Moving into the future: treatment of bone metastases and beyond

In various common cancers, the skeleton is a preferred site of metastasis. It is also threatened by bone loss resulting from anti-cancer therapy. Like bone metastases in advanced cancer, cancer treatment induced bone loss (CTIBL) substantially increases fracture risk and dramatically decreases quality of life and patient autonomy. Both chemotherapy and endocrine deprivation therapy (EDT) can significantly decrease bone mineral density (BMD). This is aggravated by the often long duration of EDT, particularly in the adjuvant setting. Cumulative bone loss can put patients at risk of osteopenia and osteoporosis. With their known efficacy in preventing skeletal complications in metastatic disease, bisphosphonates (BP) lend themselves to exploring their extended use, notably in preventing CTIBL. Clinical trials have shown BPs to effectively prevent and treat CTIBL, for which they are recommended by ASCO guidelines. Whether BPs also have the potential to prevent metastatic dissemination to bone remains to be determined. Zoledronic acid, a third-generation BP with a favourable efficacy/safety record, was shown by ongoing large clinical trials to not only prevent or reduce CTIBL in early stage cancer, but to actually increase BMD. The current evidence of the potential of zoledronic acid in addressing CTIBL and preventing bone metastases is reviewed.     

Maintaining Bone Density in Patients Undergoing Treatment for Breast Cancer: Is There an Adjuvant Benefit?

Women undergoing treatment for breast cancer often experience a marked decrease in bone mineral density. This decrease is observed with chemotherapy as well as endocrine therapy and is more pronounced and rapid than normal postmenopausal bone loss. Pharmacologic intervention is, therefore, necessary in many cases to preserve bone health and prevent fractures. Many small studies have demonstrated that cancer therapy—induced bone loss (CTIBL) is effectively prevented by bone-targeted therapies, such as bisphosphonates and other inhibitors of bone resorption. Recently, several trials have confirmed the efficacy of bisphosphonates in the prevention of CTIBL in both premenopausal and postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer. In addition, concomitant treatment with zoledronic acid 4 mg every 6 months and standard adjuvant endocrine therapy has been reported to significantly improve disease-free survival and decrease disease recurrence in bone as well as other sites compared with standard therapy alone. Zoledronic acid treatment has also decreased residual tumor volume in the neoadjuvant setting. Furthermore, long-term follow-up of a single study in patients with bone marrow micrometastases from breast cancer revealed overall survival benefits for patients receiving clodronate 1600 mg/day compared with placebo; however, combined results from several trials of clodronate are inconclusive. Overall, a large body of evidence is accumulating to support the potential adjuvant benefits of bisphosphonates in the treatment of earlystage breast cancer. Results from ongoing studies are expected to further elucidate the benefits of bisphosphonates in maintaining bone health and improving clinical outcomes in patients with breast cancer.     

Adjuvant bisphosphonates in early breast cancer: consensus guidance for clinical practice from a European Panel

Bisphosphonates have been studied in randomised trials in early breast cancer to investigate their ability to prevent cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) and reduce the risk of disease recurrence and metastasis. Treatment benefits have been reported but bisphosphonates do not currently have regulatory approval for either of these potential indications. This consensus paper provides a review of the evidence and offers guidance to breast cancer clinicians on the use of bisphosphonates in early breast cancer. Using the nominal group methodology for consensus, a systematic review of the literature was augmented by a workshop held in October 2014 for breast cancer and bone specialists to present and debate the available pre-clinical and clinical evidence for the use of adjuvant bisphosphonates. This was followed by a questionnaire to all members of the writing committee to identify areas of consensus. The panel recommended that bisphosphonates should be considered as part of routine clinical practice for the prevention of CTIBL in all patients with a T score of <-2.0 or ≥2 clinical risk factors for fracture. Compelling evidence from a meta-analysis of trial data of >18 000 patients supports clinically significant benefits of bisphosphonates on the development of bone metastases and breast cancer mortality in post-menopausal women or those receiving ovarian suppression therapy. Therefore, the panel recommends that bisphosphonates (either intravenous zoledronic acid or oral clodronate) are considered as part of the adjuvant breast cancer treatment in this population and the potential benefits and risks discussed with relevant patients.     

