Osteoporosis during Continuous Androgen Deprivation: Influence of the Modality and Length of Treatment

Association of Androgen Deprivation Therapy with Osteoporotic Fracture in Patients with Prostate Cancer with Low Tumor Burden Using a Retrospective Population-Based Propensity-Score-Matched Cohort

This study evaluated the effect of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) on osteoporotic fractures (OF) and its prognostic effect on overall survival in patients with localized or regional prostate cancer (PC) using the Korean National Insurance Dataset. A total of 8883 pairs of 1:1 propensity-score-matched patients with localized or regional PC were retrospectively enrolled between 2007 and 2016. All patients underwent at least 1 year of follow-up to evaluate therapeutic outcomes. Multivariate analysis was performed to determine the prognostic effect of ADT on OF. During a mean follow-up of 47.7 months, 977 (3.43%) patients developed OF, and the incidences of hip, spine, and wrist fractures were significantly different between ADT and non-ADT groups (p < 0.05). The ADT group had a significantly higher incidence of OF (hazard ratio 2.055, 95% confidence interval 1.747-2.417) than the non-ADT group (p < 0.05), and the incidence of spine/hip/wrist OF was significantly higher in the ADT group regardless of the PC stage (p < 0.05). Multivariate analysis failed to show any significant difference in overall survival between the two groups (p > 0.05). ADT resulted in a significantly higher incidence of OF among patients with localized and regional PC, but the overall survival did not differ between ADT and non-ADT groups.

Effects of Medical Treatment of Prostate Cancer on Bone Health

Medical treatment of prostate cancer (PC) is multidisciplinary, resulting in prolonged survival. Androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) can have negative effects on skeletal metabolism, particularly if combined with glucocorticoids. We discuss the pathophysiology and effects of ADT and glucocorticoids on skeletal endpoints, as well as the awareness and management of bone fragility. Coadministration of glucocorticoids is necessary with abiraterone because this causes a novel acquired form of 17-hydroxylase deficiency and synergistically increases the risk of fracture by affecting bone quality. Bone antiresorptive agents [selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMS), bisphosphonates, and denosumab] increase bone mineral density (BMD) and in some instances reduce fracture risk in PC patients on ADT. Awareness and management of bone health in PC can be improved by integrating endocrinologists into the multidisciplinary PC team.

Bone mineral density in Nigerian men on androgen deprivation therapy for advanced prostate cancer

Background

Cancer of the prostate (CaP) is the most frequently diagnosed non-cutaneous malignancy worldwide, and it is the second leading cause of death from cancer in men. In the developing world, majority of patients with CaP present in advanced stage and often times, androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is the only treatment option available. ADT has been reported to increase the risk of osteopenia and osteoporosis in patients with CaP in studies done predominantly among the Caucasians. There is a dearth of report of the effect of ADT on CaP in the black population most especially Nigerian population despite our high incidence of CaP. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of advanced CaP and its treatment using ADT on bone mineral density (BMD) in our patients.

Results

The age of the patients ranged from 54 to 88 years (mean 70.15 ± 6.7) and 50 to 85 years (mean 68.92 ± 8.5) for the case and control groups, respectively. The mean BMD of the control group (0.26 ± 1.5) was significantly higher than the case group pre-ADT (− 0.78 ± 1.7) (p = 0.044). Post-ADT, the BMD was significantly lower (− 1.15 ± 1.7) than pre-ADT (p = 0.001) among the case group.

Conclusion

Advanced CaP was found to be associated with a decrease in BMD, and ADT was associated with a further decline in the BMD. Therefore, prevention and treatment of skeletal-related events is vital in management of patients with advanced CaP.

Effect of Androgen Deprivation Therapy on Bone Mineral Density in a Prostate Cancer Cohort in New Zealand: A Pilot Study

Introduction:

Reduction in bone mineral density (BMD) is a common side effect of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). We aimed to examine the cross-sectional and longitudinal variation in BMD and associated bone markers in patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer (PCa) managed with and without ADT.

Methods:

Bone mineral density of the total body, lumbar spine, femoral neck, ultradistal forearm, and one-third distal radius was measured in 88 patients with PCa without bone metastases at baseline and at 6 months. Patients were categorized into 4 groups: (1) acute ADT (≤6 months), (2) chronic ADT (>6 months), (3) former ADT, and (4) no ADT (controls). Serum levels of bone metabolism markers, procollagen type I N-terminal propeptide (PINP) and C-terminal cross-linking telopeptide of type I collagen (CTX), were also measured.

Results:

In the cross-sectional analysis, men receiving chronic ADT had significantly lower total body BMD as compared with former ADT users and men with no ADT. In longitudinal analysis, a significant reduction in ultradistal forearm BMD was observed in both acute and chronic ADT users after 6 months (4.08% and 2.7%, P = .012 and .026, respectively). A significant reduction in total body BMD was observed in acute ADT users (2.99%, P = .032). Former ADT users had a significant increase in both lumbar spine and femoral neck BMD (2.84% and 1.59%, P = .008 and .002, respectively). The changes in BMD were not significantly different between acute and chronic ADT users. In the cross-sectional analysis, higher levels of PINP and CTX were observed in acute and chronic ADT users than former ADT users or PCa controls. In longitudinal analysis, the level of serum PINP and CTX did not change significantly from baseline to 6 months in acute, chronic, and former ADT users, or PCa controls, and the percentage change did not differ among the 4 groups.

Conclusions:

Men on acute ADT had a similar rate of bone loss to men on chronic ADT. Reversibility in ADT-induced bone loss was observed in those who discontinued ADT. Serum levels of PINP and CTX were higher in acute and chronic ADT users and levels returned to the range of PCa controls when treatment was withdrawn.

Androgen deprivation in prostate cancer and the long-term risk of fracture

OBJECTIVES

To determine the rate of bone mass loss and the risk of fracture induced by androgen deprivation therapy in patients with prostate cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Prospective study in 2 phases. In the first phase, demographic variables, FRAX^®, bone mineral density and clinical fractures were collected, before starting the therapy and up to 1 year after ending the therapy. In the second phase, we conducted a telephone interview a mean of 8.5 years after the start of the study to assess new fractures.

RESULTS

We included 150 patients with a mean age of 67 years and a mean therapy duration of 24 months. Before starting the treatment, 62 patients (41%) showed osteoporosis or low bone mass in the densitometry. After the first year of treatment, the bone mineral density decreased a mean of 3.7% and 2.1% in the lumbar spine and femoral neck, respectively. At the end of the second and third year, the loss rate was lower. During the first phase of the study, 4 patients (2.7%) experienced a fracture. In the telephone interviews with 80 patients (53%), only 1 had experienced a fracture.

