Effects of raloxifene on cardiovascular events and breast cancer in postmenopausal women

BACKGROUND

The effect of raloxifene, a selective estrogen-receptor modulator, on coronary heart disease (CHD) and breast cancer is not established.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 10,101 postmenopausal women (mean age, 67.5 years) with CHD or multiple risk factors for CHD to 60 mg of raloxifene daily or placebo and followed them for a median of 5.6 years. The two primary outcomes were coronary events (i.e., death from coronary causes, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for an acute coronary syndrome) and invasive breast cancer.

RESULTS

As compared with placebo, raloxifene had no significant effect on the risk of primary coronary events (533 vs. 553 events; hazard ratio, 0.95; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.84 to 1.07), and it reduced the risk of invasive breast cancer (40 vs. 70 events; hazard ratio, 0.56; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.38 to 0.83; absolute risk reduction, 1.2 invasive breast cancers per 1000 women treated for one year); the benefit was primarily due to a reduced risk of estrogen-receptor-positive invasive breast cancers. There was no significant difference in the rates of death from any cause or total stroke according to group assignment, but raloxifene was associated with an increased risk of fatal stroke (59 vs. 39 events; hazard ratio, 1.49; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.00 to 2.24; absolute risk increase, 0.7 per 1000 woman-years) and venous thromboembolism (103 vs. 71 events; hazard ratio, 1.44; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.06 to 1.95; absolute risk increase, 1.2 per 1000 woman-years). Raloxifene reduced the risk of clinical vertebral fractures (64 vs. 97 events; hazard ratio, 0.65; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.47 to 0.89; absolute risk reduction, 1.3 per 1000).

CONCLUSIONS

Raloxifene did not significantly affect the risk of CHD. The benefits of raloxifene in reducing the risks of invasive breast cancer and vertebral fracture should be weighed against the increased risks of venous thromboembolism and fatal stroke. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00190593 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Update of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR) P-2 Trial: Preventing breast cancer

The selective estrogen-receptor modulator (SERM) tamoxifen became the first U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved agent for reducing breast cancer risk but did not gain wide acceptance for prevention, largely because it increased endometrial cancer and thromboembolic events. The FDA approved the SERM raloxifene for breast cancer risk reduction following its demonstrated effectiveness in preventing invasive breast cancer in the Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR). Raloxifene caused less toxicity (versus tamoxifen), including reduced thromboembolic events and endometrial cancer. In this report, we present an updated analysis with an 81-month median follow-up. STAR women were randomly assigned to receive either tamoxifen (20 mg/d) or raloxifene (60 mg/d) for 5 years. The risk ratio (RR; raloxifene:tamoxifen) for invasive breast cancer was 1.24 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.47) and for noninvasive disease, 1.22 (95% CI, 0.95-1.59). Compared with initial results, the RRs widened for invasive and narrowed for noninvasive breast cancer. Toxicity RRs (raloxifene:tamoxifen) were 0.55 (95% CI, 0.36-0.83; P = 0.003) for endometrial cancer (this difference was not significant in the initial results), 0.19 (95% CI, 0.12-0.29) for uterine hyperplasia, and 0.75 (95% CI, 0.60-0.93) for thromboembolic events. There were no significant mortality differences. Long-term raloxifene retained 76% of the effectiveness of tamoxifen in preventing invasive disease and grew closer over time to tamoxifen in preventing noninvasive disease, with far less toxicity (e.g., highly significantly less endometrial cancer). These results have important public health implications and clarify that both raloxifene and tamoxifen are good preventive choices for postmenopausal women with elevated risk for breast cancer.

Efficacy of raloxifene on vertebral fracture risk reduction in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: four-year results from a randomized clinical trial

The Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation trial studied 7705 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis randomized to placebo, or raloxifene 60 or 120 mg/d [JAMA 282(1999): 637]. This report assesses the efficacy of raloxifene on the long-term cumulative incidence new vertebral fractures through 4 yr. New vertebral fractures was assessed from radiographs taken at baseline, yr 2-4. The primary analysis was the cumulative incidence of new vertebral fractures through 4 yr. A posthoc analysis compared the vertebral fracture risk in yr 4 alone with that observed in the first 3 yr. The 4-yr cumulative relative risks (RR) for one or more new vertebral fractures were 0.64 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53, 0.76] with raloxifene 60 mg/d and 0.57 (95% CI 0.48, 0.69) with raloxifene 120 mg/d. In yr 4 alone, raloxifene 60 mg/d reduced the new vertebral fracture risk by 39% [RR 0.61 (95% CI 0.43, 0.88)], which was not found to be significantly different from the RR observed in the first 3 yr in both raloxifene groups, irrespective of prevalent fracture status. The nonvertebral fracture risk was not significantly reduced [RR 0.93 (95% CI 0.81, 1.06)]. The safety profile after 4 yr was similar to that observed after 3 yr. Raloxifene 60 and 120 mg/d through 4 yr decreased the cumulative risk of new vertebral fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. The decreased vertebral fracture risk in yr 4 alone was not different from that observed in the first 3 yr.

