Single-dose zoledronic acid improves BMD in frail older women


A single infusion of zoledronic acid in frail older women with cognitive impairment and mobility issues improved both bone density and bone turnover for 2 years, according to research in JAMA Internal Medicine.

The 2-year, randomized, placebo-controlled, double blind study suggests that even the most vulnerable patients can respond well to a bisphosphonate for osteoporosis treatment, according to researchers.

“Trials of younger and healthier elderly suggest that the risk of a devastating hip fracture can be cut in half with such therapy, so it’s important to know if that’s also true, for instance, for seniors in nursing homes,” Susan Greenspan, MD, of the department of medicine at University of Pittsburgh, toldEndocrine Today.

Susan Greenspan

Greenspan and colleagues analyzed data from 181 women aged 65 years or older with osteoporosis, including patients with cognitive impairments and immobility who lived in nursing homes or assisted living facilities, as part of the ZEST study. Participants were enrolled and treated from December 2007 to March 2012. All patients received either 5 mg IV zoledronic acid or placebo, as well as a daily divided dose of vitamin D (800 IU/day) and 1,200 mg/day of elemental calcium. Researchers measured hip and spine bone mineral density, as well as adverse events, such as falls, at 12 and 24 months.

Mean BMD at the hip increased by 2.8% for the treatment group compared with a –0.5% loss for the placebo group at 12 months (P < .001); a 2.6% increase compared with a –1.5% loss was observed for the treatment and placebo groups, respectively, at 24 months (P < .001). The treatment group also had a greater increase in mean spine BMD at 12 months (3% vs. 1.1%; P = .01) and at 24 months (4.5% vs. 0.7%; P < .001). Results were maintained after adjustment for a baseline imbalance in frailty, diabetes and anticonvulsant use, and there were no significant differences between groups in the number of deaths, fractures or cardiac events, according to researchers.

The study marks the first randomized trial of a potent antiresorptive therapy with a group of frail older women. With research now suggesting the drug can be administered to this particular group safely and is well tolerated, a larger trial is needed to determine whether fracture reduction can also be achieved, according to researchers.

“This study has answered those questions and, thereby, sets the stage for the bigger trial, which we hope will be funded by NIH,” Greenspan said. – by Regina Schaffer

Effect of Bisphosphonate Use on Risk of Postmenopausal Breast Cancer.


Results From the Randomized Clinical Trials of Alendronate and Zoledronic Acid.

Importance  Studies have shown that bisphosphonates may have antitumor and antimetastatic properties. Recently, observational studies have suggested a possible protective effect of bisphosphonates on breast cancer, but the effect of bisphosphonate use on risk of breast cancer has not been tested in randomized trials.

Objective  To assess the relationship of postmenopausal breast cancer incidence and bisphosphonate use using data from 2 randomized (1:1), double-blind, placebo-controlled trials.

Design, Setting, and Participants  The Fracture Intervention Trial (FIT) randomly assigned 6459 women aged 55 to 81 years to alendronate or placebo for a mean follow-up of 3.8 years. The Health Outcomes and Reduced Incidence With Zoledronic Acid Once Yearly–Pivotal Fracture Trial (HORIZON-PFT) randomly assigned 7765 women aged 65 to 89 years to annual intravenous zoledronic acid or placebo for a mean follow-up of 2.8 years. Data were collected at clinical centers in the United States (FIT and HORIZON-PFT) and in Asia and the Pacific, Europe, North America, and South America (HORIZON-PFT). Women, in either study, with recurrent breast cancer or who reported a history of breast cancer were excluded from analyses. In each trial, a blinded review was conducted of each cancer adverse event report to verify incident invasive breast cancer cases. The primary analysis compared events in the active vs placebo group using a log-rank test.

Intervention  Alendronate vs placebo (FIT) or zoledronic acid vs placebo (HORIZON-PFT).

Main Outcomes and Measures  Hazard ratio for incident breast cancer in the bisphosphonate treatment group compared to the placebo group.

Results  There was no significant difference in the rate of breast cancer in FIT: 1.5% (n = 46) in the placebo group and 1.8% (n = 57) in the alendronate group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.24 [95% CI, 0.84-1.83]). In HORIZON-PFT, there was also no significant difference: 0.8% (n = 29) in the placebo group and 0.9% (n = 33) in the zoledronic acid group (HR, 1.15 [95% CI, 0.70-1.89]). There was also no significant difference when the data from FIT and HORIZON-PFT were pooled (HR, 1.20 [95% CI, 0.89-1.63]).

