Treatment Patterns of Bone-targeting Agents Among Solid Tumor Patients With Bone Metastases: An Analysis of Electronic Health Record Data in the United States From 2014 to 2018

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated real-world treatment patterns of approved bone-targeting agents (BTAs) with various mechanisms of action-pamidronate, zoledronic acid, and denosumab-for the prevention of skeletal-related events in patients with bone metastases (BM) from solid tumors.

METHODS

Adult patients with BM secondary to solid tumors between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2018, were identified from the Flatiron Health Oncology Services Comprehensive Electronic Records database and categorized by BTA use and therapy type. Time from diagnosis to initiation, persistence (mean time on treatment), and compliance (≥12 administrations/year) with BTA with up to 4 years of follow-up were examined.

RESULTS

This study included 27,268 patients with BM (breast cancer, 32.7%; lung cancer, 16.5%; prostate cancer, 17.2%; and other solid tumors, 33.6%); of these, 41.4% initiated denosumab after BM diagnosis; 21.3%, zoledronic acid; 0.6%, pamidronate; and 36.7% had no treatment record. Mean (SD) time to initiation for denosumab or zoledronic acid was 68.6 (157.0) days (denosumab, 70.3 (160.4) days; zoledronic acid, 65.2 [150.2] days). Mean persistence and compliance (first year of treatment) were significantly higher for denosumab than for zoledronic acid (22.0 vs. 14.9 mo [ P <0.0001] and 42.3% vs. 34.8% [ P <0.0001], respectively). Treatment compliance was the highest in patients with breast cancer (denosumab, 48.2%; zoledronic acid, 39.1%).

CONCLUSION

Real-world BTA treatment patterns in the United States suggest that over one-third of patients with BM secondary to solid tumors remain untreated and less than 50% of the patients received ≥12 administrations/year of BTA therapy.

Prostate cancer bone metastases biology and clinical management (Review)

Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the most prominent causes of cancer-related mortality in the male population. A highly impactful prognostic factor for patients diagnosed with PCa is the presence or absence of bone metastases. The formation of secondary tumours at the bone is the most commonly observed site for the establishment of PCa metastases and is associated with reduced survival of patients in addition to a cohort of life-debilitating symptoms, including mobility issues and chronic pain. Despite the prevalence of this disease presentation and the high medical relevance of bone metastases, the mechanisms underlying the formation of metastases to the bone and the understanding of what drives the osteotropism exhibited by prostate tumours remain to be fully elucidated. This lack of in-depth understanding manifests in limited effective treatment options for patients with advanced metastatic PCa and culminates in the low rate of survival observed for this sub-set of patients. The present review aims to summarise the most recent promising advances in the understanding of how and why prostate tumours metastasise to the bone, with the ultimate aim of highlighting novel treatment and prognostic targets, which may provide the opportunity to improve the diagnosis and treatment of patients with PCa with bone metastases.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis about the Effect of Bisphosphonates on the Risk of Skeletal-Related Event in Men with Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Although the adjuvant therapy of bisphosphonates in prostate cancer is effective in improving bone mineral density, it is still uncertain whether bisphosphonates could decrease the risk of Skeletal- Related Event (SRE) in patients with prostate cancer. We reviewed and analyzed the effect of different types of bisphosphonates on the risk of SRE, defined as pathological fracture, spinal cord compression, radiation therapy to the bone, surgery to bone, hypercalcemia, bone pain, or death as a result of prostate cancer.

METHODS

A systemic literature search was conducted on PubMed and related bibliographies. The emphasis during data extraction was laid on the Hazard Ratio (HR) and the corresponding 95% Confidence Interval (CI) from every eligible Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT). HR was pooled with the fixed effects model, and preplanned subgroup analyses were performed.

RESULTS

5 RCTs (n = 4651) were included and analyzed finally after screening 51 articles. The meta-analysis of all participants showed no significant decrease in the risk of SRE when adding bisphosphonates to control group (HR = 0.968, 95% CI = 0.874 - 1.072, p = 0.536) with low heterogeneity (I2 = 0.0% (d.f. = 4) p = 0.679). There was no significant improvement on SRE neither in the subgroups with Metastases (M1) or Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer (CSPC) (respectively HR = 0.968, 95% CI = 0.874 - 1.072, p = 0.536, I2 = 0.0% (d.f. = 4) p = 0.679; HR = 0.954, 95% CI = 0.837 - 1.088, p = 0.484, I2 = 0.0% (d.f. = 3) p = 0.534).

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated that bisphosphonates could not statistically significantly reduce the risk of SRE in patients with prostate cancer, neither in the subgroups with M1 or CSPC.

