type of bisphosphonate, we found that alendronate and etidronate resulted significant reduction in breast cancer risk. The short-term use of bisphosphonate (<1 y) led to nonsignificant change (RR 0.93, 95%CI 0.86-1.00), but a significant 26% reduction of breast cancer risk was noted with long-term use (>1 y) (RR 0.74, 95%CI 0.66-0.83).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results supported bisphosphonate as being effective in preventing breast cancer, including invasive and contralateral breast cancer. Furthermore, the long-term use (>1 y) of bisphosphonate was more significant in lowering breast cancer risk.

Bone microenvironment-mediated resistance of cancer cells to bisphosphonates and impact on bone osteocytes/stem cells

Anti-resorptive bisphosphonates (BPs) have been clinically used to prevent cancer-bone metastasis and cancer-induced bone pathologies despite the fact that the phenotypic response of the cancer-bone interactions to BP exposure is "uncharted territory". This study offers unique insights into the interplay between cancer stem cells and osteocytes/osteoblasts and mesenchymal stem cells using a three-dimensional (3D) live cancer-bone interactive model. We provide extraordinary cryptic details of the biological events that occur as a result of alendronate (ALN) treatment using 3D live cancer-bone model systems under specific bone remodeling stages. While cancer cells are susceptible to BP treatment in the absence of bone, they are totally unaffected in the presence of bone. Cancer cells colonize live bone irrespective of whether the bone is committed to bone resorption or formation and hence, cancer-bone metastasis/interactions are though to be "independent of bone remodeling stages". In our 3D live bone model systems, ALN inhibited bone resorption at the osteoclast differentiation level through effects of mineral-bound ALN on osteocytes and osteoblasts. The mineral-bound ALN rendered bone incapable of osteoblast differentiation, while cancer cells colonize the bone with striking morphological adaptations which led to a conclusion that a direct anti-cancer effect of BPs in a "live or in vivo" bone microenvironment is implausible. The above studies were complemented with mass spectrometric analysis of the media from cancer-bone organ cultures in the absence and presence of ALN. The mineral-bound ALN impacts the bone organs by limiting transformation of mesenchymal stem cells to osteoblasts and leads to diminished endosteal cell population and degenerated osteocytes within the mineralized bone matrix.

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.

Effect of bisphosphonate use on risk of postmenopausal breast cancer: results from the randomized clinical trials of alendronate and zoledronic acid

IMPORTANCE

Studies have shown that bisphosphonates may have antitumor and antimetastatic properties. Recently, observational studies have suggested a possible protective effect of bisphosphonates on breast cancer, but the effect of bisphosphonate use on risk of breast cancer has not been tested in randomized trials.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the relationship of postmenopausal breast cancer incidence and bisphosphonate use using data from 2 randomized (1:1), double-blind, placebo-controlled trials.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The Fracture Intervention Trial (FIT) randomly assigned 6459 women aged 55 to 81 years to alendronate or placebo for a mean follow-up of 3.8 years. The Health Outcomes and Reduced Incidence With Zoledronic Acid Once Yearly-Pivotal Fracture Trial (HORIZON-PFT) randomly assigned 7765 women aged 65 to 89 years to annual intravenous zoledronic acid or placebo for a mean follow-up of 2.8 years. Data were collected at clinical centers in the United States (FIT and HORIZON-PFT) and in Asia and the Pacific, Europe, North America, and South America (HORIZON-PFT). Women, in either study, with recurrent breast cancer or who reported a history of breast cancer were excluded from analyses. In each trial, a blinded review was conducted of each cancer adverse event report to verify incident invasive breast cancer cases. The primary analysis compared events in the active vs placebo group using a log-rank test.

INTERVENTION

Alendronate vs placebo (FIT) or zoledronic acid vs placebo (HORIZON-PFT).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Hazard ratio for incident breast cancer in the bisphosphonate treatment group compared to the placebo group.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the rate of breast cancer in FIT: 1.5% (n = 46) in the placebo group and 1.8% (n = 57) in the alendronate group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.24 [95% CI, 0.84-1.83]). In HORIZON-PFT, there was also no significant difference: 0.8% (n = 29) in the placebo group and 0.9% (n = 33) in the zoledronic acid group (HR, 1.15 [95% CI, 0.70-1.89]). There was also no significant difference when the data from FIT and HORIZON-PFT were pooled (HR, 1.20 [95% CI, 0.89-1.63]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These 2 randomized clinical trials do not support the findings from observational research. Contrary to the results from observational studies, we found that 3 to 4 years of bisphosphonate treatment did not decrease the risk of invasive postmenopausal breast cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00049829 (HORIZON-PFT).

The efficacy of bisphosphonates in preventing aromatase inhibitor induced bone loss for postmenopausal women with early breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives. We aim to determine the efficacy of bisphosphonates in preventing aromatase inhibitor induced bone loss (AIBL) in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer. The secondary objective was to determine the safety of bisphosphonates. Materials and Methods. We searched electronic databases in a time period of 1995 January to 2013 June. Random effects meta-analytical models were used; between study heterogeneity and publication bias was assessed. Results. A total of six eligible studies reported the BMD T score of LS at 12 months and from that 3 trials of Zoledronic acid compared the change in BMD in immediate ZOL versus delayed ZOL done with subgroups like patients with normal BMD at baseline (OR = 5.402, 95% CI = 1.329-21.959, P value = 0.018) and osteopenic BMD at baseline (OR = 4.008, 95% CI = 2.249-7.143, P value = 0.0002). Both had a significant decrease in BMD that favoured the delayed ZOL; 3 trials of risedronate and ibandronate also had a significant decrease in BMD in AIs alone group. Immediate ZOL versus delayed ZOL also showed increased risk of getting an ADR in immediate group. Conclusion. Third generation bisphosphonates has an effect on BMD of patients who are on treatment of AIs in breast cancer. Furthermore, the patients treated with immediate ZOL had a significantly high risk of musculoskeletal ADR's than patients with delayed ZOL.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Beyond aspirin-cancer prevention with statins, metformin and bisphosphonates

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

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

BACKGROUND & AIMS

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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