The anti-tumour activity of bisphosphonates

Bisphosphonates are stable analogues of pyrophosphate (PPi), an endogenous regulator of bone mineralisation. A number of placebo-controlled trials have demonstrated their positive impact on skeletal-related events (SRE) that occur as a consequence of metastatic or myelomatous bone disease. Based upon their chemical structure bisphosphonates can be classified into nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates, (N-bisphosphonates) (for example zoledronate and pamidronate) and non-nitrogen containing (for example, clodronate and etidronate), which more closely resemble PPi. Clinical trials investigating bisphosphonates in the preventative setting have shown bisphosphonates to not only delay occurrence of bone metastases in certain cancers, but in one trial, occurrence of non-osseous lesions was delayed, and survival was prolonged. Other trials however have shown the opposite. Likewise, in animal models of cancer and metastases, conflicting results have been obtained. In vitro work has concentrated on bisphosphonates direct action upon tumour cells and has found a variety of anti-tumour effects such as apoptosis induction, inhibition of cell growth, inhibition of invasive behaviour and inhibition of angiogenic factors. Furthermore it would appear that bisphosphonates have the potential to enhance anti-tumour activity of known cytotoxic drugs. Ongoing research aims to assess this further, in addition to determining more precisely the role of adjuvant bisphosphonates in cancers such as breast and prostate cancer.     

Exploring the anti-tumour activity of bisphosphonates in early breast cancer

Bisphosphonates are potent inhibitors of osteoclast-mediated bone resorption and are firmly established in the management of breast cancer patients with metastatic skeletal disease. There are extensive data that bisphosphonates, particularly nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates such as zoledronic acid, exhibit anti-tumour activity potentially via both indirect and direct mechanisms in vitro. In vivo studies using animal models of breast cancer induced bone disease have shown that bisphosphonates exert anti-tumour effects via inhibiting osteolysis and reducing skeletal tumour burden. Furthermore, pre-clinical studies have demonstrated synergistic anti-tumour effects between chemotherapy agents commonly used in breast cancer treatment and nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates. This, coupled with emerging evidence from pre-clinical in vivo studies suggesting that bisphosphonates may have additional anti-tumour activity outside of the bone microenvironment, could be of significant importance in the clinical management of breast cancer. The evidence in favour of an anti-tumour effect of bisphosphonates in the clinical setting is inconclusive however, with conflicting evidence from several trials. This review focuses on the anti-tumour activity of bisphosphonates in breast cancer, with particular focus on zoledronic acid. The pre-clinical evidence for anti-tumour activity will be reviewed, followed by the synergistic effects with anti-cancer agents. Finally, the clinical relevance and strategies for the evaluation of anti-tumour activity in breast cancer will be discussed. We are currently exploring the potential synergistic anti-tumour effects of the sequential treatment of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by zoledronic acid in a randomised phase II study evaluating biological endpoints including apoptosis, proliferation and angiogenesis in patients with breast cancer.     

Adjuvant bisphosphonate treatment for breast cancer: Why did something so elegant become so complicated?

Bisphosphonate therapy has revolutionized the care of patients with metastatic bone disease. With its demonstrated activity and anti-tumour effects in preclinical studies it was natural to transition these agents to testing in the adjuvant setting. Surprisingly, the results of adjuvant breast cancer trials have shown either modest or no benefit or even harm. We sought to explore whether there were specific patient cohorts or treatment strategies that were most likely to benefit from adjuvant bisphosphonate therapy. We compared trial designs, patient characteristics and outcomes from the six published and two presented randomized adjuvant bisphosphonate trials. Differences in trial design and patient populations make direct comparisons complicated. The most efficacious use of adjuvant bisphosphonates appears to be in patients with either biopsy evidence of osseous micrometastases, were post-menopausal or had estrogen receptor-positive tumours. Despite tremendous optimism regarding adjuvant bisphosphonate therapy, results from large trials are conflicting. Further investigation into factors influencing response to bisphosphonate treatment or selection of appropriate sub-groups of patients with desirable response characteristics is warranted.     

Toward new horizons: the future of bisphosphonate therapy

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

Adjuvant bisphosphonates in endocrine-responsive breast cancer: what is their place in therapy?