Bisphosphonates or RANK-ligand-inhibitors for men with prostate cancer and bone metastases: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Different bone-modifying agents like bisphosphonates and receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappa B ligand (RANKL)-inhibitors are used as supportive treatment in men with prostate cancer and bone metastases to prevent skeletal-related events (SREs). SREs such as pathologic fractures, spinal cord compression, surgery and radiotherapy to the bone, and hypercalcemia lead to morbidity, a poor performance status, and impaired quality of life. Efficacy and acceptability of the bone-targeted therapy is therefore of high relevance. Until now recommendations in guidelines on which bone-modifying agents should be used are rare and inconsistent.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of bisphosphonates and RANKL-inhibitors as supportive treatment for prostate cancer patients with bone metastases and to generate a clinically meaningful treatment ranking according to their safety and efficacy using network meta-analysis.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified studies by electronically searching the bibliographic databases Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase until 23 March 2020. We searched the Cochrane Library and various trial registries and screened abstracts of conference proceedings and reference lists of identified trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials comparing different bisphosphonates and RANKL-inihibitors with each other or against no further treatment or placebo for men with prostate cancer and bone metastases. We included men with castration-restrictive and castration-sensitive prostate cancer and conducted subgroup analyses according to this criteria.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the quality of trials. We defined proportion of participants with pain response and the adverse events renal impairment and osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) as the primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes were SREs in total and each separately (see above), mortality, quality of life, and further adverse events such as grade 3 to 4 adverse events, hypocalcemia, fatigue, diarrhea, and nausea. We conducted network meta-analysis and generated treatment rankings for all outcomes, except quality of life due to insufficient reporting on this outcome. We compiled ranking plots to compare single outcomes of efficacy against outcomes of acceptability of the bone-modifying agents. We assessed the certainty of the evidence for the main outcomes using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-five trials fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Twenty-one trials could be considered in the quantitative analysis, of which six bisphosphonates (zoledronic acid, risedronate, pamidronate, alendronate, etidronate, or clodronate) were compared with each other, the RANKL-inhibitor denosumab, or no treatment/placebo. By conducting network meta-analysis we were able to compare all of these reported agents directly and/or indirectly within the network for each outcome. In the abstract only the comparisons of zoledronic acid and denosumab against the main comparator (no treatment/placebo) are described for outcomes that were predefined as most relevant and that also appear in the 'Summary of findings' table. Other results, as well as results of subgroup analyses regarding castration status of participants, are displayed in the Results section of the full text. Treatment with zoledronic acid probably neither reduces nor increases the proportion of participants with pain response when compared to no treatment/placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 2.32; per 1000 participants 121 more (19 less to 349 more); moderate-certainty evidence; network based on 4 trials including 1013 participants). For this outcome none of the trials reported results for the comparison with denosumab. The adverse event renal impairment probably occurs more often when treated with zoledronic acid compared to treatment/placebo (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.45; per 1000 participants 78 more (10 more to 180 more); moderate-certainty evidence; network based on 6 trials including 1769 participants). Results for denosumab could not be included for this outcome, since zero events cannot be considered in the network meta-analysis, therefore it does not appear in the ranking. Treatment with denosumab results in increased occurrence of the adverse event ONJ (RR 3.45, 95% CI 1.06 to 11.24; per 1000 participants 30 more (1 more to 125 more); high-certainty evidence; 4 trials, 3006 participants) compared to no treatment/placebo. When comparing zoledronic acid to no treatment/placebo, the confidence intervals include the possibility of benefit or harm, therefore treatment with zoledronic acid probably neither reduces nor increases ONJ (RR 1.88, 95% CI 0.73 to 4.87; per 1000 participants 11 more (3 less to 47 more); moderate-certainty evidence; network based on 4 trials including 3006 participants). Compared to no treatment/placebo, treatment with zoledronic acid (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.97) and denosumab (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.96) may result in a reduction of the total number of SREs (per 1000 participants 75 fewer (131 fewer to 14 fewer) and 131 fewer (215 fewer to 19 fewer); both low-certainty evidence; 12 trials, 5240 participants). Treatment with zoledronic acid and denosumab likely neither reduces nor increases mortality when compared to no treatment/placebo (zoledronic acid RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.01; per 1000 participants 48 fewer (97 fewer to 5 more); denosumab RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.11; per 1000 participants 34 fewer (111 fewer to 54 more); both moderate-certainty evidence; 13 trials, 5494 participants). Due to insufficient reporting, no network meta-analysis was possible for the outcome quality of life. One study with 1904 participants comparing zoledronic acid and denosumab showed that more zoledronic acid-treated participants than denosumab-treated participants experienced a greater than or equal to five-point decrease in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General total scores over a range of 18 months (average relative difference = 6.8%, range -9.4% to 14.6%) or worsening of cancer-related quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When considering bone-modifying agents as supportive treatment, one has to balance between efficacy and acceptability. Results suggest that Zoledronic acid likely increases both the proportion of participants with pain response, and the proportion of participants experiencing adverse events However, more trials with head-to-head comparisons including all potential agents are needed to draw the whole picture and proof the results of this analysis.

The use of bisphosphonates in the management of bone involvement from solid tumours and haematological malignancies - a European survey

Bone metastases in patients with solid tumours (ST) and bone lesions in patients with haematological malignancies (HM) are common. Associated skeletal-related events (SREs) cause severe pain, reduced quality of life and place a burden on health care resources. Bone-targeted agents can reduce the risk of SREs. We evaluated the management of bone metastasis/lesions in five European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK) by an observational chart audit. In total, 881 physicians completed brief questionnaires on 17 193 patients during the observation period, and detailed questionnaires for a further 9303 individuals. Patient cases were weighted according to the probability of inclusion. Although a large proportion of patients with bone metastases/lesions were receiving bisphosphonates, many had their treatment stopped (ST, 19%; HM, 36%) or will never be treated (ST, 18%; HM, 13%). The results were generally similar across the countries, although German patients were more likely to have asymptomatic bone lesions detected during routine imaging. In conclusion, many patients who could benefit from bone-targeted agents do not receive bisphosphonates and many have their treatment stopped when they could benefit from continued treatment. Developing treatment guidelines, educating physicians and increasing the availability of new agents could benefit patients and reduce costs.

Pathologic fracture and healthcare resource utilisation: A retrospective study in eight European countries

BACKGROUND

Skeletal-related events (SREs; pathologic fracture [PF], spinal cord compression and radiation or surgery to bone) are common complications of bone metastases or bone lesions and can impose a considerable burden on patients and healthcare systems. In this study, the healthcare resource utilisation (HRU) associated with PFs in patients with bone metastases or lesions secondary to solid tumours or multiple myeloma was estimated in eight European countries.

METHODS

Eligible patients were identified in Austria, the Czech Republic, Finland, Greece, Poland, Portugal, Sweden and Switzerland. HRU data were extracted from hospital charts from 3.5 months before the index PF (defined as a PF preceded by a 6.5-month period without a SRE) until 3 months after the last SRE during the study period. Changes from baseline in the number and duration of inpatient stays, number of outpatient visits and number of procedures provided were recorded.

RESULTS

Overall, 118 patients with PFs of long bones (those longer than they are wide, e.g. the femur) and 241 patients with PFs of other bones were included. Overall, HRU was greater in patients with long bone PFs than in those with PFs of other bones. A higher proportion of patients with long bone PFs had multiple SREs (79.7%), and more of their SREs were considered to be linked (73.4%) compared with patients with PFs of other bones (51.0% and 47.2%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The increased number and duration of inpatient stays for PFs of long bones compared with those for PFs of other bones may be due in part to the requirement for complicated and lengthy rehabilitation in patients with long bone PFs. Implementing strategies to delay or reduce the number of PFs experienced by patients with bone metastases or lesions may therefore reduce the associated HRU and patient burden.

Bisphosphonates for cancer treatment: Mechanisms of action and lessons from clinical trials

A growing body of evidence points toward an important anti-cancer effect of bisphosphonates, a group of inexpensive, safe, potent, and long-term stable pharmacologicals that are widely used as osteoporosis drugs. To date, they are already used in the prevention of complications of bone metastases. Because the bisphosphonates can also reduce mortality in among other multiple myeloma, breast, and prostate cancer patients, they are now thoroughly studied in oncology. In particular, the more potent nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates have the potential to improve prognosis. The first part of this review will elaborate on the direct and indirect anti-tumoral effects of bisphosphonates, including induction of tumor cell apoptosis, inhibition of tumor cell adhesion and invasion, anti-angiogenesis, synergism with anti-neoplastic drugs, and enhancement of immune surveillance (e.g., through activation of γδ T cells and targeting macrophages). In the second part, we shed light on the current clinical position of bisphosphonates in the treatment of hematological and solid malignancies, as well as on ongoing and completed clinical trials investigating the therapeutic effect of bisphosphonates in cancer. Based on these recent data, the role of bisphosphonates is expected to further expand in the near future outside the field of osteoporosis and to open up new avenues in the treatment of malignancies.

