Osteoporosis management in patients with breast cancer: EMAS position statement

Prevention and Co-Management of Breast Cancer-Related Osteoporosis Using Resveratrol

Breast cancer (BC) is currently one of the most common cancers in women worldwide with a rising tendency. Epigenetics, generally inherited variations in gene expression that occur independently of changes in DNA sequence, and their disruption could be one of the main causes of BC due to inflammatory processes often associated with different lifestyle habits. In particular, hormone therapies are often indicated for hormone-positive BC, which accounts for more than 50-80% of all BC subtypes. Although the cure rate in the early stage is more than 70%, serious negative side effects such as secondary osteoporosis (OP) due to induced estrogen deficiency and chemotherapy are increasingly reported. Approaches to the management of secondary OP in BC patients comprise adjunctive therapy with bisphosphonates, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and cortisone, which partially reduce bone resorption and musculoskeletal pain but which are not capable of stimulating the necessary intrinsic bone regeneration. Therefore, there is a great therapeutic need for novel multitarget treatment strategies for BC which hold back the risk of secondary OP. In this review, resveratrol, a multitargeting polyphenol that has been discussed as a phytoestrogen with anti-inflammatory and anti-tumor effects at the epigenetic level, is presented as a potential adjunct to both support BC therapy and prevent osteoporotic risks by positively promoting intrinsic regeneration. In this context, resveratrol is also known for its unique role as an epigenetic modifier in the regulation of essential signaling processes-both due to its catabolic effect on BC and its anabolic effect on bone tissue.

A Recent Review of the Management of Postmenopausal Symptoms in Breast Cancer Survivors

The treatment strategy for postmenopausal symptoms resulting from estrogen deficiency in breast cancer survivors receiving endocrine therapy should differ from that in normal women. Several nonhormonal pharmacological therapies can be used to treat vasomotor symptoms. Cognitive-behavioral therapy can help alleviate psychophysiological symptoms, including depression and sleep disorders. Topical vaginal estrogen and moisturizers may aid in treating genitourinary symptoms. Additionally, chronic conditions must be individually managed. Prevention of osteoporosis should always be included in the management, and physicians should be alert to possible cardiovascular risk and cognitive function changes.

DXA assessment and fracture prevention in hormone positive breast cancer patients after treatment initiation with aromatase inhibitors: A registry-based cohort study

Background

Several guidelines have been proposed to prevent aromatase inhibitors induced bone loss (AIBL), but there is scarce data on their endorsement in clinical practice.

Aim

To assess bone health evaluation and fracture prevention in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer after aromatase inhibitors (AI) initiation.

Methods

An historical cohort analysis based on data from the cancer and osteoporosis Maccabi Health Services (MHS) registries from Jan 1st 2009 to Dec 31st 2020. Cases of estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer were extracted. Index date was set as the first aromatase inhibitors (AI) purchase. Variables such as age, BMI, smoking history, alcohol use, rheumatoid arthritis, diabetes, glucocorticosteroid use, previous fractures, BMD T-scores and purchases of AI and anti-resorptive agents were collected. Age under 50, previous cancer, prior major osteoporotic fractures and prior anti-resorptive treatment were exclusion criteria. Kaplan-Meier curves were generated to assess the time to outcomes. Multivariable Cox's proportional hazards survival model was performed.

Results

A total of 8617 women initiating AI were eligible. The median follow up was 6.1 years. The mean (SD) age at index was 62.8 (9.2), the mean (SD) BMI was 29.1 (5.6). The mean (SD) T-score was -1.3 (1.2) at the lumbar spine, -1.5 (0.9) at the femoral neck and -1.0 (1.0) at the total hip. Twenty percent had type 2 diabetes, 8.1 % were active smokers, 3.8% had rheumatoid arthritis and 1.2% were exposed to glucocorticoids.A total of 37% and 53% underwent a DXA scan at 1 and 2 years from AI initiation, and 12% and 17% were prescribed an anti-resorptive agent at 1 and 2 years from index. Advanced age was associated with a higher rate of evaluation and treatment, while obesity and diabetes were associated with a lower rate. The cumulative incidence of a major osteoporotic fracture was 8.8 and 15.8 % at 5 and 10 years, respectively.

Conclusions

Despite the excess risk of fractures, bone health assessment and preventive treatment are still partial and postponed in breast cancer AI treated patients. Strategies to ensure appropriate care are needed.

Treatment of women with BRCA mutation

The cumulative risk for breast and ovarian cancer is high in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. The lifetime risk of breast cancer by the age of 80 years is respectively up to 72% and 69% in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. The risk of ovarian cancer is higher (44%) in BRCA1 than in BRCA2 (17%) mutation carriers. Breast and ovarian cancers tend to arise earlier in BRCA1 mutation carriers. Breast cancers in BRCA1 mutation carriers are more frequently (up to 70%) triple negative while the majority (up to 80%) of breast cancers in BRCA2 mutation carriers are hormone sensitive. Many issues remain to be resolved. In daily practice we are often confronted with patients having BRCA mutations classified as variants of unknown significance, who do have breast cancer personally or have a strong family history of breast cancer. On the other hand, 30-40% of mutation carriers will not develop breast cancer. Moreover, it is very difficult to predict the age at which cancer will arise. In a multidisciplinary setting we need to offer BRCA and other mutation carriers a wide range of information, advice and support.