Recent advances in the treatment of early breast cancer have improved clinical outcomes and prolonged survival, especially in women with endocrine-responsive disease. However, cancer therapies including cytotoxic chemotherapy, ovarian suppression, and aromatase inhibitors can drastically reduce circulating estrogen, increasing bone loss and fracture risk. Because most women with early breast cancer will live for many years, it is important to protect bone health during cancer therapy. Several recent clinical trials combining adjuvant endocrine therapy with bisphosphonates have demonstrated efficacy for preventing cancer treatment-induced bone loss in pre- and postmenopausal women with early breast cancer. The largest body of evidence supporting the use of adjuvant bisphosphonates comes from studies with zoledronic acid; however, studies with risedronate, ibandronate, and denosumab (a biologic agent) have also demonstrated efficacy for preventing bone loss. Adding zoledronic acid to endocrine therapy prevents bone loss and improves bone mineral density (BMD). In addition, preclinical studies suggest that bisphosphonates have direct and indirect antitumor activity, such as inducing tumor cell apoptosis, reducing tumor cell adhesion and invasion, reducing angiogenesis, activating immune responses, and synergy with chemotherapy agents, among others. Clinical trials have demonstrated significantly improved disease-free survival in patients receiving adjuvant endocrine therapy plus zoledronic acid compared with endocrine therapy alone. Ongoing studies will further define the role of adjuvant bisphosphonates in maintaining bone health and improving clinical outcomes. The available evidence suggests that pre- and postmenopausal patients may receive clinical benefit from including bisphosphonates as part of their adjuvant treatment regimen for endocrine-responsive early breast cancer.     

Antiresorptive therapies in oncology and their effects on cancer progression

Bone health is an emerging concern in the early breast cancer setting. Current adjuvant therapies, especially hormonal therapies in premenopausal patients (e.g. goserelin) and aromatase inhibitors in postmenopausal patients, have been associated with substantial decreases in bone mineral density that may place patients at risk for fractures. Bisphosphonates--and the recently approved anti-RANKL antibody, denosumab--have both demonstrated activity for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis and cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) in breast cancer patients, although neither has received widespread approval specifically for CTIBL. However, some bisphosphonates, especially the nitrogen-containing bisphosphonate zoledronic acid, have also demonstrated clinically meaningful anticancer effects in patients receiving adjuvant hormonal therapy for breast cancer and in other oncology settings. The effects of denosumab on cancer disease outcomes in the adjuvant setting remain to be established. This discrepancy has created a dilemma in terms of how to evaluate the complete benefit:risk profile of bone-health management options in the adjuvant breast cancer setting. This review summarises the current data on the course of cancer in clinical trials of the antiresorptive agents and provides important insight into the relative anticancer potential of the various therapies.     

Cancer treatment-induced bone loss: pathophysiology and clinical perspectives

Hormone-ablative therapies for breast or prostate cancer can cause marked and rapid reductions in circulating estrogen or testosterone levels, resulting in significant effects on bone metabolism and cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL). Most patients with cancer are over the age of 65 and are already at risk for osteoporosis. Thus, accelerated bone loss from CTIBL is especially concerning in this population. Although there are currently no approved therapies for the treatment or prevention of CTIBL, oral bisphosphonates have been used in settings other than oncology to treat bone loss. New-generation i.v. bisphosphonates have demonstrated promising activity in preventing CTIBL in patients receiving hormonal therapy for breast or prostate cancer. In particular, zoledronic acid not only prevents CTIBL in both breast and prostate cancer patients but also increases bone mineral density above baseline. Such agents have the potential to delay or prevent CTIBL in patients receiving hormonal therapies.     

Should bisphosphonates be utilized in the adjuvant setting for breast cancer?

Adjuvant therapies for early breast cancer are associated with substantial decreases in bone mineral density. Bisphosphonates are antiresorptive agents that have an established role in preventing skeletal morbidity in patients with bone metastases and in the treatment of osteoporosis. Recently, several trials have demonstrated the efficacy of bone-directed agents for prevention of cancer treatment-induced bone loss in both premenopausal and postmenopausal women with early stage breast cancer. Moreover, it is now becoming evident that bisphosphonates may also exert anticancer effects in the adjuvant setting. For example, long-term follow-up of a study in patients with bone marrow micrometastases from breast cancer revealed overall survival benefits for clodronate versus placebo, and an ongoing large trial may provide further insights. Addition of twice-yearly zoledronic acid to standard adjuvant endocrine therapy significantly improved disease-free survival and decreased disease recurrence compared with standard therapy alone in 3 clinical trials involving nearly 3,500 patients with stage I-IIIA breast cancer, and monthly zoledronic acid during neoadjuvant therapy decreased residual tumor volume and improved pathologic response in patients with stage II/III breast cancer. Overall, a large and growing body of evidence suggests the potential adjuvant benefits of bisphosphonates in early breast cancer.     