Selective estrogen receptor modulation: concept and consequences in cancer

Extended exposure to the selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) such as raloxifene to prevent osteoporosis and tamoxifen or the aromatase inhibitors to treat or prevent breast cancer are established therapeutic strategies. However, there are now clearly defined consequences of exhaustive antihormonal therapy in breast cancer. Ultimately, drug resistance to SERMs and aromatase inhibitors enhances cancer cell survival but a paradoxical supersensitivity to estrogen action develops that causes cancer cell apoptosis. The future exploitation of these novel data will allow selective killing of cancer with fewer side effects for patients.

Early discontinuation of treatment for osteoporosis

PURPOSE

To identify factors associated with early treatment discontinuation of three agents commonly prescribed for women with low bone density.

METHODS

A telephone survey was conducted in 2000 to 2001 in a random sample of women aged 45 years or older who had bone density T-scores -1.0 or lower and who had initiated treatment with hormone replacement therapy, raloxifene, oral endronate. Logistic regression was used to estimate adjusted odds ratios for early treatment discontinuation.

RESULTS

Among 956 women who were interviewed an average of 7 months after treatment initiation, 334 were taking hormone therapy, and 88 (26%) had discontinued; 256 were taking raloxifene, and 48 (19%) had discontinued (P = 0.03 vs. hormone therapy); and 366 were taking alendronate, and 70(19%) had discontinued (P = 0.02 vs. hormone therapy). Women with bothersome side effects (somewhat bothered: odds ratio [OR] = 4.0; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.5 to 6.5; very or extremely bothered: OR = 25; 95% CI: 16 to 39) or who thought that their bone density test results did not show osteoporosis (OR = 1.6; 95% CI: 1.0 to 2.5) were more likely to discontinue therapy, as compared with women reporting regular exercise (OR = 0.7; 95% CI: 0.4 to 1.0) or a willingness to take prescribed medications (OR = 0.6; 95% CI: 0.4 to 0.9). After adjustment for side effects and patient characteristics, the odds of early treatment discontinuation did not differ significantly among treatments.

CONCLUSION

Improved adherence to osteoporosis treatment requires that treatment side effects be minimized and women be educated regarding their bone density test results.

Raloxifene to prevent gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist-induced bone loss in men with prostate cancer: a randomized controlled trial

GnRH agonists decrease bone mineral density and increase fracture risk in men with prostate cancer. Raloxifene increases bone mineral density in postmenopausal women, but its efficacy in hypogonadal men is not known. In a 12-month open-label study, men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer (n = 48) who were receiving a GnRH agonist were assigned randomly to raloxifene (60 mg/d) or no raloxifene. Bone mineral densities of the posteroanterior lumbar spine and proximal femur were measured by dual energy x-ray absorptiometry. Mean (+/-se) bone mineral density of the posteroanterior lumbar spine increased by 1.0 +/- 0.9% in men treated with raloxifene and decreased by 1.0 +/- 0.6% in men who did not receive raloxifene (P = 0.07). Bone mineral density of the total hip increased by 1.1 +/- 0.4% in men treated with raloxifene and decreased by 2.6 +/- 0.7% in men who did not receive raloxifene (P < 0.001). Similar between-group differences were observed in the femoral neck (P = 0.06) and trochanter (P < 0.001). In men receiving a GnRH agonist, raloxifene significantly increases bone mineral density of the hip and tends to increase bone mineral density of the spine.

Factors affecting uptake and adherence to breast cancer chemoprevention: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Preventive therapy is a risk reduction option for women who have an increased risk of breast cancer. The effectiveness of preventive therapy to reduce breast cancer incidence depends on adequate levels of uptake and adherence to therapy. We aimed to systematically review articles reporting uptake and adherence to therapeutic agents to prevent breast cancer among women at increased risk, and identify the psychological, clinical and demographic factors affecting these outcomes.

DESIGN

Searches were carried out in PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE and PsychInfo, yielding 3851 unique articles. Title, abstract and full text screening left 53 articles, and a further 4 studies were identified from reference lists, giving a total of 57. This review was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42014014957).

RESULTS

Twenty-four articles reporting 26 studies of uptake in 21 423 women were included in a meta-analysis. The pooled uptake estimate was 16.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) 13.6-19.0], with high heterogeneity (I(2) = 98.9%, P < 0.001). Uptake was unaffected by study location or agent, but was significantly higher in trials [25.2% (95% CI 18.3-32.2)] than in non-trial settings [8.7% (95% CI 6.8-10.9)] (P < 0.001). Factors associated with higher uptake included having an abnormal biopsy, a physician recommendation, higher objective risk, fewer side-effect or trial concerns, and older age. Adherence (day-to-day use or persistence) over the first year was adequate. However, only one study reported a persistence of ≥ 80% by 5 years. Factors associated with lower adherence included allocation to tamoxifen (versus placebo or raloxifene), depression, smoking and older age. Risk of breast cancer was discussed in all qualitative studies.

CONCLUSION

Uptake of therapeutic agents for the prevention of breast cancer is low, and long-term persistence is often insufficient for women to experience the full preventive effect. Uptake is higher in trials, suggesting further work should focus on implementing preventive therapy within routine care.