CONCLUSIONS

In the patients with prostate cancer and androgen deprivation therapy, greater bone loss occurred during the first year. When the treatment did not exceed 2 years, the absolute risk of fracture was low, and clinical fractures were uncommon in the short and long term.

Androgen deprivation therapy impact on quality of life and cardiovascular health, monitoring therapeutic replacement

INTRODUCTION

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is commonly utilized in the management of both localized and advanced adenocarcinoma of the prostate. The use of ADT is associated with several adverse events, physical changes, and development of medical comorbidities/mortality.

AIM

The current article reviews known adverse events associated with ADT as well as treatment options, where available. Current recommendations and guidelines are cited for ongoing monitoring of patients receiving ADT.

METHODS

A PubMed search of topics relating to ADT and adverse outcomes was performed, with select articles highlighted and reviewed based on level of evidence and overall contribution.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Reported outcomes of studies detailing adverse effects of ADT were reviewed and discussed. Where available, randomized trials and meta-analyses were reported.

RESULTS

ADT may result in several adverse events including decreased libido, erectile dysfunction, vasomotor symptoms, cognitive, psychological and quality of life impairments, weight gain, sarcopenia, increased adiposity, gynecomastia, reduced penile/testicular size, hair changes, periodontal disease, osteoporosis, increased fracture risk, diabetes and insulin resistance, hyperlipidemia, and anemia. The definitive impact of ADT on lipid profiles, cardiovascular morbidity/mortality, and all-cause mortality is currently unknown with available data. Treatment options to reduce ADT-related adverse events include changing to an intermittent treatment schedule, biophysical therapy, counseling, and pharmacotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated with ADT are at increased risk of several adverse events and should be routinely monitored for the development of potentially significant morbidity/mortality. Where appropriate, physicians should reduce known risk factors and counsel patients as to known risks and benefits of therapy.

Skeletal-related events in metastatic prostate cancer and the number needed to treat: a critical consideration

PURPOSE

With stage migration induced by early diagnosis of prostate-specific antigen, the course of disease for prostate cancer (PCa) patients has changed. Increasingly, patients undergo long-term androgen ablation with consecutive risks including osteoporosis and pathologic fractures. A recent randomized trial found that the RANK ligand inhibitor denosumab was more effective preventing skeletal-related events in patients with metastatic PCa as compared to treatment with the bisphosphonate zoledronic acid. This improved efficacy was linked to an increase of side effects.

METHODS

The present analysis compares results reported for both substances using a number needed to treat analysis approach. Based upon these findings, risk-benefit calculations were performed.

RESULTS

The results demonstrate that for patients with bone metastatic castration-resistant PCa, decision for or against treatment with either denosumab or zoledronic acid must not only consider efficacy but needs to balance the desired effects versus potential side effects. This is of specific relevance since life expectancy is limited in this patient cohort with end-stage disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Further scientific efforts are necessary to identify optimal dosing and application intervals for denosumab and zoledronic acid as well as to answer the question of optimal duration of treatment. These findings will directly impact the risk versus benefit relations for both therapeutic options.

Guideline-discordant androgen deprivation therapy in localized prostate cancer: patterns of use in the medicare population and cost implications

Background Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in localized prostate cancer improves overall survival and is recommended by National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines in certain situations. However, ADT is without benefit in other situations and can actually cause harm. This study examines recent trends in the ADT use and quantifies the cost of guideline-discordant ADT. Patients and methods Patients, aged 66-80 years, in the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare database with non-metastatic prostate cancer diagnosed between 2004 and 2007 were included for analysis. Prostate-specific antigen, Gleason score, and stage were used to define D'Amico risk categories. Logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with guideline-discordant ADT. Annual direct cost was estimated using 2011 Medicare reimbursement for ADT. Results Of 28 654 men included, 12.4% received guideline-discordant ADT. In low-risk patients, 14.9% received discordant ADT, mostly due to simultaneous ADT with radiation. Discordant use was seen in 7.3% of intermediate and 14.9% of high-risk patients, mostly from ADT as primary therapy. The odds of receiving guideline-discordant ADT decreased over time (2007 versus 2004; OR 0.69; 95% CI 0.62-0.76). The estimated annual direct cost from discordant ADT is $42 000 000. Conclusion Approximately one in eight patients received ADT discordant with published guidelines. Elimination of discordant use would result in substantial savings.

Endocrine prevention and treatment of prostate cancer

The major androgen within the prostate is dihydrotestosterone (DHT). DHT and 5α-reductase are highly associated with prostate cancer. It has been hypothesised that inhibition of 5α-reductase activity might reduce the risk of prostate cancer development, slow tumour progression and even treat the existing disease. The basis for endocrine treatment of prostate cancer is to deprive the cancer cells of androgens. Every type of endocrine treatment carries adverse events which influence quality of life in different ways. 5α-Reductase inhibitors (5-ARI) reduce risk of being diagnosed with prostate cancer but they do not eliminate it. By suppressing PSA from BPH and indolent prostate cancers 5-ARI enhances the ability of a rising PSA to define a group of men at increased risk of clinically significant prostate cancer. Also fewer high-grade cancers are missed because biopsy is more accurate in smaller prostates. Androgen deprivation is an effective treatment for patients with advanced prostate cancer. However, it is not curative, and creates a spectrum of unwanted effects that influence quality of life. Castration remains the frontline treatment for metastatic prostate cancer, where orchiectomy, oestrogen agonists, GnRH agonists and antagonists produce equivalent clinical responses. MAB is not significantly more effective than single agent GnRH agonist or orchiectomy. Nonsteroidal antiandrogen monotherapy is as effective as castration in treatment of locally advanced prostate cancer offering quality of life benefits. Neoadjuvant endocrine treatment has its place mainly in the external beam radiotherapy setting. Increasing data suggest IAD is as effective as continuous ADT. The decision regarding the type of androgen deprivation should be made individually after informing the patient of all available treatment options, including watchful waiting, and on the basis of potential benefits and adverse effects. There are new promising secondary or tertiary forms of endocrine therapies under evaluation, like CTP17A1 inhibitors and more potent antiandrogens including MDV3100, which give new hope for patients developing castration resistant prostate cancer.