Impact of bone-targeted therapies in chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients treated with abiraterone acetate: post hoc analysis of study COU-AA-302

BACKGROUND

Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) often involves bone, and bone-targeted therapy (BTT) has become part of the overall treatment strategy.

OBJECTIVE

Investigation of outcomes for concomitant BTT in a post hoc analysis of the COU-AA-302 trial, which demonstrated an overall clinical benefit of abiraterone acetate (AA) plus prednisone over placebo plus prednisone in asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC patients.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This report describes the third interim analysis (prespecified at 55% overall survival [OS] events) for the COU-AA-302 trial.

INTERVENTION

Patients were grouped by concomitant BTT use or no BTT use.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Radiographic progression-free survival and OS were coprimary end points. This report describes the third interim analysis (prespecified at 55% OS events) and involves patients treated with or without concomitant BTT during the COU-AA-302 study. Median follow-up for OS was 27.1 mo. Median time-to-event variables with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs), 95% CIs, and p values for concomitant BTT versus no BTT were obtained via Cox models.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

While the post hoc nature of the analysis is a limitation, superiority of AA and prednisone versus prednisone alone was demonstrated for clinical outcomes with or without BTT use. Compared with no BTT use, concomitant BTT significantly improved OS (HR 0.75; p=0.01) and increased the time to ECOG deterioration (HR 0.75; p<0.001) and time to opiate use for cancer-related pain (HR 0.80; p=0.036). The safety profile of concomitant BTT with AA was similar to that reported for AA in the overall intent-to-treat population. Osteonecrosis of the jaw (all grade 1/2) with concomitant BTT use was reported in <3% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

AA with concomitant BTT was safe and well tolerated in men with chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC. The benefits of AA on clinical outcomes were increased with concomitant BTT.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Treatment of advanced prostate cancer often includes bone-targeted therapy. This post hoc analysis showed that in patients with advanced prostate cancer who were treated with abiraterone acetate and prednisone in combination with bone-targeted therapy, there was a continued trend in prolongation of life when compared with patients treated with prednisone alone.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00887198.

Systematic literature review and network meta-analysis comparing bone-targeted agents for the prevention of skeletal-related events in cancer patients with bone metastasis

BACKGROUND

Complications from skeletal-related events (SREs) constitute a challenge in the care of cancer patients with bone metastasis (BM).

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated the comparative effectiveness of pamidronate, ibandronate, zoledronate, and denosumab in reducing the morbidity of SREs in cancer patients with BM.

METHODS

Medline (1948 to January 2014), Embase (1980 to January 2014), the Cochrane Library (2014 issue 1), and Web of Science with Conference Proceedings (1970 to January 2014) were searched. Only randomized controlled trials assessing denosumab, bisphosphonates, or placebo in cancer patients with BM were included. The primary outcomes were SREs and SREs by type. The network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed with a random-effects Bayesian model.

RESULTS

The NMA included 14 trials with 10,192 patients. Denosumab was superior to placebo in reducing the risk of SREs (odds ratio [OR]: 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.31-0.75), followed by zoledronate (OR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.41-0.77) and pamidronate (OR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.41-0.72). Ibandronate compared with placebo could not reduce the risk of SREs. Denosumab was superior to placebo in reducing the risk of pathologic fractures (OR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.32-0.79), followed by zoledronate (OR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.43-0.86). Denosumab was superior to placebo in reducing the risk of radiation (OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.35-0.75), followed by pamidronate (OR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.52-0.86) and zoledronate (OR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.52-0.96).

CONCLUSION

This NMA showed that denosumab, zoledronate, and pamidronate were generally effective in preventing SREs in cancer patients with BM. Denosumab and zoledronate were also associated with reductions in the risk of pathologic fractures and radiation compared with placebo. Denosumab was shown to be the most effective of the bone-targeted agents.

Survival with Newly Diagnosed Metastatic Prostate Cancer in the "Docetaxel Era": Data from 917 Patients in the Control Arm of the STAMPEDE Trial (MRC PR08, CRUK/06/019)

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common disease among men worldwide. It is important to know survival outcomes and prognostic factors for this disease. Recruitment for the largest therapeutic randomised controlled trial in PCa--the Systemic Therapy in Advancing or Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Evaluation of Drug Efficacy: A Multi-Stage Multi-Arm Randomised Controlled Trial (STAMPEDE)--includes men with newly diagnosed metastatic PCa who are commencing long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT); the control arm provides valuable data for a prospective cohort.

OBJECTIVE

Describe survival outcomes, along with current treatment standards and factors associated with prognosis, to inform future trial design in this patient group.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

STAMPEDE trial control arm comprising men newly diagnosed with M1 disease who were recruited between October 2005 and January 2014.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Overall survival (OS) and failure-free survival (FFS) were reported by primary disease characteristics using Kaplan-Meier methods. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were derived from multivariate Cox models.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

A cohort of 917 men with newly diagnosed M1 disease was recruited to the control arm in the specified interval. Median follow-up was 20 mo. Median age at randomisation was 66 yr (interquartile range [IQR]: 61-71), and median prostate-specific antigen level was 112 ng/ml (IQR: 34-373). Most men (n=574; 62%) had bone-only metastases, whereas 237 (26%) had both bone and soft tissue metastases; soft tissue metastasis was found mainly in distant lymph nodes. There were 238 deaths, 202 (85%) from PCa. Median FFS was 11 mo; 2-yr FFS was 29% (95% CI, 25-33). Median OS was 42 mo; 2-yr OS was 72% (95% CI, 68-76). Survival time was influenced by performance status, age, Gleason score, and metastases distribution. Median survival after FFS event was 22 mo. Trial eligibility criteria meant men were younger and fitter than general PCa population.

CONCLUSIONS

Survival remains disappointing in men presenting with M1 disease who are started on only long-term ADT, despite active treatments being available at first failure of ADT. Importantly, men with M1 disease now spend the majority of their remaining life in a state of castration-resistant relapse.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Results from this control arm cohort found survival is relatively short and highly influenced by patient age, fitness, and where prostate cancer has spread in the body.

Cost analysis of skeletal-related events in Spanish patients with bone metastases from solid tumours

PURPOSE

To estimate the cost per skeletal-related event (SRE) in patients with bone metastases secondary to solid tumours in the Spanish healthcare setting.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with bone metastases secondary to breast, prostate or lung cancer were included in this multicentre, observational study. SREs are defined as pathologic fracture (vertebral and non-vertebral fracture), radiation to bone, spinal cord compression or surgery to bone. Health resource utilisation associated with these events (inpatient stays, outpatient, emergency room and home health visits, nursing home stays and procedures) were collected retrospectively for all SREs that occurred in the 97 days prior to enrolment and prospectively during follow-up. Unit costs were obtained from the 2010 eSalud healthcare costs database.