Patient-reported symptoms and quality of life during treatment with tamoxifen or raloxifene for breast cancer prevention: the NSABP Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR) P-2 trial

CONTEXT

Tamoxifen has been approved for breast cancer risk reduction in high-risk women, but how raloxifene compares with tamoxifen is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the differences in patient-reported outcomes, quality of life [QOL], and symptoms in Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR) participants by treatment assignment.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTIONS

STAR was a double-blind, randomized phase 3 prevention trial designed to evaluate the relative efficacy of raloxifene vs tamoxifen in reducing the incidence of invasive breast cancer in high-risk postmenopausal women. Between July 1, 1999, and November 4, 2004, 19,747 participants were enrolled at centers throughout North America, with a median potential follow-up time of 4.6 years (range, 1.2-6.5 years). Patient-reported symptoms were collected from all participants using a 36-item symptom checklist. Quality of life was measured with the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), the Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression (CES-D), and the Medical Outcomes Study Sexual Activity Questionnaire in a substudy of 1983 participants, median potential follow-up 5.4 years (range, 4.6-6.0 years). Questionnaires were administered before treatment, every 6 months for 60 months and at 72 months.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary QOL end points were the SF-36 physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) component summaries.

RESULTS

Among women in the QOL analysis, mean PCS, MCS, and CES-D scores worsened modestly over the study's 60 months, with no significant difference between the tamoxifen (n = 973) and raloxifene (n = 1010) groups (P>.2). Sexual function was slightly better for participants assigned to tamoxifen (age-adjusted repeated measure odds ratio, 1.22%; 95% CI, 1.01-1.46). Of the women in the symptom assessment analyses, the 9769 in the raloxifene group reported greater mean symptom severity over 60 months of assessments than the 9743 in the tamoxifen group for musculoskeletal problems (1.15 vs 1.10, P = .002), dyspareunia (0.78 vs 0.68, P<.001), and weight gain (0.82 vs 0.76, P<.001). Women in the tamoxifen group reported greater mean symptom severity for gynecological problems (0.29 vs 0.19, P<.001), vasomotor symptoms (0.96 vs 0.85, P<.001), leg cramps (1.10 vs 0.91, P<.001), and bladder control symptoms (0.88 vs 0.73, P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

No significant differences existed between the tamoxifen and raloxifene groups in patient-reported outcomes for physical health, mental health, and depression, although the tamoxifen group reported better sexual function. Although mean symptom severity was low among these postmenopausal women, those in the tamoxifen group reported more gynecological problems, vasomotor symptoms, leg cramps, and bladder control problems, whereas women in the raloxifene group reported more musculoskeletal problems, dyspareunia, and weight gain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00003906.

Benefit/risk assessment for breast cancer chemoprevention with raloxifene or tamoxifen for women age 50 years or older

PURPOSE

The Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR) demonstrated that raloxifene was as effective as tamoxifen in reducing the risk of invasive breast cancer (IBC) in postmenopausal women and had lower risks of thromboembolic events, endometrial cancer, and cataracts but had a nonstatistically significant higher risk of noninvasive breast cancer. There is a need to summarize the risks and benefits of these agents.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Baseline incidence rates of IBC and other health outcomes, absent raloxifene and tamoxifen, were estimated from breast cancer chemoprevention trials; the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program; and the Women's Health Initiative. Effects of raloxifene and tamoxifen were estimated from STAR and the Breast Cancer Prevention Trial. We assigned weights to health outcomes to calculate the net benefit from raloxifene compared with placebo and tamoxifen compared with placebo.

RESULTS

Risks and benefits of treatment with raloxifene or tamoxifen depend on age, race, breast cancer risk, and history of hysterectomy. Over a 5-year period, postmenopausal women with an intact uterus had a better benefit/risk index for raloxifene than for tamoxifen. For postmenopausal women without a uterus, the benefit/risk ratio was similar. The benefits and risks of raloxifene and tamoxifen are described in tables that can help identify groups of women for whom the benefits outweigh the risks.

CONCLUSION

We developed a benefit/risk index to quantify benefits from chemoprevention with tamoxifen or raloxifene. This index can complement clinical evaluation in deciding whether to initiate chemoprevention and in comparing the benefits and risks of raloxifene versus tamoxifen.

Combination teriparatide and raloxifene therapy for postmenopausal osteoporosis: results from a 6-month double-blind placebo-controlled trial

We compared combination treatment with teriparatide plus raloxifene with teriparatide alone in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis in a 6-month double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that measured biochemical markers of bone turnover and BMD. Markers of bone formation and spine BMD increased similarly with teriparatide alone and combination therapy. However, combination therapy induced a significantly smaller increase in bone resorption versus teriparatide alone and significantly increased total hip BMD versus baseline.