Honey: A Promising Therapeutic Supplement for the Prevention and Management of Osteoporosis and Breast Cancer

Osteoporosis and breast cancer are serious diseases that have become a significant socioeconomic burden. There are biochemical associations between the two disorders in terms of the amended function of estrogen, receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa beta ligand, oxidative stress, inflammation, and lipid accumulation. Honey as a functional food with high antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties can contribute to the prevention of various diseases. Its health benefits are mainly related to the content of polyphenols. This review aims to summarize the current knowledge from in vitro, animal, and human studies on the use of honey as a potential therapeutic agent for osteoporosis and breast cancer. Preclinical studies have revealed a beneficial impact of honey on both bone health (microstructure, strength, oxidative stress) and breast tissue health (breast cancer cell proliferation and apoptosis, tumor growth rate, and volume). The limited number of clinical trials, especially in osteoporosis, indicates the need for further research to evaluate the potential benefits of honey in the treatment. Clinical studies related to breast cancer have revealed that honey is effective in increasing blood cell counts, interleukin-3 levels, and quality of life. In summary, honey may serve as a prospective therapeutic supplement for bone and breast tissue health.

Pharmacologic Treatment of Primary Osteoporosis or Low Bone Mass to Prevent Fractures in Adults: A Living Clinical Guideline From the American College of Physicians

DESCRIPTION

This guideline updates the 2017 American College of Physicians (ACP) recommendations on pharmacologic treatment of primary osteoporosis or low bone mass to prevent fractures in adults.

METHODS

The ACP Clinical Guidelines Committee based these recommendations on an updated systematic review of evidence and graded them using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system.

AUDIENCE AND PATIENT POPULATION

The audience for this guideline includes all clinicians. The patient population includes adults with primary osteoporosis or low bone mass.

RECOMMENDATION 1A

ACP recommends that clinicians use bisphosphonates for initial pharmacologic treatment to reduce the risk of fractures in postmenopausal females diagnosed with primary osteoporosis (strong recommendation; high-certainty evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 1B

ACP suggests that clinicians use bisphosphonates for initial pharmacologic treatment to reduce the risk of fractures in males diagnosed with primary osteoporosis (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 2A

ACP suggests that clinicians use the RANK ligand inhibitor (denosumab) as a second-line pharmacologic treatment to reduce the risk of fractures in postmenopausal females diagnosed with primary osteoporosis who have contraindications to or experience adverse effects of bisphosphonates (conditional recommendation; moderate-certainty evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 2B

ACP suggests that clinicians use the RANK ligand inhibitor (denosumab) as a second-line pharmacologic treatment to reduce the risk of fractures in males diagnosed with primary osteoporosis who have contraindications to or experience adverse effects of bisphosphonates (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence).

RECOMMENDATION 3

ACP suggests that clinicians use the sclerostin inhibitor (romosozumab, moderate-certainty evidence) or recombinant PTH (teriparatide, low-certainty evidence), followed by a bisphosphonate, to reduce the risk of fractures only in females with primary osteoporosis with very high risk of fracture (conditional recommendation).

RECOMMENDATION 4

ACP suggests that clinicians take an individualized approach regarding whether to start pharmacologic treatment with a bisphosphonate in females over the age of 65 with low bone mass (osteopenia) to reduce the risk of fractures (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence).

Bone mineral density, osteopenia and osteoporosis among US adults with cancer

BACKGROUND

Bone mineral deficits are one of the most common complications in cancer survivors. However, there are no studies evaluating bone mineral density (BMD) and the prevalence of osteopenia and osteoporosis among patients with different types of cancers.

AIM

The objective was to assess BMD and evaluate the prevalence of osteopenia and osteoporosis among US adults with cancer.

DESIGN

A cross-section propensity score matching study.

METHODS

We extracted data from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey database from 2005 to 2018. We compared BMD in participants with and without cancer which was further analyzed according to cancer type. We conducted logistic regression to evaluate adjusted odds ratios of osteopenia and osteoporosis and determine risk factors for their development.

RESULTS

We found that BMD was significantly higher in participants without cancer than cancer patients. Furthermore, the median BMD of patients with breast cancer or skin cancer (including melanoma) was significantly lower than participants without cancer. People with breast, lung, genitourinary and skin cancers were more likely to incur osteopenia/osteoporosis than those without cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

BMD differs depending upon type in survivors. Individuals with a history of cancer have a poor understanding of osteoporosis and its risk factors. Understanding risk factors in patients with cancers identified in our study may be helpful for preventing osteoporosis and fractures and the development of screening guidelines.

Breast cancer therapy and bone

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women and the leading cause of cancer-associated mortality. The estrogen deprivation associated with therapies used to treat this disease may result in significant loss of bone density and a consequent increase in fracture risk. Anti-resorptive osteoporosis therapies (bisphosphonates and the inhibitor of receptor activator of nuclear factor-κB ligand [RANKL] denosumab) play an important role in the mitigation of cancer therapy-induced bone loss (CTIBL), and may function as adjuvant therapy in moderate to high-risk breast cancer to prevent disease recurrence. Various international guidelines have delineated treatment thresholds based on both bone density assessment and clinical risk factors for CTIBL. The role of these bone-targeted therapies as adjuvant anti-cancer treatment is evolving. Currently, evidence supports the use of the bisphosphonates, zoledronic acid and clodronate, in this setting. Unfortunately, a focus on bone health in women with breast cancer is often not prioritized, leaving this group vulnerable to significant bone loss and subsequent fracture.

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.

