Endodontic Implications of Bisphosphonate-Associated Osteonecrosis of the Jaws: A Report of Three Cases

Clinical impact of bisphosphonates in root canal therapy

Bisphosphonates are stable structural analogs of pyrophosphate, which suppress the activity of osteoclasts, leading to decreased bone resorption. They are essential medications in the treatment of osteoporosis. Osteonecrosis of the jaw is a serious adverse effect of bisphosphonate therapy. The prevalence of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw varies from 0% to 28%, and it can be triggered by dental extraction and trauma. Root canal therapy can delay, or even eliminate, the need for tooth extraction, and therefore, may reduce the risk of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw. We suggest that this might be the best treatment for teeth with pulpal and/or periapical disease.

Effects of Zoledronic Acid in Experimental Periapical Lesions in Rats: An Imaging and Histological Analysis

The aim of this study was to assess the imaging and histological features of experimental periapical lesions, including the adjacent alveolar bone, in rats under zoledronic acid treatment. The study used 40 male Wistar rats distributed into 8 groups of 5 animals each: G1: induction of periapical lesion (PL) and weekly intraperitoneal administration (WIPA) of saline solution (0.9% NaCl) for 4 weeks; G2: PL induction and WIPA of zoledronic acid (0.15 mg/kg/week) for 4 weeks; G3: PL induction and WIPA of saline solution for 8 weeks; G4: PL induction and WIPA of zoledronic acid for 8 weeks; G5:WIPA of saline solution for 4 weeks and subsequent PL induction; G6: WIPA of zoledronic acid for 4 weeks and subsequent PL induction; G7: WIPA of saline solution for 8 weeks and subsequent PL induction; G8: WIPA of zoledronic acid for 8 weeks and subsequent PL induction. The administration of zoledronic acid or saline solution continued after PL induction until the euthanasia. Thus, cone beam computed tomography and histological analysis were performed. Statistical analyzes were performed by ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis test. Groups treated with zoledronic acid showed significantly smaller size of PL than the groups treated with 0.9% NaCl (p<0.05). PLs were formed by chronic inflammation ranging from mild to moderate, with no difference between groups. In all specimens, no mandibular necrosis was observed. In conclusion, the presence of PLs apparently does not represent an important risk factor for the development of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaws.

Bisphosphonates in multiple myeloma: an updated network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Bisphosphonates are specific inhibitors of osteoclastic activity and are used in the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma (MM). While bisphosphonates are shown to be effective in reducing vertebral fractures and pain, their role in improving overall survival (OS) remains unclear. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2002 and previously updated in 2010 and 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the evidence related to benefits and harms associated with use of various types of bisphosphonates (aminobisphosphonates versus non-aminobisphosphonates) in the management of patients with MM. Our primary objective was to determine whether adding bisphosphonates to standard therapy in MM improves OS and progression-free survival (PFS), and decreases skeletal-related morbidity. Our secondary objectives were to determine the effects of bisphosphonates on pain, quality of life, incidence of hypercalcemia, incidence of bisphosphonate-related gastrointestinal toxicities, osteonecrosis of jaw (ONJ) and hypocalcemia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase (September 2011 to July 2017) and the CENTRAL (2017, Issue 7) to identify all randomized controlled trial (RCT) in MM up to July 2017 using a combination of text and MeSH terms.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Any randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing bisphosphonates versus placebo/no treatment/bisphosphonates and observational studies or case reports examining bisphosphonate-related ONJ in patients with MM were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted the data. Data were pooled and reported as hazard ratio (HR) or risk ratio (RR) using a random-effects model. We used meta-regression to explore statistical heterogeneity. Network meta-analysis using Bayesian approach was conducted.