Conclusions and Relevance  These 2 randomized clinical trials do not support the findings from observational research. Contrary to the results from observational studies, we found that 3 to 4 years of bisphosphonate treatment did not decrease the risk of invasive postmenopausal breast cancer.

Bisphosphonate-Related Osteonecrosis of Jaw in the Adjuvant Breast Cancer Setting: Risks and Perspective.


Bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of jaw (BONJ) is a rare adverse effect of antiresorptive treatments (primarily zoledronic acid and more recently denusomab) to my knowledge first described 10 years ago. The definition of BONJ includes the presence of necrotic bone for more than 6 weeks in an area of the oral cavity normally covered by mucosa, prior or current bisphosphonate use, and no prior history of radiation to the head and neck.1 The risks of BONJ increase with more frequent scheduling (ie, monthly) and prolonged durations of administration (ie, > 2 years) of intravenous bisphosphonates, and the major risk factor for BONJ is dental extractions or procedures that expose bone during antiresorptive therapy. Principally, this led to the recommendation that, before initiating bisphosphonates, a dental evaluation and, if needed, dental work be completed before starting these drugs.2 Small nonrandomized cohort studies suggest that the incidence of BONJ is decreased with dental screening before initiating intravenous (IV) bisphosphonates.3,4 There is no evidence that routine dental health maintenance increases the risks of BONJ, and patients should be encouraged to have routine care during treatment with these drugs.

The precise mechanism(s) of BONJ or why it is confined to the jaw, predisposing risk factors other than dental extractions, optimal treatments, and more importantly, the short- and long-term outcomes and health-related quality of life of patients who develop BONJ are largely unknown.57 Some, but not all, recent studies suggest that genetic polymorphisms in genes related to bone metabolism, collagen, or aromatase may predispose patients to BONJ.8,9 As is true of other rare but serious complications of cancer treatment, health professionals tend to overestimate or underestimate the risks, depending on their specialty (eg, dentists or medical oncologists), general knowledge of BONJ, and anecdotal experience. In addition, recent small studies in patients seen in either dental or cancer clinics suggest that awareness and education about BONJ is lacking.10,11

Rathbone et al,12 on behalf of the Adjuvant Zoledronic Acid to Reduce Recurrence (AZURE) trial investigators, have made an important contribution by providing the incidence and outcomes of BONJ in a prospective randomized controlled trial of zoledronic acid in more than 3,000 women with localized breast cancer receiving adjuvant systemic therapy and assessing the oral health-related quality of life in a small subset of them. Several aspects of the trial are noteworthy. The trial opened in 2003, which is the same year that BONJ was first described. In 2004, the protocol and consent was amended to exclude women with active dental issues or recent jaw surgery, consent was reaffirmed for all prior trial enrollees, educational materials were provided to all trial participants and investigators, and suspected cases of BONJ were reported as serious adverse events in real time to the trial coordinating center. These then triggered requests for additional information, and the final case determinations were adjudicated by the study team, which included an oral surgeon.

Thus to the extent possible, investigators and trial participants were made aware of the potential of BONJ. However, we do not know whether a standard approach to case ascertainment of BONJ was performed at every clinic visit for all women enrolled onto the trial. For example, in recently closed Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) trial 70604 (ClinicalTrials.gov trial number NCT00869206) trial participants were queried about dental problems, visits, and procedures they had had in the past 1 to 12 months, and the information was recorded in the monthly case report form. Without such a standard approach to case ascertainment, the potential bias of under- or over-reporting suspected cases of BONJ is possible.

The schedule of zoledronic acid in the AZURE trial was intensive, with one 4-mg dose administered every 3 to 4 weeks for 5 to 6 months, followed by one dose every 3 to 6 months for 46 months, or a total of 19 doses in 5 years. This schedule approximates the 24 once-per-month zoledronic acid doses typically used to treat women with breast cancer and skeletal metastases. It is interesting to note that, in the Austrian Breast Cancer Study Group (ABCSG) trial-12, in which more than 1,800 premenopausal women received goselerin and were randomly assigned to either tamoxifen or anastrozole with or without zoledronic acid, treatment with zoledronic acid reduced the risk of local recurrence, bone metastases, and distant metastases (overall hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.91; P = .009).13 The schedule of zoledronic acid in the ABCSG trial was one 4-mg dose every 6 months for 3 years or a total of 6 doses, and there were no reports of BONJ (median follow-up, 62 months).