Bone-modifying Agents (BMAs) in Breast Cancer

Bone-modifying agents (BMAs) are mainstays in breast cancer and prevent and treat osteoporosis in early-stage disease and reduce skeletal metastases complications in advanced disease. There is some evidence to support that BMA also prevents skeletal metastases and improves overall survival. Bone loss occurs with chemotherapy-induced ovarian failure, gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, and aromatase inhibitors. In some women, the bone loss will be of sufficient magnitude to increase the risks of osteoporosis or fractures. Recommended steps in osteoporosis prevention or treatment include risk factor assessment, taking adequate amounts of calcium and vitamin D3, and periodic evaluations with dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scanning. If clinically indicated by the T-scores and fracture-risk prediction algorithms treat with oral, IV bisphosphonates or subcutaneous denosumab (DEN). Zoledronic acid (ZA) or DEN reduces skeletal metastases complications, including pathological fracture, spinal cord compression, or the necessity for radiation or surgery to bone. Also, both of these drugs have the side-effect of osteonecrosis at a similar incidence. Monthly administration of ZA or DEN is standard, but several recent randomized trials show noninferiority between ZA monthly and every 3-month ZA. Every 3-month ZA is a new standard of care. Similar trials of the schedule of DEN are ongoing. ZA anticancer effect is only in postmenopausal women or premenopausal women rendered postmenopausal by GnRH agonists or bilateral oopherectomy. High-risk women, either postmenopausal or premenopausal, receiving GnRH/oopherctomy should consider adjuvant ZA. There are insufficient data to support DEN in this setting. Herein, this narrative review covers the mechanism of action of BMA, randomized clinical trials, and adverse events, both common and rare.

Managing Menopausal Symptoms in Young Women With Breast Cancer: When Medicine Is Not All. The Take Care Project

In the last decade, endocrine therapy strategies in perimenopausal women with hormone-responsive early breast cancer (BC) have changed and now ovarian function suppression (OFS) is recommended for the majority of patients. Side effects of OFS mimic menopausal symptoms, including hot flushes, sweats, weight gain, and sexual dysfunction, which may negatively impact quality of life (QoL). Aims of the Take Care Project are the education of physicians and patients to have all the information (medical and nonmedical) they need to manage menopausal symptoms by distributing educational materials useful to face menopause. Four different areas have been identified by surveys conducted among physicians and young patients: for each area, interventions and tools have been elaborated by a doctor and nonphysician professionals of these identified areas, to offer the widest information available. Clinical and practical suggestions have been provided. Based on the evidence given, we strongly suggest setting up a multidisciplinary team for the treatment planning of young patients with BC, which could help patients to face and manage their new menopause condition. The reduction of side effects and the improvement in QoL should be the best ally to treat young patients with BC.

Update on the Role of Neuropeptide Y and Other Related Factors in Breast Cancer and Osteoporosis

Breast cancer and osteoporosis are common diseases that affect the survival and quality of life in postmenopausal women. Women with breast cancer are more likely to develop osteoporosis than women without breast cancer due to certain factors that can affect both diseases simultaneously. For instance, estrogen and the receptor activator of nuclear factor-κB ligand (RANKL) play important roles in the occurrence and development of these two diseases. Moreover, chemotherapy and hormone therapy administered to breast cancer patients also increase the incidence of osteoporosis, and in recent years, neuropeptide Y (NPY) has also been found to impact breast cancer and osteoporosis.Y1 and Y5 receptors are highly expressed in breast cancer, and Y1 and Y2 receptors affect osteogenic response, thus potentially highlighting a potential new direction for treatment strategies. In this paper, the relationship between breast cancer and osteoporosis, the influence of NPY on both diseases, and the recent progress in the research and treatment of these diseases are reviewed.

Osteoporosis: A Long-Term and Late-Effect of Breast Cancer Treatments

Simple Summary

Osteoporosis is a prevalent condition affecting 200 million individuals world-wide. Estimates are about one in three women will experience a fragility fracture of hip, spine or wrist. Common breast cancer treatments, such as aromatase inhibitors in postmenopausal women and chemotherapy-induced ovarian failure in premenopausal women, cause bone loss that in some women will lead to osteoporosis and fragility fractures. Fragility fractures cause morbidity and mortality and are entirely preventable. Prevention or treatment of osteoporosis includes lifestyle modifications (e.g., reducing smoking and excessive alcohol consumption, and increasing physical activity), taking calcium and vitamin D3, screening for osteoporosis with dual-energy absorptiometry, and treatment, if clinically indicated, with ether oral bisphosphonates, intravenous zoledronic acid, or subcutaneous denosumab. This chapter reviews the pathogenesis of osteoporosis, the magnitude of bone loss related to common breast cancer treatments, osteoporosis risk factor assessment and screening, and the specific drugs to treat or prevent osteoporosis.

Abstract

Osteoporosis is both a long-term effect (occurs during treatment and extends after treatment) and a late-effect (occurs after treatment ends) of breast cancer treatments. The worldwide prevalence of osteoporosis is estimated to be some 200 million patients. About one in three postmenopausal women will experience an osteoporotic (or fragility) fracture of the hip, spine, or wrist. breast cancer treatments, including gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, chemotherapy-induced ovarian failure (CIOF), and aromatase inhibitors (AIs), cause bone loss and increase the risks of osteoporosis. Also, breast cancer is a disease of aging, and most of the “one in eight” lifetime risks of breast cancer are in women in their sixth, seventh, and eighth decades. The majority of women diagnosed with breast cancers today will be long-term survivors and experience personal cures. It is the coalescence of osteoporosis with breast cancer, two common and age-related conditions that make osteoporosis relevant in women with breast cancer throughout the continuum from diagnosis, treatment, and survivorship. It is critical to remember that women (and men) will lose bone after age thirty years. However, only certain women will lose bone of sufficient magnitude to merit treatment with anti-osteoporosis drugs. The narrative review is intended for medical, surgical, radiation oncologists, and other mid-level providers, and provides an overview of bone loss and the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis.