Skeletal complications of ADT: disease burden and treatment options

Therapy based on androgenic deprivation is one of the standard treatments that many prostate cancer patients receive. Moreover, its use is increasing owing to a clear expansion of the indications for this therapy in patients with localized prostate cancer. Despite classically being considered to be well tolerated, androgenic deprivation has adverse effects. Of these, the loss of mineral bone mass is particularly notable and can lead to osteoporosis, as well as an increased risk of bone fracture. Some fractures, such as hip fractures, may have serious consequences. Useful procedures such as bone densitometry can aid in the diagnosis of these conditions. Once diagnosed, decreases in mineral bone mass can be managed by dietary recommendations, general changes in lifestyle or medication. We review the most important randomized controlled trials evaluating different drugs (bisphosphonates, denosumab and toremifene) in the prevention of bone loss and in the reduction in fracture risk in prostate cancer patients treated with androgen-deprivation therapy. Following the applicable recommendations, urologists must carefully monitor the bone health of prostate cancer patients subjected to androgenic deprivation to obtain an early diagnosis and apply the appropriate general and/or therapeutic measures if necessary.

Bone mineral density in Jamaican men on androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer

Background

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been reported to reduce the bone mineral density (BMD) in men with prostate cancer (CaP). However, Afro-Caribbeans are under-represented in most studies. The aim was to determine the effect of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) on the bone mineral density (BMD) of men with prostate cancer in Jamaica.

Methods

The study consisted of 346 Jamaican men, over 40 years of age: 133 ADT treated CaP cases (group 1), 43 hormone-naïve CaP controls (group 2) and 170 hormone naïve controls without CaP (group 3). Exclusion criteria included metastatic disease, bisphosphonate therapy or metabolic disease affecting BMD. BMD was measured with a calcaneal ultrasound and expressed in S.D. units relative to young adult men (T score), according to the World Health Organization definition. Patient weight, height and BMI were assessed.

Results

Mean ± sd, age of patients in group 1 (75± 7.4 yrs) was significantly greater than groups 2 and 3 (67 ± 8.1 yrs; 65±12.0 yrs). There was no significant difference in weight and BMI between the 3 groups. . The types of ADT (% of cases, median duration in months with IQR) included LHRH (Luteinizing hormone releasing hormone) analogues (28.6%, 17.9, IQR 20.4), oestrogens (9.8%, 60.5, IQR 45.6) anti-androgens (11.3%, 3.3, IQR 15.2) and orchiectomy (15.7%, 43.4, IQR 63.9). Unadjusted t score of group 1, mean ± sd, (-1.6± 1.5) was significantly less than group 2 (-0.9±1.1) and group 3 (-0.7±1.4), p <0.001. Ninety three (69.9%), 20 (45%) and 75 (42%) of patients in groups 1, 2 and 3 respectively were classified as either osteopenic or osteoporotic (p<0.001). Adjusting for age, there was a significant difference in t scores between groups 1 and 2 as well as between groups 1 and 3 (p<0.001). Compared with oestrogen therapy and adjusting for duration of therapy, the odds of low bone mineral density (osteopenia or osteoporosis) with LHRH analogue was 4.5 (95%CI, 14.3 to 3.4); with anti-androgens was 5.9 (95%CI, 32.7 to 5); with orchiectomy was 7.3 (95%CI, 30 to 5.8) and multiple drugs was 9.2 ((95%CI, 31 to 7.1).

Conclusions

ADT is associated with lower BMD in Jamaican men on hormonal therapy for prostate cancer.

[Loss of bone mass in patients with prostate cancer subjected to androgenic deprivation]

CONTEXT

Treatment based on androgenic deprivation is one of the standard treatments that many prostate cancer patients receive. Moreover, its use is increasing due to a clear expansion of the indications of this therapy in patients with localized cancer.

SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE

In spite of being classically considered that it is well tolerated, androgenic deprivation has adverse effects. Of these, it is worth mentioning the loss of mineral bone mass, which can lead to osteoporosis and increase the risk of bone fracture. Some fractures may have serious consequences, as occurs with hip fractures. To make a diagnosis in this situation, there are useful procedures such as bone densitometry. Once diagnosed, the decrease in mineral bone mass can be managed with dietary recommendations, general changes in lifestyle, or with drugs such as denosumab.

CONCLUSIONS

Following applicable recommendations, urologists must carefully monitor the bone health of patients with prostate cancer subjected to androgenic deprivation, in order to obtain an early diagnosis and to apply the appropriate general and/or therapeutic measures, if necessary.

Review of major adverse effects of androgen-deprivation therapy in men with prostate cancer

Androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) is a common treatment for men with prostate cancer. Although ADT is effective at suppressing prostate-specific antigen (PSA), stabilizing disease, alleviating symptoms in advanced disease, and potentially prolonging survival, it is not without serious side effects. However, to the authors' knowledge, there is lack of a systematic review of its major adverse effects to date. The authors of this report systematically reviewed and quantitatively assessed the literature on skeletal and cardiac side effects associated with ADT in men with prostate cancer. The PubMed database was searched for relevant published articles from 1966 to May 2008, and 683 articles were reviewed systematically from an original 20 different Medical Subject Heading search combinations. The focus of the review was on bone-related and cardiovascular-related outcomes. When appropriate, results were pooled from articles on specific adverse outcomes, summary risk estimates were calculated, and tests of heterogeneity were performed. Fourteen articles were identified that met inclusion criteria from the original 683 studies. Men who underwent ADT for prostate cancer had a significantly increased risk of overall fracture of 23% (summary relative risk, 1.23; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.10-1.38) compared with men who had prostate cancer but who did not undergo ADT. Furthermore, men who underwent ADT had a 17% increase in cardiovascular-related mortality compared with men who did not undergo with ADT (summary hazards ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.07-1.29). Significant elevations in the risk of diabetes also were observed from 2 large studies. ADT was associated with an increased risk of skeletal fracture, incident diabetes, and cardiovascular-related mortality, although the absolute risk of these events was low. Preventive measures against these adverse effects and careful assessment of patient's baseline health status should be considered.

Implementation of osteoporosis screening guidelines in prostate cancer patients on androgen ablation

Androgen ablation (AA) therapy is one of the modalities used to treat prostate cancer. It is well known that AA therapy increases the risk of osteoporosis and fractures. In 2004, the British Columbia Cancer Agency published guidelines regarding bone health in these patients. A key recommendation was to arrange for bone mineral density (BMD) testing if AA was to be used for 6 mo or longer. Our objective was to evaluate how well these guidelines were implemented by reviewing the number of BMDs performed in patients who had been treated at one of the 4 cancer centers in British Columbia. We found that the overall number of BMDs documented after the implementation of the guidelines was significantly greater than the number documented before (25% vs 7.5%, p value < 0.0001). There appeared to be regional differences in implementation, with the greatest effect seen at the Vancouver center, which serves as the chief academic center for the province. The greater effect of guidelines at this center suggests a need for more effective dissemination peripherally. The care gap remaining at even the most impacted center indicates a need for greater efforts to both implement guidelines and monitor their implementation over time.