INTRODUCTION

The effects of combining two approved treatments for osteoporosis with different modes of action were examined by comparing teriparatide [rhPTH(1-34)] monotherapy with combination teriparatide and raloxifene therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A 6-month randomized, double-blind trial comparing teriparatide plus raloxifene (n = 69) versus teriparatide plus placebo (n = 68) was conducted in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

RESULTS

Bone formation (N-terminal propeptide of type 1 collagen [PINP]) increased similarly in both treatment groups. However, the increase in bone resorption (serum C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen [CTx]) in the combination group was significantly smaller than in the teriparatide-alone group (p = 0.015). Lumbar spine BMD significantly increased 5.19 +/- 0.67% from baseline in the teriparatide-alone group. In the combination group, lumbar spine (6.19 +/- 0.65%), femoral neck (2.23 +/- 0.64%), and total hip (2.31 +/- 0.56%) BMD significantly increased from baseline to study endpoint, and the increase in total hip BMD was significantly greater than in the teriparatide-alone group (p = 0.04). In the teriparatide-alone group, mean serum calcium levels increased from baseline to endpoint (0.30 +/- 0.06 mg/dl, p < 0.001), whereas mean serum phosphate remained unchanged. In the combination group, mean serum calcium was unchanged, and mean serum phosphate decreased (-0.20 +/- 0.06 mg/dl, p < 0.001) from baseline to endpoint. Changes in serum calcium (p < 0.001) and phosphate (p < 0.004) were significantly different between treatment groups. The safety profile of combination therapy was similar to teriparatide alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Combination therapy increased bone formation to a similar degree as teriparatide alone. However, the increase in bone resorption was significantly less and total hip BMD significantly increased for combination therapy compared with teriparatide alone. Combination treatment with raloxifene may thus enhance the bone forming effects of teriparatide. Further studies over longer treatment duration that include fracture endpoints are necessary to fully ascertain the clinical significance of combination raloxifene plus teriparatide therapy in postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Effects of teriparatide in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis on prior alendronate or raloxifene: differences between stopping and continuing the antiresorptive agent

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to assess adding vs. switching to teriparatide 20 microg/d in patients on alendronate or raloxifene.

DESIGN

We conducted a randomized, open-label trial.

PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS

Postmenopausal women with osteoporosis on alendronate or raloxifene for at least 18 months added teriparatide (Add groups) or switched to teriparatide (Switch groups) for 18 months.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We measured bone turnover markers (BTM) and bone mineral density (BMD).

RESULTS

In the alendronate stratum, increases in BTM were smaller in the Add vs. Switch group [6-month PINP (64 vs. 401%); bone ALP (15 vs. 71%); betaCTX (27 vs. 250%); all P < 0.001]. However, at 6 months, total hip BMD increased more in the Add vs. Switch group (1.4 vs. -0.8%; P = 0.002). In the Add vs. Switch group, 18-month BMD increments were higher in lumbar spine (8.4 vs. 4.8%; P = 0.003) and total hip (3.2 vs. 0.9%; P = 0.02), but not in femoral neck (2.7 vs. 2.3%; P = 0.75). In the raloxifene stratum, increases in BTM were also smaller in the Add vs. Switch group [6-month PINP (131 vs. 259%; P < 0.001), bone ALP (31 vs. 44%; P = 0.035), and betaCTX (67 vs. 144%; P = 0.001)]. At 6 months, total hip BMD increase was greater in the Add vs. Switch group (1.8 vs. 0.5%; P = 0.028). At 18 months, increases in lumbar spine (9.2 vs. 8.1%), total hip (2.8 vs. 1.8%), and femoral neck (3.8 vs. 2.2%) were not significantly different between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In women with osteoporosis treated with antiresorptives, greater bone turnover increases were achieved by switching to teriparatide, whereas greater BMD increases were achieved by adding teriparatide.

Selective estrogen receptor modulation and reduction in risk of breast cancer, osteoporosis, and coronary heart disease

The recognition of selective estrogen receptor modulation in the laboratory has resulted in the development of two selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs), tamoxifen and raloxifene, for clinical application in healthy women. SERMs are antiestrogenic in the breast but estrogen-like in the bones and reduce circulating cholesterol levels. SERMs also have different degrees of estrogenicity in the uterus. Tamoxifen is used specifically to reduce the incidence of breast cancer in premenopausal and postmenopausal women at risk for the disease. In contrast, raloxifene is used specifically to reduce the risk of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women at high risk for osteoporosis. The study of tamoxifen and raloxifene (STAR) trial is currently comparing the ability of these SERMs to reduce breast cancer incidence in high-risk postmenopausal women. There is intense interest in understanding the molecular mechanism(s) of action of SERMs at target sites in a woman's body. An understanding of the targeted actions of this novel drug group will potentially result in the introduction of new multifunctional medicines with applications as preventive agents or treatments of breast cancer and endometrial cancer, coronary heart disease, and osteoporosis.

American Society of Clinical Oncology technology assessment on breast cancer risk reduction strategies: tamoxifen and raloxifene

OBJECTIVE

To conduct an evidence-based technology assessment to determine whether tamoxifen and raloxifene as breast cancer risk-reduction strategies are appropriate for broad-based conventional use in clinical practice.

POTENTIAL INTERVENTION

Tamoxifen and raloxifene.

OUTCOME

Outcomes of interest include breast cancer incidence, breast cancer-specific survival, overall survival, and net health benefits.

EVIDENCE

A comprehensive, formal literature review was conducted for tamoxifen and raloxifene on the following topics: breast cancer risk reduction; tamoxifen side effects and toxicity, including endometrial cancer risk; tamoxifen influences on nonmalignant diseases, including coronary heart disease and osteoporosis; and decision making by women at risk for breast cancer. Testimony was collected from invited experts and interested parties.