Challenges in Preventing Bone Loss Induced by Aromatase Inhibitors

CONTEXT

Aromatase inhibitors have become a mainstay in the adjuvant treatment regimen in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. While many of these patients have an excellent long-term prognosis, adverse effects on bone represent an emerging complication of aromatase inhibitor treatment, resulting in substantial bone loss and fragility fractures. Treatment approaches to prevent aromatase inhibitor-induced bone loss typically consist of an antiresorptive approach with bisphosphonates or the RANKL antibody denosumab. However, different guidelines vary with respect to treatment thresholds, duration, and dosing. The choice of antiresorptive regime is further complicated by comorbidities and potential disease-modifying effects of individual agents.

OBJECTIVE

This review summarizes the evidence of how aromatase inhibitors affect bone health and provides an update of clinical approaches to preserve bone strength in affected women. (J Clin Endocrinol Metab XX: 0-0, 2020).

Aromatase Inhibitors-Induced Musculoskeletal Disorders: Current Knowledge on Clinical and Molecular Aspects

Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) have radically changed the prognosis of hormone receptor positive breast cancer (BC) in post-menopausal women, and are a mainstay of the adjuvant therapy for BC after surgery in place of, or following, Tamoxifen. However, AIs aren't side effect-free; frequent adverse events involve the musculoskeletal system, in the form of bone loss, AI-associated arthralgia (AIA) syndrome and autoimmune rheumatic diseases. In this narrative review, we reported the main clinical features of these three detrimental conditions, their influence on therapy adherence, the possible underlying molecular mechanisms and the available pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments. The best-known form is the AIs-induced osteoporosis, whose molecular pathway and therapeutic possibilities were extensively investigated in the last decade. AIA syndrome is a high prevalent joint pain disorder which often determines a premature discontinuation of the therapy. Several points still need to be clarified, as a universally accepted diagnostic definition, the pathogenetic mechanisms and satisfactory management strategies. The association of AIs therapy with autoimmune diseases is of the utmost interest. The related literature has been recently expanded, but many issues remain to be explored, the first being the molecular mechanisms.

Breast Cancer Survivorship, Quality of Life, and Late Toxicities

Breast cancer is the most frequent cancer in women: in 2018, almost two million cases have been diagnosed all over the world and it represents the principal cause of death from a neoplastic disease in women. In the past years, breast cancer prognosis has significantly improved over time: currently 5-year survival rates are in the range of 90%, and 10-year survival is about 80%. This improvement has been mostly observed in western countries, due to high coverage and compliance with screening programs, leading to early diagnosis, i.e., when the disease is at a subclinical level, and to an improvement in tumor molecular characterization and innovative systemic treatments. Yet the identification of different biological breast cancer subtypes prompted the development of innovative targeted agents and improved treatment personalization. On the other hand, longer survival rates and increasing proportions of cured patients require dedicated strategies to manage long-term sequelae of breast cancer treatments, with particular attention to quality of life. This review analyzes the most important issues, potentially occurring with cancer treatments, concerning long-term sequelae and quality of life, to define a global approach to breast cancer survivorship.

Bone health care in women with breast cancer

The aim of this article is to analyze and critically appraise the literature regarding optimal bone health care in women with breast cancer and, more specifically, to present (1) the causes of bone loss in breast cancer patients, (2) the appropriate screening for osteoporosis and fracture risk estimation, (3) optimal prevention and therapeutic strategies for osteoporosis and fractures, (4) the role of antiresorptive agents as adjuvant therapy for the prevention of bone metastases and increase of overall survival, and (5) current data on the possible use of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) in these patients. The objective is to provide a sound pathophysiological background along with evidence-based and practical recommendations for physicians managing such women.

Management of osteoporosis in women with breast cancer

The screening, prevention and treatment of osteoporosis are similar in women with or without breast cancer. Breast cancer treatments, such as aromatase inhibitors, chemotherapy-induced ovarian failure and gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists all decrease estrogen levels, which in turn causes net bone resorption and bone loss. Bone loss over time will be of sufficient magnitude to cause some women to experience fractures. Thus, osteoporosis is an equation; the peak bone mass achieved by age 30 years minus the age-related and menopausal bone loss. Women should have their bone density measured by dual x-ray absorptiometry scans every 2 years. As clinically indicated, women should receive anti-osteoporosis drugs such as zoledronic acid, denosumab or oral bisphosphonates.

Risk of Osteoporotic Fracture in Patients with Breast Cancer: Meta-Analysis

Background

The fracture risk induced by anti-estrogen therapy in patients with breast cancer remains controversial. The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis and systematic review to evaluate the risk of osteoporotic fracture in patients with breast cancer.

Methods

A systematic search was performed to identify studies that included any osteoporotic fracture (hip fracture and vertebral fracture) in patients breast cancer. Main outcome measures were occurrence and risk of osteoporotic fractures including hip and vertebral fractures in patients and controls.

Results

A systematic search yielded a total of 4 studies that included osteoporotic fracture outcomes in patients with breast cancer. Meta-analysis showed a higher risk of osteoporotic fracture in patients with breast cancer. Analysis of these 4 studies involving a total of 127,722 (23,821 cases and 103,901 controls) patients showed that the incidence of osteoporotic fractures was higher in the breast cancer group than in the control group. The pooled estimate of crude relative risk for osteoporotic fracture was 1.35 (95% confidence interval, 1.29-1.42; P<0.001).

Conclusions

Although studies were limited by a small number, results suggested a possible association between anti-estrogen therapy and increased risk of osteoporotic fractures in patients with breast cancer.

