Search

Bisphosphonates (BP) prevent, reduce, and delay cancer-related skeletal complications in patients, and have substantially decreased the prevalence of such events since their introduction. Today, a broad range of BP with differences in potency, efficacy, dosing, and administration as well as approved indications is available. In addition, results of clinical trials investigating the efficacy of BP in cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) have been recently published. The purpose of this paper is to review the current evidence on the use of BP in solid tumours and provide clinical recommendations. An interdisciplinary expert panel of clinical oncologists and of specialists in metabolic bone diseases assessed the widespread evidence and information on the efficacy of BP in the metastatic and nonmetastatic setting, as well as ongoing research on the adjuvant use of BP. Based on available evidence, the panel recommends amino-bisphosphonates for patients with metastatic bone disease from breast cancer and zoledronic acid for patients with other solid tumours as primary disease. Dosing of BP should follow approved indications with adjustments if necessary. While i.v. administration is most often preferable, oral administration (clodronate, IBA) may be considered for breast cancer patients who cannot or do not need to attend regular hospital care. Early-stage cancer patients at risk of developing CTIBL should be considered for preventative BP treatment. The strongest evidence in this setting is now available for ZOL. Overall, BP are well-tolerated, and most common adverse events are influenza-like syndrome, arthralgia, and when used orally, gastrointestinal symptoms. The dose of BP may need to be adapted to renal function and initial creatinine clearance calculation is mandatory according to the panel for use of any BP. Subsequent monitoring is recommended for ZOL and PAM, as described by the regulatory authority guidelines. Patients scheduled to receive BP (mainly eve

BackgroundIn the BOLERO-2 trial, everolimus (EVE), an inhibitor of mammalian target of rapamycin, demonstrated significant clinical benefit with an acceptable safety profile when administered with exemestane (EXE) in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR(+)) advanced breast cancer. We report on the incidence, time course, severity, and resolution of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) as well as incidence of dose modifications during the extended follow-up of this study.Patients and methodsPatients were randomized (2:1) to receive EVE 10 mg/day or placebo (PBO), with open-label EXE 25 mg/day (n = 724). The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, objective response rate, and safety. Safety evaluations included recording of AEs, laboratory values, dose interruptions/adjustments, and study drug discontinuations.ResultsThe safety population comprised 720 patients (EVE + EXE, 482; PBO + EXE, 238). The median follow-up was 18 months. Class-effect toxicities, including stomatitis, pneumonitis, and hyperglycemia, were generally of mild or moderate severity and occurred relatively early after treatment initiation (except pneumonitis); incidence tapered off thereafter. EVE dose reduction and interruption (360 and 705 events, respectively) required for AE management were independent of patient age. The median duration of dose interruption was 7 days. Discontinuation of both study drugs because of AEs was higher with EVE + EXE (9%) versus PBO + EXE (3%).ConclusionsMost EVE-associated AEs occur soon after initiation of therapy, are typically of mild or moderate severity, and are generally manageable with dose reduction and interruption. Discontinuation due to toxicity was uncommon. Understanding the time course of class-effect AEs will help inform preventive and monitoring strategies as well as patient education.Trial registration numberNCT00863655.

BackgroundIn the BOLERO-2 trial, everolimus (EVE), an inhibitor of mammalian target of rapamycin, demonstrated significant clinical benefit with an acceptable safety profile when administered with exemestane (EXE) in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR(+)) advanced breast cancer. We report on the incidence, time course, severity, and resolution of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) as well as incidence of dose modifications during the extended follow-up of this study.Patients and methodsPatients were randomized (2:1) to receive EVE 10 mg/day or placebo (PBO), with open-label EXE 25 mg/day (n = 724). The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, objective response rate, and safety. Safety evaluations included recording of AEs, laboratory values, dose interruptions/adjustments, and study drug discontinuations.ResultsThe safety population comprised 720 patients (EVE + EXE, 482; PBO + EXE, 238). The median follow-up was 18 months. Class-effect toxicities, including stomatitis, pneumonitis, and hyperglycemia, were generally of mild or moderate severity and occurred relatively early after treatment initiation (except pneumonitis); incidence tapered off thereafter. EVE dose reduction and interruption (360 and 705 events, respectively) required for AE management were independent of patient age. The median duration of dose interruption was 7 days. Discontinuation of both study drugs because of AEs was higher with EVE + EXE (9%) versus PBO + EXE (3%).ConclusionsMost EVE-associated AEs occur soon after initiation of therapy, are typically of mild or moderate severity, and are generally manageable with dose reduction and interruption. Discontinuation due to toxicity was uncommon. Understanding the time course of class-effect AEs will help inform preventive and monitoring strategies as well as patient education.Trial registration numberNCT00863655.

Bisphosphonates (BP) prevent, reduce, and delay cancer-related skeletal complications in patients, and have substantially decreased the prevalence of such events since their introduction. Today, a broad range of BP with differences in potency, efficacy, dosing, and administration as well as approved indications is available. In addition, results of clinical trials investigating the efficacy of BP in cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) have been recently published. The purpose of this paper is to review the current evidence on the use of BP in solid tumours and provide clinical recommendations. An interdisciplinary expert panel of clinical oncologists and of specialists in metabolic bone diseases assessed the widespread evidence and information on the efficacy of BP in the metastatic and nonmetastatic setting, as well as ongoing research on the adjuvant use of BP. Based on available evidence, the panel recommends amino-bisphosphonates for patients with metastatic bone disease from breast cancer and zoledronic acid for patients with other solid tumours as primary disease. Dosing of BP should follow approved indications with adjustments if necessary. While i.v. administration is most often preferable, oral administration (clodronate, IBA) may be considered for breast cancer patients who cannot or do not need to attend regular hospital care. Early-stage cancer patients at risk of developing CTIBL should be considered for preventative BP treatment. The strongest evidence in this setting is now available for ZOL. Overall, BP are well-tolerated, and most common adverse events are influenza-like syndrome, arthralgia, and when used orally, gastrointestinal symptoms. The dose of BP may need to be adapted to renal function and initial creatinine clearance calculation is mandatory according to the panel for use of any BP. Subsequent monitoring is recommended for ZOL and PAM, as described by the regulatory authority guidelines. Patients scheduled to receive BP (mainly eve