Abemaciclib plus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor as initial therapy for HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer: final overall survival results of MONARCH 3.

BACKGROUND: In MONARCH 2, the addition of abemaciclib to fulvestrant significantly improved both progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) with disease progression on prior endocrine therapy. In MONARCH 3, the addition of abemaciclib to a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) as initial therapy for HR+, HER2- ABC significantly improved PFS. Here, we present the prespecified final OS results for MONARCH 3. PATIENTS AND METHODS: MONARCH 3 is a randomized, double-blind, phase III study of abemaciclib plus NSAI (anastrozole or letrozole) versus placebo plus NSAI in postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- ABC without prior systemic therapy in the advanced setting. The primary objective was investigator-assessed PFS; OS was a gated secondary endpoint, and chemotherapy-free survival was an exploratory endpoint. RESULTS: A total of 493 women were randomized 2 : 1 to receive abemaciclib plus NSAI (n = 328) or placebo plus NSAI (n = 165). After a median follow-up of 8.1 years, there were 198 OS events (60.4%) in the abemaciclib arm and 116 (70.3%) in the placebo arm (hazard ratio, 0.804; 95% confidence interval 0.637-1.015; P = 0.0664, non-significant). Median OS was 66.8 versus 53.7 months for abemaciclib versus placebo. In the subgroup with visceral disease, there were 113 OS events (65.3%) in the abemaciclib arm and 65 (72.2%) in the placebo arm (hazard ratio, 0.758; 95% confidence interval 0.558-1.030; P = 0.0757, non-significant). Median OS was 63.7 months versus 48.8 months for abemaciclib versus placebo. The previously demonstrated PFS benefit was sustained, and chemotherapy-free survival numerically improved with the addition of abemaciclib. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Abemaciclib combined with an NSAI resulted in clinically meaningful improvement in median OS (intent-to-treat population: 13.1 months; subgroup with visceral disease: 14.9 months) in patients with HR+ HER2- ABC; however, statistical significance was not reached.

Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy for high-risk early breast cancer: safety and patient-reported outcomes from the monarchE study.

BACKGROUND: In monarchE, abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) as adjuvant treatment of hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor 2-negative, high-risk, early breast cancer (EBC) demonstrated a clinically meaningful improvement in invasive disease-free survival versus ET alone. Detailed safety analyses conducted at a median follow-up of 27 months and key patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are presented. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The safety population included all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment (n = 5591). Safety analyses included incidence, management, and outcomes of common and clinically relevant adverse events (AEs). Patient-reported health-related quality of life, ET symptoms, fatigue, and side-effect burden were assessed. RESULTS: The addition of abemaciclib to ET resulted in higher incidence of grade ≥3 AEs (49.7% versus 16.3% with ET alone), predominantly laboratory cytopenias [e.g. neutropenia (19.6%)] without clinical complications. Abemaciclib-treated patients experienced more serious AEs (15.2% versus 8.8%). Discontinuation of abemaciclib and/or ET due to AEs occurred in 18.5% of patients, mainly due to grade 1/2 AEs (66.8%). AEs were managed with comedications (e.g. antidiarrheals), abemaciclib dose holds (61.7%), and/or dose reductions (43.4%). Diarrhea was generally low grade (grade 1/2: 76%); grade 2/3 events were highest in the first month (20.5%), most were short-lived (≤7 days) and did not recur. Venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) were higher with abemaciclib + ET (2.5%) versus ET (0.6%); in the abemaciclib arm, increased VTE risk was observed with tamoxifen versus aromatase inhibitors (4.3% versus 1.8%). PROs were similar between arms, including being 'bothered by side-effects of treatment', except for diarrhea. At ≥3 months, most patients reporting diarrhea reported 'a little bit' or 'somewhat'. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with high-risk EBC, adjuvant abemaciclib + ET has an acceptable safety profile and tolerability is supported by PRO findings. Most AEs were reversible and manageable with comedications and/or dose modifications, consistent with the known abemaciclib toxicity profile.

Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy for high-risk early breast cancer: updated efficacy and Ki-67 analysis from the monarchE study.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy (ET) previously demonstrated clinically meaningful improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) in hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer at the second interim analysis, however follow-up was limited. Here, we present results of the prespecified primary outcome analysis and an additional follow-up analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This global, phase III, open-label trial randomized (1 : 1) 5637 patients to adjuvant ET for ≥5 years ± abemaciclib for 2 years. Cohort 1 enrolled patients with ≥4 positive axillary lymph nodes (ALNs), or 1-3 positive ALNs and either grade 3 disease or tumor ≥5 cm. Cohort 2 enrolled patients with 1-3 positive ALNs and centrally determined high Ki-67 index (≥20%). The primary endpoint was IDFS in the intent-to-treat population (cohorts 1 and 2). Secondary endpoints were IDFS in patients with high Ki-67, DRFS, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: At the primary outcome analysis, with 19 months median follow-up time, abemaciclib + ET resulted in a 29% reduction in the risk of developing an IDFS event [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58-0.87; nominal P = 0.0009]. At the additional follow-up analysis, with 27 months median follow-up and 90% of patients off treatment, IDFS (HR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.59-0.82; nominal P < 0.0001) and DRFS (HR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.57-0.83; nominal P < 0.0001) benefit was maintained. The absolute improvements in 3-year IDFS and DRFS rates were 5.4% and 4.2%, respectively. Whereas Ki-67 index was prognostic, abemaciclib benefit was consistent regardless of Ki-67 index. Safety data were consistent with the known abemaciclib risk profile. CONCLUSION: Abemaciclib + ET significantly improved IDFS in patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer, with an acceptable safety profile. Ki-67 index was prognostic, but abemaciclib benefit was observed regardless of Ki-67 index. Overall, the robust treatment benefit of abemaciclib extended beyond the 2-year treatment period.

Extreme chromosomal instability forecasts improved outcome in ER-negative breast cancer: a prospective validation cohort study from the TACT trial.

BACKGROUND: Chromosomal instability (CIN) has been shown to be associated with drug resistance and poor clinical outcome in several cancer types. However, in oestrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer we have previously demonstrated that extreme CIN is associated with improved clinical outcome, consistent with a negative impact of CIN on tumour fitness and growth. The aim of this current study was to validate this finding using previously defined CIN thresholds in a much larger prospective cohort from a randomised, controlled, clinical trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: As a surrogate measurement of CIN, dual centromeric fluorescence in situ hybridisation was performed for both chromosomes 2 and 15 on 1173 tumours from the breast cancer TACT trial (CRUK01/001). Each tumour was scored manually and the mean percentage of cells deviating from the modal centromere number was used to define four CIN groups (MCD1-4), where tumours in the MCD4 group were defined as having extreme CIN. RESULTS: In a multivariate analysis of disease-free survival, with a median follow-up of 91 months, increasing CIN was associated with improved outcome in patients with ER-negative cancer (P trend = 0.03). A similar pattern was seen in ER-negative/HER2-negative cancers (Ptrend = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: This prospective validation cohort study further substantiated the association between extreme CIN and improved outcome in ER-negative breast cancers. Identifying such patients with extreme CIN may help distinguish good from poor prognostic groups, and therefore support treatment and risk stratification in this aggressive breast cancer subtype.

Febrile neutropaenia and chemotherapy discontinuation in women aged 70 years or older receiving adjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer.

AIMS: Low rates of adjuvant chemotherapy use are frequently reported in older women with early breast cancer. One of the reasons for this may be the risk of febrile neutropaenia or the perception that older patients will probably not complete the chemotherapy course prescribed. There are no data regarding these adverse outcomes in routine clinical practice. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified 128 patients aged 70 years or over who received neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer in seven UK cancer centres between 2006 and 2012. Data were collected regarding standard clinical and pathological variables and treatment toxicity and outcomes. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients (19%) had an episode of febrile neutropaenia. Overall, 27 patients (21%) did not complete their planned therapy. Chemotherapy discontinuation was more common in those patients with an episode of febrile neutropaenia (46% versus 16%, P = 0.004). Thirty patients (23%) were admitted with chemotherapy-related complications. There were no treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: The rates of febrile neutropaenia and treatment discontinuation are high in women aged 70 years or over receiving adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. Close attention should be paid to the choice or regimen and the use of supportive therapies in this patient population.

Positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the management of recurrent/metastatic breast cancer: a large retrospective study from the Royal Marsden Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Despite the increasing use of positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) in the management of patients with breast cancer, its role is yet to be defined. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed PET/CT scans carried out in breast cancer patients, the indication, concordance/discordance with other imaging and whether their use had altered patient management. RESULTS: PET/CT scans (233) were carried out in 122 patients between July 2004 and October 2008. Indications were as follows: staging (S) (91), response assessment (RA) (87), clarification (C) of findings on other imaging (32) and reassurance (ASS) (23). In the S group, positive scans were helpful in accurately defining the extent of disease and guided localised or systemic treatment. PET/CT was particularly useful for detecting lytic bone metastases. One-third of the scans was carried out for RA. PET/CT allowed early RA and in some cases appropriate discontinuation of ineffective treatment. PET/CT was used effectively for the clarification of indeterminate lesions on CT (18), magnetic resonance imaging (15) and bone scan (13). In the ASS group, all scans were negative. CONCLUSIONS: PET/CT is useful in accurately staging metastatic disease, assessing response to systemic treatment and clarifying equivocation on other imaging. Incorporation of PET/CT in these areas contributes to breast cancer management optimisation.

Treatment of HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer with lapatinib and capecitabine in the lapatinib expanded access programme, including efficacy in brain metastases--the UK experience.

BACKGROUND: The global lapatinib expanded access programme provided access to lapatinib combined with capecitabine for women with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who previously received anthracycline, taxane and trastuzumab. METHODS: Progression-free survival (PFS) and safety data for 356 patients recruited from the United Kingdom are reported. Efficacy was assessed in 162 patients from the five lead centres, including objective tumour response rate (ORR), time to disease progression (TTP) and efficacy in those with central nervous system (CNS) metastases. Correlation of PFS and ORR with previous capecitabine treatment was also documented. RESULTS: Overall, PFS for the 356 UK patients was 21 weeks (95% CI: 17.6-24.7). In the 162 assessable patients, ORR was 21% (95% CI: 15-27%) and median TTP was 22 weeks (95% CI: 17-27). Efficacy was greater in capecitabine-naive patients (ORR 23 vs 16.3%, P=0.008). For 34 patients with CNS metastases, ORR was 21% (95% CI: 9-39%), with evidence of improvement in neurological symptoms, and median TTP was 22 weeks (95% CI: 15-28). CONCLUSIONS: Lapatinib combined with capecitabine is an active treatment option for women with refractory HER2-positive MBC, including those with progressive CNS disease.

Vinorelbine and infusional 5-fluorouracil in anthracycline and taxane pre-treated metastatic breast cancer.

AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of a combination of intravenous vinorelbine and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) given by continuous infusion in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracyclines and taxanes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-one patients with metastatic breast cancer were treated with intravenous vinorelbine 30 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 of each 21-day cycle together with 5-FU 200 mg/m2/day by continuous infusion. All had previously been treated with an anthracycline and 41% had also been previously treated with a taxane. All had normal haematological, renal and hepatic function and all but three had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of 2 or better. RESULTS: The overall response rate by World Health Organization criteria was 46% (28 patients); excluding nine non-evaluable patients gave a response rate of 54%. In patients who had previously been treated with both an anthracycline and a taxane, a response rate of 50% was observed (12 of 24 patients). Severe toxicity was uncommon, as was toxicity attributable to infusional 5-FU. Myelosuppression was rarely severe, but was common and led to delay or dose reduction in 38% of treatments. Eleven patients (18%) were admitted with fever and/or neutropenia and one patient died. The median received dose intensity was vinorelbine 16 mg/m2/week and 5-FU 143 mg/m2/day. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of vinorelbine and infusional 5-FU is active in metastatic breast cancer, including in patients previously treated with an anthracycline and a taxane. Toxicity is generally manageable, but myelosuppression is significant at this dose regimen. Recommended doses for routine clinical use are 5-FU 200 mg/m2/day and intravenous vinorelbine 30 mg/m2 days 1 and 15 on a 28-day cycle.

Clinical efficacy of capecitabine as first-line chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer--how low can you go?