MAIN RESULTS

In this update, we included four new studies (601 participants), resulting in a total of 24 included studies.Twenty RCTs compared bisphosphonates with either placebo or no treatment and four RCTs involved another bisphosphonate as a comparator. The 24 included RCTs enrolled 7293 participants. Pooled results showed that there was moderate-quality evidence of a reduction in mortality with on OS from 41% to 31%, but the confidence interval is consistent with a larger reduction and small increase in mortality compared with placebo or no treatment (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.07; 14 studies; 2706 participants). There was substantial heterogeneity among the included RCTs (I² = 65%) for OS. To explain this heterogeneity we performed a meta-regression assessing the relationship between bisphosphonate potency and improvement in OS, which found an OS benefit with zoledronate but limited evidence of an effect on PFS. This provided a further rationale for performing a network meta-analyses of the various types of bisphosphonates that were not compared head-to-head in RCTs. Results from network meta-analyses showed evidence of a benefit for OS with zoledronate compared with etidronate (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.87) and placebo (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.91). However, there was no evidence for a difference between zoledronate and other bisphosphonates.The effect of bisphosphonates on disease progression (PFS) is uncertain. Based on the HR of 0.75 (95% CI 0.57 to 1.00; seven studies; 908 participants), 47% participants would experience disease progression without treatment compared with between 30% and 47% with bisphosphonates (low-quality evidence). There is probably a similar risk of non-vertebral fractures between treatment groups (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.56; six studies; 1389 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Pooled analysis demonstrated evidence for a difference favoring bisphosphonates compared with placebo or no treatment on prevention of pathological vertebral fractures (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.89; seven studies; 1116 participants; moderate-quality evidence) and skeletal-related events (SREs) (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.88; 10 studies; 2141 participants; moderate-quality evidence). The evidence for less pain with bisphosphonates was of very low quality (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.95; eight studies; 1281 participants).Bisphosphonates may increase ONJ compared with placebo but the confidence interval is very wide (RR 4.61, 95% CI 0.99 to 21.35; P = 0.05; six studies; 1284 participants; low-quality evidence). The results from the network meta-analysis did not show any evidence for a difference in the incidence of ONJ (eight RCTs, 3746 participants) between bisphosphonates. Data from nine observational studies (1400 participants) reported an incidence of 5% to 51% with combination of pamidronate and zoledronate, 3% to 11% with zoledronate alone, and 0% to 18% with pamidronate alone.The pooled results showed no evidence for a difference in increase in frequency of gastrointestinal symptoms with the use of bisphosphonates compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.59; seven studies; 1829 participants; low-quality evidence).The pooled results showed no evidence for a difference in increase in frequency of hypocalcemia with the use of bisphosphonates compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 2.19, 95% CI 0.49 to 9.74; three studies; 1090 participants; low-quality evidence). The results from network meta-analysis did not show any evidence for differences in the incidence of hypocalcemia, renal dysfunction and gastrointestinal toxicity between the bisphosphonates used.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Use of bisphosphonates in participants with MM reduces pathological vertebral fractures, SREs and pain. Bisphosphonates were associated with an increased risk of developing ONJ. For every 1000 participants treated with bisphosphonates, about one patient will suffer from the ONJ. We found no evidence of superiority of any specific aminobisphosphonate (zoledronate, pamidronate or ibandronate) or non-aminobisphosphonate (etidronate or clodronate) for any outcome. However, zoledronate was found to be better than placebo and first-generation bisposphonate (etidronate) in pooled direct and indirect analyses for improving OS and other outcomes such as vertebral fractures. Direct head-to-head trials of the second-generation bisphosphonates are needed to settle the issue if zoledronate is truly the most efficacious bisphosphonate currently used in practice.

Immune cell profile of dental pulp tissue treated with zoledronic acid

AIM

To characterize the pulp immune cell profile in the teeth of rats treated with zoledronic acid (ZA).

METHODOLOGY

Male Wistar rats (n = 6 per group) received four intravenous infusions of ZA at doses of 0.04, 0.20 or 1.00 mg kg^-1 ZA or saline (control). On the 70th experimental day, they were euthanized. The first right molar was examined microscopically and submitted to toluidine blue reaction and immunohistochemical for CD68, tumour necrosis Factor (TNF)-α, interleukin (IL)-1β, inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS), nuclear factor kappa B (NF-kB) and IL-18 binding protein (IL-18 bp). The presence of ectasic/dilated vessels and inflammatory cells was analysed, and mast cells and mononuclear CD68-positive cells were counted along with the intensity of immunostaining (0-3) for inflammatory markers in odontoblasts and nonodontoblasts pulp cells. The Kruskal-Wallis/Dunn's test (scores or quantitative data) and the chi-squared test (categorical data) were used (GraphPad Prism 5.0, P < 0.05).