Managing bone loss in women with early-stage breast cancer receiving aromatase inhibitors

Third-generation aromatase inhibitors (AIs; anastrozole, letrozole, exemestane) have replaced tamoxifen as the adjuvant treatment of choice for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early-stage breast cancer. Because bone loss is a predictable adverse event of AI therapy, early recognition, prevention, and/or treatment of AI-induced bone loss is needed. One to 5 years of AI therapy causes a bone mineral density (BMD) loss of up to 7.2% in postmenopausal women; however, current clinical guidelines do not recommend initiating bisphosphonate therapy for the treatment of BMD loss until fragility fractures or frank osteoporosis occur. Results of recent trials evaluating the use of intravenous (I.V.) zoledronic acid as prevention and treatment of AI-induced bone loss in women with early-stage breast cancer receiving letrozole suggest a potential benefit to the concurrent use of zoledronic acid and letrozole. To our knowledge, clinical trials assessing oral or other I.V. bisphosphonates for these indications have not been published. Recently, concerns of bisphosphonate-induced renal safety and osteonecrosis of the jaw have emerged. Studies evaluating bisphosphonates in women with breast cancer have reported lower rates of renal dysfunction than those reported in patients with metastatic cancer receiving bisphosphonates, and no cases of jaw osteonecrosis. The use of bisphosphonates in this population requires further study to more clearly define the most appropriate timing and length of therapy as well as the long-term efficacy and safety of these drugs. Until these data become available, balancing the safety concerns with the potential benefits of I.V. bisphosphonates to minimize or prevent AI-induced bone loss in women with early-stage breast cancer is required.     

Bone health issues in women with early-stage breast cancer receiving aromatase inhibitors

Bone health is an important issue for women with all stages of breast cancer, but especially those with early-stage breast cancer receiving aromatase inhibitors (AIs). AIs have been shown to reduce bone mineral density and are associated with an increased incidence of fractures. Although AIs significantly improve survival times in early-stage breast cancer patients, many of these patients eventually develop metastatic bone disease. Therefore, identifying effective strategies for preventing bone metastases is needed. Results of preclinical studies with bisphosphonates show increased tumor cell kill in several breast cancer cell lines, but study results evaluating this class of drugs for prevention of bone metastases in women with early-stage breast cancer receiving adjuvant therapies have been inconsistent. However, several large studies to clarify the role of bisphosphonates in maintaining or improving bone health in these women are under way.     

Potential use of bisphosphonates in the prevention of metastases in early-stage breast cancer

Great strides have been made over the past 20 years in the treatment of breast cancer, and despite increasing incidence, the number of deaths has fallen sharply since the late 1980s. The advent of new therapies including taxanes and aromatase inhibitors and recent, exciting results that announced trastuzumab in the adjuvant treatment for patients with HER2-positive tumors should decrease the number of deaths even further. However, although most patients present with disease that appears to be localized to the breast, a significant proportion of women will eventually develop metastatic breast cancer. Therefore, the detection and treatment of micrometastatic disease represents perhaps the most important remaining challenge in breast cancer management. Bone is the most frequent site of distant relapse, accounting for approximately 40% of all first recurrences. In addition to the well-recognized release of bone cell-activating factors from the tumor, it is now appreciated that release of bone-derived growth factors and cytokines from bone can attract cancer cells to the bone surface and facilitate their growth and proliferation. Bisphosphonates are potent inhibitors of bone osteolysis; therefore, their use in early-stage cancer could be an adjuvant therapeutic strategy of potential importance. Bisphosphonates might also have direct effects on tumor cells in the bone marrow microenvironment. Clinical trial results with the early bisphosphonate clodronate have proven inconclusive, but the results of recently completed large adjuvant clinical trials with this compound and more potent second-generation and third-generation bisphosphonates are eagerly awaited.     