Sixty-three patients received capecitabine at 1000 mg/m2 twice daily every 2 out of 3 weeks as first-line treatment for advanced disease at our institution. Forty-five patients (71%) had previously received adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The median number of capecitabine cycles administered was 5(1-40). Forty-eight patients had measurable disease with response rate (RR) of 29%. The median time to progression (TTP) was 18(2-122) weeks. Seven patients (11%) had TTP of >1 yr, four of whom received more than 10(24-40) cycles of capecitabine. Thirty-seven percent of patients still needed dose reductions. Our retrospective audit is consistent with a previously published study which used a higher starting dose of capecitabine as first-line chemotherapy. For a subgroup of patients, capecitabine can result in a long TTP with minimal toxicity. The benefit of continuing capecitabine beyond a fixed number of cycles should be investigated further. Schedules using even lower doses of capecitabine for longer periods may also be of interest.

Targeting downstream effectors of epidermal growth factor receptor/HER2 in breast cancer with either farnesyltransferase inhibitors or mTOR antagonists.

In breast cancer, there is an increasing recognition of the pivotal role played by the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and HER2 together with the various downstream signal transduction pathways, in particular the Ras/Raf/Mek/erk1/2 pathway that regulates cell proliferation together with the phosphatidylinositol-3-OH kinase (PI3K)/Akt/mTOR pathway that is implicated in cell survival. While monoclonal antibodies and small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors targeted against EGFR/HER2 are now being used for breast cancer therapy, there is considerable interest in also targeting the critical downstream pathways that cells may remain dependent upon. Activation of these downstream pathways in breast cancer may be associated with resistance to either conventional endocrine or cytotoxic therapies or, indeed, lack of response to EGFR/HER2-targeted approaches. Farnesyltransferase inhibitors (FTIs) were initially developed to target Ras activation, although their mechanism of action may be more nonspecific. Trials in breast cancer have been completed with FTIs alone or in combination with endocrine or cytotoxic therapy. Activation of the PI3K/Akt pathway has also been associated with resistance to either tamoxifen or estrogen deprivation, and preclinical studies have shown that the mTOR antagonists can restore endocrine sensitivity in breast cancer cells. Randomized phase II/III trials of aromatase inhibitors combined with mTOR antagonists are in progress and have been powered to detect whether combined therapy can significantly prolong time to disease progression compared to endocrine therapy alone. Finally, preclinical experiments are now investigating whether downstream agents should be combined with upstream EGFR/HER2 therapies to produce maximal blockade of vertical signal transduction pathways. Subsequent trials will be needed to see whether combinations of novel STIs are well tolerated and how they may further enhance clinical benefit in breast cancer.

The anti-oestrogen ICI 182,780, but not tamoxifen, inhibits the growth of MCF-7 breast cancer cells refractory to long-term oestrogen deprivation through down-regulation of oestrogen receptor and IGF signalling.

Long-term culture of MCF-7 wild-type (wt) cells in steroid-depleted medium (LTED) results in hypersensitivity to oestradiol (E2) coinciding with elevated levels of ERalpha and enhanced growth factor signalling. In this study, we aimed to compare the effects of the pure anti-oestrogen ICI 182,780 (ICI) with the competitive anti-oestrogen tamoxifen (TAM) on oestrogen and IGF signalling in these cells. Wt MCF-7 and LTED cells were treated with a log 7 concentration range of E2, TAM or ICI. Effects on cell growth, ERalpha transactivation, expression of ERalpha, ERbeta and components of the IGF pathway were measured with and without insulin. In the presence of insulin, growth of LTED cells was refractory to TAM but inhibited by ICI and E2. In the absence of insulin, LTED cells showed persistent hypersensitivity to E2, and remained inhibited by ICI but were largely unaffected by TAM. ICI but not TAM inhibited ER-mediated gene transcription and treatment with ICI resulted in a dose-dependent reduction in ERalpha levels whilst having no effect on ERbeta expression. IGF-I receptor and insulin receptor substrate 2 levels were increased in LTED versus the Wt MCF-7 cells, and ICI but not TAM reduced their expression in a dose-dependent fashion. Thus IGF signalling as well as ERalpha expression and function are enhanced during LTED. While the resultant cells are resistant to TAM, ICI down-regulates ERalpha, reducing IGF signalling and cell growth. These results support the use of ICI in women with ER-positive breast cancer who have relapsed on an aromatase inhibitor.