RESULTS

A total of 93 Spanish patients with solid tumours were included (31 had breast cancer, 21 prostate cancer and 41 lung cancer), contributing a total of 143 SREs to this cost analysis. Inpatient stays (between 9.0 and 29.9 days of mean length of stay per inpatient stay by SRE type) and outpatient visits (between 1.7 and 6.4 mean visits per SRE type) were the most frequently reported types of health resources utilised. The mean cost per SRE was between <euro>2,377.79 (radiation to bone) and <euro>7,902.62 (spinal cord compression).

CONCLUSION

SREs are associated with a significant consumption of healthcare resources that generate a substantial economic burden for the Spanish healthcare system.

Incidence of skeletal-related events over time from solid tumour bone metastases reported in randomised trials using bone-modifying agents

AIMS

Skeletal-related events (SREs) in patients with bone metastases decrease a patient's quality of life and functional status. Although bone-modifying agents have been found to reduce the time to first on-trial SRE and decrease the total incidence of SREs in randomised clinical trials, standard practice in the management of bone metastases has changed concurrently. The purpose of this study was to investigate if advances in bone-targeted therapies have decreased the incidence of individual types of SREs and to delineate the trend of SREs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature review was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify phase III, randomised bisphosphonate and other bone-targeted therapy trials from 1980 to September 2011. For all studies, a mean year of enrolment ([start of enrolment + end of enrolment]/2) was calculated. The incidences of SREs were tabulated and expressed as percentages of on-trial patients. Generalised linear mixed models were used to search for the trends of SREs over time for all placebo and intervention arms. Regression coefficients were interpreted as the odds ratio, which was calculated using the exponential of the slope. Ninety-five per cent confidence intervals were also calculated.

RESULTS

In total, 20 eligible studies were identified that reported SRE data from phase III trials, of which 11 were suitable for the quantitative analysis. Most of the articles included patients with breast cancer and the remaining involved patients with prostate, renal cell, bladder and lung cancer or other solid tumours. Enrolment periods for all included data ranged from 1990 to 2009. Statistically significant overall downward trends in pathological fractures and the need for surgery were seen over time. Also significant differences between intervention and placebo were seen with all SREs.

CONCLUSION

The decrease in SREs over time may not only be a result of the development of new generation bone-targeted agents, but also due to better systemic management and awareness of events associated with bone metastases.

Management of skeletal-related events in patients with advanced prostate cancer and bone metastases: Incorporating new agents into clinical practice

Skeletal-related events (SREs) are a common complication of bone metastases, and have serious negative consequences for patients with castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). SREs can lead to severe pain, increased risk of death, increased health care costs and reduced quality of life. Until recently, zoledronic acid has been the sole standard of care for the prevention of SREs in men with CRPC with bone metastases. Denosumab, a receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligand (RANK-L) inhibitor, has been recently approved for use in Canada for this indication, thus presenting another option for these patients. Denosumab was shown to be superior to zoledronic acid in delaying the time to first or subsequent SREs in CRPC patients with bone metastases. This review discusses current and previous trials examining agents designed to prevent SREs in men with CRPC and bone metastases. It also discusses the practical aspects of administering a bone-targeted therapy, including choosing a bone-targeted therapy, monitoring at the onset and during therapy, switching from one therapy to another, and assessing potential complications.

Zoledronate for metastatic bone disease and pain: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported different results when using zoledronate to treat skeletal-related events (SREs) and bone pain in patients with metastatic bone disease (MBD), and few have looked at the risks and benefits of long-term use of the drug. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of zoledronate to treat MBD in the short and long-term.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify RCTs evaluating zoledronate for MBD. Relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Twelve RCTs involving 4,450 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Zoledronate decreased the risk of developing SREs compared with placebo (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.81, P < 0.001). Zoledronate consistently reduced the brief pain inventory (BPI) below baseline compared with placebo at 3, 12, and 24 months. In addition, the likelihood of experiencing a bone pain event was significantly lower in the zoledronate group than in the placebo group (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.89, P < 0.001). While the two groups did not differ significantly in the incidence of nausea(RR = 1.07, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.19, P = 0.250), emesis (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.09, P = 0.420), or adverse renal events (RR 1.41, 95% CI 0.94 to 2.11, P = 0.09), the zoledronate group showed a significantly higher relative risk of pyrexia (RR 1.43, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.70, P < 0.001), fatigue (RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.43, P < 0.001), and anemia (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.55, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Compared to placebo, zoledronate significantly reduced the incidence of bone pain and SREs in patients with MBD for periods as long as 24 months. In addition, zoledronate is generally well tolerated over this long period.

Skeletal morbidity rates over time in patients with bone metastases from solid tumors reported in bone modifying agents randomised trials

Objective

Skeletal related events (SREs) are common in patients with bone metastases and lead to decreased quality of life and functional status. The definition of an SRE has evolved over the years and now excludes hypercalcemia of malignancy due to its low incidence. The purpose of this review was to investigate if advances in bone-targeted therapies have decreased skeletal morbidity rates (SMR) over time.

Methods

A literature search was conducted in several databases to identify phase III results from bone-targeted therapy trials from 1980 through September 2011. Graphs were created to document the trends of the natural log of SMR over the mean time of enrolment for all placebo and intervention arms. Statistical hypothesis testing was employed to account for confounding factors.

Results

A total of 14 studies were identified which reported the SMR from phase III trials from 1990 to 2007. A statistically significant downward trend was observed in the placebo arms of trials over time; a similar trend was seen in all intervention arms. In a direct comparison of intervention against placebo arms, it was found that there was a significant decreasing time trend (p<0.0001) and a significant departure in SMR from placebo to intervention arms (p=0.0348). These results were seen even after accounting for the confounding factors of histology and differences in drugs.

Conclusion

The decrease in SMR over time may not only be a result of advancements with bone targeted agents, but also due to better management and awareness of events associated with bone metastases.

Nasty or Nice? Findings from a UK Survey to evaluate the impact of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) clinical guidelines on the management of prostate cancer

AIMS

Although the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence clinical guideline 58 (CG58) for prostate cancer management was expected to have a positive effect, several recommendations raised concern among UK physicians. We conducted a survey of UK oncologists in 2008 and a second, similar survey in 2010 to assess views on these recommendations and to evaluate the change in opinion over time.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two semi-structured questionnaires were issued by the British Uro-oncology Group to society members in September 2008 and October 2010.