RESULTS

There was no differences in the number of animals exhibiting dilated/ectasic blood vessels (P = 0.242) and inflammatory cells (P = 0.489) or in the number of mast cells (P = 1.000). However, there was an increase in mononuclear CD68-positive cells (P = 0.026), immunostaining of TNF-α (P = 0.020), IL-1β (P = 0.027) and iNOS (P = 0.001) in odontoblasts, and IL-1β (P = 0.013) in nonodontoblast pulp cells dose-dependently. NFkB (nucleus and cytoplasm) and IL-18 bp did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSION

ZA modified the immune cell profile in the dental pulp, increasing the number of macrophages and expression of pro-inflammatory markers independent of NFkB.

Bisphosphonate-Induced Osteonecrosis of the Jaw

Objective:

To review the risk of osteonecrosis of the jaw associated with bisphosphonates.

Data Sources:

A MEDLINE search (1966–January 2007) and a search of international Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970–January 2007) were conducted to identify relevant literature. Additional references were reviewed from selected articles.

Study Selection and Data Extraction:

Articles related to bisphosphonate-induced osteonecrosis of the jaw were reviewed and summarized. Inclusion criteria required that articles be either case studies or case series that were reporting actual cases linking osteonecrosis of the jaw with bisphosphonate use. Articles that addressed sites of osteonecrosis not involving the jaw, teaching cases (fictitious patients), and a retrospective claims analysis paper were excluded from consideration.

Data Synthesis:

Bisphosphonates have recently been linked to osteonecrosis of the jaw, with the greatest incidence seen with the intravenous preparations zoledronic acid and pamidronate. Osteonecrosis refers to death of a part of the bone, resulting in decreased bone density. Although the majority of occurrences have been associated with the intravenous bisphosphonates, oral bisphosphonates have also been implicated. Other risk factors noted from reported cases include dental extraction or trauma to the jaw exposing part of the bone. It is difficult to determine an exact incidence of osteonecrosis of the jaw in the general population of patients prescribed bisphosphonates; however, the incidence in cancer patients is approximately 6–7%.

Conclusions:

Although discontinuation of intravenous bisphosphonates in cancer patients has been recommended, stopping oral bisphosphonates prior to dental work cannot be universally endorsed at this time, since it is unknown whether this is effective in reducing the risk of osteonecrosis of the jaw. Treatment of this condition is not well established; therefore, efforts should be directed toward prevention. Pharmacists may further counsel patients to practice good oral hygiene and regularly follow up with their dentist during therapy. Current evidence suggests limited surgical debridement with systemic and local antibiotics as treatments.

Osteonecrosis of the Jaws and Bisphosphonate Therapy

Bisphosphonates are a class of agents used to treat osteoporosis and malignant bone metastases. The efficacy of these agents in treating and preventing the significant skeletal complications associated with these conditions has had a major positive impact for patients and is responsible for their widespread use in medicine. Despite these benefits, osteonecrosis of the jaws has recently emerged as a significant complication in a subset of patients receiving these drugs. Based on a growing number of case reports and institutional reviews, bisphosphonate therapy may cause exposed and necrotic bone that is isolated to the jaw. This complication usually presents following simple dento-alveolar surgery, and can cause a significant adverse effect on the quality of life for most patients. The pathogenesis for this complication appears to be related to the profound inhibition of osteoclast function and bone remodeling.

Bisphosphonates in multiple myeloma: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Bisphosphonates are specific inhibitors of osteoclastic activity and used in the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma (MM). While bisphosphonates are shown to be effective in reducing vertebral fractures and pain, their role in improving overall survival (OS) remains unclear. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2002 and previously updated in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the evidence related to benefits and harms associated with use of various types of bisphosphonates (aminobisphosphonates versus nonamino bisphosphonates) in the management of patients with MM. Our primary objective was to determine whether adding bisphosphonates to standard therapy in MM improves OS and progression-free survival (PFS), and decreases skeletal-related morbidity. Our secondary objectives were to determine the effects of bisphosphonates on pain, quality of life, incidence of hypercalcemia, incidence of bisphosphonate-related gastrointestinal toxicities, osteonecrosis of jaw and hypocalcemia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, LILACS, EMBASE (December 2009 to October 2011) and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (all years, latest Issue September 2011) to identify all randomized trials in MM up to October 2011 using a combination of text and MeSH terms. We also handsearched relevant meeting proceedings (December 2009 to October 2011).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Any randomized controlled trial (RCT) assessing the role of bisphosphonates and observational studies or case reports examining bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw in patients with MM were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted the data. Data were pooled and reported as hazard ratio (HR) or risk ratio (RR) under a random-effects model. Statistical heterogeneity was explored using metaregression.