VALUES

More weight was given to publications that described randomized trials. BENEFITS/HARMS/COSTS: The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Working Group acknowledges that a woman's decision regarding breast cancer risk-reduction strategies will depend on the importance and weight attributed to the information provided regarding both cancer and non-cancer-related risks.

CONCLUSIONS

For women with a defined 5-year projected risk of breast cancer of >/= 1.66%, tamoxifen (at 20 mg/d for up to 5 years) may be offered to reduce their risk. It is premature to recommend raloxifene use to lower the risk of developing breast cancer outside of a clinical trial setting. On the basis of available information, use of raloxifene should currently be reserved for its approved indication to prevent bone loss in postmenopausal women. Conclusions are based on single-agent use of the drugs. At the present time, the effect of using tamoxifen or raloxifene with other medications (such as hormone replacement therapy), or using tamoxifen and raloxifene in combination or sequentially, has not been studied adequately. The continuing use of placebo-controlled trials in other risk-reduction trials highlights the current unanswered issues concerning the use of such interventions, especially when the influence on net health benefit remains to be determined. Breast cancer risk reduction is a rapidly evolving area. This technology assessment represents an ongoing process with existing plans to monitor and review data and to update recommendations in a timely matter. (See

VALIDATION

The conclusions of the Working Group were evaluated by the ASCO Health Services Research Committee and by the ASCO Board of Directors.

SPONSOR

American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Return of chronic pelvic pain from endometriosis after raloxifene treatment: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether 6 months of raloxifene was effective in treatment of chronic pelvic pain in women with endometriosis.

METHODS

Women with chronic pelvic pain and no endometriosis treatment for 6 months underwent laparoscopy for excision of all lesions. Those with biopsy-proven endometriosis were randomly allocated to raloxifene (180 mg) or placebo daily. A second laparoscopy was performed at 2 years, or earlier, if pain returned. Return of pain was defined as 2 months of pain equal to or more severe than that at study entry. Menstrual cycles and adverse events were recorded. The log rank test was used to compare the time to return of pain by drug group. Analyses were done as intent-to-treat.

RESULTS

A total of 127 of 158 women underwent surgery. Of these, 93 had biopsy-confirmed endometriosis and were randomly assigned to study treatment. Menstrual cycle length, pelvic pain severity, quality of life, bone mineral density, and adverse events did not differ between treatment groups. The Data Safety Monitoring Committee terminated the study early when the raloxifene group experienced pain (P=.03) and had second surgery (P=.016) significantly sooner than the placebo group. Interestingly, biopsy-proven endometriosis was not associated with return of pain (P=.6).

CONCLUSION

Raloxifene significantly shortened the time to return of chronic pelvic pain. Because recurrence of endometriosis lesions did not correlate with return of pain, other factors are implicated in pelvic pain.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, www.cliicaltrials.gov, NCT00001848

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I.

Safety and adverse effects associated with raloxifene: multiple outcomes of raloxifene evaluation

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of raloxifene on major adverse events that occur with postmenopausal estrogen therapy or tamoxifen.

METHODS

The Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation, a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, enrolled 7,705 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Women were randomly assigned to raloxifene 60 mg/d or 120 mg/d or placebo. Outcomes included venous thromboembolism, cataracts, gallbladder disease, and endometrial hyperplasia or cancer.

RESULTS

During a mean follow-up of 3.3 years, raloxifene was associated with an increased risk for venous thromboembolism (relative risk [RR] 2.1; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-3.8). The excess event rate was 1.8 per 1,000 woman-years (95% CI -0.5-4.1), and the number needed to treat to cause 1 event was 170 (95% CI 100-582) over 3.3 years. Risk in the raloxifene group was higher than in the placebo group for the first 2 years, but decreased to about the same rate as in the placebo group thereafter. Raloxifene did not increase risk for cataracts (RR 0.9; 95% CI 0.8-1.1), gallbladder disease (RR 1.0; 95% CI 0.7-1.3), endometrial hyperplasia (RR 1.3; 95% CI 0.4-5.1), or endometrial cancer (RR 0.9; 95% CI 0.3-2.7).

CONCLUSION

Raloxifene was associated with an increased risk for venous thromboembolism, but there was no increased risk for cataracts, gallbladder disease, endometrial hyperplasia, or endometrial cancer.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I