Alendronate decreases the fracture risk in patients with prostate cancer on androgen-deprivation therapy and with severe osteopenia or osteoporosis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate changes in bone mass and fracture risk in patients with prostate cancer on androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) and with a basal T-score of >-2.0, who were treated with an oral bisphosphonate, as such patients treated with ADT are at increased risk of bone loss and bone fracture.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We selected 61 patients with prostate cancer treated with ADT; 31 were treated with oral alendronate 70 mg once-weekly and a control group of 30 were not. At baseline and 12 months we measured bone mineral density (BMD) of the lumbar spine, femoral neck and total hip by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. All patients had severe osteopenia or osteoporosis at baseline. The risk of femoral neck fracture was calculated at baseline and 12 months (Z-score 2.7).

RESULTS

Patients treated with alendronate had a significant increase in BMD at the lumbar spine and femoral neck after 1 year of follow-up, with mean (sd) values of 1.06 (0.26) vs 1.01 (0.21) g/cm(2) at baseline (P < 0.001), and 0.75 (0.07) vs 0.73 (0.07) g/cm(2) (P = 0.03), respectively, while the control group had a significant loss of BMD at the total hip of 0.79 (0.14) vs 0.81 (0.13) g/cm(2) (P = 0.03). BMD was significantly improved at the three locations in patients treated with alendronate compared with the control group, with differences at the lumbar spine, femoral neck and total hip of 0.05 (0.07) vs 0.01 (0.10) (P = 0.001), 0.01 (0.04) vs -0.002 (0.03) (P = 0.04) and 0.01 (0.04) vs -0.01 (0.02) g/cm(2), respectively (P = 0.001). Patients treated with alendronate had a significant decrease in the fracture risk at the femoral neck, by -0.54 (1.29) (P = 0.04) after 1 year of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with once-weekly 70 mg alendronate significantly improved the BMD at the lumbar spine and femoral neck in patients with prostate cancer with severe osteopenia or osteoporosis and on ADT, and significantly decreased the risk of femoral neck fracture.

Cancer treatment-induced bone loss in breast and prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Bone loss resulting from the treatment of breast and prostate cancer is an emerging problem. Bisphosphonates have a potential role in the prevention of this cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL).

METHODS

Studies evaluating the incidence and prevalence of CTIBL in early breast and prostate cancer patients and trials evaluating the preventative role of bisphosphonates were identified by a search of the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases through the end of March 2008. Reference lists from retrieved articles were cross referenced, and further information was obtained from relevant scientific meetings.

RESULTS

Several therapies commonly used in the treatment of women and men with breast and prostate cancers, in particular the aromatase inhibitors (AIs) for breast cancer and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer, are associated with significant bone loss and with an increase in fracture risk. The use of bisphosphonates seems to attenuate the bone loss, although the long-term impact remains unclear because of insufficient follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Adjuvant endocrine therapy with an AI or androgen deprivation can be considered a risk factor for the development of osteopenia, osteoporosis, and bone fracture, which can be mitigated by appropriate bisphosphonate therapy. Clear identification of risk factors for osteoporosis in individual patients should aid treatment decisions about whether to use bisphosphonates when starting or switching to an AI or ADT. Patients need to be educated about this risk and other measures to avoid this complication, including lifestyle modifications that may benefit their general and bone health.

Preservation of bone health in prostate cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Bone is the most common site of metastasis in prostate cancer. The burden of disease from bone metastasis has repercussions in terms of cost to society, decreased quality of life, and decreased survival. Given the magnitude of bone-related morbidity in advanced prostate cancer, physicians need to be aware of preventive and therapeutic measures, and to be proactive in implementing them.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patients with prostate cancer are often osteopenic at baseline. Implementing androgen-deprivation therapy further increases bone mineral density loss. Lifestyle changes, vitamin D and calcium supplementation may slow the rate of bone mineral density loss. Bisphosphonates reduce androgen-deprivation therapy-related bone loss in prostate cancer patients. Zoledronic acid is the only bisphosphonate proven to decrease skeletal-related events in a randomized controlled trial in patients with metastatic prostate cancer. Newer agents such as selective oestrogen receptor modifiers and antibodies targeting receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappaB ligand are under investigation.

SUMMARY

Bone mineral density loss and skeletal complications are directly related to androgen-deprivation therapy and metastases in prostate cancer patients. Preventive and therapeutic modalities are available to physicians, who should be proactive in implementing them. Novel agents are under investigation and data pertaining to their efficacy should become available in the near future.

Androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer

Androgen deprivation continues to play a crucial role in the treatment of advanced and metastatic prostate cancer. In the 65 years since its use was first described, urologists and medical oncologists have developed new and innovative ways to manipulate the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis with the goal of alleviating symptoms and prolonging the life of men with prostate cancer. Despite the successes that androgen deprivation therapy has brought, each method and regimen possesses unique benefits and burdens, of which the clinician and patient must be cognizant. This review discusses the first-line androgen deprivation methods and regimens presently in use with special attention paid to their side effects and the management of them, as well as the question of when to initiate androgen deprivation therapy.

A prospective, multicenter, open-label trial of zoledronic acid in patients with hormone refractory prostate cancer

PURPOSE

The short-term safety and efficacy of zoledronic acid for the treatment of skeletal metastasis was evaluated in patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 19 hormone-refractory prostate cancer patients with bone metastases were enrolled. All patients received up to six infusions of zoledronic acid (4 mg, given intravenously over 15 minutes, every 3-4 weeks). Safety was assessed by monitoring adverse events and serum creatinine levels. Efficacy was assessed by monitoring skeletal-related events, brief pain inventory score, quality of life score, type of pain medication, and analgesic score. Mean age of patients was 67.3 years (46-86 years), mean time from diagnosis of bone metastases was 27.6 months (0-117 months), and mean time from diagnosis of hormone-refractory disease was 7.5 months (0-26 months).

RESULTS

There was no clinically significant change in serum creatinine levels. Eleven adverse events (musculoskeletal disorders and systemic disorders) in 8 patients were classed as having a possible relationship to study drug. Fifteen patients completed six courses of zoledronic acid infusion. There were no significant changes in the brief pain inventory composite scores, quality of life questionnaire scores or analgesic score. No new skeletal-related events developed during the treatment period.

