Skip to main content
  • AACR Publications
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

  • Register
  • Log in
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
    • Reviewing
    • CME
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • CCR Focus Archive
    • Meeting Abstracts
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • OnlineFirst
    • Editors' Picks
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • AACR Publications
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

User menu

  • Register
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Clinical Cancer Research
Clinical Cancer Research

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
    • Reviewing
    • CME
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • CCR Focus Archive
    • Meeting Abstracts
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • OnlineFirst
    • Editors' Picks
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
Cancer Therapy: Clinical

Cancer Therapy Associated Bone Loss: Implications for Hip Fractures in Mid-Life Women with Breast Cancer

Beatrice J. Edwards, Dennis W. Raisch, Veena Shankaran, June M. McKoy, William Gradishar, Andrew D. Bunta, Athena T. Samaras, Simone N. Boyle, Charles L. Bennett, Dennis P. West and Theresa A. Guise
Beatrice J. Edwards
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Dennis W. Raisch
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Veena Shankaran
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
June M. McKoy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
William Gradishar
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Andrew D. Bunta
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Athena T. Samaras
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Simone N. Boyle
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Charles L. Bennett
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Dennis P. West
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Theresa A. Guise
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-1595 Published February 2011
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Purpose: Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) have been recently associated with hip fractures. We present a case series of breast cancer survivors and a systematic review of bone health care in breast cancer.

Experimental Design: We completed clinical assessments and bone density testing (BMD) of hip fractures from January 2005 to December 2008. Prefracture and 12-month functional status was obtained. Systematic review included case reports and review of MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, and Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FDA AERS) from January 1998 to December 2008 (search terms: breast cancer, bone loss, osteopenia, osteoporosis, malignancy, cancer treatment, menopause, adriamycin, cytoxan, tamoxifen, and AIs).

Results: Median age was 53.5 years; five women had osteopenia, one osteoporosis. Five cases were ER (+), and received surgery, XRT chemotherapy, and anastrozole. Functional decline was noted at 12 months, with difficulty in performing heavy housekeeping, climbing stairs, and shopping. The FDA AERS database included 228 cases of fractures associated with breast cancer therapy; 77/228 (29.4%) were hip or femur fractures. Among mid-life women under the age of 64 years there were 78 fractures; 15/228 (19%) were hip and femur fractures. AIs were the most common drug class associated with fractures (n = 149, 65%).

Conclusions: Cancer treatment induced bone loss results in hip fractures among mid-life women with breast cancer. Hip fractures occur at younger ages and higher BMD than expected for patients in this age group without breast cancer. Hip fractures result in considerable functional decline. Greater awareness of this adverse drug effect is needed. Clin Cancer Res; 17(3); 560–8. ©2011 AACR.

Translational Relevance

We present a case series of hip fractures in middle-aged women with breast cancer, and a review of the literature of cancer treatment induced bone loss (CTIBL). Hip and other fractures associated with low bone mass can affect cancer survivors having a deleterious influence on clinical outcomes and quality of life. In the care of women with cancer, it is essential to establish an effective bone preserving medical regimen to minimize side effects of cancer therapy. Thus, although the majority of women with breast cancer can expect to be fully cured from the disease, the prevention of CTIBL induced fractures is important to consider in cancer survival.

Introduction

Hip fractures, the most serious complication of osteoporosis, usually occur in the 8th decade of life (1), and confer a 2.8-fold increased risk of dying during the following 3 months (2). Fractures contribute to deterioration in functional status (3–5). Thus, a quarter of individuals become permanently disabled in the following year (6). For the remaining hip fracture victims, some degree of functional disability can be evident (7–10). Aromatase inhibitors (AIs), highly effective medicines in cancer care, may be contributing to the occurrence of hip fractures. These drugs block estrogen production in peripheral tissues and the 3 third generation AIs (anastrozole, letrozole, and exemestane) reduce circulating estrogen levels, leading to accelerated bone loss and an increased risk of fracture. The bone effects of AIs, like those of other serious adverse drug reactions (sADRs), are important and frequently unrecognized causes of morbidity and mortality among cancer patients. Furthermore, a median of 7 years elapses before sADRs are described by pharmaceutical suppliers or the FDA (11). Detection of sADR signals for oncology therapies is especially problematic because of the complexity in obtaining high quality reports of the clinical events associated with sADRs and difficulty in distinguishing between the underlying cancer, comorbid illness, and the toxic effect of a cancer therapy. Herein, we evaluate the occurrence of hip fractures in menopausal women with early stage breast cancer.