MAIN RESULTS

In this update, we included 2 studies (2464 patients) that were not part of our last Cochrane review published in 2010. In this review we included 16 RCTs comparing bisphosphonates with either placebo or no treatment and 4 RCTs with a different bisphosphonate as a comparator. The 20 included RCTs enrolled 6692 patients. Overall methodological quality of reporting was moderate. Thirty per cent (6/20) of trials reported the method of generating the randomization sequence. Forty per cent (8/20) of trials had adequate allocation concealment. Withdrawals and dropouts were described in 60% (12/20) of trials. Pooled results showed no direct effect of bisphosphonates on OS compared with placebo or no treatment (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.13; P = 0.64). However, there was a statistically significant heterogeneity among the included RCTs (I(2) = 55%, P = 0.01) for OS. To explain this heterogeneity we performed a metaregression assessing the relationship between bisphosphonate potency and improvement in OS, which found indicating an OS benefit with zoledronate (P = 0.058). This provided a further rationale for performing network meta-analyses of the various types of bisphosphonates that were not compared head to head in RCTs. Results from network meta-analyses showed superior OS with zoledronate compared with etidronate (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.86) and placebo (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.98). However, there was no difference between zoledronate and other bisphosphonates. Pooled analysis did not demonstrate a beneficial effect of bisphosphonates compared with placebo or no treatment in improving PFS (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.19; P = 0.18) There was no heterogeneity among trials reporting PFS estimates (I(2) = 35%, P = 0.20).Pooled analysis demonstrated a beneficial effect of bisphosphonates compared with placebo or no treatment on prevention of pathological vertebral fractures (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.89; I(2) = 7%), skeletal-related events (SRE) (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.89; I(2) = 2%) and amelioration of pain (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.95; I(2) = 63%). The network meta-analysis did not show any difference in the incidence of osteonecrosis of the jaw (5 RCTs, 3198 patients) between bisphosphonates. Rates of osteonecrosis of the jaw in observational studies (9 studies, 1400 patients) ranged from 0% to 51%. The pooled results (6 RCTs, 1689 patients) showed no statistically significant increase in frequency of gastrointestinal symptoms with the use of bisphosphonates compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.60; P = 0.11).The pooled results (3 RCTs, 1002 patients) showed no statistically significant increase in frequency of hypocalcemia with the use of bisphosphonates compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 2.19, 95% CI 0.49 to 9.74). The network meta-analysis did not show any differences in the incidence of hypocalcemia, renal dysfunction and gastrointestinal toxicity between the bisphosphonates used.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Use of bisphosphonates in patients with MM reduces pathological vertebral fractures, SREs and pain. Assuming a baseline risk of 20% to 50% for vertebral fracture without treatment, between 8 and 20 MM patients should be treated to prevent vertebral fracture(s) in one patient. Assuming a baseline risk of 31% to 76% for pain amelioration without treatment, between 5 and 13 MM patients should be treated to reduce pain in one patient. With a baseline risk of 35% to 86% for SREs without treatment, between 6 and 15 MM patients should be treated to prevent SRE(s) in one patient. Overall, there were no significant adverse effects associated with the administration of bisphosphonates identified in the included RCTs. We found no evidence of superiority of any specific aminobisphosphonate (zoledronate, pamidronate or ibandronate) or nonaminobisphosphonate (etidronate or clodronate) for any outcome. However, zoledronate appears to be superior to placebo and etidronate in improving OS.

Bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the maxilla and sinusitis maxillaris

Bisphosphonates (BPs) are widely used as bone-stabilizers, but side effects of BP therapy include bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ), which is resistant to therapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of maxillary BRONJ involving sinusitis maxillaris. 21 patients presenting with maxillary BRONJ, from 2005 to 2008, were included in the study. In 18 cases BP had been administered for carcinoma and in 3 cases for osteoporosis, with an average exposure time of 47.4 months. 12 patients spontaneously developed BRONJ. The 10 patients diagnosed with stage III BRONJ presented with concomitant sinusitis maxillaris. Despite treatment, there were six recurrences of BRONJ, four of them with additional sinusitis maxillaris. Whether BRONJ occurred spontaneously or after extraction there was no difference in the outcome. Patients with advanced maxillary BRONJ often suffer from sinusitis maxillaris, both of which are frequently resistant to therapy.

Bisphosphonates in multiple myeloma

BACKGROUND

Bisphosphonates are specific inhibitors of osteoclastic activity and are currently used as supportive therapy for multiple myeloma (MM). However, the exact clinical role of bisphosphonates in MM remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

This update of the first review published in 2002. We have also analyzed observational studies targeting osteonecrosis of jaw (ONJ).

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the literature using the methods outlined in the previous review. We also searched observational studies or case reports examining ONJ.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected RCTs with a parallel design related to the use of bisphosphonate in myeloma. We also selected observational studies or case reports examining bisphosphonates related to ONJ.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We have reported pooled data using either hazard ratio or risk ratio and, when appropriate, as absolute risk reduction and the number needed to treat to prevent or to cause a pathological event. We have assessed statistical heterogeneity and reported I(2) statistic.

MAIN RESULTS

This review includes 17 trials with 1520 patients analyzed in bisphosphonates groups, and 1490 analyzed in control groups. In comparison with placebo/no treatment, the pooled analysis demonstrated the beneficial effect of bisphosphonates on prevention of pathological vertebral fractures (RR= 0.74 (95% CI: 0.62 to 0.89), P = 0.001), total skeletal related events (SREs) (RR= 0.80 (95% CI: 0.72 to 0.89), P < 0.0001) and on amelioration of pain (RR = 0.75 (95% CI: 0.60 to 0.95), P = 0.01). We found no significant effect of bisphosphonates on overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), hypercalcemia or on the reduction of non-vertebral fractures. The indirect meta-analyses did not find the superiority of any particular type of bisphosphonate over others. Only two RCTs reported ONJ. The identified observational studies suggested that ONJ may be a common event (range: 0% to 51%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Adding bisphosphonates to the treatment of MM reduces pathological vertebral fractures, SREs and pain but not mortality. Assuming the baseline risk of 20% to 50% for vertebral fracture without treatment, we estimate that between eight and 20 MM patients should be treated to prevent vertebral fracture(s) in one patient. Assuming the baseline risk of 31% to 76% for pain amelioration without treatment, we estimate that between five to 13 MM patients should be treated to reduce pain in one patient. Also, with the baseline risk of 35% to 86% for SREs without treatment, we estimate that between six and 15 MM patients should be treated to prevent SRE(s) in one patient. No bisphoshphonate appears to be superior to others.

Bisphosphonate-associated osteomyelitis of the jaw: guidelines for practicing clinicians

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the literature and discuss the risk factors, mechanisms, pathophysiologic aspects, and recommended management of bisphosphonate-associated osteomyelitis of the jaw (BAOMJ).

METHODS

More than 350 published articles, case reports mentioning BAOMJ, and independent histology slides from BAOMJ lesions were reviewed critically. The most pertinent publications are cited and discussed.

RESULTS

The incidence of BAOMJ increases after extraction of teeth, dentoalveolar surgical procedures, or recent oral trauma leading to exposed maxillary or mandibular bone. Contributory factors include poor oral hygiene, oral infections, periodontal disease; recent or ongoing corticosteroid administration or chemotherapy; compromised immune status; diabetes or vascular insufficiency; old age; chronic diseases; and malignancies. On average, 1 of every 100,000 patients treated with bisphosphonates orally for osteoporosis or Paget disease of bone may develop BAOMJ-like lesions. Patients with cancer often receive bisphosphonate doses 10 times or higher, and also more frequently, than those used in patients with osteoporosis or Paget disease of bone. Therefore, greater frequency of administration of bisphosphonates, higher dosages, and prolonged use (that is, for more than 2 years) are likely to be factors triggering BAOMJ.