CONCLUSION

Zoledronic acid administered in this study as a 15-minute infusion demonstrated an acceptable and well-known safety profile in patients with refractory prostate cancer with bone metastases. However, prospective placebo- controlled clinical trials are required to elucidate the efficacy of zoledronic acid.

Bone health in prostate cancer patients receiving androgen-deprivation therapy: the role of bisphosphonates

Androgen-deprivation therapy, a mainstay in the treatment of locally advanced and metastatic prostate cancer, is associated with significant bone loss and related complications, such as fracture. Bisphosphonates, osteoclast inhibitors, are effective in preventing skeletal-related events in patients with metastatic prostate cancer and also in preventing bone loss in patients with locally advanced disease. Understanding the management of bone health, including identifying patients at risk, the most appropriate therapy, and monitoring and managing side effects, is critical. This review provides the most recent bone health risk factor and bisphosphonate data available for prostate cancer patients.

[Contribution of LHRH analogs in prostate cancer treatment]

The contribution of LHRH analogs is enormous in prostate cancer management at nearly all stages of the disease, the Leading cancer in males over 50 years of age. They make it possible to use hormone therapy reliably, with Little morbidity, and can be reversed. Their use can be immediate or delayed, continuous or intermittent, whether or not they are associated with an antiandrogen, and can be associated with chemotherapy for patients who have reached the stage of hormone-refractory prostate cancer.

The relationship between daily calcium intake and bone mineral density in men with prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the relationship between daily calcium intake (DCI) and bone mineral density (BMD) in patients with prostate cancer, and to assess if DCI is a risk factor for osteoporosis in this group of patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

DCI was assessed by a standard questionnaire answered by men with prostate cancer who had had bone densitometry. BMD was measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in the lumbar spine and different hip sites, in a cross-sectional study including 372 men with prostate cancer free of bone metastases, 71.5% (266) under androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) and 28.5% (106) after radical prostatectomy (RP). Osteoporosis was defined according to the International Society for Clinical Densitometry official position (2005).

RESULTS

A DCI of <1000 mg, the National Institute of Health recommendation, was detected in 93% of the men, (93.5% under ADT and 91.5% after RP). Osteoporosis was identified in 49.2% (183) of the patients, 54.9% (146) under ADT and 34.9% (37) after RP. The mean DCI was 609.7 mg in men with osteoporosis and 682.8 mg in those without (P < 0.001); in men under ADT the mean DCI remained significantly lower in those with osteoporosis (615.5 vs 700.4 mg, P < 0.001). A multivariate analysis showed that DCI was an independent risk factor for osteoporosis, together with patient age, ADT and its duration.

CONCLUSIONS

DCI seems to be related to BMD; a low DCI was an independent risk factor for osteoporosis in men with prostate cancer. In the study population overall the DCI was inadequate. Urologists should recommend a DCI of >1000 mg in patients with prostate cancer, especially in those under ADT.

The effect of androgen deprivation therapy on periodontal disease in men with prostate cancer

PURPOSE

We tested the hypothesis that men undergoing androgen deprivation therapy as treatment for prostate cancer are at greater risk for periodontitis and tooth loss.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 81 men with a mean age of 68.5 years who had prostate cancer were consecutively recruited among 325 enrolled in an academic osteoporosis study. Of these men 68 were eligible to participate in the research. The prevalence of periodontal disease in 41 men with prostate cancer undergoing androgen deprivation for a mean of 1.5 years was compared to that in 27 with prostate cancer not undergoing androgen deprivation, who served as controls. The prevalence of periodontal disease was examined in relation to bone mineral density in men with prostate cancer with and without androgen deprivation therapy. A periodontist (PF) blinded to androgen deprivation status recorded probing depth, clinical attachment level, bleeding, plaque scores, gingival recession, missing teeth and calculus. Logistic regression models were used to test the association between androgen deprivation therapy and periodontal disease. Linear regression models were used to assess the association between periodontal disease and bone mineral density in the 2 groups with prostate cancer (treated/untreated). We adjusted for variables known to influence periodontal disease, including patient age, race, smoking and periodontal disease history.

RESULTS

The prevalence of periodontal disease was 80.5% in men on androgen deprivation therapy compared with 3.7% in those not on androgen deprivation therapy (OR 3.33, 95% CI 1.07-10.35). Men on androgen deprivation therapy had significantly greater probing depth and higher plaque scores (p<0.001 and <0.09, respectively). A total of 81 men (76.9%) completed bone mineral density examinations. There was no relationship between bone mineral density and periodontal disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Men with prostate cancer undergoing androgen deprivation therapy were more likely to have periodontal disease than men not on androgen deprivation therapy. If confirmed in larger studies, this observation could have important public health implications, given the increasing use of androgen deprivation therapy to treat prostate cancer.

Prevalence of Osteoporosis During Long-Term Androgen Deprivation Therapy in Patients with Prostate Cancer

OBJECTIVES

To know the prevalence of osteoporosis in patients with prostate cancer according to the duration of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT).

METHODS

Dual energy x-ray absorptiometry was used to assess the bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine, femoral neck, Ward's triangle, trochanter, and total hip in 390 patients free of bone metastases. Osteoporosis was diagnosed if a T-score of less than 2.5 was detected at any measurement site. A subset of 124 patients were hormone naive at BMD testing, and 112 had undergone ADT for 2 years, 61 for 4 years, 37 for 6 years, 35 for 8 years, and 21 for 10 years or longer.

RESULTS

The osteoporosis rate was 35.4% in hormone-naive patients, 42.9% after 2 years of ADT, 49.2% after 4 years, 59.5% after 6 years, 65.7% after 8 years, and 80.6% after 10 or more years. Conversely, the rate of normal BMD decreased from 19.4% in hormone-naive patients to 17.8% after 2 years of ADT, 16.4% after 4 years, 10.8% after 6 years, 5.7% after 8 years, and 0% after 10 or more years of ADT.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of osteoporosis seemed high in hormone-naive patients with prostate cancer, and it increased to more than 80% after 10 years of ADT. Because of the increased risk of bone fractures in those patients, clinicians should be aware of the impact of ADT on BMD to prevent bone mass loss.

Bone-Directed Treatments for Prostate Cancer

Maintaining bone health in men who have advanced prostate cancer is an important goal of therapy. Low bone mass is prevalent in men who have prostate cancer, and long-term androgen deprivation therapy causes additional significant decreases in bone mineral density. The adverse effects of the disease and current treatment modalities on bone health are further compounded when patients develop bone metastases,which cause clinically significant skeletal morbidity. Treatment with bone-directed therapies, including intravenous bisphosphonates, radio-nuclides, and endothelin-1 antagonists, can provide palliative and therapeutic benefits for patients who have established bone metastases, and treatment with intravenous bisphosphonates may prevent the development of bone metastases.