Clinical trials of intracellular signal transductions inhibitors for breast cancer--a strategy to overcome endocrine resistance.

Acquired resistance to endocrine therapy in breast cancer is associated with an increase in peptide growth factor signaling that results in cross-talk activation of the estrogen receptor (ER). Small molecule signal transduction inhibitors (STIs) can target components of these intracellular pathways, and may prove effective in anticancer therapy. However, early phase II clinical trials with various STIs as monotherapy in advanced breast cancer have shown only a modest level of efficacy for these intracellular inhibitors. Preclinical data suggest that combinations of tamoxifen with STIs may provide significantly greater growth inhibition than either therapy alone, and, furthermore, may delay the emergence of endocrine resistance. There are now several trials assessing the efficacy of combinations of small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), such as gefitinib and lapatinib, with either tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitors both in the second-line, endocrine-resistant and first-line, hormone-sensitive setting. Similar trials continue with both farnesyltransferase inhibitors (FTIs) and mTOR antagonists, where there are strong preclinical data to suggest additive or synergistic effects for either of these agents in combination with endocrine therapies. Biomarker studies in the presurgical setting are also being utilized as an alternative approach to investigate whether combined endocrine/STI therapy is an effective clinical strategy. This article reviews some of the preclinical evidence supporting this strategy, together with the current status of clinical trials in this area.

Mitomycin C, vinblastine and cisplatin (MVP): an active and well-tolerated salvage regimen for advanced breast cancer.

This phase II study assessed the clinical efficacy and tolerability of a combination of mitomycin C, vinblastine and cisplatin in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) previously treated with chemotherapy. A total of 87 patients with MBC, most of whom had been exposed to anthracyclines (92%) and/or taxanes (29%) in the adjuvant and/or metastatic setting, were treated with mitomycin C (8 mg m(-2) day 1 cycles 1, 2, 4 and 6), vinblastine (6 mg m(-2) day 1) and cisplatin (50 mg m(-2) day 1) repeated each 21 days for a maximum of six cycles. The overall response rate (ORR) was 32% (95% CI: 22-42%) with 31% partial response (PR) and one complete response (CR). Stable disease (SD) rate was 21% (95% CI: 12-29%). There was no statistically significant difference in the ORR when MVP was given as the first-line treatment for MBC vs second or subsequent line (38 vs 30%, P=0.6), or between patients with an early (<6 months) vs late (>6 months) relapse post-anthracyclines (30 vs 52%, P=0.3). Toxicity profile was mild. This platinum-based chemotherapy is an effective, well-tolerated and low-cost regimen for patients with MBC, including those pretreated with anthracyclines.

A cancer research (UK) randomized phase II study of idoxifene in patients with locally advanced/metastatic breast cancer resistant to tamoxifen.

Idoxifene is a novel selective oestrogen receptor modulator (SERM) which had greater binding affinity for the oestrogen receptor (ER) and reduced agonist activity compared with tamoxifen in preclinical studies. In a randomized phase II trial in 56 postmenopausal patients with progressive locally advanced/metastatic breast cancer we assessed whether idoxifene showed evidence of activity compared with an increased 40 mg/day dose of tamoxifen in patients who had previously demonstrated resistance to the standard 20 mg/day dose of tamoxifen. Of 47 patients eligible for response (25 idoxifene, 22 tamoxifen), two partial responses and two disease stabilizations (SD) for >6 months were seen with idoxifene (overall clinical benefit rate 16%, 95% CI 4.5-36.1%). The median duration of clinical benefit was 9.8 months. In contrast, no objective responses were seen with the increased 40 mg/day dose of tamoxifen, although two patients had SD for 7 and 14 months (clinical benefit rate 9%, 95% CI 1.1-29.2%). Idoxifene was well tolerated and the reported possible drug-related toxicities were similar in frequency to those with tamoxifen (hot flushes 13% vs 15%, mild nausea 20% vs 15%). Endocrine and lipid analysis in both groups showed a similar significant fall in serum follicle-stimulating hormone and luteinizing hormone after 4 weeks, together with a significant rise in sex hormone binding globulin levels and 11% reduction in serum cholesterol levels. In conclusion, while idoxifene was associated with only modest evidence of clinical activity in patients with tamoxifen-resistant breast cancer, its toxicity profile and effects on endocrine/lipid parameters were similar to those of tamoxifen.

