Prevention of aromatase inhibitor-induced bone loss with alendronate in postmenopausal women: The BATMAN Trial

Approach to Bone Health in the Patient With Breast Cancer

Treatment for breast cancer, including endocrine therapies, can contribute to bone loss and increase the risk of osteoporosis and fractures. Management of bone health in patients with cancer is often coordinated between oncologists, endocrinologists, and primary care physicians. In this article, we discuss the approach to screening for fracture risk among patients initiating treatments for breast cancer and recommendations for lifestyle modifications to optimize bone health. We will review 3 indications for pharmacologic bone-targeted therapies: prevention of cancer treatment-induced bone loss, adjuvant therapy to reduce recurrence, and management of bone metastases.

Cancer treatment-induced bone loss

Cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTBL) is associated with anti-tumor treatments, including endocrine therapies, chemotherapeutic treatments, radiotherapy, glucocorticoids, and tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Osteoporosis, characterized by the loss of bone mass, can increase the risk of fractures, leading to mortality and long-term disability, even after cancer remission. Cancer and osteoporosis have marked clinical and pathogenetic similarities. Both have a multifactorial etiology, affect the geriatric population, and markedly influence quality of life. Lifestyle management, including calcium and vitamin D supplementation, is recommended but the supporting evidence is limited. Oral and injectable bisphosphonates are effective for osteoporosis and malignant bone disease. Bisphosphonates increase bone mineral density (BMD) in patients with CTBL. Denosumab is also used in the management of CTBL; in clinical trials, it improved BMD and reduced the risk of fracture. Currently, there are no bone anabolic therapies for patients with cancer. Appropriate therapies are necessary to maintain optimal bone health, particularly in patients at heightened risk.

Initiation of Antiresorptive Drug Treatment during Endocrine Therapy for Breast Cancer-A Retrospective Cohort Study of 161,492 Patients in Germany

BACKGROUND

The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to measure the proportion of women with an initial prescription of an antiresorptive drug (bisphosphonates or denosumab) during five years of endocrine breast cancer therapy.

METHODS

The study included women with an initial prescription of tamoxifen (TAM) or aromatase inhibitors (AIs) between January 2016 and December 2020. Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed to show the cumulative incidence of antiresorptive drug prescription for TAM and AIs separately for four age groups. A univariable Cox proportional hazards regression model was also used to estimate the relationship between initial endocrine drug (AIs vs. TAM) and antiresorptive drug prescription.

RESULTS

Within 5 years, 14.1% of patients on AI and 6.1% on TAM received their first prescription for an antiresorptive drug (p < 0.001). The difference between AI and TAM was greatest in women ≤50 years (12.9% of AI and 2.8% of patients on TAM), and smallest in women >80 years (14.5% of AI and 10.3% of patients on TAM). The proportion of denosumab was 46.2% among AI patients vs. 29.1% among patients on TAM (p < 0.001) as alendronate was prescribed to 36.9% of AI vs. 50.0% of patients on TAM.

CONCLUSIONS

Across all age groups, the cumulative incidence of antiresorptive drug prescriptions was higher in patients with BC treated with AI than those receiving TAM. Denosumab was most frequently used as an antiresorptive drug in patients treated with AI, while alendronate was administered more often in patients treated with TAM.

Prevention of aromatase inhibitor-induced bone loss with anti-resorptive therapy in post-menopausal women with early-stage breast cancer

We assessed if antiresorptive treatment can prevent aromatase inhibitor-induced bone loss in patients with early breast cancer. We observed that patients who did not receive antiresorptive treatment had a 20.8-fold increase in risk of bone loss after 24 months of aromatase inhibitors therapy.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to describe changes in femoral and lumbar bone mineral density (BMD) after 24 months of aromatase inhibitors (AIs) and antiresorptive treatment in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.

METHODS

Prospective, longitudinal study in a real-life setting with a 2-year follow-up. Patients underwent a complete baseline bone assessment including clinical assessment, biological evaluation, BMD measurement, and spine X-ray. Antiresorptive treatment was prescribed to patients with a T-score <  - 2 or a T-score <  - 1.5 SD with additional osteoporosis risk factors. A follow-up bone assessment was carried out after 24 months.