RESULTS

In 2008, 61 UK oncologists completed the survey; 60% agreed that CG58 would make a positive contribution towards improving patient care. There was strong opposition towards active surveillance as the first-line treatment for men with low-risk localised prostate cancer (49% disagreement); implementing 5 yearly flexible sigmoidoscopy post-prostate radiotherapy (51% disagreement); offering follow-up outside of the hospital (e.g. by general practitioners in primary care) for men with a stable prostate-specific antigen for ≥2 years (44% disagreement); and recommendations against docetaxel retreatment (47% disagreement) or bisphosphonate use (58% disagreement). In 2010, 77 UK oncologists completed the survey. The results were largely consistent with 2008, although several recommendations, particularly for localised disease, seem to have promoted a change in clinical practice, suggesting that they are facilitating a standardised approach. Compared with 2008, the 2010 results indicate a shift in favour of active surveillance (80% agreement) and primary care follow-up (59% agreement), but increasing opposition for docetaxel retreatment (57% disagreement). Opinions remained divided for flexible sigmoidoscopy and bisphosphonates.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite initial concerns, the CG58 seems to have had a positive impact on prostate cancer management in the UK, with adherence likely facilitating a standardised approach. However, with new data emerging, these findings underscore the need to regularly update guidelines. A revision of the CG58 is anticipated by 2014.

Denosumab for treatment of bone metastases secondary to solid tumours: systematic review and network meta-analysis

AIM

To evaluate the evidence for denosumab for the treatment of bone metastases secondary to solid tumours and, using a network meta-analysis, indirectly compare denosumab with bisphosphonates and best supportive care.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE (1948 to April 2011), EMBASE (1980 to March 2011), Cochrane Library (all sections) (issue 1, 2011) and Web of Science with Conference Proceedings (1970 to May 2011) and additional meeting abstracts (2010 and 2011) were searched. STUDY ELIGIBILITY, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Only randomised controlled trials assessing denosumab, bisphosphonates or best supportive care in patients with bone metastases from any solid tumour were included.

SYNTHESIS

Direct evidence comparing denosumab and zoledronic acid was assessed for breast cancer, prostate cancer and other solid tumours. Denosumab was compared with pamidronate and best supportive care through a network meta-analysis for each tumour type. The primary outcomes were time to first skeletal related event (SRE) and time to first and subsequent SRE. Secondary outcomes were skeletal morbidity rate, pain, quality of life (QoL) and overall survival.

RESULTS

Denosumab was found to be more effective in delaying the time to first SRE and reducing the risk of first and subsequent SRE compared to zoledronic acid, placebo and pamidronate. In breast and prostate cancer, denosumab was effective in reducing skeletal morbidity rate compared with placebo. The lack of published data on pain and QoL meant that firm conclusions could not be made. Denosumab did not appear to have an affect on overall survival.

LIMITATIONS

Network meta-analyses are subject to uncertainties and potential biases.

CONCLUSIONS

Denosumab is effective in preventing SRE, but the effect on pain and QoL is unclear.

Recent developments in treatments targeting castration-resistant prostate cancer bone metastases

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is the most common male cancer and one of the top causes of male cancer-related death. Most patients with prostate cancer respond to initial androgen deprivation therapy before progressing to castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and eventually developing bone metastases. Growth of prostate cancer metastases in the bone microenvironment produces numerous factors that disrupt the dynamic equilibrium of osteogenesis and osteolysis existing in healthy bone, leading to progressive morbidity, poor quality of life, and increased treatment costs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Relevant studies of CRPC and targeted therapies were identified from literature and clinical trial databases, websites, and conference abstracts.

RESULTS

Available data on agents potentially targeting bone metastatic CRPC or the bone microenvironment in patients with CRPC are discussed, including inhibitors of tumor growth/survival and bone turnover (SRC family kinase inhibitors, endothelin-1 inhibitors, MET inhibitors, and thalidomide and its derivatives), inhibitors of bone turnover (bisphosphonates and receptor activator of nuclear factor-kB ligand inhibitors), antiangiogenic agents (vascular endothelial growth factor receptor and platelet-derived growth factor blockers), prostate cancer vaccines, and bone-directed radiopharmaceuticals.

CONCLUSIONS

With increasing data availability demonstrating tumor-bone microenvironment interactions and routine incorporation of bone-related end points into CRPC trials, bone microenvironment-targeted agents are likely to become an increasingly important component of CRPC treatment.

Optimizing the care of patients with advanced prostate cancer in the UK: current challenges and future opportunities

What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Treatment options in the UK for men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have been limited, and there is no standard approach, particularly in the second-line setting. The absence of a standard approach is further confounded by the differing definitions and terminologies still used in clinical practice to describe this group of patients (e.g. androgen-independent prostate cancer, hormone refractory prostate cancer, CRPC). With multiple new treatment options emerging, it will be critical to identify key considerations in our decision-making process and to establish an optimum, standardized approach to treatment so that new therapies can be assimilated into an mCRPC treatment algorithm and our routine clinical practice. Most UK oncologists consider patients with advanced, symptomatic prostate cancer as eligible for chemotherapy, although a poor performance status, significant co-morbid factors, advancing age, and the presence of asymptomatic disease with slowly rising prostate-specific antigen levels would prevent chemotherapy use. The decision to retreat with chemotherapy is largely driven by prior response to first-line chemotherapy. Many UK oncologists feel that UK clinical practice is likely to change over the next 5 years, with abiraterone acetate, MDV3100 and cabazitaxel likely to have the most positive impacts in the treatment of mCRPC.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the current management of patients with advanced prostate cancer by UK oncologists. To gain insights into the future role of emerging therapies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A semi-structured questionnaire was issued by the British Uro-oncology Group to society members during a closed meeting in September 2010. Emerging therapies evaluated were: abiraterone acetate, aflibercept, bevacizumab, cabazitaxel, custirsen, MDV3100, sipuleucel-T and zibotentan.

RESULTS

Eighty of 98 (82%) surveys were completed. Responders had on average 189 new referrals, and treated 126 patients with advanced prostate cancer each year. Chemotherapy was used by 86% of responders for patients with symptomatic metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), although poor performance status, advancing age and slowly rising prostate-specific antigen levels would prevent chemotherapy use. The decision to retreat with chemotherapy was largely driven by prior response to first-line chemotherapy, with docetaxel preferred for those responding. Many (78%) felt that UK clinical practice was likely to change over the next 5 years, and that abiraterone acetate, MDV3100 and cabazitaxel would have the most positive impact. Opinions regarding the future use of aflibercept and custirsen were mixed. Few (≤3%) would use zibotentan or bevacizumab in the future based on recent negative phase III study results, or because of cost and complexity for sipuleucel-T.