In the AZURE trial, the overall cumulative incidence of BONJ at 108 months was 2.1% (95% CI, 0.9% to 3.3%) and, extrapolating from Figure 1 of the article,12 was about 1.1% at 36 months. This is comparable with the cumulative estimated incidence of BONJ of 1.4% at 3 years in women with breast cancer receiving once-per-month zoledronic acid for skeletal metastases.14 The 1.1% rate is about fourfold higher than that reported in a meta-analysis of randomized trials of less frequently scheduled zoledronic acid to mitigate bone loss in early-stage breast cancer, in which the incidence is about 0.25%.15More than 80% of the identified patients with BONJ had dental extractions before being diagnosed with BONJ, consistent with the range of 40% to 90% of dental extractions preceding BONJ.16

The outcome of 26 women with BONJ is provided in Table 3 of their article.12“Completely recovered” and “improving” were the outcomes for 35% and 19% of the BONJ population, respectively, whereas “recovered with sequela” and “present and unchanged” were the outcomes for 12% and 31%, respectively. It is unfortunate that precise definitions were not provided for these descriptors, nor were the details of the specific treatments for BONJ described. The optimal treatment of BONJ is not defined. In a recent review article, “healing” of BONJ associated with medical treatments, surgical debridement, and surgical flap and/or resection was 18%, 17%, and 46%, respectively,6but these were nonrandomized, retrospective, and cohort studies subject to patient selection and other biases.

Among the relevant questions to women with breast cancer receiving zoledronic acid or denosumab are “What are my chances of developing BONJ, and if I do, how does the disease and its treatment affect my life in the short- and long-term?” The answer to the first part of that question is clearly low—between 0.2% to 2%, depending on whether the treatment is intended to prevent/treat osteoporosis, prevent skeletal metastases in the context of a clinical trial, or treat skeletal metastases. The results of a quality-of-life component described by Rathbone et al12 performed in a subset of trial participants does not address the quality of life in women who developed and live with BONJ; rather, at 5 years after random assignment, there were no differences in the domains of oral health-related quality of life in a small subset of women respondents randomly assigned to zoledronic acid or to a control arm using the Oral Health–Related Profile 14,17 an instrument well-validated in noncancer populations.

These results may provide a modicum of reassurance that receiving zoledronic acid does not seem to be associated with a detectable impact on oral health–related quality of life 5 years down the road. However, the authors appropriately recognize that this one-time retrospective assessment of oral health–related quality of life limits our ability to make any definitive conclusions. There are few data assessing quality of life in women with BONJ. In a nonrandomized comparison of 42 women with metastatic breast cancer receiving IV bisphosphonates, quality of life as assessed by the Head and Neck Quality of Life Questionnaire–35 was statistically significantly worse in the domains of pain, swallowing, speech, social eating, social contact, and several others for those who developed BONJ.18 Nearly 50% of women who developed BONJ in the AZURE trial were characterized as either “recovered with sequela” or “unchanged” at last follow-up. What happened to these women and how much impact and interference BONJ is having on their daily lives is unknown.

The results from two large cooperative trials using IV zoledronic acid—CALGB 70604 in more than 1,800 patients with metastatic breast cancer, prostate cancer, and multiple myeloma and a SWOG trial (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00127205) of more than 5,000 women with early-stage I-III breast cancers receiving adjuvant therapy comparing the oral bisphosphonates clodronate and ibandronate with IV zoledronic acid—should contribute additional information. CALGB 70604 is designed to determine whether once-every-3-months IV zoledronic acid is not inferior to the standard once-per-month schedule (8 v 24 doses) with a primary end point of the incidence of skeletal-related events and secondary end points of the incidences of BONJ, renal dysfunction, and pharmacogenomics using whole-genome analysis. In the SWOG trial, the oral bisphosphonates are administered daily for 3 years with an intense schedule of zoledronic acid of one 4-mg dose every month for 6 months followed by one 4-mg dose every 3 months for 30 months, or a total of 16 doses in 3 years. The primary end points are disease-free survival, overall survival, and adverse events. Results are expected in 2014 for the CALGB trial and 2015 for the SWOG trial.

