Search

Purpose: This randomized study compared denosumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody against receptor activator of nuclear factor κ B (RANK) ligand, with zoledronic acid in delaying or preventing skeletal-related events (SREs) in patients with breast cancer with bone metastases., Patients and Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either subcutaneous denosumab 120 mg and intravenous placebo (n = 1,026) or intravenous zoledronic acid 4 mg adjusted for creatinine clearance and subcutaneous placebo (n = 1,020) every 4 weeks. All patients were strongly recommended to take daily calcium and vitamin D supplements. The primary end point was time to first on-study SRE (defined as pathologic fracture, radiation or surgery to bone, or spinal cord compression)., Results: Denosumab was superior to zoledronic acid in delaying time to first on-study SRE (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.95; P = .01 superiority) and time to first and subsequent (multiple) on-study SREs (rate ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.89; P = .001). Reduction in bone turnover markers was greater with denosumab. Overall survival, disease progression, and rates of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs were similar between groups. An excess of renal AEs and acute-phase reactions occurred with zoledronic acid; hypocalcemia occurred more frequently with denosumab. Osteonecrosis of the jaw occurred infrequently (2.0%, denosumab; 1.4%, zoledronic acid; P = .39)., Conclusion: Denosumab was superior to zoledronic acid in delaying or preventing SREs in patients with breast cancer metastatic to bone and was generally well tolerated. With the convenience of a subcutaneous injection and no requirement for renal monitoring, denosumab represents a potential treatment option for patients with bone metastases.

Purpose: Bone metastases are associated with severe and sometimes intractable pain, compromising patient quality of life (QOL). This open-label pilot study investigated the effects of short-term intensive treatment with intravenous (i.v.) ibandronate on opioid-resistant bone pain in patients with skeletal metastases., Patients and Methods: Eighteen patients with advanced tumors and metastatic bone disease received nonstandard treatment with 4 mg of ibandronate administered i.v. (2-hour infusion) for 4 consecutive days (16-mg total dose). Baseline opioid analgesic use was equivalent to 400 mg/d of morphine. Patients were assessed for 6 weeks or until death. Changes from baseline were determined for bone pain, opioid consumption, patient functioning, QOL, performance status, and biochemical markers of calcium metabolism and bone turnover. Renal function was assessed by serum urea and creatinine measurement., Results: Short-term, intensive ibandronate treatment significantly reduced bone pain scores within 7 days (P <.001). Pain reductions were sustained over the study period. Ibandronate significantly improved QOL, patient functioning, and performance status (P <.05). Mean values of the urinary cross-links pyridinoline and deoxypyridinoline tended to increase after day 21, returning close to baseline values by day 42. There was no correlation between the change in crosslinks values and the change in pain scores after ibandronate treatment. Ibandronate was well tolerated, with no evidence of renal toxicity., Conclusion: Nonstandard, intensive treatment with i.v. ibandronate seems to have a marked analgesic effect in patients with opioid-resistant bone pain from metastatic bone disease. Further investigation is warranted.

Purpose: The purpose of this article is to review the recent data on bisphosphonate use in oncology and to provide some guidelines on the indications for their use in cancer patients., Design: The group consensus reached by experts on the rationale for the use of bisphosphonates in cancer patients and their current indications for the treatment of tumor-induced hypercalcemia and metastatic bone pain in advanced disease and for the prevention of the complications of multiple myeloma and of metastatic bone disease are reviewed., Results: Bisphosphonates are potent inhibitors of tumor-induced osteoclast-mediated bone resorption. They now constitute the standard treatment for cancer hypercalcemia, for which we recommend a dose of 1,500 mg of clodronate or 90 mg of pamidronate; the latter compound is more potent and has a longer lasting effect. Intravenous bisphosphonates exert clinically relevant analgesic effects in patients with metastatic bone pain. Regular pamidronate infusions can also achieve a partial objective response by conventional International Union Against Cancer criteria and enhance the objective response rate to chemotherapy. In breast cancer, the prolonged administration of oral clodronate 1,600 mg daily reduces the frequency of morbid skeletal events by more than one fourth, whereas monthly pamidronate infusions of 90 mg for only 1 year in addition to chemotherapy reduce by more than one third the frequency of all skeletal-related events. The use of bisphosphonates to prevent bone metastases remains experimental. Last, bisphosphonates in addition to chemotherapy are superior to chemotherapy alone in patients with stages II and III multiple myeloma and can reduce the skeletal morbidity rate by approximately one half., Conclusion: Bisphosphonate use is a major therapeutic advance in the management of the skeletal morbidity caused by metastatic breast cancer or multiple myeloma, although many questions remain unanswered, notably regarding the optimal selection of patients and the duration of treatment.