Antitumor effects and anticancer applications of bisphosphonates

Bisphosphonates are firmly entrenched in the treatment of metastatic bone disease secondary to several tumor types, including breast cancer, prostate cancer, and myeloma. More recently, an emerging body of preclinical and clinical evidence indicates that bisphosphonates might also exhibit antitumor activity. This expanded role for bisphosphonates in the adjuvant setting might have profound clinical implications in many cancer types, particularly in the context of prevention of bone metastasis. Increased understanding of the mechanistic basis of the antitumor effects indicates that these might occur via direct mechanisms such as induction of apoptosis and inhibition of tumor cell adhesion and invasion, as well as indirect mechanisms such as inhibition of angiogenesis. There is also considerable evidence to suggest that nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates might exert additive or synergistic interactions with standard cytotoxic agents. However, mature clinical data with bisphosphonates are limited and, thus far, provide conflicting evidence regarding the antitumor role of bisphosphonates, but have mostly been conducted with first-generation bisphosphonates such as clodronate that are not as effective as next-generation bisphosphonates. Several large randomized clinical trials are ongoing with the next-generation bisphosphonate zoledronic acid to prospectively confirm an antitumor role for bisphosphonates in various tumor types. This review assesses the current body of preclinical and clinical evidence in favor of an antitumor effect of bisphosphonates in different cancer types.     

Approaches to managing bone metastases from breast cancer: the role of bisphosphonates

Conventional management of metastatic bone disease involves local and systemic therapies in various combinations, along with symptomatic management to provide optimal care. In recent years, it has become clear that adding bisphosphonates to these treatments reduces the incidence and severity of skeletal complications. Bisphosphonates can also relieve metastatic bone pain and improve quality of life, although the extent to which they have demonstrated these effects may differ between agents. While bisphosphonates are the standard of care for the treatment of bone metastases, clinical trials are investigating additional indications for these agents, including the use of intensive dosing regimens for the relief of severe or opioid-resistant metastatic bone pain and adjuvant treatment for the prevention of bone metastases and cancer treatment-induced bone loss. Current and future indications demand effective, well-tolerated and convenient bisphosphonates, and the benefits of different drugs must be balanced against their limitations. The cost-effectiveness of bisphosphonate treatment is also a consideration, given the high economic burden of metastatic bone disease from breast cancer.     

American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline on the role of bisphosphonates in breast cancer. American Society of Clinical Oncology Bisphosphonates Expert Panel.

PURPOSE: To determine clinical practice guidelines for the use of bisphosphonates in the prevention and treatment of bone metastases in breast cancer and their role relative to other therapies for this condition. METHODS: An expert multidisciplinary panel reviewed pertinent information from the published literature and meeting abstracts through May 1999. Additional data collected as part of randomized trials and submitted to the United States Food and Drug Administration were also reviewed, and investigators were contacted for more recent information. Values for levels of evidence and grade of recommendation were assigned by expert reviewers and approved by the panel. Expert consensus was used if there were insufficient published data. The panel addressed which patients to treat and when in their course of disease, specific drug delivery issues, duration of therapy, management of bony metastases with other therapies, and the public policy implications. The guideline underwent external review by selected physicians, members of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Health Services Research Committee, and the ASCO Board of Directors. RESULTS: Bisphosphonates have not had an impact on the most reliable cancer end point: overall survival. The benefits have been reductions in skeletal complications, ie, pathologic fractures, surgery for fracture or impending fracture, radiation, spinal cord compression, and hypercalcemia. Intravenous (IV) pamidronate 90 mg delivered over 1 to 2 hours every 3 to 4 weeks is recommended in patients with metastatic breast cancer who have imaging evidence of lytic destruction of bone and who are concurrently receiving systemic therapy with hormonal therapy or chemotherapy. For women with only an abnormal bone scan but without bony destruction by imaging studies or localized pain, there is insufficient evidence to suggest starting bisphosphonates. Starting bisphosphonates in patients without evidence of bony metastasis, even in the presence of other extraskeletal metastases, is not recommended. Studies of bisphosphonates in the adjuvant setting have yielded inconsistent results. Starting bisphosphonates in patients at any stage of their nonosseous disease, outside of clinical trials, despite a high risk for future bone metastasis, is currently not recommended. Oral bisphosphonates are one of several options which can be used for preservation of bone density in premenopausal patients with treatment-induced menopause. The panel suggests that, once initiated, IV bisphosphonates be continued until evidence of substantial decline in a patient's general performance status. The panel stresses that clinical judgment must guide what is a substantial decline. There is no evidence addressing the consequences of stopping bisphosphonates after one or more adverse skeletal events. Symptoms in the spine, pelvis, or femur require careful evaluation for spinal cord compression and pathologic fracture before bisphosphonate use and if symptoms recur, persist, or worsen during therapy. The panel recommends that current standards of care for cancer pain, analgesics and local radiation therapy, not be displaced by bisphosphonates. IV pamidronate is recommended in women with pain caused by osteolytic metastasis to relieve pain when used concurrently with systemic chemotherapy and/or hormonal therapy, since it was associated with a modest pain control benefit in controlled trials. CONCLUSION: Bisphosphonates provide a meaningful supportive but not life-prolonging benefit to many patients with bone metastases from cancer. Further research is warranted to identify clinical predictors of when to start and stop therapy, to integrate their use with other treatments for bone metastases, to identify their role in the adjuvant setting in preventing bone metastases, and to better determine their cost-benefit consequences.     