RESULTS

Among 328 patients referred to our center, 168 patients (67.7 ± 10.6 years) were included in our study, and 144 were eligible for antiresorptive treatment. After 24 months, patients receiving antiresorptive treatment experienced a significant increase of + 6.28% in femoral-BMD (F-BMD) and + 7.79% in lumbar-BMD (L-BMD). This increase was not significantly different between osteoporotic and osteopenic patients. Conversely, patients not receiving antiresorptive treatment presented significant F-BMD and L-BMD loss regardless of the baseline BMD. In the multivariate logistic model, the lack of antiresorptive treatment was the only predictive factor for major femoral bone loss with a 20.83 odds ratio (CI95%:4.2-100, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This real-life study confirmed that antiresorptive treatment significantly increases femoral and lumbar BMD regardless of the baseline BMD in postmenopausal patients receiving AIs for early breast cancer. Patients who did not receive antiresorptive treatment had a 20.8-fold increased risk of major bone loss. Nevertheless, the best threshold to adopt for starting antiresorptive agents remains undetermined.

Management of bone loss due to endocrine therapy during cancer treatment

Bone modifying agents BMAs (oral and IV bisphosphonates, denosumab) are used to treat bone loss due to endocrine therapy in patients with hormone receptor positive (HR +) early breast cancer and non-metastatic prostate cancer (NMPC). Timely initiation of appropriate sequential therapy is imperative to reduce cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL). This narrative review summarizes current literature regarding management of CTIBL in HR + early breast cancer and NMPC patients. Risk factors for fragility fractures, screening strategies, optimal timing for the treatment, dosing/duration of therapy, and post treatment monitoring have not been clearly defined in HR + early breast and NMPC patients receiving endocrine therapy. This review aims to discuss the utility of fracture risk assessment (FRAX) tool for the prevention and management of CTIBL, osteoanabolic therapy for imminent fracture risk reduction, and sequential therapy options. Using predefined terms, PubMed, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar were searched for studies on CTIBL in HR + breast and NMPC patients. We included randomized clinical trials, meta-analysis, evidence-based reviews, observational studies, and clinical practice guidelines. Fracture risk assessment tools (FRAX) guide therapy for osteoporosis in patients with early HR + breast cancer and NMPC. BMAs to prevent bone loss should be initiated at higher T-score than recommended by FRAX in premenopausal HR + breast cancer patients with chemotherapy-induced ovarian failure, oophorectomy and gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) therapy, post-menopausal women with HR + breast cancer receiving aromatase inhibitor therapy, and NMPC patients with androgen deprivation therapy. Sequential therapy with osteoanabolic agents as first line treatment offers a potential therapeutic strategy in patients with high imminent fracture risk. Due to limited data in cancer patients regarding management of osteoporosis, a dosing schedule similar to osteoporosis is considered appropriate. Risk stratification to identify vulnerable patient population, choosing the appropriate sequential therapy, and close monitoring of patients at the risk of bone loss can potentially reduce the mortality, morbidity, and health care cost related to CTIBL.

Review of bone health in women with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer receiving endocrine therapy

In estrogen-receptor-positive tumors, adjuvant endocrine therapy has been shown to be highly beneficial for both overall and disease-free survival. Estradiol is key in regulating bone and mineral physiology, and several studies found a strong correlation between these therapies and the risk of fractures. Since these therapies are often given for 5 through 10 years, the timing for bisphosphonates or denosumab initiation seems essential to managing bone metabolism. However, gray zones and discrepancies between guidelines remain as to the best threshold when to start antiresorptive treatment, or whether antiresorptive treatment should be administered to every woman undergoing adjuvant endocrine therapy, independent of their risk factors for fractures. Treatment options and strategies should be discussed at the start of hormone adjuvant therapy to come to a shared decision with the patient, with the final aim of reducing the risk of future fractures as much as possible. This review will cover present guidelines and literature on antiresorptive treatment in this setting, to provide clinicians with useful clues for managing these patients.

Managing Bone Health in Breast Cancer

OBJECTIVE

Osteoporosis is a common condition that can be caused or exacerbated by estrogen deficiency.

METHODS

This narrative review will discuss optimizing bone health in the setting of adjuvant endocrine treatments for hormone receptor-positive breast cancer and the current use of antiresorptive agents as adjuvant therapy and as bone modifying agents.

RESULTS

Adjuvant endocrine treatments for hormone receptor-positive breast cancer (tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors) affect bone health. The exact effect depends on the agent used and the menopausal state of the woman. Antiresorptive medications for osteoporosis, bisphosphonates and denosumab, lower the risk of bone loss from aromatase inhibitors. Use of bisphosphonates as adjuvant treatment in breast cancer, regardless of hormone receptor status, is increasing because of benefits seen to cancer relapse and survival.