In clinical trials, hip fractures were rarely reported. In the Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination (ATAC) trial, there were more vertebral fractures in the anastrozole group, but hip fracture occurrence was low (1%; refs. 12, 13). In the Breast International Group (BIG 1–98; ref. 14) and the Intergroup Exemestane Study (IES; refs. 15–17) hip fractures were not reported. In the 100-month follow-up to the ATAC trial, fracture risk declined following discontinuation of anastrazole (18).

This case series describes 6 cases of hip fractures in middle-aged women with early-stage breast cancer. We also present the functional impact of hip fractures at 12 months, as well as a systematic review of case reports, case series, and observational databases with regard to the adverse bone health consequences of cancer therapy.

Materials and Methods

Clinical assessment

Women with breast cancer who sustained hip fracture between the ages of 25 to 60 years were seen at the Bone Health and Osteoporosis Center at Northwestern University from January 2005 through December 2007. The protocol was approved by the Northwestern University Institutional Review Board, and patients signed informed consent. Clinical evaluation consisted of a physical exam, bone densitometry, prefracture functional assessment, and evaluation for secondary causes of bone loss (19). Evaluation at 12 months comprised physical and functional assessment.

Functional assessment

Function was measured using the 1984 validated National Health Interview Survey (NHIS): Supplement on Aging to assess functional difficulty (20–26). These 5 functional measures, or activities of daily living (ADLs), included meal preparation, heavy housekeeping, ability to climb 10 stairs, shopping, and getting out of a car. Each ADL was self reported on a 0 to 3 scale: 0 = no difficulty in performing the activity, 1 = some difficulty, 2 = much difficulty, and 3 = unable to perform the activity. Prefracture and 12-month functional status were obtained.

Assessment for secondary causes of bone loss

The majority of women with hip fractures have a secondary cause of bone loss, such as vitamin D insufficiency, calcium malabsorption, hypercalciuria, chronic kidney disease, and monoclonal gammopathy of unknown significance (19). Vitamin D deficiency has been reported in high prevalence in nationally representative studies (19, 27, 28). Laboratory testing therefore included a complete blood cell count, a blood chemistry profile, serum intact PTH, 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH) D] levels, serum protein electrophoresis, thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH), and results from an adequate 24-hour urine collection for calcium and creatinine. Detailed methodology has been previously published (19, 28).

Bone densitometry

Bone densitometry of the nonfractured hip and lumbar spine was performed at the Bone Health Osteoporosis Center using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) technology (Hologic Inc.). Patients were considered to have osteoporosis if their adjusted T scores were ≤–2.5 at any measurement site. Normative databases from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey were used to determine T scores. Data from lumbar spine scans were used only if at least 2 vertebrae were visualized without interfering artifacts.

Review of National Safety databases, clinical trials, and observational databases

The FDA AERS is a pharmacovigilance database where health professionals and patients can voluntarily report sADRs. We conducted a review of the FDA's AERS database for the years 1998 through the fourth quarter 2008. The search specified all Medical Dictionary for Drug Regulatory Affairs (MedDRA) preferred terms, including the word “fracture,” females, and an indication of breast cancer. We specifically excluded all cases with MedDRA preferred terms of osteonecrosis, which is also associated with fractures, but was not relevant to this report. Drug names were summarized from the search and included breast cancer and chemotherapeutic agents such as doxorubicin (Rubex; doxo; adriamycin; ubex; adriacin; adriblastin; caelyx, doxil, Myocet, Robanul), Cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan, Procytox; Ciclofosfamida; Cycloblastine; Cyclophosphan; Cyclostin;Endoxan; Genoxal; Genuxal;Neosar; Sendoxan; Syklofosfamid), and AIs such as exemestane (Aromasin), letrozole (Femara), and anastrozole (Arimidex; Pantestone). For the literature review, MEDLINE and PubMed searches for peer-reviewed articles published from 1998 to December 2008 were performed. Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms included: osteoporosis, bone loss, osteopenia, menopause, fractures, hip fractures, adriamycin, ciclofosfamide, doxorubicin, aromatase inhibitors exemestane (Aromasin), letrozole (Femara), and anastrozole (Arimidex; Pantestone), and tamoxifen.