CONCLUSION

The association of bisphosphonate therapy with BAOMJ is rare in noncancer patients and is likely to be a class effect that may occur with use of any bisphosphonate. Whether patients with cancer require such a high frequency of intravenously administered bisphosphonates needs to be investigated. Following established guidelines can decrease the risks of BAOMJ in vulnerable patients. Rather than necrotic bone, current evidence supports an infectious and perhaps immunologic underlying cause for BAOMJ. The estimated incidence of BAOMJ among noncancer patients receiving bisphosphonates is about 0.001%, whereas among patients with cancer receiving intravenous bisphosphonate therapy the incidence is between 0.5% and 4%, depending on the dose, frequency, and duration of therapy (on average, approximately 2%). Nevertheless, the benefits of bisphosphonates far outweigh the risks.

Bisphosphonate Associated Osteonecrosis of the Jaw

In 2003, the first reports describing osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) in patients receiving bisphosphonates (BP) were published. These cases occurred in patients with cancer receiving high-dose intravenous BP; however, 5% of the cases were in patients with osteoporosis receiving low-dose bisphosphonate therapy. We present the results of a systematic review of the incidence, risk factors, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of BP associated ONJ. We conducted a comprehensive literature search for relevant studies on BP associated ONJ in oncology and osteoporosis patients published before February 2008.All selected relevant articles were sorted by area of focus. Data for each area were abstracted by 2 independent reviewers. The results showed that the diagnosis is made clinically. Prospective data evaluating the incidence and etiologic factors are very limited. In oncology patients receiving high-dose intravenous BP, ONJ appears to be dependent on the dose and duration of therapy, with an estimated incidence of 1%–12% at 36 months of exposure. In osteoporosis patients, it is rare, with an estimated incidence < 1 case per 100,000 person-years of exposure. The incidence of ONJ in the general population is not known. Currently, there is insufficient evidence to confirm a causal link between low-dose BP use in the osteoporosis patient population and ONJ. We concluded BP associated ONJ is associated with high-dose BP therapy primarily in the oncology patient population. Prevention and treatment strategies are currently based on expert opinion and focus on maintaining good oral hygiene and conservative surgical intervention.

Osteonecrosis of the jaw in patients with multiple myeloma treated with zoledronic acid

Intravenous bisphosphonates-the potent inhibitors of osteoclast-mediated bone resorption are among the most commonly prescribed drugs in the management of multiple myeloma (MM). Zoledronic acid (ZA) is a new generation potent intravenous bisphosphonate that has been approved for the treatment and prevention of bone lesions, and/or hypercalcemia associated with MM. Osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) is an emerging serious side effect of the new generation bisphosphonates with a growing number of reports related to this pathological entity. ONJ usually appears following oral surgical and dental procedures but sometimes occur spontaneously. These cases are mostly seen and treated by dentists and oral surgeons. The aim of this study was to discuss the frequency, characteristics, risk factors, management and histopathological features of ZA induced ONJ based on the literature and illustrated with five own cases. Thirty-two patients with MM who received ZA for a median period of 26.5 +/- 18.7 months (min: 5 months, max: 76 months) were evaluated. ONJ was detected in five patients and mean drug duration time was 34 months. The frequency was 15% and the patients were usually symptomatic. There was no significant difference in terms of the duration of ZA in patients with and without ONJ. Management of these established cases were performed with medical treatment, minor debridement, sequestrectomy, and combining bone resection with autologous platelet rich plasma. Our data indicate that ZA therapy has a major role in the development of ONJ a fact that should be considered by physicians treating MM patients.

Biophosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaws

In 2003 and 2004, the first reports of patients who developed necrosis of the jawbones while taking biophosphonates appeared in literature; most patients were on this drug for treatment of cancer and some osteoporosis. Since then, more than 500 cases have been identified and the number of these cases continues to grow. This article reviews the action of bisphosphonates, the condition called bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaws, strategies to minimize occurrence, and treatment of this condition.