Raloxifene: a review of its use in postmenopausal osteoporosis

Raloxifene is a selective estrogen receptor modulator that partially mimics the effects of estrogens in bone and the cardiovascular system, while functioning as an antiestrogen in endometrial and breast tissue. In randomised placebo-controlled studies involving postmenopausal women or patients with osteoporosis, raloxifene 60 to 150 mg/day was effective in increasing bone mineral density (BMD) over 12- to 36-month periods. At the 60 mg/day recommended dosage, increases of 1.6 to 3.4%, 0.9 to 2.3% and 1.0 to 1.6% were reported in lumbar spine, femoral neck and total hip, respectively, versus < or =0.5% with placebo. Raloxifene 60 or 120 mg/day decreased the risk of vertebral fractures over a 36-month period in postmenopausal patients with osteoporosis. Significant reductions in radiographic fracture risk versus placebo (30 and 50%) occurred regardless of whether patients had existing fractures at baseline. Although raloxifene did not affect the overall incidence of nonvertebral fractures, a reduction in the incidence of ankle fracture was reported in comparison with placebo. In postmenopausal women, raloxifene 60 mg/day significantly reduced serum levels of total and low density lipoprotein cholesterol from baseline, compared with placebo. High density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglyceride levels were unaffected. Raloxifene 60 or 120 mg/day reduced the risk of invasive breast cancer by 76% during a median of 40 months' follow-up in postmenopausal patients with osteoporosis and no history of breast cancer. A relative risk reduction of 90% was reported for estrogen-receptor positive invasive breast cancers; estrogen-receptor negative cancer risk was unaffected by raloxifene. Raloxifene was generally well tolerated in clinical trials at dosages up to 150 mg/day. Adverse events thought to be related to raloxifene treatment were hot flushes and leg cramps. Venous thromboembolism was the only serious adverse event thought to be related to raloxifene treatment and a relative risk of 3.1 compared with placebo treatment was reported in patients with osteoporosis. Vaginal bleeding occurred in < or =6.4% of raloxifene-treated women but was reported by 50 to 88% of those receiving estrogens or hormone replacement therapy (HRT). Raloxifene treatment was not associated with stimulatory effects on the endometrium.

CONCLUSIONS

Raloxifene significantly increases BMD in postmenopausal women and reduces vertebral fracture risk in patients with osteoporosis. In clinical trials, raloxifene was generally well tolerated compared with placebo and HRT, although its propensity to cause hot flushes precludes use in women with vasomotor symptoms. In particular, the lack of stimulatory effects on the endometrium and the reduction in invasive breast cancer incidence indicate raloxifene as an attractive alternative to HRT for the management of postmenopausal osteonorosis.

Raloxifene: A selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) with multiple target system effects

Selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) exhibit a pharmacologic profile characterized by estrogen agonist activity in some tissues with estrogen antagonist activity in other tissues. These compounds were initially called "antiestrogens," but it was subsequently recognized that this inadequately described their spectrum of activities. The first widely used SERM, tamoxifen, has estrogen antagonist activity in breast tissue but shows estrogen-like activity in other tissues. Raloxifene is another SERM in clinical use, and it was developed to avoid some of the undesirable estrogen agonist actions of other SERMs to improve the drug safety profile. Raloxifene has been introduced for clinical use in treatment and prevention of postmenopausal osteoporosis. This review will explore the preclinical and clinical pharmacology of raloxifene, and compare it to other SERMs currently available for clinical use.

Effects of raloxifene, a selective estrogen receptor modulator, on bone turnover markers and serum sex steroid and lipid levels in elderly men

Several lines of evidence implicate estrogen deficiency as a cause of bone loss in elderly men. Thus, in 50 elderly men (mean age +/- SD, 69.1 +/- 6.0 years), we performed a randomized blinded study to assess the effect of 6 months of treatment with 60 mg/day of raloxifene (a selective estrogen receptor modulator [SERM] that has an agonist effect on bone but is not feminizing) versus placebo on bone turnover markers. The mean changes in bone turnover markers, serum sex steroid, or lipid levels with treatment did not differ between groups. However, changes in urinary cross-linked N-telopeptide of type I collagen (NTX) excretion were related directly to the baseline serum estradiol level in the raloxifene (r = 0.57; p = 0.004) but not in the placebo-treated (r = 0.15; p = 0.485) men (p = 0.015 for the difference between groups). Moreover, the men in whom NTX excretion decreased after raloxifene treatment had significantly lower baseline estradiol levels (mean +/- SEM, 22 +/- 2 pg/ml) than the men in whom urinary NTX excretion didn't change or increased after raloxifene therapy (30 +/- 3 pg/ml; p = 0.03), and no such difference was found in the placebo group. Thus, raloxifene has no significant effect on bone turnover markers or lipid levels in elderly men. However, the association noted between baseline estradiol levels and the change in urine NTX excretion in the raloxifene-treated men suggests that a subset of men with low estradiol levels may respond to raloxifene or other SERMs, and further studies are needed to directly test this possibility.

Prevention of bone loss in postmenopausal women treated with lasofoxifene compared with raloxifene

OBJECTIVE

Osteoporosis is a significant health problem in postmenopausal women. Consequently, new and effective therapies are being sought to preserve bone mass and prevent osteoporosis in this population of women. The objective of this study was to compare the effects of lasofoxifene with raloxifene and placebo on indices of bone health in postmenopausal women.

DESIGN

A randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active treatment-controlled study of 2 years duration was conducted. Women included 410 postmenopausal women aged 47 to 74 years. The four treatment groups were: lasofoxifene 0.25 mg/day, or 1.0 mg/day, raloxifene 60 mg/day, or placebo daily. All women received daily calcium and vitamin D supplements. The primary endpoint was percent change from baseline to 2 years in lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) in all women having baseline and at least one follow-up bone density measurement. Total hip BMD, biochemical markers of bone turnover, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and safety were also evaluated in all women.