Bone mineral density changes in patients with prostate cancer during the first 2 years of androgen suppression

PURPOSE

We characterized bone mineral density changes in patients with prostate cancer on androgen deprivation therapy during the first 2 years of uninterrupted therapy, and identified which location most reflects bone mass loss.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using dual energy x-ray absorptiometry, bone mineral density was prospectively assessed in patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer at the lumbar spine and femoral neck, Ward's triangle, trochanter and total hip. Measurements were performed at baseline and yearly thereafter in patients on ADT, and at baseline and 1 year in controls (age matched patients with prostate cancer, free of biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy).

RESULTS

A total of 62 patients were included in the study, 31 in each group. Median age (70 and 69 years, respectively), mean Gleason score and mean baseline serum testosterone did not significantly differ. Patients receiving ADT experienced a significant bone mass loss at 12 months in all locations, ranging from 2.29% to 5.55% (p <0.001). In contrast, bone mineral density did not change significantly (0.64% to 1.68%) in patients not receiving ADT. In the 20 patients on ADT after 24 months, the second year decrease was not as severe, nor was it significant compared to first year values. The major bone mass loss occurred in Ward's triangle, with decreases of 5.55% at 12 months and 7.05% at 24 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Bone mineral density decreases during the first 24 months of androgen suppression with the most relevant effect occurring in the first year. Ward's triangle is the axial skeletal site that reflects the major bone mass loss. Because the deleterious impact of long-term androgen suppression on bone mineral density is inversely related to fracture risk and indirectly related to survival in patients with prostate cancer, early diagnosis and prevention of bone mass loss are warranted in these patients.

Rationale for zoledronic acid therapy in men with hormone-sensitive prostate cancer with or without bone metastasis

Men with prostate cancer are at risk for bone loss and skeletal complications throughout the course of their disease. Bone loss is prevalent in many men with prostate cancer at initial diagnosis, and initiating androgen deprivation therapy results in accelerated bone resorption, leading to bone loss and an increased risk of fracture. These men are also at high risk for disease progression and bone metastases that can result in significant skeletal morbidity, including pathologic fracture, spinal cord compression, and debilitating bone pain requiring additional therapy. Excessive osteoclast activity plays a central role in the pathophysiology of bone disease at each stage of prostate cancer disease progression. Zoledronic acid, a highly potent inhibitor of osteoclast-mediated bone resorption, has increased bone mineral density in men receiving androgen deprivation therapy and is the only bisphosphonate that has shown statistically significant reductions in skeletal morbidity in patients with bone metastases from prostate cancer. Furthermore, preclinical evidence suggests that zoledronic acid has antitumor activity in prostate cancer models. Recently, a treatment algorithm was developed by the 3rd International Consultation on Prostate Cancer recommending the use of zoledronic acid for the prevention of skeletal complications in patients with bone metastases from prostate cancer, regardless of their hormone status, and for the prevention of treatment-induced bone loss in patients without evidence of bone metastases. According to this algorithm, zoledronic acid should be considered for the prevention of skeletal morbidity in patients with prostate cancer throughout their treatment continuum.

Clinical benefit of zoledronic acid for the prevention of skeletal complications in advanced prostate cancer

Men with prostate cancer are at high risk of developing bone metastases that can lead to clinically significant skeletal morbidity. Recently, a randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III trial in 422 men with hormone-refractory prostate cancer and bone metastases demonstrated that zoledronic acid (4 mg every 3 weeks) significantly reduced the incidence and onset of skeletal complications and provided significant long-term reductions in bone pain compared with placebo. Patients received zoledronic acid for a 15-month core phase, with the option to continue therapy for 9 more months on the extension phase. To evaluate the continuing benefit of long-term zoledronic acid therapy, retrospective exploratory analyses were conducted based on the incidence of skeletal-related events (SREs; defined as pathologic bone fracture, spinal cord compression, surgery or radiation therapy to bone, or change in antineoplastic therapy for bone pain) occurring only during the extension phase of this trial. Quality of life parameters included assessment with the Brief Pain Inventory. Similar to results reported for the 15-month core phase and the entire 24-month study, the 9-month extension phase demonstrated that zoledronic acid significantly reduced the percentage of patients with an SRE (P = 0.017), prolonged the median time to first SRE (P = 0.036), reduced the annual incidence of SREs by 52% (P = 0.016), and reduced the risk of SREs by 53% (P = 0.022) compared with placebo. Furthermore, zoledronic acid was safe and well tolerated. Therefore, zoledronic acid provides long-term continuing clinical benefit for men with prostate cancer and bone metastases and represents a new therapeutic option for this population.

[GnRH analogs and prostate cancer treatment]

Prostate cancer is currently the main indication of LH-RH analogs. This class, which in recent years has replaced diethylstilbestrol and surgical castration, now plays a major role at all stages of the disease. Numerous studies with contradictory results have compared total hormonal blockage, an alog combined with an anti-androgen, with analog alone in locally advanced prostate cancer. A recent metaanalysis showed a slight though globally non-significant advantage in favour of total blockage, but with a significant advantage in the case of a nonsteroidal anti-androgen. In stage T3 cancers, adjuvant hormone therapy over three years in combination with radiotherapy versus external radiotherapy alone was more effective in terms of local or metastatic progression and survival. Institution during radiotherapy and a prolonged duration of treatment gives a greater benefit though this was only significant for the subgroup of patients with a Gleason score > or = 8. For localized stages but at high risk (PSA > 15 ng / ml and\or Gleason score > 7), adjuvant hormone therapy after prostatectomy improved recurrence-free survival in comparison with prostatectomy followed-up by simple monitoring. On the other hand, the administration of analogs two or three months before radical prostatectomy did not seem to provide any additional benefit. Medical castration prolonged by LH-RH analogs engenders multiple side effects which become all the more worrying as patient survival is prolonged by this hormone therapy. In phase I-II studies, intermittent treatment is equivalent to continuous treatment for "hormone sensitive" patients (PSA nadir at six months < 0.5 ng). Phase III studies are in progress to confirm this equivalence. This intermittent hormone therapy may be a useful solution for elderly patients (> 78 years old) with a biologically highly active cancer and remains to be evaluated in relatively young subjects after radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy. Combination of analogs with chemotherapy has been used very recently for patients who have reached hormonal escape and may be a useful immediate option for patients with cancers with a high risk of progression.