The incidence of BONJ is likely decreasing since it was first reported in 2003 as a result of increasing awareness and a more precise definition of the disease, disseminating recommendations for dental screening, and limiting the schedule and duration of monthly treatments. When IV zoledronic acid is used for cancer treatment–related bone loss, the incidence of BONJ is low (about 0.25%) and lower still with use of oral bisphosphonates. Likewise, the 1% to 1.5% incidence of BONJ with 24 once-per-month zoledronic acid treatments in treating skeletal metastases in women with breast cancer is probably acceptable in most cases. If the results of CALGB 70604 indeed show that less frequent dosing of zoledronic acid is not inferior to the standard monthly dosing, then this will also likely lower the incidence of BONJ.

The use IV zoledronic acid to improve patient outcomes is a work in progress, and the results from the SWOG trial should provide additional data. Overall, the AZURE trial results19 showed that IV zoledronic acid on an intensive schedule did not improve disease-free survival or overall survival, and therefore the 2% total cumulative incidence of BONJ, although low, is clearly not acceptable. Whether there is a subpopulation of women with early-stage breast cancer as has been proposed—premenopausal receiving ovarian suppression13 or postmenopausal women19,20,21—in which the therapeutic ratio favors using adjuvant zoledronic acid or clodronate vis-à-vis BONJ and other adverse effects remains to be verified in subsequent trials. Finally, the incidence of osteonecrosis of the jaw related to monthly denosumab is slightly higher than that reported for zoledronic acid when used in patients with skeletal metastases.22 Phase III trials are addressing the role of denosumab to improve clinical outcomes in women with early-stage breast cancer.

Source: JCO

Efficacy and safety of 12-weekly versus 4-weekly zoledronic acid for prolonged treatment of patients with bone metastases from breast cancer (ZOOM): a phase 3, open-label, randomised, non-inferiority trial.


Background

Zoledronic acid reduces skeletal-related events in patients with breast cancer, but concerns have been raised about prolonged monthly administration. We assessed the efficacy and safety of a reduced dosing frequency of zoledronic acid in women treated previously with monthly zoledronic acid.

Methods

We did this non-inferiority, phase 3 trial in 62 centres in Italy. We enrolled patients with breast cancer who had one or more bone metastases and had completed 12—15 months of monthly treatment with zoledronic acid. Patients were randomly assigned with a permutated block (size four to eight) random list stratified by centre in a 1:1 ratio to zoledronic acid 4 mg once every 12 weeks or once every 4 weeks, and followed up for at least 1 year. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was skeletal morbidity rate (skeletal-related events per patient per year) in the intention-to-treat population. We used a non-inferiority margin of 0·19. The trial is registered with EudraCT, number 2005-004942-15.

Findings

We screened 430 patients and enrolled 425, of whom 209 were assigned to the 12-week group and 216 to the 4-week group. The skeletal morbidity rate was 0·26 (95% CI 0·15—0·37) in the 12-week group versus 0·22 (0·14—0·29) in the 4-week group. The between-group difference was 0·04 and the upper limit of one-tailed 97·5% CI was 0·17, which is lower than the non-inferiority margin. The most common grade 3—4 adverse events were bone pain (56 [27%] patients in the 12-week group vs 65 [30%] in the 4-week group), nausea (24 [11%] vs 33 [15%]), and asthenia (18 [9%] vs 33 [15%]). Renal adverse events occurred in one patient (<1%) in the 12-week group versus two (1%) in the 4-week group. One patient (<1%) in the 4-week group had grade 1 acute renal failure. Osteonecrosis of the jaw occurred in four patients in the 12-week group versus three in the 4-week group. No treatment-related deaths were reported. Median N-terminal telopeptide concentration changed from baseline more in the 12-week group than in the 4-week group after 12 months (12·2% vs 0·0%; p=0·011).

Interpretation

Our results raise the possibility of decreasing administration of zoledronic acid to a 12-weekly regimen to reduce exposure during the second year, while maintaining its therapeutic effects. However, the effects on N-terminal telopeptide should be investigated further before changing current practice.

