Evaluating bone health in women with oestrogen receptor positive breast cancer (ERBC) starting aromatase inhibitors

2009 ◽  
Vol 35 (5) ◽  
pp. 475-480 ◽  
Author(s):  
G.P. Clunie ◽  
A. Clark ◽  
C.J. Mortimer ◽  
S. Stephenson ◽  
J. Aitken ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 241 (3) ◽  
pp. R111-R124 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabashini K Ramchand ◽  
Yee-Ming Cheung ◽  
Belinda Yeo ◽  
Mathis Grossmann

In women with oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive early breast cancer, oestradiol is important for breast cancer development and progression. Endocrine therapy prevents the deleterious effects of oestradiol in breast tissue by systemically depleting oestradiol concentration (aromatase inhibitors) or preventing its local action in breast tissue (selective oestrogen receptor modulators i.e. tamoxifen), thereby improving oncological outcomes. Use of aromatase inhibitors in postmenopausal women and ovarian function suppression with either tamoxifen or aromatase inhibition in premenopausal women, consequent to systemic oestradiol depletion, exerts detrimental effects on skeletal health. The oestradiol-deficient state causes increased bone remodelling and a negative bone balance. This results in bone loss, microstructural deterioration and bone fragility predisposing to fractures. Similar effects are also seen with tamoxifen in premenopausal women. In contrast, use of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women appears to exert protective effects on bone but studies on fracture risk are inconclusive. The longevity of women with ER-positive breast cancer treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy emphasises the need to mitigate the adverse skeletal effects of these therapies in order to maximise benefit. In general, fractures are associated with increased morbidity, mortality and are a high socioeconomic burden. Whilst the efficacy of antiresorptive therapy in preventing bone mineral density loss in postmenopausal women has been established, further clinical trial evidence is required to provide guidance regarding fracture risk reduction, when to initiate and stop treatment, choice of agent and optimal management of bone health in premenopausal women receiving endocrine therapy. In addition, potential oncological benefits of antiresorptive therapies will also need to be considered.


2019 ◽  
Vol 211 (5) ◽  
pp. 224-229 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathis Grossmann ◽  
Sabashini K Ramchand ◽  
Frances Milat ◽  
Amanda Vincent ◽  
Elgene Lim ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Diana ◽  
Francesca Carlino ◽  
Emilio Francesco Giunta ◽  
Elisena Franzese ◽  
Luigi Pio Guerrera ◽  
...  

Opinion statementAbout 70–80% of early breast cancer (BC) patients receive adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) for at least 5 years. ET includes in the majority of cases the use of aromatase inhibitors, as upfront or switch strategy, that lead to impaired bone health. Given the high incidence and also the high prevalence of BC, cancer treatment–induced bone loss (CTIBL) represents the most common long-term adverse event experimented by patients with hormone receptor positive tumours. CTIBL is responsible for osteoporosis occurrence and, as a consequence, fragility fractures that may negatively affect quality of life and survival expectancy. As recommended by main international guidelines, BC women on aromatase inhibitors should be carefully assessed for their fracture risk at baseline and periodically reassessed during adjuvant ET in order to early detect significant worsening in terms of bone health. Antiresorptive agents, together with adequate intake of calcium and vitamin D, should be administered in BC patients during all course of ET, especially in those at high risk of osteoporotic fractures, as calculated by tools available for clinicians. Bisphosphonates, such as zoledronate or pamidronate, and anti-RANKL antibody, denosumab, are the two classes of antiresorptive drugs used in clinical practice with similar efficacy in preventing bone loss induced by aromatase inhibitor therapy. The choice between them, in the absence of direct comparison, should be based on patients’ preference and compliance; the different safety profile is mainly related to the route of administration, although both types of drugs are manageable with due care, since most of the adverse events are predictable and preventable. Despite advances in management of CTIBL, several issues such as the optimal time of starting antiresorptive agents and the duration of treatment remain unanswered. Future clinical trials as well as increased awareness of bone health are needed to improve prevention, assessment and treatment of CTIBL in these long-term survivor patients.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document