Purpose: To evaluate the hypocalcemic effect and safety of three different doses of the bisphosphonate ibandronate in tumor-associated hypercalcemia, and to identify factors predicting response., Patients and Methods: One hundred seventy-four cancer patients with a serum calcium level greater than 2.7 mmol/L (10.8 mg/dL) were enrolled onto the trial. If hypercalcemia persisted after fluid repletion, patients were randomly assigned to treatment with 0.6 mg, 1.1 mg, and 2.0 mg of ibandronate. Response, defined as restoration of normocalcemia, was evaluated by an intent-to-treat analysis., Results: One hundred seventy-three (99%) patients were assessable for toxicity and 151 (87%) for efficacy. The administration of 0.6 mg (group A), 1.1 mg (group B), or 2.0 mg (group C) of ibandronate led to response rates of 44%, 52%, and 67%, respectively. Significantly more patients in group C responded than in group A (P = .0276). Of the various parameters examined, only the initial serum calcium level (P < .0001; odds ratio, 0.083) and the dose of ibandronate (P = .0162; odds ratio, 2.094) correlated with response. One hundred ninety-five adverse events (AEs) were reported, 99 classified as serious and 96 as nonserious. Three serious and sixteen nonserious AEs were considered related to ibandronate treatment. The three serious AEs were one case with thrombocytopenia, one with nausea, and one with fever., Conclusion: Ibandronate therapy led to a dose-dependent reduction in serum calcium levels. The response to ibandronate treatment correlated negatively with the initial serum calcium level and positively with the dose administered. A dose of 2 mg was necessary to achieve a response rate comparable to that in previous studies with the bisphosphonates pamidronate and clodronate. Because the incidence of drug-associated AEs was low, a dose escalation of ibandronate can be recommended for further clinical trials.

Treatment of malignancy-associated hypercalcemia remains unsatisfactory. We have prospectively treated 26 consecutive hypercalcemic cancer patients with intravenous (IV) aminohydroxypropylidene diphosphonate (APD). The drug was administered daily as a 15-mg two-hour IV infusion until both serum and urinary calcium had been normalized for 48 hours. Twenty-four patients were fully evaluable (eight head and neck tumors, seven breast cancers, three epidermoid tumors of the lung, and six miscellaneous neoplasms). Whereas rehydration had only inconsistent effects, APD normalized serum calcium in all patients after a mean of three daily doses: serum calcium decreased from 13.3 +/- 0.4 mg/dL (mean +/- SEM) before APD to 8.0 +/- 0.1 mg/dL at the end of treatment. Ionized calcium declined in parallel to total calcium. APD was as effective in hypercalcemia due to bone metastases as in paraneoplastic hypercalcemia. The drug was tolerated without toxicity and had a prolonged effect: serum calcium remained normal during 3+ weeks (1 + to 8 +) in 17 patients who did not receive or did not respond to antitumoral treatment. APD normalized serum calcium by inhibiting bone resorption, as evidenced by the dramatic decrease in urinary excretion of calcium and hydroxyproline. Inhibition of bone resorption was probably also responsible for the decrease in serum phosphorus from 2.9 +/- 0.2 to 2.0 +/- 0.1 mg/dL. In summary, IV APD constitutes a major advance in the treatment of malignancy-associated hypercalcemia: it is very effective, well tolerated, and has a prolonged efficacy.