Source: lancet

Efficacy and safety of 12-weekly versus 4-weekly zoledronic acid for prolonged treatment of patients with bone metastases from breast cancer (ZOOM): a phase 3, open-label, randomised, non-inferiority trial.


Background

Zoledronic acid reduces skeletal-related events in patients with breast cancer, but concerns have been raised about prolonged monthly administration. We assessed the efficacy and safety of a reduced dosing frequency of zoledronic acid in women treated previously with monthly zoledronic acid.

Methods

We did this non-inferiority, phase 3 trial in 62 centres in Italy. We enrolled patients with breast cancer who had one or more bone metastases and had completed 12—15 months of monthly treatment with zoledronic acid. Patients were randomly assigned with a permutated block (size four to eight) random list stratified by centre in a 1:1 ratio to zoledronic acid 4 mg once every 12 weeks or once every 4 weeks, and followed up for at least 1 year. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was skeletal morbidity rate (skeletal-related events per patient per year) in the intention-to-treat population. We used a non-inferiority margin of 0·19. The trial is registered with EudraCT, number 2005-004942-15.

Findings

We screened 430 patients and enrolled 425, of whom 209 were assigned to the 12-week group and 216 to the 4-week group. The skeletal morbidity rate was 0·26 (95% CI 0·15—0·37) in the 12-week group versus 0·22 (0·14—0·29) in the 4-week group. The between-group difference was 0·04 and the upper limit of one-tailed 97·5% CI was 0·17, which is lower than the non-inferiority margin. The most common grade 3—4 adverse events were bone pain (56 [27%] patients in the 12-week group vs 65 [30%] in the 4-week group), nausea (24 [11%] vs 33 [15%]), and asthenia (18 [9%] vs 33 [15%]). Renal adverse events occurred in one patient (<1%) in the 12-week group versus two (1%) in the 4-week group. One patient (<1%) in the 4-week group had grade 1 acute renal failure. Osteonecrosis of the jaw occurred in four patients in the 12-week group versus three in the 4-week group. No treatment-related deaths were reported. Median N-terminal telopeptide concentration changed from baseline more in the 12-week group than in the 4-week group after 12 months (12·2% vs 0·0%; p=0·011).

Interpretation

Our results raise the possibility of decreasing administration of zoledronic acid to a 12-weekly regimen to reduce exposure during the second year, while maintaining its therapeutic effects. However, the effects on N-terminal telopeptide should be investigated further before changing current practice.

Source: Lancet.

 

Once-Yearly Zoledronic Acid for Men with Osteoporosis.


This drug lowered the incidence of radiographic, but not clinical, vertebral fractures.

In a 2007 study, once-yearly infusions of the bisphosphonate drug zoledronic acid (Reclast, Aclasta) lowered the incidence of fractures in postmenopausal women (JW Gen Med May 2 2007). Now, in another industry-sponsored randomized trial, 1199 men (age range, 50–85) at high risk for fractures received zoledronic acid (5-mg dose, given intravenously at baseline and at 12 months) or placebo. The study was open to men with osteoporosis defined by bone-density testing and to men with osteopenia plus one to three mild-to-moderate vertebral fractures identified by lateral spine radiographs.

At 2 years, the proportion of men with new radiographic vertebral fractures was significantly lower in the zoledronic acid group than in the placebo group (1.6% vs. 4.9%). A small difference in incidence of symptomatic vertebral or nonvertebral fractures (1.0% vs. 1.8%) did not reach significance. About 20% to 25% of zoledronic acid recipients developed fever, myalgia, or arthralgia (compared with about 5%–10% of placebo recipients), but the duration of these adverse effects was not reported. No cases of jaw osteonecrosis or atypical femoral fractures were noted, but myocardial infarction occurred in nine zoledronic acid recipients and in two placebo recipients (P=0.03).

Comment: A once-yearly infusion of zoledronic acid significantly lowered the incidence of radiographic vertebral fractures, but not clinical fractures, in this 2-year study in men. Infusions of this drug are known to cause transient flu-like symptoms; however, the small excess of myocardial infarctions was unexpected and is of some concern. In the trial in women that was cited above, zoledronic acid recipients experienced a higher incidence of serious atrial fibrillation (but not myocardial infarctions).

Source: Journal Watch General Medicine