Catheter fracture: a rare complication of totally implantable venous devices.

The use of totally implantable venous devices (TIVDs) has revolutionised the care and quality of life of oncology patients. Although considered to be generally safe, catheter fracture is a rare but serious complication. The 'pinch-off' syndrome is caused by the compression of the catheter between the clavicle and first rib, and may lead to fracture and possible dislocation of the catheter. We report here the case history of two patients with metastatic breast cancer who developed the 'pinch-off' syndrome, first recognised by difficulty in line aspiration and pain during injection of the catheter. In one case, there was complete fracture with migration of the catheter tip to the right pulmonary artery. In both cases, the lines were removed without serious injury to the patient. All patients with TIVDs should be investigated for possible catheter fracture if they develop pain over the superior anterior chest wall and/or there is difficulty or pain during aspiration or injection.

A trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis of letrozole followed by tamoxifen versus tamoxifen followed by letrozole for postmenopausal advanced breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Third-generation aromatase inhibitors are being considered as an alternative to tamoxifen as first-line therapy for advanced breast cancer. These newer therapies are more expensive, and will gain greater acceptance if they can demonstrate cost-effectiveness. METHODS: Life table analyses are used to compare the costs and benefits [life years gained and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained] of treating postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer with first-line letrozole (with the option of second-line tamoxifen) compared with first-line tamoxifen (with the option of second-line letrozole). Patient-level data from a large clinical trial describes the effectiveness of the therapy options, clinicians estimate resource usage and utility values are obtained from the literature. RESULTS: The mean cost of providing first- and second-line hormonal therapy is pound 4765 if letrozole is the first-line therapy and pound 3418 if tamoxifen is provided first (a difference of pound 1347). However, patients receiving letrozole as first-line therapy gain an additional 0.228 life years, or 0.158 QALYs. The cost-effectiveness analysis found that first-line hormonal therapy with letrozole gains additional life years at a cost of pound 5917, whilst the cost per additional QALY gained is pound 8514. CONCLUSION: The strategy of letrozole as first-line hormonal therapy not only provides an opportunity for extending and improving patient's quality of life, but also is highly cost-effective compared with other generally accepted medical treatments.

Systematic review of role of bisphosphonates on skeletal morbidity in metastatic cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To review the evidence for the use of bisphosphonates to reduce skeletal morbidity in cancer patients with bone metastases. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases, scanning reference lists, and consultation with experts and pharmaceutical companies. Foreign language papers were included. STUDY SELECTION: Included trials were randomised controlled trials of patients with malignant disease and bone metastases who were treated with oral or intravenous bisphosphonate compared with another bisphosphonate, placebo, or standard care. All trials measured at least one outcome of skeletal morbidity. RESULTS: 95 articles were identified; 30 studies fulfilled inclusion criteria. In studies that lasted > or = 6 months, compared with placebo bisphosphonates significantly reduced the odds ratio for fractures (vertebral 0.69, 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 0.84, P < 0.0001; non-vertebral 0.65, 0.54 to 0.79, P < 0.0001; combined 0.65, 0.55 to 0.78, P < 0.0001), radiotherapy (0.67, 0.57 to 0.79, P < 0.0001), and hypercalcaemia (0.54, 0.36 to 0.81, P = 0.003) but not for orthopaedic surgery (0.70, 0.46 to 1.05, P = 0.086) or spinal cord compression (0.71, 0.47 to 1.08, P = 0.113). The reduction in orthopaedic surgery was significant in studies that lasted over a year (0.59, 0.39 to 0.88, P = 0.009). Use of bisphosphonates significantly increased time to first skeletal related event but did not increase survival. Subanalyses showed that most evidence supports use of intravenous aminobisphosphonates. CONCLUSIONS: In people with metastatic bone disease bisphosphonates significantly decrease skeletal morbidity, except for spinal cord compression and increased time to first skeletal related event. Treatment should start when bone metastases are diagnosed and continue until it is no longer clinically relevant.