Preventing Bone Loss During Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: Early Experience with Neridronate

OBJECTIVE

Androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) is the usual treatment for locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer. Osteoporosis is a common complication of ADT. The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of neridronate, a relatively new bisphosphonate to prevent bone loss during androgen ablation.

METHODS

Sixty patients with prostate cancer and osteoporosis were enrolled and randomly assigned to 2 different treatment regimes: group A (30 patients) treated with maximum androgenic blockage (MAB), and group B (30 patients) treated with bicalutamide 150 mg. Each group was divided in 2 subgroups A1-A2 and B1-B2. All patients received calcium and cholecalciferol supplements (500 mg of elemental calcium and 400 IU cholecalciferol) daily. The A2 and B2 subgroups were also treated with neridronate (25 mg intramuscular monthly). Lumbar and femoral bone mineral density (BMD) was evaluated by dualenergy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), both at baseline and after one year of treatment. Deoxypyridinoline (DPD) and bone-alkaline phosphatase (B-ALP) were determined at the beginning, midstudy and at the end.

RESULTS

Patients treated only with calcium and cholecalciferol (A1, B1 subgroups) showed a marked bone loss after 6, and 12 months, with increased levels of DPD and BALP, compared to baseline values. Patients treated with neridronate (A2 et B2 subgroups) showed unchanged levels of these markers. After one year of treatment, lumbar and total hip BMD decreased significantly in patients treated only with calcium and cholecalciferol (A1 subgroup: -4.9% and -1.9% respectively). BMD did not change significantly at any site in patients treated also with neridronate (A2 subgroup: +1% and +0.8% respectively). Lumbar and total hip BMD did not change significantly (-1.5% and -1% respectively) in B1 subgroup. In B2 subgroup an important increase in lumbar spine and the total hip BMD was shown (+2.5% and 1.6% respectively). No relevant side effects were recorded during our study.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, neridronate is an effective and safe treatment in preventing bone loss in men receiving ADT for prostate cancer.

Physician practices of bone density testing and drug prescribing to prevent or treat osteoporosis during androgen deprivation therapy

BACKGROUND

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is a strong risk factor for osteoporosis. The current study identified physician practices in preventing or treating osteoporosis during ADT. The practices of interest are the uses of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans, bisphosphonates, calcium or vitamin D supplement, calcitonin, or estrogen.

METHODS

A retrospective medical record review was conducted. Patients were included if they had received ADT with goserelin injection for >/= 1 year. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of receiving at least one intervention.

RESULTS

Analyses included 184 patients. Most were the elderly with multiple risk factors for osteoporosis. Only 8.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.6-13.0%) of patients received a DXA scan at least once during the past 3 years. Oral and intravenous bisphosphonates were prescribed in 4.9% (95%CI, 1.8-8.0%) and 0.5% (95%CI, 0-2.0%) of patients, respectively, during the past year. Overall, 14.7% of patients (95%CI, 9.5-20.0%) received at least one intervention. Concurrent risk factors for osteoporosis, including smoking, alcoholism, advanced age, low body mass index, long duration of ADT, multiple comorbidities, history of fractures, and steroid use, were not independent predictors of having received interventions. However, bone metastasis was, with a hazard ratio of 5.6 (95%CI, 1.99-15.6%). Primary care physicians provided the greatest number of interventions and cancer-related specialists provided the fewest.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of patients with prostate carcinoma undergoing ADT did not receive interventions to prevent or treat osteoporosis. Having other concurrent risk factors for osteoporosis was not predictive of receiving these few interventions.

Risk of fracture after androgen deprivation for prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

The use of androgen-deprivation therapy for prostate cancer has increased substantially over the past 15 years. This treatment is associated with a loss of bone-mineral density, but the risk of fracture after androgen-deprivation therapy has not been well studied.

METHODS

We studied the records of 50,613 men who were listed in the linked database of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program and Medicare as having received a diagnosis of prostate cancer in the period from 1992 through 1997. The primary outcomes were the occurrence of any fracture and the occurrence of a fracture resulting in hospitalization. Cox proportional-hazards analyses were adjusted for characteristics of the patients and the cancer, other cancer treatment received, and the occurrence of a fracture or the diagnosis of osteoporosis during the 12 months preceding the diagnosis of cancer.

RESULTS

Of men surviving at least five years after diagnosis, 19.4 percent of those who received androgen-deprivation therapy had a fracture, as compared with 12.6 percent of those not receiving androgen-deprivation therapy (P<0.001). In the Cox proportional-hazards analyses, adjusted for characteristics of the patient and the tumor, there was a statistically significant relation between the number of doses of gonadotropin-releasing hormone received during the 12 months after diagnosis and the subsequent risk of fracture.

CONCLUSIONS

Androgen-deprivation therapy for prostate cancer increases the risk of fracture.

HIP FRACTURES IN MEN WITH PROSTATE CANCER TREATED WITH ORCHIECTOMY

PURPOSE

Androgen deprivation therapy increases the risk of osteoporosis related fractures. This issue is of increasing importance in men with prostate cancer as increasingly more undergo androgen deprivation therapy and therapy is administered sooner following diagnosis. Data directly addressing the long-term fracture risk in men diagnosed with prostate cancer are limited.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using population based registries in Sweden we studied the incidence of hip fractures in 17,731 men diagnosed with prostate cancer from 1964 to 1996 who were treated with bilateral orchiectomy within 6 months of diagnosis. The fracture incidence was compared to the incidence in 43,230 men diagnosed with prostate cancer but not treated with orchiectomy and in 362,354 of similar age who were randomly selected from the general population.

RESULTS

Men treated with orchiectomy were at increased risk for hip fracture. The estimated relative risk comparing men who underwent orchiectomy to population controls was 2.11 (95% CI 1.94 to 2.29) for femoral neck fractures and 2.16 (95% CI 1.97 to 2.36) for intertrochanter fractures. An increased risk of hip fracture was observed as early as 6 months after orchiectomy and the relative risk remained fairly constant up to 15 years following orchiectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Hip fracture risk increases almost immediately following orchiectomy and the excess risk persists for at least 15 years. This side effect should be considered when assessing the merits of androgen deprivation therapy, particularly in symptom-free men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer. Measures to prevent osteoporosis should be considered in men undergoing androgen deprivation therapy.