Effect of an estrogen-deficient state and alendronate therapy on bone loss resulting from experimental periapical lesions in rats

The aim of the research was to evaluate the impact of an estrogen-deficient state and alendronate (ALD) therapy on bone loss resulting from experimental periapical lesions in rats. Periapical lesions were induced on ovariectomized (OVX) and sham-ovariectomized (Sham) rats. After sample preparation, histologic and radiographic examination for periapical bone loss area and an enzyme histochemical test for tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase (TRAP) were performed. The results showed that OVX significantly increased bone loss resulting from periradicular lesions. After daily subcutaneous injection of ALD, the bone loss area and the number of TRAP-positive cells (osteoclasts) were reduced. These findings suggested that alendronate may protect against increased bone loss from experimental periapical lesions in estrogen-deficient rats. Given recent recognition of adverse effects of bisphosphonates, including an increased risk for osteonecrosis, the findings from this study should not be interpreted as a new indication for ALD treatment. However, they may offer insight into understanding and predicting outcomes in female postmenopausal patients already on ALD therapy for medical indications.

Incidence of Osteonecrosis of the Jaw in Patients With Multiple Myeloma and Breast or Prostate Cancer on Intravenous Bisphosphonate Therapy

PURPOSE

Osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) has been observed recently in patients with cancer who are receiving intravenous bisphosphonate (BP) therapy. The incidence of BP-associated ONJ has not been well established. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of ONJ in a cohort of patients with multiple myeloma (MM), breast cancer (BC), or prostate cancer (PC) who were receiving BP therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed. Medical record numbers were identified by ICD-9 codes: 203.0, 203.01, 174.9, and 185.0 for active MM, MM in remission, BC, and PC, respectively. Patients were included if they were evaluated and/or treated between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2005, and had received zoledronic acid and/or pamidronate. Patients were excluded if they had a history of radiation therapy to the jaws or of tumors or cysts. ONJ was defined as clinical evidence of "exposed necrotic bone" in the mouth.

RESULTS

Through evaluation of 1,086 patient medical records, it was determined that 447 subjects met the inclusion criteria: 11 of 292 patients with MM (3.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6%, 6.0%) had ONJ, as did 2.5% of 81 patients with BC (0%, 6.9%) and 2.9% of 69 patients with PC (0%, 5.9%).

CONCLUSION

The incidence of ONJ associated with intravenous BPs was at least 3.8 per 100 patients with MM, 2.5 per 100 patients with BC, and 2.9 per 100 patients with PC during the 5-year study period. The next phase of this study involves assessment of risk factors that differentiate these patients from those treated with BPs who do not develop ONJ.

Bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaws: a comprehensive review

BACKGROUND

Bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaws (BRONJ) presents the clinician with significant management dilemmas. The purpose of this study was to distil information related to this disorder by comprehensively reviewing the literature.

METHODS

The structure and function of bisphosphonates, and their role in the development of BRONJ will be discussed, as will the possible mechanisms through which this pathology develops. A review of cases presented in the literature will be undertaken, and suggestions offered as to the management of this pathology in terms of surgical and conservative approaches.

RESULTS

Presentation of BRONJ is currently more common in patients taking intravenous forms of bisphosphonates, but there is a fear that the long-term cumulative effects of oral bisphosphonates may see BRONJ increasingly occurring in this patient group.

CONCLUSIONS

Prevention is superior to treatment, and the establishment of meticulous oral hygiene and pre-emptive surgical treatment prior to commencement of bisphosphonate therapy is recommended.

Dental endosseous implants in patients on bisphosphonate therapy

About a decade ago, bisphosphonates were introduced as an alternative to hormone replacement therapies for osteoporosis and to treat osteolytic tumors. More recently, it has became evident that the bisphosphonates used intravenously such as pamidronate (Aredia; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp., East Hanover, NJ) and zoledronate (Zometa; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp.), in particular, could lead to painful refractory bone exposure (sometimes termed osteochemonecrosis or osteonecrosis) in the jaws. Patients with osteonecrosis of the jaws usually present after dental treatment with oral signs and symptoms of painful, exposed, and necrotic bone, primarily of the mandible and, to a lesser extent, the maxilla. Although the precipitating event that produces this complication may be spontaneous, there is little doubt that oral surgery and endosseous implants can be responsible. Exodontia is the main precipitant. The present postulated mechanism of osteonecrosis of the jaws is that prolonged use of bisphosphonates may suppress bone turnover to the point that the repair function of physiologic microdamage of bone is abolished. Such a mechanism could presumably interfere with the healing process after implant placement. Although, to our knowledge, there is no evidence that bone disorders are a contraindication to implants, there is evidence that bisphosphonate therapy is a contraindication. Where possible, extractions should be avoided, and it is best to avoid all elective oral surgery in patients on bisphosphonates, including endosseous implant placement, or the treatment should be performed well before commencing bisphosphonates. If surgery is essential on a patient taking bisphosphonate therapy, the patient must be counseled about the risks.

Bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaws: a therapeutic dilemma

OBJECTIVE

To describe our experience in prevention and treatment of mandibular and maxillary osteonecrosis, an emerging complication of long-term intravenous administration of bisphosphonates.

STUDY DESIGN

Between February 2004 and February 2006, 10 patients who had received zoledronic acid intravenously because of multiple bone myelomas or bone metastases were treated for mandibular and maxillary osteonecrosis in the Departments of Otorhinolaryngology and Maxillofacial Surgery of our institution.

RESULTS

All of the patients underwent surgical sequestrectomies. More extensive surgery was necessary in 3 cases. There were no major complications, and the majority of the patients are alive with no signs of infection or bone exposure.

CONCLUSIONS

Our experience confirms that bisphosphonate therapy contributes to the pathogenesis of mandibular and maxillary osteonecrosis. Surgery seems to be necessary in the majority of the patients, although the most adequate procedure is far from being standardized and prevention seems to play a pivotal role.

Implications of Androgen-Deprivation Therapy in Patients With Prostate Cancer: A Case Study

S.R., a 65-year-old male with a history of prostate cancer, went to a cancer center in 2003. He had developed symptoms of bladder outlet obstruction in 1999 and was seen by a urologist. His baseline prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was 44 ng/ml. On physical examination, his prostate was enlarged, and a biopsy in January 2000 revealed adenocarcinoma with a Gleason score of 8. A metastatic workup, including a bone scan and a computed tomography scan of the abdomen and pelvis (CT A/P), was negative for evidence of metastatic disease. S.R. received conformal external beam radiation, and the luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist leuprolide acetate was initiated. Following treatment, his PSA nadired to 0.2 ng/ml, and he did well until 2002, when his PSA started to rise. A reevaluation CT A/P revealed enlarged retroperitoneal and pelvic lymph nodes, and a bone scan was positive for metastatic disease. He underwent a bilateral orchiectomy in November 2002.

Management of the adverse effects associated with intravenous bisphosphonates

Intravenous bisphosphonates are widely used to treat hypercalcemia and to reduce skeletal-related morbidity among cancer patients. However, serious complications, generally occurring in less than 2% of patients participated in phase III clinical trials, including acute systemic inflammatory reaction, ocular inflammation, renal failure, nephrotic syndrome, electrolyte imbalance, and osteonecrosis of the maxilla and mandible have all been increasingly reported. Yet, strategies to deal with these complications are becoming clear. Acute systemic inflammatory reaction is often self-limited and becomes less intense during subsequent treatments. For patients who develop ocular symptoms, prompt ophthalmologic evaluation is crucial to determine the safety of a subsequent bisphosphonate therapy. Patients who receive long-term pamidronate should be evaluated at intervals for early sign of nephritic syndrome as timely cessation of the agent may result in a full recovery. To reduce the risk of severe electrolyte abnormalities, particularly hypocalcemia, correcting any pre-treatment electrolyte abnormality and supplementing vitamin D and calcium may be helpful. Finally, to reduce the risk of osteonecrosis of the maxilla and mandible, obtaining a full dental evaluation before treatment and avoidance of invasive dental procedures is suggested. The three commonly used intravenous bisphosphonates (pamidronate, zoledronic acid, and ibandronate), are generally safe; ibandronate has to date been the least reported to be associated with renal side effects. As clinical indications of intravenous bisphosphonates continue to expand, prescribing clinicians should be familiar with these possible adverse effects and discuss them with patients before commencing or continuing on therapy.