CONCLUSION

Optimizing bone health in women with breast cancer during and after cancer treatment is informed by an understanding of breast cancer treatment and its skeletal effect.

Therapeutic Options in the Management of Aromatase Inhibitor-Associated Bone Loss

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer is the most commonly occurring cancer in women worldwide. Early breast cancer is a kind of invasive neoplasm that has not proliferated beyond the breast or the axillary lymph nodes. Current therapeutic strategies for breast cancer mainly include local therapies such as surgery or radiotherapy and systemic therapies like chemotherapy, endocrine, and targeted therapy.Nowadays, the adjuvant treatment for hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer in postmenopausal women remains the main effective systemic therapy which can improve disease-free survival and overall survival; it involves several endocrine treatment regimens including selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs), aromatase inhibitors (AIs), or a combination of them. AIs have been shown to be more effective in preventing recurrence in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer when compared with tamoxifen, thus representing the standard of care for adjuvant endocrine therapy. Although AIs are usually well-tolerated, they can have some side effects. Apart from the appearance of arthralgias or myalgias and cardiovascular events, AI therapies, reducing already low endogenous postmenopausal estradiol levels, cause increased bone loss and increase fracture risk in postmenopausal women.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the therapeutic options in the management of aromatase inhibitor-associated bone loss (AIBL).

METHODS

We reviewed the current literature dealing with different therapeutic options in the treatment of AIBL.

RESULTS

Clinical practice guidelines recommend a careful evaluation of skeletal health in all women with breast cancer before AI therapy initiation. Adequate calcium and vitamin D intake have also been suggested. Pharmacological attempts to minimize AI-related bone loss have focused on the use of antiresorptive agents, such as bisphosphonates and denosumab, to protect bone integrity and reduce the risk of fractures. Furthermore, clinical trials have shown that by making the bone microenvironment less susceptible to breast cancer metastasis, these drugs are able to increase disease-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

AI, thatare the pillar of the systemic treatment for patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, are associated with different side effects, and in particular osteoporosis and fractures. Both bisphosphonates and denosumab are able to prevent this negative effect.

Aromatase inhibitors attenuate the effect of alendronate in women with breast cancer

INTRODUCTION

Aromatase inhibitors are known to accelerate bone loss in patients with breast cancer. However, how much AIs affect the efficacy of antiresorptive agents has not been studied. The study aimed to compare the effect of alendronate on bone mineral density (BMD) between patients with and without AI treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective study, 90 postmenopausal women with early breast cancer who were being treated with both AI and alendronate 70 mg weekly (ALN + AI), and 90 age- and body mass index (BMI)-matched patients who were only taking alendronate (ALN-only) were analyzed. BMD and bone turnover markers (BTMs) were assessed at the baseline and 12 months.

RESULTS

The mean age was 63 years. At baseline, the ALN-only group had lower lumbar spine (LS), femur neck (FN), and total hip (TH) BMD than ALN + AI group. After 1-year of alendronate treatment, the LS and FN BMD were improved more in the ALN-only group than those in the ALN + AI group after adjustments for age, BMI, baseline BMD, diabetes, hypertension, renal function, and previous fracture history [LS BMD: 6.2% (3.1%; 9.2%) in ALN-only, 3.5% (-0.5%; 6.5%) in ALN + AI, p = 0.001; FN BMD: 2.5% (0.3%; 5.7%) in ALN-only, 0.9% (- 1.8%; 3.6%) in ALD + AI, p = 0.032]. BTMs were significantly decreased in both groups, but the changes between groups were similar.

CONCLUSION

The effect of alendronate on the LS and FN BMD was attenuated in postmenopausal women who were taking AI compared to those who were not on AI.

Endocrine Therapy-related Endocrinopathies-Biology, Prevalence and Implications for the Management of Breast Cancer

Nearly 270,000 new breast cancer cases are predicted to be diagnosed in the USA in 2019 with more than 70% being estrogen receptor positive and treated using endocrine therapy. The suppression of estrogen biosynthesis or action via the use of ovarian suppression, aromatase inhibitors and selective estrogen receptor modulators/degraders, respectively, is effective in approximately 70% of women. The systemic inhibition of estrogen during breast cancer treatment is also associated with side effects due to the important endocrine functions of this steroid hormone, including its role in the maintenance of energy homeostasis and bone health. The current work will present perspectives of the impact of endocrine therapy from the point of view of breast medical oncology, endocrinology, and basic science.