Increased Fracture Risk in Women Treated With Aromatase Inhibitors Versus Tamoxifen: Beneficial Effect of Bisphosphonates

Aromatase inhibitors have been associated with accelerated bone loss and an increased risk of osteoporotic fractures. Currently, bisphosphonates are recommended to reduce fracture risk in these patients. The aim of this study is to evaluate the fracture risk in breast cancer patients receiving aromatase inhibitors, compared to tamoxifen users, and to assess the effectiveness of oral bisphosphonates in reducing fracture risk. We performed an observational cohort study up to 10 years of follow-up. Data were extracted from primary care records in a population database. Women diagnosed with breast cancer between 2006 and 2015 and treated with tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitors (n = 36,472) were stratified according to low (without osteoporosis diagnosis nor bisphosphonates exposure) or high (with osteoporosis and/or treated with bisphosphonates) fracture risk. Cox models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HR [95% CI]) of fracture from the propensity score-matched patients. Sensitivity analyses account for competing risk of death were performed (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR] [95% CI]). In postmenopausal women, fracture risk in aromatase inhibitor users showed an HR 1.40 [95% CI,1.05 to 1.87] and SHR 1.48 [95% CI, 1.11 to 1.98], compared to tamoxifen. Observing aromatase inhibitors patients at high risk of fracture, bisphosphonate-treated patients had an HR 0.73 [95% CI, 0.51 to 1.04] and SHR 0.69 [95% CI, 0.48 to 0.98] compared to nontreated. In conclusion, fracture risk in postmenopausal women during aromatase inhibitor treatment, in real-life conditions, was >40% compared to tamoxifen, corroborating previous randomized controlled trials results. In high-risk patients, bisphosphonate users had lower significant fracture incidence during aromatase inhibitor therapy than nonbisphosphonate users. Monitoring fracture risk and related risk factors in aromatase inhibitor patients is advisable. © 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Denosumab with Bisphosphonates in Increasing Bone Mineral Density in Patients with Prostate Cancer and Breast Cancer on Antihormonal Treatment

Osteoporosis is a common condition prevalent in both sexes that can be primary and secondary. Secondary osteoporosis may occur in cancer patients undergoing antihormonal treatment, leading to an increased risk of fractures. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in patients with prostate cancer and aromatase inhibitors (AI) in patients with breast cancer can drastically increase the risk of osteoporosis. Bisphosphonates are one of the key medications in managing these patients and are widely prescribed. A monoclonal antibody called denosumab, which is a relatively new treatment option, is also used in this population group. To conduct a detailed comparison of these groups, we performed a thorough literature search using Pubmed and Google Scholar to extract data in the form of research papers/clinical trials. A total of 18 research papers were extracted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and other inclusion and exclusion criteria. Seven of these papers were based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing denosumab with either placebo or bisphosphonates in patients with breast cancer and prostate cancer. Two meta-analyses comparing the safety and efficacy of both these drugs in this population group were also included. Denosumab was found to significantly increase bone mineral density (BMD) for up to two years and showed better results than bisphosphonates, while both had a comparable safety profile. More trials should be conducted in patients with prostate cancer or breast cancer on ADT or AI therapy, respectively, for longer durations to assess the long-term safety of these drugs in this population.

BOne HEalth ManagEment in Patients with Early Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Italian Osteoncology Center "Real-Life" Experience (BOHEME Study)

Background: We assessed the real-life clinical impact of bone health management in patients with breast cancer (BC) receiving adjuvant endocrine therapy at an Italian Osteoncology Center. Methods: Pre- and post-menopausal women undergoing adjuvant endocrine therapy for early-stage BC who came to our institute for their first bone health evaluation from January 2011 to June 2016 were considered in this retrospective observational study. Results: 1125 pre- and post-menopausal early-stage BC patients (209 and 916, respectively) were evaluated. Median age was 61 years (range 26–88). In the pre-menopausal group, spinal x-ray revealed that 10 patients (4.7%) had a morphometric vertebral fracture. Higher age (OR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.01–1.29) and bone mineral density (BMD) ≤ −2.5 (OR: 14.45; 95% CI: 1.70–122.67) were associated with a higher risk of bone fracture. The overall frequency of bone fracture was 17.6% (n = 161) in post-menopausal patients and a lower risk for bone fractures was associated with tamoxifen or other treatments (OR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.12–0.53), presence of back pain (OR: 1.65; 95% CI: 1.16–2.36), lower BMD (OR: 2.09 in patients with T-score ≤ 2.5; 95% CI: 1.21–3.59) and lower vitamin D levels (OR: 1.57 in patients with ≤ 10 ng/mL; 95% CI: 1.05–2.34) in univariate analysis. Conclusion: Our findings confirm that bone health management should be an integral part of long-term cancer care.

Denosumab for bone health in prostate and breast cancer patients receiving endocrine therapy? A systematic review and a meta-analysis of randomized trials

•

Hormonal receptors positive breast tumor and prostate cancer are managed with endocrine therapies.

•

Endocrine therapies designed for breast and prostate cancer are often associated to serious adverse skeletal related events, such fractures.

•

Denosumab is a monoclonal anti-body binding RANKL which acts as inhibitor of osteoclasts activity, thus increasing bone mass.

•

Denosumab was showed to strongly prevent hormonal therapies-related skeletal issues.

•

Denosumab administration results safe in bone mass increase and reduction of fractures risk.