CONCLUSIONS

Although emerging therapies for mCRPC mean that the future is bright, guidelines are needed to ensure optimum use and sequencing of treatments. Additional costs and anticipated workload associated with new agents will require careful consideration.

Assessment of zoledronic acid treatment patterns and clinical outcomes in patients with bone metastases from genitourinary cancers

BACKGROUND

Patients with bone metastases secondary to genitourinary (GU) cancer are at risk for skeletal-related events (SREs), including bone pain requiring palliative radiotherapy, fractures or surgery to bone, spinal cord compression, and hypercalcemia of malignancy. These SREs can be debilitating and potentially life-limiting. This study examined treatment practices and the association of treatment patterns with Zometa (zoledronic acid, ZOL), an intravenous bisphosphonate (IV-BP), with SREs and fractures. (Zometa is a registered trademark of Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, USA.)

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of commercial and Medicare Advantage enrollment and medical claims data was performed to evaluate IV-BP use and SRE patterns in adult patients with GU cancers. Criteria included diagnosis of ≥1 bone metastasis and prostate cancer (PC), renal cell carcinoma (RCC), or bladder cancer (BlC) between January 2001 and December 2006; continuous healthcare plan enrollment for ≥6 months before the index date; and no evidence of prior IV-BP use. Patients were followed until disenrollment from the healthcare plan or December 2007.

RESULTS

Of 6347 patients (PC, n = 4976; RCC, n = 941; BlC, n = 430; mean [standard deviation] age: 68.9 [11.1] years), only approximately 23% received ZOL. The mean time between diagnosis of bone metastasis and ZOL initiation was approximately 108 days. Among patients with PC, fracture risk was significantly smaller for ZOL vs no IV-BP (incidence rate ratio = 0.70; p < 0.001), and 2-year survival was significantly longer for ZOL-treated vs no IV-BP patients (p = 0.007). Patients with longer persistency on ZOL had a smaller fracture risk than patients with shorter persistency. Sub-set analyses were not performed for RCC and BIC because the proportion of patients treated was too low.

LIMITATIONS

Interpretation of this claims-based analysis must be tempered by the inherent limitations of observational data, such as limited and accurate available information, and unavailable information including clinical or disease-specific parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous BP therapy is not always received in patients with bone metastases secondary to GU cancers, and, when used, there are typically long time periods before treatment initiation. Without IV-BPs, PC patients have significantly larger risks of fracture and death compared with ZOL-treated patients, and benefits appear to be larger with increasing persistency on ZOL.

[Secondary and tertiary prevention of urological tumors]

The amount and quality of available data on secondary and tertiary prevention of urological tumors are to a large extent unsatisfactory. In the areas of nutrition and supplementary diet the consumption of tomatoes and especially tomato products could have a beneficial effect on the course of the disease for patients with prostate cancer, whereas there is evidence that the consumption of foodstuffs containing calcium (milk and milk products) and linolenic acid as well as a fat-rich diet accelerate tumor progression. Despite as yet unsatisfactory data, men with urothelial tumors or prostate cancer should abstain from smoking and undertake sports activities. For medicinal measures the administration of 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors and bone-promoting substances for patients with prostate cancer are under discussion. The effectiveness of the substances zoledronate and denosumab has been demonstrated in prospective randomized studies. The authors recommend that the scientifically neglected field of tertiary prevention of urological tumors should in future be included as a core factor of scientific investigations.

Once-daily dasatinib: expansion of phase II study evaluating safety and efficacy of dasatinib in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

OBJECTIVES

To determine the activity and tolerability of 100-mg once-daily (QD) dasatinib in patients with metastatic castration-resistance prostate cancer (CRPC). Dasatinib, an oral Src family kinase inhibitor, has demonstrated both preclinical and clinical activity with twice-daily dosing in patients with metastatic CRPC.

METHODS

Chemotherapy-naive men with metastatic CRPC and increasing prostate-specific antigen levels were treated with dasatinib 100 mg QD. The primary measurement was a composite lack of disease progression, according to the Prostate Cancer Working Group 2 criteria, determined every 12 weeks during the study. The other analyses included changes in the prostate-specific antigen level, bone lesions, soft tissue disease, and bone turnover markers (urine N-telopeptide and bone alkaline phosphatase).

RESULTS

The present trial was designed before the publication of the recent Prostate Cancer Working Group 2 criteria; however, the analyses are presented to conform to the updated guidelines. A total of 48 patients received dasatinib. A lack of disease progression was observed in 21 patients (44%) at week 12 and in 8 (17%) at week 24. Urine N-telopeptide was reduced by ≥40% from baseline in 22 (51%) of 43 patients, and bone alkaline phosphatase was decreased in 26 (59%) of 44 patients. Dasatinib was well-tolerated, with only 6 patients (13%) with drug-related grade 3-4 adverse events and 3 (6%) with grade 3 adverse events. The most common treatment-related adverse events (≥20%) were fatigue, nausea, diarrhea, headache, and anorexia.

CONCLUSIONS

Dasatinib 100 mg QD has a favorable safety profile and maintains a similar degree of activity as the previously reported twice-daily dosing schedules. These data support additional study of dasatinib 100 mg QD for metastatic CRPC.

Once-daily dasatinib: expansion of phase II study evaluating safety and efficacy of dasatinib in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

OBJECTIVES

To determine the activity and tolerability of 100-mg once-daily (QD) dasatinib in patients with metastatic castration-resistance prostate cancer (CRPC). Dasatinib, an oral Src family kinase inhibitor, has demonstrated both preclinical and clinical activity with twice-daily dosing in patients with metastatic CRPC.

METHODS

Chemotherapy-naive men with metastatic CRPC and increasing prostate-specific antigen levels were treated with dasatinib 100 mg QD. The primary measurement was a composite lack of disease progression, according to the Prostate Cancer Working Group 2 criteria, determined every 12 weeks during the study. The other analyses included changes in the prostate-specific antigen level, bone lesions, soft tissue disease, and bone turnover markers (urine N-telopeptide and bone alkaline phosphatase).

RESULTS

The present trial was designed before the publication of the recent Prostate Cancer Working Group 2 criteria; however, the analyses are presented to conform to the updated guidelines. A total of 48 patients received dasatinib. A lack of disease progression was observed in 21 patients (44%) at week 12 and in 8 (17%) at week 24. Urine N-telopeptide was reduced by ≥40% from baseline in 22 (51%) of 43 patients, and bone alkaline phosphatase was decreased in 26 (59%) of 44 patients. Dasatinib was well-tolerated, with only 6 patients (13%) with drug-related grade 3-4 adverse events and 3 (6%) with grade 3 adverse events. The most common treatment-related adverse events (≥20%) were fatigue, nausea, diarrhea, headache, and anorexia.