RESULTS

Both doses of lasofoxifene significantly increased lumbar spine BMD compared with raloxifene (P < or = 0.05) and with placebo treatment (P < or = 0.05). Least squares mean increases (95% CI) from baseline in lumbar spine BMD, compared with placebo, were 3.6% (1.9, 5.2) for lasofoxifene 0.25 mg/day, 3.9% (2.4, 5.5) for lasofoxifene 1.0 mg/day, and 1.7% (0.3, 3.0) for raloxifene. The two doses of lasofoxifene and raloxifene were equally effective at increasing total hip BMD. Lasofoxifene and raloxifene significantly reduced the levels of biochemical markers of bone turnover compared with placebo. In general, the effects of lasofoxifene were greater than the responses to raloxifene. At 2 years, lasofoxifene significantly (P < or = 0.05) reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels by 20.6% and 19.7% with 0.25 mg/day and 1 mg/day, respectively, compared with raloxifene (12.1%) and placebo (3.2%). Lasofoxifene and raloxifene had a similar adverse event profile with low rate of discontinuations due to adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Lasofoxifene may be an effective and well-tolerated treatment option for the prevention of bone loss in postmenopausal women.

Medication Use for the Risk Reduction of Primary Breast Cancer in Women: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Medications to reduce risk of breast cancer are effective for women at increased risk but also cause adverse effects.

OBJECTIVE

To update the 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force systematic review on medications to reduce risk of primary (first diagnosis) invasive breast cancer in women.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, and MEDLINE (January 1, 2013, to February 1, 2019); manual review of reference lists.

STUDY SELECTION

Discriminatory accuracy studies of breast cancer risk assessment methods; randomized clinical trials of tamoxifen, raloxifene, and aromatase inhibitors for primary breast cancer prevention; studies of medication adverse effects.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Investigators abstracted data on methods, participant characteristics, eligibility criteria, outcome ascertainment, and follow-up. Results of individual trials were combined by using a profile likelihood random-effects model.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Probability of breast cancer in individuals (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC]); incidence of breast cancer, fractures, thromboembolic events, coronary heart disease events, stroke, endometrial cancer, and cataracts; and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 46 studies (82 articles [>5 million participants]) were included. Eighteen risk assessment methods in 25 studies reported low accuracy in predicting the probability of breast cancer in individuals (AUC, 0.55-0.65). In placebo-controlled trials, tamoxifen (risk ratio [RR], 0.69 [95% CI, 0.59-0.84]; 4 trials [n = 28 421]), raloxifene (RR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.24-0.80]; 2 trials [n = 17 806]), and the aromatase inhibitors exemestane and anastrozole (RR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.26-0.70]; 2 trials [n = 8424]) were associated with a lower incidence of invasive breast cancer. Risk for invasive breast cancer was higher for raloxifene than tamoxifen in 1 trial after long-term follow-up (RR, 1.24 [95% CI, 1.05-1.47]; n = 19 747). Raloxifene was associated with lower risk for vertebral fractures (RR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.53-0.73]; 2 trials [n = 16 929]) and tamoxifen was associated with lower risk for nonvertebral fractures (RR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.45-0.98]; 1 trial [n = 13 388]) compared with placebo. Tamoxifen and raloxifene were associated with increased thromboembolic events compared with placebo; tamoxifen was associated with more events than raloxifene. Tamoxifen was associated with higher risk of endometrial cancer and cataracts compared with placebo. Symptomatic effects (eg, vasomotor, musculoskeletal) varied by medication.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Tamoxifen, raloxifene, and aromatase inhibitors were associated with lower risk of primary invasive breast cancer in women but also were associated with adverse effects that differed between medications. Risk stratification methods to identify patients with increased breast cancer risk demonstrated low accuracy.

Safety assessment of raloxifene over eight years in a clinical trial setting

OBJECTIVE

Osteoporosis is a chronic disorder that warrants long-term therapy. If benefits are to outweigh risks, the long-term safety profiles of these therapies must be favorable. The aim of this study was to assess the safety of raloxifene over 8 years in 4011 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis in a clinical trial setting through adverse event reporting.

METHODS

Data analyzed comprised all reported adverse events collected at each visit of both the Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation (MORE) trial, and the subsequent Continuing Outcomes Relevant to Evista (CORE) trial. MORE was an international, 4-year double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study, designed to assess the effect of raloxifene on bone mineral density and vertebral fracture incidence in 7705 (placebo, 2576; raloxifene, 5129) postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Breast cancer was a secondary endpoint. Based on the breast cancer findings of MORE, the CORE trial, a 4-year double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of a subset of MORE participants, was subsequently conducted. CORE enrolled 4011 (placebo, 1286; raloxifene, 2725) participants and was designed to examine raloxifene's effect on breast cancer incidence. Safety analyses were performed using the intention-to-treat principle, and comparison between therapies was analyzed using a two-sided Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

Over the 8 years of follow-up of 4011 women, there was no difference in all-cause mortality or hospitalization incidence between raloxifene and placebo groups (p > 0.1). Excluding breast cancer and non-melanoma skin cancer, cancer incidence was 4.6% and 6.3% in the raloxifene and placebo group, respectively (p = 0.027). Raloxifene was associated with a 1.7-fold increase in venous thromboembolism incidence (95% confidence interval 0.93-3.14), with an absolute risk difference of 0.9 per 1000 woman-years. There was no difference in the incidence of myocardial infarction, stroke, uterine cancer, endometrial hyperplasia, ovarian cancer or postmenopausal bleeding between the raloxifene and placebo treatment groups (p > 0.5). Uterine polyps, hot flushes and muscle cramps were more common in those receiving raloxifene versus placebo (p = 0.028, p < 0.001, and p = 0.008, respectively).