Hormonal therapies for receptor positive-breast and prostate cancer patients have shown clinical efficacy but also several side effects including osteoporosis, loss of bone mass and increased fracture risk. Denosumab represents an anti RANKL (receptor activator of nuclear factor-kB ligand) monoclonal anti-body acting as inhibitor of osteoclasts formation, function, and survival, then increasing bone mass. Herein, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the role of Denosumab in saving bone health in prostate and breast cancer patients receiving respectively androgen deprivation therapy and adjuvant endocrine therapy. Moreover, selected patients have to be treated with Denosumab at the dose of 60 mg every six month or placebo. Outcomes studied included the bone mass density (BMD) increase at 24 and 36 months, BMD loss, reduction of fractures risk (in particular vertebral) at 24 and 36 months and safety (overall, serious adverse events – SAEs and discontinuation rate). Our results showed a reduction of the BMD loss up to 36 months both at the lumbar and femoral level and a BMD increase both at 24 and 36 months. It was also found a reduction in the number of new vertebral and femoral fractures at 24 and 36 months. Finally, our pooled analysis showed that Denosumab did not affect both the SAEs and therapy discontinuation risk. In conclusion, Denosumab administration can be considered effective and safe in the prevention and management of the above mentioned adverse events related to hormonal therapies designed for breast and prostate tumors.

The effects of adjuvant endocrine therapy on bone health in women with breast cancer

In women with oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive early breast cancer, oestradiol is important for breast cancer development and progression. Endocrine therapy prevents the deleterious effects of oestradiol in breast tissue by systemically depleting oestradiol concentration (aromatase inhibitors) or preventing its local action in breast tissue (selective oestrogen receptor modulators i.e. tamoxifen), thereby improving oncological outcomes. Use of aromatase inhibitors in postmenopausal women and ovarian function suppression with either tamoxifen or aromatase inhibition in premenopausal women, consequent to systemic oestradiol depletion, exerts detrimental effects on skeletal health. The oestradiol-deficient state causes increased bone remodelling and a negative bone balance. This results in bone loss, microstructural deterioration and bone fragility predisposing to fractures. Similar effects are also seen with tamoxifen in premenopausal women. In contrast, use of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women appears to exert protective effects on bone but studies on fracture risk are inconclusive. The longevity of women with ER-positive breast cancer treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy emphasises the need to mitigate the adverse skeletal effects of these therapies in order to maximise benefit. In general, fractures are associated with increased morbidity, mortality and are a high socioeconomic burden. Whilst the efficacy of antiresorptive therapy in preventing bone mineral density loss in postmenopausal women has been established, further clinical trial evidence is required to provide guidance regarding fracture risk reduction, when to initiate and stop treatment, choice of agent and optimal management of bone health in premenopausal women receiving endocrine therapy. In addition, potential oncological benefits of antiresorptive therapies will also need to be considered.

Bisphosphonates and Cancer: A Relationship Beyond the Antiresorptive Effects

Bisphosphonates (BPs) are stable analogues of the Inorganic Pyrophosphate (PPi), an endogenous regulator of bone mineralization, which can resist the hydrolysis in the gastrointestinal tract. Their conformation allows targeting the bone as a result of their three-dimensional structure, which makes them primary agents against osteoclast-mediated bone loss. They are used in many bone pathological conditions, like bone metastasis, because of its ability to modulate bone metabolism into a less favorable place to cancer cell growth, through the inhibition of osteoclastogenesis and bone resorption. This review is focused on the mechanisms of action through which BPs affect the cellular activity and survival, mainly on their antitumoral effects. In conclusion, BPs are considered the primary therapy for skeletal disorders due to its high affinity for bone, but now they are also considered as potential antitumor agents due to its ability to induce tumor cell apoptosis, inhibition of cell adhesion, invasion and proliferation, modulation of the immune system to target and eliminate cancer cells as well as affect the angiogenic mechanisms. Like any other drug, they also have some adverse effects, but the most common, the acute phase reaction, can be minimized with the intake of calcium and vitamin D.

Bone health in women with breast cancer

Women with early, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer are treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy, using aromatase inhibitors or selective estradiol receptor modulators such as tamoxifen, to deprive breast tissue from the deleterious effects of estradiol action, hence improving long-term prognosis. Aromatase inhibitors and, in premenopausal women, tamoxifen accelerate bone loss and increase fracture risk. Therefore, all women commencing endocrine therapy need a targeted work-up to assess the baseline fracture risk, and monitoring of bone health during endocrine therapy should be individualized based on this baseline risk. While high-level evidence specific to early breast cancer is lacking, non-pharmacologic measures to maintain optimal bone health such as weight-bearing exercise and calcium and vitamin D sufficiency should be implemented in all women. Antiresorptive treatment should be initiated in all women with preexisting fragility fractures (including vertebral morphometric fractures) and should be considered in women with areal bone mineral density (BMD) T-scores < -2.0 (or Z-scores in women aged <50 years) or those experiencing rapid bone loss (≥5% per year), taking into consideration the baseline BMD and other risk factors for fracture. Further clinical trial evidence is required to provide definitive guidance regarding criteria to initiate antiresorptive treatment, choice of agents, and duration of treatment, taking into account potential oncologic benefits of antiresorptive therapy on breast cancer-related outcomes.

Bone health evaluation one year after aromatase inhibitors completion

INTRODUCTION

Breast cancer patients treated with aromatase inhibitors (AIs) experience increased bone loss during their treatment. However, there is little information about bone mineral density (BMD) after completing AI-treatment. The present study aimed to assess BMD changes one year after AI-therapy completion.