Seed, soil and secreted hormones: Potential interactions of breast cancer cells with their endocrine/paracrine microenvironment and implications for treatment with bisphosphonates

The process of formation of metastasis is undoubtedly inefficient, with the majority of disseminated tumour cells perishing in their metastatic environment. Their ability to survive is determined by their intrinsic abilities, with emerging evidence of the importance of cancer stem cells possessing self propagating potential, but also the interaction with the premetastatic niche, which may either help or hinder their formation into micrometastasis, thus influencing recurrence and survival in breast cancer patients. Use of the bone targeted agents bisphosphonates in the adjuvant setting has been extensively studied in large clinical trials, and demonstrated an interesting interplay with the endocrine microenvironment, with postmenopausal women or premenopausal women receiving ovarian suppression therapy gaining a survival advantage compared to pre/perimenopausal women. The interaction between the endocrine hormones and the paracrine TGFβ growth factors may provide an explanation for the differences seen according to ovarian function in the response to bisphosphonates. In this review the evidence of interplay between ovarian endocrine hormones, TGFβ paracrine growth factors and bisphosphonates will be presented, and subsequent influence on breast cancer cells in the bone pre-metastatic niche hypothesised.     

Prevention of bone metastases and management of bone health in early breast cancer

Treatment options for women with early-stage breast cancer have never been better, and the addition of bisphosphonates to adjuvant therapy is a valuable new tool capable of substantially improving clinical outcomes for these women. Several recent studies demonstrated that the anticancer activity of bisphosphonates is not limited to bone, and can translate into a reduction in disease recurrence, including reductions in locoregional and distant metastases. In addition, bisphosphonates maintain bone health during adjuvant therapy; this may be especially important for women who are at high risk for fracture.     

Denosumab for the treatment of bone metastases in breast cancer: evidence and opinion

Introduction: Denosumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody, targets the receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappaB (RANK) ligand, a protein essential for osteoclast differentiation, activity and survival. Loss of osteoclasts from the bone surface reduces bone turnover and bone loss in malignant and benign diseases. In breast cancer, bone metastases are frequently observed; cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) may result as a consequence of endocrine treatment or chemotherapy. Furthermore, preclinical studies suggest a direct role of the RANK/RANK-ligand pathway in breast tumorigenesis. This paper reviews preclinical and clinical data on denosumab in breast cancer.Materials and methods: Studies were identified through the Medline database. Key search terms included: AMG-162, bisphosphonates, denosumab, RANK-ligand and zoledronic acid. Information available in abstract form only was retrieved from major oncology meetings, such as the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) annual meeting, ASCO breast meeting, European Cancer Organization, European Society of Medical Oncology and the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium.Results: Denosumab was consistently well tolerated throughout clinical trials, although the observed incidence of osteonecrosis of the jaw was comparable to that with bisphosphonates. Efficacy as determined by a reduction of skeletal-related events was at least equal to zoledronic acid, and superior in one phase III study conducted in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Clinical trials investigating the role of denosumab for the prevention of CTIBL and breast cancer recurrences are currently ongoing.Conclusion: In conclusion, denosumab appears to be an effective and safe treatment option in patients with bone metastases from breast cancer with the potential of also preventing CTIBL.