French recommendations on strategies for preventing and treating osteoporosis induced by adjuvant breast cancer therapies

Standard adjuvant therapies for breast cancer such as chemotherapy or aromatase inhibitor and LH-RH agonist hormone therapy are associated with significant survival gains but also induce bone loss by aggravating the estrogen deprivation. The bone loss may be substantial, notably during early treatment, and occurs regardless of the baseline bone mineral density values. The objective of developing these recommendations was to achieve a practical consensus among various scientific societies, based on literature review, about osteoporosis prevention and treatment in these patients. The following scientific societies contributed to the work: Société Française de Rhumatologie (SFR), Groupe de Recherche et d'Information sur les Ostéoporoses (GRIO), Groupe Européen d'Etudes des Métastases Osseuses (GEMO), Association Francophone pour les Soins Oncologiques de Support (AFSOS), Société Française de Sénologie et de Pathologie Mammaire (SFSPM), Société Française de Radiothérapie Oncologique (SFRO). Drug prescription and reimbursement modalities in France were taken into account. These recommendations apply to postmenopausal women taking systemic chemotherapy and/or aromatase inhibitor therapy, non-postmenopausal women taking LH-RH agonist therapy, and non-postmenopausal women with persistent amenorrhea 1 year after chemotherapy completion. All women in these three categories should undergo an evaluation of bone health and receive interventions to combat risk factors for bone loss. Patients with a history of severe osteoporotic fracture and/or a T-score value <-2.5 should receive osteoporosis drug therapy. The FRAX® score should be used to guide treatment decisions in patients whose T-score is between -1 and -2.5. General osteoporosis prevention measures should be applied in patients without criteria for osteoporosis drug therapy, who should undergo bone mineral density measurements 18-24 months later if the baseline T-score is<-1 and 3-5 years later if the baseline T-score is>-1. The anti-tumor effect of bisphosphonates and denosumab was not considered when establishing these recommendations.

The skeletal impact of cancer therapies

Both cancer and therapies used in the treatment of cancer can have significant deleterious effects on the skeleton, increasing the risks for both bone loss and fracture development. While advancements in cancer therapies have resulted in enhanced cancer survivorship for patients with many types of malignancies, it is increasingly recognized that efforts to reduce bone loss and limit fractures must be considered for nearly all patients undergoing cancer therapy in order to diminish the anticipated future skeletal consequences. To date, most studies examining the impact of cancer therapies on skeletal outcomes have focused on endocrine-associated cancers of the breast and prostate, with more recent advances in our understanding of bone loss and fracture risk in other malignancies. Pharmacologic efforts to limit the adverse effects of cancer therapies on bone have nearly universally employed anti-resorptive approaches, although studies have frequently relied on surrogate outcomes such as changes in bone mineral density or bone turnover markers, rather than on fractures or other skeletal-related events, as primary study endpoints. Compounding current deficiencies for the provision of optimal care is the recognition that despite clearly written and straightforward society-based guidelines, vulnerable eligible patients are very often neither identified nor provided with appropriate treatments to limit the skeletal impact of their cancer therapies.

Antiresorptive agents' bone-protective and adjuvant effects in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer

Potent antiresorptive drugs (bisphosphonate and denosumab) are often used to protect bone health in postmenopausal breast cancer patients. In addition, clinical trials have shown that these drugs increase disease-free survival, though the mechanism of adjuvant benefit is largely unknown. Here we review the bone health and adjuvant data for both classes of antiresorptive drugs and highlight differences in their pharmacology. Inhibition of bone resorption is vitally important to protect against osteoporotic fractures, and may also contribute to adjuvant survival benefits by making the bone microenvironment less amenable to breast cancer metastasis. After a course of therapy, stoppage of bisphosphonates yields a persistent antiresorptive effect, whereas discontinuation of denosumab causes a rebound increase in bone resorption markers and a loss of bone mineral density to baseline levels. Whether the potential adjuvant benefits of denosumab are also rapidly lost after drug discontinuation deserves further investigation.