METHODS

Data were collected from 864 postmenopausal women treated with AI during 5 years (5y-AI group), or during 2-3 years after taking tamoxifen therapy (pTAM-AI group). Participants with osteoporosis were treated with oral bisphosphonates (BP). BMD changes in lumbar spine (LS), femoral neck (FN) and total hip (TH) between baseline, end of treatment, and at one year post-treatment were assessed using repeated-measures ANOVA.

RESULTS

At the end of AI-treatment, 382 patients had available BMD values and 316 also had post-treatment BMD values. As expected, BMD levels were decreased at AI-completion in non-BP treated patients. After one year, LS BMD increased in both groups (5y-AI: +2.11% [95%CI: 1.55 to 2.68], p < 0.001; pTAM-AI: +1.00% [95%CI: 0.49 to 1.51], p < 0.001) compared with the end of AI-therapy, while values at FN and TH remained stable. On the other hand, BMD values of BP-treated patients were increased or maintained at the end of AI-treatment and also at post-treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

At one year after AI-completion, FN and TH BMD remained reduced in non-BP treated women, while LS BMD was recovered in the 5y-AI group and partially recovered in the pTAM-AI group. BP treatment increased or maintained BMD values at the end of therapy and at one year post-treatment.

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.

Assessment and management of bone health in women with oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer receiving endocrine therapy: Position statement of the Endocrine Society of Australia, the Australian and New Zealand Bone & Mineral Society, the Australasian Menopause Society and the Clinical Oncology Society of Australia

To formulate clinical consensus recommendations on bone health assessment and management of women with oestrogen receptor-positive early breast cancer receiving endocrine therapy, representatives appointed by relevant Australian Medical Societies used a systematic approach for adaptation of guidelines (ADAPTE) to derive an evidence-informed position statement addressing 5 key questions. Women receiving adjuvant aromatase inhibitors and the subset of premenopausal woman treated with tamoxifen have accelerated bone loss and increased fracture risk. Both bisphosphonates and denosumab prevent bone loss; additionally, denosumab has proven antifracture benefit. Women considering endocrine therapy need fracture risk assessment, including clinical risk factors, biochemistry and bone mineral density (BMD) measurement, with monitoring based on risk factors. Weight-bearing exercise, vitamin D and calcium sufficiency are recommended routinely. Antiresorptive treatment should be considered in women with prevalent or incident clinical or morphometric fractures, a T-score (or Z-scores in women <50 years) of <-2.0 at any site, or if annual bone loss is ≥5%, considering baseline BMD and other fracture risk factors. Duration of antiresorptive treatment can be individualized based on absolute fracture risk. Relative to their skeletal benefits, risks of adverse events with antiresorptive treatments are low. Skeletal health should be considered in the decision-making process regarding choice and duration of endocrine therapy. Before and during endocrine therapy, skeletal health should be assessed regularly, optimized by nonpharmacological intervention and where indicated antiresorptive treatment, in an individualized, multidisciplinary approach. Clinical trials are needed to better delineate long-term fracture risks of adjuvant endocrine therapy and to determine the efficacy of interventions designed to minimize these risks.

Osteoporosis and musculoskeletal complications related to therapy of breast cancer

Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) are the treatment of choice for the majority of postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor (ER) positive breast cancers in early and advanced stage settings. One of most frequent side effects of AIs is bone loss that is of sufficient magnitude to increase risk of osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporosis is primarily a complex genetic disease with few modifiable risk factors. As the lifespan increases, and breast mortality decreases, more women with breast cancer will be at risk of osteoporotic fractures, or falls that result in fractures. The screening, prevention, and treatment of osteoporosis do not differ in women with or without breast cancer. Rather, breast cancer treatments, including AIs, chemotherapy-induced ovarian failure, and gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, all decrease estrogen, which causes net bone resorption, leading some women to experience fracture. Occurring in about fifty-percent of women, AI-induced arthralgia is one of the most common side effects, and causes of nonadherence and discontinuation. Registry studies show that nonadherence and discontinuation may contribute to higher breast cancer mortality. Thus, understanding the mechanisms, risk factors, and interventions to mitigate symptoms of AI-induced arthralgia is a high priority.

Link between estrogen deficiency osteoporosis and susceptibility to bone metastases: A way towards precision medicine in cancer patients

Different fields of cancer management consider bone health to be of increasing clinical importance for patients: 1) presence of bone metastases in many solid tumors, 2) use of bone-targeted treatments in the reduction of bone metastasis, 3) effects of cancer treatment on reproductive hormones, critical for normal bone remodeling maintenance. Additionally, bone microenvironment is further complicated by the decline of ovarian sex steroid production and by the related increase in inflammatory factors linked to menopause, which result in accelerated bone loss and increased risk of osteoporosis (OP). Similarly, cancers and metastasis to bone showed a close relationship with sex hormones (particularly estrogen). Thus, these findings raise a question: Could pre-existing estrogen deficiency OP promote and/or influence cancer cell homing and tumor growth in bone? Although some preclinical and clinical evidence exists, it is mandatory to understand this aspect that would be relevant in the clinical theatre, where physicians need to understand the treatments available to reduce the risk of skeletal disease in cancer patients. This descriptive systematic review summarizes preclinical and clinical studies dealing with bimodal interactions between pre-existing estrogen deficiency OP and bone metastasis development and provides evidence supporting differences in tumor growth and colonization between healthy and OP status. Few studies evaluated the impact of estrogen deficiency OP on the susceptibility to bone metastases. Therefore, implementing biological knowledge, could help researchers and clinicians to have a better comprehension of the importance of pre- and post-menopausal bone microenvironment and its clinical implications for precision medicine in cancer patients.