CONCLUSIONS

Dasatinib 100 mg QD has a favorable safety profile and maintains a similar degree of activity as the previously reported twice-daily dosing schedules. These data support additional study of dasatinib 100 mg QD for metastatic CRPC.

Synergistic Effect of Geranylgeranyltransferase Inhibitor, GGTI, and Docetaxel on the Growth of Prostate Cancer Cells

Most advanced prostate cancers progress to castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) after a few years of androgen deprivation therapy and the prognosis of patients with CRPC is poor. Although docetaxel and cabazitaxel can prolong the survival of patients with CRPC, inevitable progression appears following those treatments. It is urgently required to identify better or alternative therapeutic strategies. The purpose of this study was to confirm the anti-cancer activity of zoledronic acid (Zol) and determine whether inhibition of geranylgeranylation in the mevalonate pathway could be a molecular target of prostate cancer treatment. We examined the growth inhibitory effect of Zol in prostate cancer cells (LNCaP, PC3, DU145) and investigated a role of geranylgeranylation in the anticancer activity of Zol. We, then, evaluated the growth inhibitory effect of geranylgeranyltransferase inhibitor (GGTI), and analyzed the synergy of GGTI and docetaxel by combination index and isobolographic analysis. Zol inhibited the growth of all prostate cancer cell lines tested in a dose-dependent manner through inhibition of geranylgeranylation. GGTI also inhibited the prostate cancer cell growth and the growth inhibitory effect was augmented by a combination with docetaxel. Synergism between GGTI and docetaxel was observed across a broad range of concentrations. In conclusion, our results demonstrated that GGTI can inhibit the growth of prostate cancer cells and has synergistic effect with docetaxel, suggesting its potential role in prostate cancer treatment.

Evolving role of bone biomarkers in castration-resistant prostate cancer

The preferential metastasis of prostate cancer cells to bone disrupts the process of bone remodeling and results in lesions that cause significant pain and patient morbidity. Although prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is an established biomarker in prostate cancer, it provides only limited information relating to bone metastases and the treatment of metastatic bone disease with bisphosphonates or novel noncytotoxic targeted or biological agents that may provide clinical benefits without affecting PSA levels. As bone metastases develop, factors derived from bone metabolism are released into blood and urine, including N- and C-terminal peptide fragments of type 1 collagen and bone-specific alkaline phosphatase, which represent potentially useful biomarkers for monitoring metastatic bone disease. A number of clinical trials have investigated these bone biomarkers with respect to their diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive values. Results suggest that higher levels of bone biomarkers are associated with an increased risk of skeletal-related events and/or death. As a result of these findings, bone biomarkers are now being increasingly used as study end points, particularly in studies investigating novel agents with putative bone effects. Data from prospective clinical trials are needed to validate the use of bone biomarkers and to confirm that marker levels provide additional information beyond traditional methods of response evaluation for patients with metastatic prostate cancer.

Zoledronic acid therapy impacts risk and frequency of skeletal complications and follow-up duration in prostate cancer patients with bone metastasis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effects of timing and length of zoledronic acid (ZA) treatment on outcomes for patients with prostate cancer in clinical practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with prostate cancer and first bone metastasis diagnosed from January 2003 to October 2006 were included. Patients were considered 'untreated' if no ZA was given, 'early ZA-treated' if ZA was initiated before skeletal complication (SC) occurrence or 'late ZA-treated' if one or more SC was documented before or at ZA initiation. Patients were classified with short (≤ 90 days), medium (91-180 days) or long (>180 days) treatment persistence. Assessments included follow-up duration (FUP) and risk of developing one or more SC.

RESULTS

Among eligible patients, 847 were untreated, 243 were early ZA-treated and 218 were late ZA-treated. For untreated versus early ZA-treated groups, median FUP was 263 versus 357 days (p < 0.0001), respectively, and time to first SC was 199 versus 273 days (p < 0.0001), respectively. ZA treatment was associated with significantly longer FUP and lower SC risk. The early ZA-treated group had significantly longer FUP versus the late ZA-treated group (median days, 357 vs. 299.5); the late ZA-treated group experienced significantly higher SC risk vs. the early ZA-treated group (odds ratio, 1.51). Compared with the long-persistence group, FUP was 56% and 40% shorter in the short and medium groups, respectively (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Treatment with and early initiation of ZA for patients with prostate cancer and bone metastasis significantly prolonged time to and reduced risk of developing SC, while extending FUP.

Pathologic fracture and metastatic spinal cord compression in patients with prostate cancer and bone metastases

Background

The purpose of this study was to determine the risk factors for and incidence as well as prognostic impact of pathologic fracture (PF) and metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) in patients with bone metastases (BM) from prostate cancer.

Methods

Retrospective cohort study including 61 consecutive patients seen at Nordland hospital's department of oncology between 2007 and 2009. The initial diagnosis of BM might have been made earlier. Twenty-nine patients (48%) received taxotere and 72% zoledronic acid after diagnosis of BM.

Results

Median actuarial survival after diagnosis of BM was 23 months. Six patients (10%) were alive at 5 years. Bone pain at baseline was present in 49% of patients. Eighty-nine percent required external beam radiotherapy and/or radioisotopes after diagnosis of BM. Seventeen patients (28%) developed at least one major skeletal complication, i.e. MSCC or PF (4 of them developed more than one). The actuarial risk was 44% at 4 and 5 years. Most events developed before treatment with zoledronic acid and/or taxotere. Median survival from diagnosis of either MSCC or PF was 11 months (5 months from MSCC). We did not identify statistically significant risk factors for development of major skeletal complications. Serum alkaline phosphatase above median value and age less than or equal to 70 years were the only risk factors approaching significance.

Conclusions

We found high rates of major skeletal complications in this unselected contemporary group of patients. Identification of risk factors might guide the development of early interventions aiming at prevention of MSCC and PF.

A SNP in CYP2C8 is not associated with the development of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw in men with castrate-resistant prostate cancer

A single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in CYP2C8 (rs1934951), was previously identified in a genome-wide association study as a risk factor for the development of osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) in patients receiving bisphosphonates (BPs) for multiple myeloma. To determine if the same SNP is also associated with the development of ONJ in men receiving BPs for bone metastases from prostate cancer, we genotyped 100 men with castrate-resistant prostate cancer treated with bisphosphonates for bone metastases, 17 of whom developed ONJ. Important clinical characteristics, including type and duration of bisphosphonate therapy, were consistent among those who developed ONJ and those who did not. We found no significant correlation between the variant allele and the development of ONJ (OR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.165-2.42, P > 0.47). This intronic SNP in CYP2C8 (rs1934951) does not seem to be a risk factor for the development of bisphosphonate-related ONJ in men with prostate cancer. It is important to note that this is only the second study to investigate the genetics associated with BP-related ONJ and the first to do so in men with prostate cancer. More studies are needed to identify genetic risk factors that may predict the development of this important clinical condition.