CONCLUSION

These 8-year data support the known clinical safety profile of raloxifene, established in the MORE trial.

The NSABP Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR) trial

In the Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR) trial, postmenopausal women at increased risk of breast cancer received either oral tamoxifen (20 mg/day) or raloxifene (60 mg/day) over 5 years. There were an equal number of cases of invasive breast cancer in women assigned to tamoxifen and raloxifene. There were fewer cases of noninvasive breast cancer in the tamoxifen group than in the raloxifene group (risk ratio [RR]: 1.40; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.98-2.02). There were more cases of uterine cancer with tamoxifen than with raloxifene (RR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.35-1.08). Thromboembolic events occurred less often in the raloxifene group (RR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.54-0.91) and there were fewer cataracts and cataract surgeries in the women taking raloxifene (RR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.68-0.92). The STAR trial has shown that raloxifene is as effective as tamoxifen in reducing the risk of invasive breast cancer and has a lower risk of adverse events but a nonstatistically significant higher risk of noninvasive breast cancer. The risk of other cancers, fractures, ischemic heart disease and stroke is similar for both drugs.

Alendronate produces greater effects than raloxifene on bone density and bone turnover in postmenopausal women with low bone density: results of EFFECT (Efficacy of FOSAMAX versus EVISTA Comparison Trial) International

OBJECTIVES

Alendronate and raloxifene are antiresorptive agents with different mechanisms of action, each used to treat osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. This study was undertaken to compare the efficacy and tolerability of alendronate to raloxifene in postmenopausal women with low-bone density.

DESIGN

Randomized, double-masked, double-dummy multicentre international study.

SETTING

Clinical trial centres in Europe, South America and Asia-Pacific.

SUBJECTS

A total of 487 postmenopausal women with low bone density, based on bone mineral density (BMD) of the lumbar spine or hip (T-score < or =-2.0). Interventions. Patients received either alendronate 70 mg once weekly and daily placebo identical to raloxifene or raloxifene 60 mg daily and weekly placebo identical to alendronate for 12 months.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Evaluations included BMD of the lumbar spine and hip and markers of bone turnover at 6 and 12 months and adverse event reporting.

RESULTS

Alendronate demonstrated substantially greater increases in BMD than raloxifene at both lumbar spine and hip sites at 12 months. Lumbar spine BMD increased 4.8% with alendronate vs. 2.2% with raloxifene (P < 0.001). The increase in total hip BMD was 2.3% with alendronate vs. 0.8% with raloxifene (P < 0.001). Reductions in bone turnover were significantly larger with alendronate than raloxifene. Overall tolerability was similar, however, the proportion of patients reporting vasomotor events was significantly higher with raloxifene (9.5%) than with alendronate (3.7%, P = 0.010). The proportion of patients reporting gastrointestinal events was similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

In postmenopausal women with low bone density, improvements in BMD and markers of bone turnover were substantially greater during treatment with alendronate compared to raloxifene.

Short-term urogenital effects of raloxifene, tamoxifen, and estrogen

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess the urogenital effects of raloxifene, tamoxifen, conjugated equine estrogen, and placebo in healthy postmenopausal women.

STUDY DESIGN

This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study compared the urogenital effects of 0.625 mg of conjugated equine estrogen (n = 15 women), 20 mg of tamoxifen (n = 14 women), 60 mg of raloxifene, (n = 15 women), and placebo (n = 13 women). Evaluations at baseline and evaluations after 20 weeks receiving the drug included a pelvic examination with cytologic evaluation of vagina and urethra, pelvic organ prolapse quantitation, and urethral axis deflection by cotton swab test (only in patients with incontinence [33%]).

RESULTS

Conjugated equine estrogen increased the maturation value of both urethral and vaginal cytologic condition (P =.002, P =.032, respectively). There was a decrease in vaginal maturation value in the raloxifene group (not significant). Two of 8 women in the conjugated equine estrogen group showed evidence of worsening prolapse by pelvic organ prolapse quantitation; the condition of 2 of 8 women improved. In the raloxifene, tamoxifen, and placebo groups 8 of 12 women, 4 of 13 women, and 2 of 11 women had worsening in prolapse scores, respectively, whereas none of the women had improvement. Increased cotton swab deflection was found in 3 of 5 women in the raloxifene group, in 5 of 8 women in the tamoxifen group, in 0 of 4 women in the placebo group, and in 0 of 2 women in the conjugated equine estrogen group. Seventy-five percent of the patients who received raloxifene and 60% of the patients who received tamoxifen had increases in prolapse by any measure (ie, pelvic organ prolapse quantitation or cotton swab or clinical assessment) compared with 18% of the patients in the placebo group and 22% of the patients in the conjugated equine estrogen group (P =.015), although symptoms did not differ among groups.

CONCLUSION

Neither raloxifene nor tamoxifen improve cytohormonal effects in the vagina or urethra, whereas conjugated equine estrogen does. Raloxifene and tamoxifen appear to show worsening prolapse compared with conjugated equine estrogen and placebo. The clinical relevance of these effects is unknown and requires investigation.