Kadsurenone is a useful and promising treatment strategy for breast cancer bone metastases by blocking the PAF/PTAFR signaling pathway

Breast cancer (BC) is characterized by high incidences of bone metastases. Current treatment strategies for BC bone metastases primarily focused on breaking the ‘vicious osteolytic cycle’. Platelet-activating factor (PAF) is a potent phospholipid mediator, which has previously reported biological activities in BC progression and osteoclast differentiation by activating its receptor PAF receptor (PTAFR). However, the role of PAF in the mediation of BC bone metastases remains elusive. In the present study, it was revealed that the upregulation of PTAFR was associated with an increased incidence of bone metastases. It was also revealed that PAF significantly enhanced the processes of BC cell migration and BC mediated osteoclastogenesis. These results suggest that PAF serves a promotion role in BC bone metastases. It was further demonstrated that the natural PAF antagonist Kadsurenone may effectively attenuate each process by partially blocking the PAF/PTAFR signaling pathway. Therefore, targeting PAF/PTAFR by Kadsurenone may be a promising treatment strategy for BC bone metastases.

Cancer Treatment and Bone Health

Considerable advances in oncology over recent decades have led to improved survival, while raising concerns about long-term consequences of anticancer treatments. In patients with breast or prostate malignancies, bone health is a major issue due to the high risk of bone metastases and the frequent prolonged use of hormone therapies that alter physiological bone turnover, leading to increased fracture risk. Thus, the onset of cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) should be considered by clinicians and recent guidelines should be routinely applied to these patients. In particular, baseline and periodic follow-up evaluations of bone health parameters enable the identification of patients at high risk of osteoporosis and fractures, which can be prevented by the use of bone-targeting agents (BTAs), calcium and vitamin D supplementation and modifications of lifestyle. This review will focus upon the pathophysiology of breast and prostate cancer treatment-induced bone loss and the most recent evidence about effective preventive and therapeutic strategies.

Fractures frequently occur in older cancer patients: the MD Anderson Cancer Center experience

PURPOSE AND INTRODUCTION

A growing number of cancer patients are older adults aged 65 years and older. Patients with cancer are at increased risk for developing osteoporosis, falls, and fractures. We sought to identify the incidence of fractures in older adults who underwent cancer care between January 2013 and December 2015.

METHODS

A comprehensive geriatric assessment was performed, and bone densitometry was measured at baseline, with a 2-year follow-up.

RESULTS

In this study, among 304 patients with gastrointestinal, urologic, breast, lung, and gynecologic cancers we evaluated, and who completed the bone density testing (n = 199), 80% had osteoporosis or low bone mass (osteopenia). There was a higher prevalence of osteoporosis in cancer patients (40 vs. 16%, p = 0.05) than in population studies. Vitamin D insufficiency (< 30 ng/ml) was identified in 49% of tested cases (n = 245). Risk factors for low bone mass or osteoporosis were advanced age (p = 0.05), malnutrition (p = 0.04), and frailty (p = 0.01). Over the following 2 years (median follow-up 18 months), there was an incidence of fractures of 110 per 1000 person-years, or 2.8 times higher than reported in individuals without cancer. Risk factors for fractures included advanced age (70-79 vs. 60-69 years, p = 0.05) and frailty (p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Most older cancer patients studied have osteoporosis or low bone mass, resulting in an almost 3-fold increase in fracture risk as compared to epidemiologic studies. Bone health issues are commonly seen in older cancer patients, we recommend universal bone density testing. The initiation of antiresorptive treatment when findings are of osteopenia or osteoporosis will reduce the risk of fractures.

Update on osteoporosis treatment

Treatment of osteoporosis should be directed primarily towards secondary prevention of fractures. The occurrence of drug-related adverse effects for the treatment of osteoporosis has led to a reevaluation of the indications, the duration of treatment and even withdrawal of some drugs from the market. This review has been made from different patient profiles that practitioners will find in usual practice; from patients with hip fracture with cognitive impairment, limitation of their day-to-day living activities and comorbidities, to active patients without any limitations; patients with vertebral fractures and non-vertebral fractures where secondary prevention is highly important. In general, antiresorptive drugs (alendronate and risedronate) will be the first choice. Zoledronate or denosumab will be indicated in cases of digestive intolerance, poor adherence or an increased risk of hip fracture. Teriparatide will be indicated to patients with 2or more previous vertebral fractures or very low bone density.

Evaluation and management of skeletal disease in cancer care

Recently, there have been considerable advancements in cancer therapies thereby prolonging the life of cancer survivors. However, these recent advancements present new challenges in the management of bone disease in cancer survivors. Bone acts as a fertile soil for cancer seeding and bone health is often compromised because of increased inflammatory cytokines in cancer, direct cancer metastasis and toxic effects of anti-cancer therapies. This effect is more pronounced in elderly population who already have compromised bone mineral density leading to increased skeletal related events and bone pain. Timely diagnosis and effective interventions are essential for reducing bone-related morbidity in cancer survivors. Also, a complex interdependence exists between cancer related bone disease and tumor growth, creating a vicious circle of extensive bone destruction and cancer progression. Hence, maintenance of bone health and integrity plays a pivotal role in comprehensive cancer care. The bone-targeted treatments have been shown to preserve bone health, and modify the course of the underlying cancer. Management of long-term bone health requires a broad knowledge base that endocrinologists, oncologists and other care team members should be aware of. The manuscript highlights the skeletal effects of cancer, adjuvant therapies used for hormone-responsive cancers, chemotherapy induced bone loss and steps for accurate diagnosis and management of bone disease in cancer survivors by bridging the gaps in the comprehensive cancer care.