Optimizing clinical benefits of bisphosphonates in cancer patients with bone metastases

Malignant bone disease is common in patients with advanced solid tumors or multiple myeloma. Bisphosphonates have been found to be important treatments for bone metastases. A positive benefit-risk ratio for bisphosphonates has been established, and ongoing clinical trials will determine whether individualized therapy is possible.

Bisphosphonates are important treatments for bone metastases. Considerations for optimizing the clinical benefits of bisphosphonates include efficacy, compliance, and safety. Several bisphosphonates are approved for clinical use; however, few have demonstrated broad efficacy in the oncology setting and been compared directly in clinical trials. Among patients with bone metastases from breast cancer, the efficacy of approved bisphosphonates was evaluated in a Cochrane review, showing a reduction in the risk of skeletal-related events (SREs) ranging from 8% to 41% compared with placebo. Between-trial comparisons are confounded by inconsistencies in trial design, SRE definition, and endpoint selection. Zoledronic acid has demonstrated clinical benefits beyond those of pamidronate in a head-to-head trial that included patients with breast cancer or multiple myeloma. Compliance and adherence also have effects on treatment efficacy. In a comparison study, the adherence rates with oral bisphosphonates were found to be significantly lower compared with those of intravenous bisphosphonates. The safety profiles of oral and intravenous bisphosphonates differ. Oral bisphosphonates are associated with gastrointestinal side effects, whereas intravenous bisphosphonates have dose- and infusion rate–dependent effects on renal function. Osteonecrosis of the jaw is an uncommon but serious event in patients receiving monthly intravenous bisphosphonates or denosumab. The incidence of this event can be reduced with careful oral hygiene. A positive benefit-risk ratio for bisphosphonates has been established, and ongoing clinical trials will determine whether individualized therapy is possible.

Bone metastases: molecular mechanisms and novel therapeutic interventions

It has been long recognized that skeleton represents one of the most favored metastatic sites for common cancers like breast and prostate. During the last decade the molecular mechanisms that are responsible for the development of bone metastasis have been gradually illuminated. It appears that the bone microenvironment has a pivotal role in this process. Metastatic tumor cells interact with bone triggering a cascade of molecular events that produce osteolytic and/or osteoblastic phenomena. In this review, we summarize and discuss the most significant factors and signaling pathways implicated in bone colonization. Moreover, based on the recent literature and data, we foresee the need for designing novel agents that will efficiently disrupt these interactions among cancer cells and bone microenvironment, bringing hope for more effective treatments.

Src kinase inhibitors: an emerging therapeutic treatment option for prostate cancer

IMPORTANCE OF THE FIELD

Once prostate cancer becomes castration-resistant, bone metastases are a significant problem and treatment options are limited. As a result, there is a need for more effective therapies that have antitumor and anti-bone metastatic effects. Because Src and Src-family kinases (SFKs) are involved in multiple signaling pathways central to prostate cancer development, progression, and metastasis, in addition to normal and pathologic osteoclast activities, Src inhibition represents a valid therapeutic strategy for investigation.

AREAS COVERED IN THIS REVIEW

Here, current treatment options for advanced prostate cancer, the preclinical rationale behind using Src inhibitors, emerging data from clinical trials of Src inhibitors in prostate cancer, and future therapeutic directions are described. Data published in peer-reviewed journals within the last 20 years or presented at recent European or American Society of Clinical Oncology conferences have been reviewed.

WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN

Readers will gain an insight into the development of therapeutic Src inhibitors, including dasatinib and saracatinib; an understanding of their effects on prostate cancer cells and the bone microenvironment; and emerging clinical data.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

Src is implicated in prostate cancer progression and metastasis, therefore treatment with Src inhibitors warrants further investigation.

Is there a role for ibandronate in the treatment of prostate cancer patients with bony metastases?

PURPOSE

Zoledronic acid is widely accepted as the treatment of choice for a number of cancers which metastasise to bone and is the only bisphosphonate licensed for the treatment of prostate cancer. However, drug related nephrotoxicity, although rare, does pose a significant complication when using zoledronic acid. Prostate cancer patients are generally older than 65 years of age and already exhibit some form of impaired renal function. Thus, for prostate cancer patients who are unable to tolerate zoledronic acid there is a need for an alternative bisphosphonate. One possibility could be ibandronate which is also a potent third generation, nitrogen-containing bisphosphonate and is an attractive choice for some patients due to the fact it is available in both intravenous and oral preparations.

METHODS

This article reviews the current published literature regarding the use of ibandronate in the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer.

RESULTS

Preliminary data emerging from small Phase II studies suggests ibandronate may provide a therapeutic alternative for the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer when zoledronic acid is deemed unsuitable.

CONCLUSION

Further in vivo research with ibandronate in prostate cancer is urgently needed in order to elucidate whether this bisphosphonate may play a role in the treatment and palliative management of metastatic prostate cancer.

Zoledronic acid : a review of its use in the management of bone metastases of malignancy

Zoledronic acid (Zometa), a third-generation amino-bisphosphonate, has been approved in the US, the EU and many other countries worldwide for the prevention of skeletal-related events in patients with bone metastases of malignancy. In several well designed trials, zoledronic acid 4 mg administered as a 15-minute infusion every 3-4 weeks was effective in reducing the occurrence of skeletal complications in patients with bone metastases secondary to multiple myeloma, breast cancer or prostate cancer. Zoledronic acid was as effective as pamidronic acid in reducing the occurrence of skeletal complications in patients with multiple myeloma or breast cancer. In patients with solid tumours other than breast or prostate cancer, zoledronic acid did not show significant clinical benefit over placebo in terms of the primary endpoint; however, some benefit of therapy in terms of secondary endpoints was observed with zoledronic acid relative to placebo. Its efficacy in a broad range of tumours and short infusion time (15 minutes) are an advantage over other available bisphosphonates. Modelled pharmacoeconomic analyses in patients with breast cancer suggested that zoledronic acid therapy is cost effective relative to no therapy with regard to the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained; however, results were mixed when zoledronic acid was compared with other commonly used bisphosphonates. Zoledronic acid is generally well tolerated; the risk of osteonecrosis of the jaw may be minimized by adhering to recommendations regarding dental therapy. Additional efficacy and economic data are required to definitively position zoledronic acid with respect to other bisphosphonates. Nevertheless, available clinical data indicate that zoledronic acid is an effective treatment option for the management of bone metastases of malignancy.