Skeletal Morbidity in Men with Prostate Cancer: Quality-of-Life Considerations throughout the Continuum of Care

OBJECTIVE

With current treatments, men usually survive many years after being diagnosed with prostate cancer. However, without supportive care, the systemic effects of prostate cancer and therapies such as androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) can undermine skeletal integrity, resulting in skeletal complications that may erode quality of life (QOL). Prostate cancer patients are at risk for fractures from cancer treatment-induced bone loss. In addition, they are also at risk for pathologic fractures, severe bone pain, and other sequelae from bone metastases, which almost invariably occur during the progression of prostate cancer. This review investigates the incidence and pathophysiology of bone loss and skeletal morbidity in prostate cancer patients and reviews available treatment options for maintaining skeletal health throughout the continuum of care for these patients.

METHODS

Studies were identified through MEDLINE searches, review of bibliographies of relevant articles, and review of abstracts from national meetings.

RESULTS

Several supportive care options are available to prevent generalized and localized bone loss, including calcium and vitamin D supplements and bisphosphonates. Oral calcium and vitamin D supplementation alone, however, appears to be insufficient to prevent bone loss during ADT. Zoledronic acid administered every 3 months during ADT or every 3 to 4 weeks for patients with bone metastases can reverse bone loss and reduce skeletal morbidity, respectively, in patients with prostate cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Skeletal complications contribute to the erosion of QOL in prostate cancer patients. Palliative care can provide important benefits to these patients. Some agents, such as zoledronic acid, may provide skeletal health benefits throughout the course of prostate cancer progression. Further investigations of the QOL impact of these benefits are warranted.

Endocrine treatment of prostate cancer

Although androgen deprivation as a treatment for patients with prostate cancer was described more than 60 years ago its optimal use remains controversial. The widespread use of prostate-specific (PSA) assay has lead to earlier diagnosis and earlier detection of recurrent disease. This means that the systemic side effects of androgen deprivation and quality of life have become more important. Debates continue regarding the proper use and timing of endocrine therapy with orchiectomy, oestrogen agonists, gonadotropin hormone-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, GnRH antagonists, and androgen antagonists. A critical review of the literature was performed. Data support that androgen deprivation is an effective treatment for patients with advanced prostate cancer. However, although it improves survival, it is not curative, and creates a spectrum of unwanted effects that influence quality of life. Castration remains the frontline treatment for metastatic prostate cancer, where orchiectomy, oestrogen agonists and GnRH agonists produce equivalent clinical responses. Maximum androgen blockade (MAB) is not significantly more effective than single agent GnRH agonist or orchiectomy. Nonsteroidal antiandrogen monotherapy is as effective as castration in treatment of locally advanced prostate cancer offering quality of life benefits. Adjuvant endocrine treatment is able to delay disease progression at any stage. There is, however, controversy of the possible survival benefit of such treatment, including patients having PSA relapse after definitive local treatment for prostate cancer. Neoadjuvant endocrine treatment has its place mainly in the external beam radiotherapy setting. Intermittent androgen blockade is still considered experimental. The decision regarding the type of androgen deprivation should be made individually after informing the patient of all available treatment options, including watchful waiting, and on the basis of potential benefits and adverse effects. Several large studies are under way to investigate the role of adjuvant endocrine treatment in the field of early prostate cancer, intermittent androgen deprivation and endocrine therapy alone compared with endocrine therapy with radiotherapy. The real challenge, however, is to develop better means to avert hormone-refractory prostate cancer and better treatments for patients with hormone-refractory disease when it occurs.

Complications of androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Androgen deprivation as a form of treatment for prostate cancer has been used for decades. Within the last decade, however, there has been a significant increase in its use. Therefore, it is incumbent upon the physician to be familiar with the side effects associated with this treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

Some of the side effects such as osteoporosis, changes in lipid profiles, and anemia may have significant morbidity associated with them, while other side effects such as impotence, decreased libido, fatigue, and hot flashes primarily affect the patient's quality of life. Prevention strategies and treatments exist for many of these side effects.

SUMMARY

This review will update physicians treating patients with androgen deprivation therapy on the side effects associated with this treatment. Once physicians are aware of the potential side effects, they can educate patients on what to expect when starting androgen deprivation therapy. More importantly, physicians can now prevent some of these complications prior to their occurrence, and when these complications occur they have knowledge of the latest treatments.

Toward New Horizons: The Future of Bisphosphonate Therapy

Bisphosphonate therapy has become a standard of care for patients with malignant bone disease. In addition, preclinical and preliminary clinical data suggest that bisphosphonates may prevent cancer-treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) and the development of malignant bone disease in patients with early-stage cancer. Patients who receive adjuvant hormonal therapy for breast cancer or androgen-deprivation therapy for prostate cancer are at an especially high risk for CTIBL because of reduced estrogenic signaling. Oral clodronate (Bonefos; Anthra Pharmaceuticals; Princeton, NJ), oral risedronate (Actonel; Proctor and Gamble Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Cincinnati, OH), and i.v. zoledronic acid (Zometa; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp.; East Hanover, NJ) have all demonstrated promise in preventing CTIBL in patients receiving hormonal therapy for breast cancer. Zoledronic acid has demonstrated efficacy with the longest between-treatment interval (3-6 months) and is currently being investigated in the Zometa/Femara Adjuvant Synergy Trials (Z-FAST and ZO-FAST in the United States and Europe, respectively). In patients receiving androgen-deprivation therapy for prostate cancer, i.v. pamidronate (Aredia; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp.) and i.v. zoledronic acid both have demonstrated significant benefits over placebo, but only zoledronic acid produced significant increases in bone mineral density compared with baseline values. Additionally, bisphosphonates have demonstrated antitumor activities in preclinical models, and clinical trials with oral clodronate suggest that bisphosphonates might prevent or delay bone metastasis in patients with early-stage breast cancer. Clinical trials are investigating the effect of zoledronic acid on disease progression in patients with breast cancer, prostate cancer, and non-small cell lung cancer. The results of these clinical trials should further define the clinical benefit of bisphosphonates in the oncology setting.

Complications of Androgen-Deprivation Therapy for Prostate Cancer

With the increasing indications for the use of androgen-deprivation therapy in the treatment of men with prostate cancer, side effects of the therapy deserve greater attention. Side effects such as hot flashes, decreased libido, decreased sexual function, and fatigue primarily affect the patients quality of life. Other side effects such as osteoporosis and changes in lipid profiles may also affect the patients overall health. Treatments such as estrogen, megestrol acetate, antidepressants, and bisphosphonates are useful in the management of many of the deleterious side effects of androgen deprivation. In addition, alternative management strategies such as intermittent androgen ablation and antiandrogen monotherapy may be useful in minimizing side effects caused by androgen ablation. Patients and physicians should be well aware of the potential side effects of androgen-deprivation therapy as well as the preventive and treatment strategies for these side effects in order to improve patients quality of life and health.