Bone health during endocrine therapy for cancer

Preservation of bone health remains a long-term clinical challenge in patients with breast and prostate cancer. Osteoporosis, defined by a loss of bone mass and microarchitecture, often results in fragility fractures that are typically associated with a high socioeconomic burden. Endocrine therapy, a mainstay treatment in the management of patients with hormone-sensitive breast and prostate cancer in the adjuvant setting, commonly exerts adverse effects on the musculoskeletal system and is associated with an increased risk of osteoporosis and fractures. Adjuvant use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues, which can also be used in metastatic disease, in combination with tamoxifen in premenopausal women, and aromatase inhibitors in postmenopausal women with hormone-sensitive breast cancer, causes rapid bone loss and fragility fractures. By contrast, selective oestrogen receptor modulators, such as tamoxifen, have bone-protective effects in postmenopausal women. In men with castration-sensitive prostate cancer, androgen deprivation is achieved with drugs that lower gonadotropin levels, and these drugs can be combined with androgen receptor antagonists. These therapies induce a high bone turnover with rapid bone loss that is reminiscent of the changes occurring in early menopause and result in an increased risk of fracture. In this Review, we describe how adjuvant endocrine therapies of breast and prostate cancer impair bone health and outline evidence from randomised controlled trials of strategies to reduce risk of fracture.

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

BACKGROUND

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

PATIENTS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Effects of adjuvant exemestane versus anastrozole on bone mineral density for women with early breast cancer (MA.27B): a companion analysis of a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Treatment of breast cancer with aromatase inhibitors is associated with damage to bones. NCIC CTG MA.27 was an open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial in which women with breast cancer were assigned to one of two adjuvant oral aromatase inhibitors-exemestane or anastrozole. We postulated that exemestane-a mildly androgenic steroid-might have a less detrimental effect on bone than non-steroidal anastrozole. In this companion study to MA.27, we compared changes in bone mineral density (BMD) in the lumbar spine and total hip between patients treated with exemestane and patients treated with anastrozole.

METHODS

In MA.27, postmenopausal women with early stage hormone (oestrogen) receptor-positive invasive breast cancer were randomly assigned to exemestane 25 mg versus anastrozole 1 mg, daily. MA.27B recruited two groups of women from MA.27: those with BMD T-scores of -2·0 or more (up to 2 SDs below sex-matched, young adult mean) and those with at least one T-score (hip or spine) less than -2·0. Both groups received vitamin D and calcium; those with baseline T-scores of less than -2·0 also received bisphosphonates. The primary endpoints were percent change of BMD at 2 years in lumbar spine and total hip for both groups. We analysed patients according to which aromatase inhibitor and T-score groups they were allocated to but BMD assessments ceased if patients deviated from protocol. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00354302.

FINDINGS

Between April 24, 2006, and May 30, 2008, 300 patients with baseline T-scores of -2·0 or more were accrued (147 allocated exemestane, 153 anastrozole); and 197 patients with baseline T-scores of less than -2·0 (101 exemestane, 96 anastrozole). For patients with T-scores greater than -2·0 at baseline, mean change of bone mineral density in the spine at 2 years did not differ significantly between patients taking exemestane and patients taking anastrozole (-0·92%, 95% CI -2·35 to 0·50 vs -2·39%, 95% CI -3·77 to -1·01; p=0·08). Respective mean loss in the hip was -1·93% (95% CI -2·93 to -0·93) versus -2·71% (95% CI -4·32 to -1·11; p=0·10). Likewise for those who started with T-scores of less than -2·0, mean change of spine bone mineral density at 2 years did not differ significantly between the exemestane and anastrozole treatment groups (2·11%, 95% CI -0·84 to 5·06 vs 3·72%, 95% CI 1·54 to 5·89; p=0·26), nor did hip bone mineral density (2·09%, 95% CI -1·45 to 5·63 vs 0·0%, 95% CI -3·67 to 3·66; p=0·28). Patients with baseline T-score of -2·0 or more taking exemestane had two fragility fractures and two other fractures, those taking anastrozole had three fragility fractures and five other fractures. For patients who had baseline T-scores of less than -2·0 taking exemestane, one had a fragility fracture and four had other fractures, whereas those taking anastrozole had five fragility fractures and one other fracture.

INTERPRETATION

Our results demonstrate that adjuvant treatment with aromatase inhibitors can be considered for breast cancer patients who have T-scores less than -2·0.

FUNDING

Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute, Pfizer, Canadian Institutes of Health Research.