Results

Six Caucasian women with hip fractures were identified in the Bone Health and Osteoporosis Center at Northwestern University, with a median age of 53.5 years. Five had osteopenia (T-score <–1.0 and >–2.5), and 1 osteoporosis (T-score <–2.5). Vitamin D deficiency and low calcium absorption were identified in 2 cases (Table 1), while an additional case presented with vitamin D deficiency with high urinary calcium loss. Median age at time of diagnosis and chemotherapy induced menopause was 48 years of age. Patients had received treatment including lumpectomy, XRT and chemotherapy with cytoxan and adriamycin. Four cases were estrogen receptor positive (ER [+]) and had received AIs. Fractures occurred 1 to 4 years after cancer diagnosis.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Bone density and metabolic assessment for secondary causes of bone loss in perimenopausal breast cancer women with hip fractures

Functional decline

Prefracture status was independent in all activities (mean score 0) for all participants. Twelve months posthip fracture women reported clinically important functional decline with greatest difficulty in heavy housekeeping, climbing stairs and shopping (score 7 ± 1, maximum difficulty 15; refs. 20, 29). Two women reported difficulty walking more than 200 yards (P < 0.05).

FDA Adverse events reporting system (FDA AERS)

Between January 1998 and December 2008, we identified 226 cases of fractures associated with the use of chemotherapy and/or AIs. The age distribution was uniform with an equal distribution from the age of 30 years and coincided with the age of breast cancer therapy (Fig. 1). Among women ≤64 years of age, there were 78 fractures, with 15 (19%) cases of hip and femur fractures. AIs were the most common drug class associated with fractures (n = 149, 65%) (Fig. 2).

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

Age distribution of fracture occurrence associated with breast cancer therapy among FDA MedWatch reports in the AERS database.

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Location of fractures in breast cancer survivors aged 40 to 64 years reported to FDA as MedWatch reports.

Observational studies

Claims-based study

A claims-based case control study revealed that breast cancer survivors who received anastrozole sustained more fractures after adjusting for confounding factors [odds ratio (OR): 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.03–1.43; P = 0.02; ref. 30]. Mincey's analysis of 12,000 patients demonstrated that the risk of bone loss remained higher in the AI group than in the non-AI group, with a 27% increase (95% CI: 4–55%; P = 0.02) and 21% (95% CI: 3–43%; P = 0.02) increase in the risk of bone loss and fractures.

Epidemiologic studies

Breast cancer survivors in the Women's Health Initiative study were at increased risk for fractures [relative risk (RR): 1.31, 95% CI: 1.21–1.41] as compared to age-matched women without breast cancer (31). Likewise, hip fracture risk and fall risk increased in postmenopausal women after the diagnosis of breast cancer [hazard ratio (HR): 1.55, 95% CI: 1.13–2.11 and HR: 1.15, 95% CI: 1.06–1.25, respectively; ref. 32]. Accordingly, there appears to be a disease and non-AI cancer treatment-related increased risk for fractures. Kanis demonstrated that the incidence of vertebral fractures in women diagnosed with breast cancer was increased (5.4% vs. 1.5%). This effect was more marked in women with a prevalent fracture at study entry (OR: 3.4). When fracture risk was adjusted for age, duration of follow-up and prevalent fracture, the risk was 4.7 (95% CI: 2.3–9.9; P < 0.0001) in women newly diagnosed with breast cancer and 22.7 (95% CI: 9.1–57.1; P < 0.0001) in the women with recurrent breast cancer (33). Higher fracture estimates are derived from European studies. In a large-scale, population-based case-control study, AIs were associated with a 2-fold increased risk for fractures (95% CI: 1.05–3.93), and a 4-fold increased risk for hip fractures specifically (95% CI: 1.03–2.09; ref. 34).

Clinical trials

Bisphosphonates have demonstrated consistent effects on BMD. Risedronate increases BMD in a cohort of women with breast cancer with and without prior TMX use by 2.5% ± 1.2%, (95% CI, 0.2–4.9) at the lumbar spine (P = 0.041) and 2.6% ± 1.1%, (95% CI, 0.3–4.8) at the femoral neck (P = 0.029; refs. 35–37). Alendronate, ibandronate, and clodronate had similar positive effects in women with breast cancer (38–40). More recently, the Zometa-Femara Adjuvant Synergy Z-FAST Trial reported that hormone receptor-positive breast cancer patients receiving letrozole who received up-front versus delayed-start zoledronic acid experienced fewer fractures (5.7% vs. 6.3%), diminished disease recurrence (3% vs. 5.3%), and an increased mean BMD (6.7% vs. 5.2%; ref. 41). Similarly, the ongoing Zometa-Femara Adjuvant Synergy (ZO-FAST) trial noted that postmenopausal patients with hormone-receptor positive breast cancer receiving letrozole and immediate versus delayed zoledronic acid experienced increased mean BMD preservation (+4.39% vs. −4.9%) and a 41% relative risk reduction of disease recurrence or death (42). In summary, results of available clinical studies suggest that all 3 third-generation AIs affect bone turnover, BMD and fracture risk, and that decreased BMD, disease recurrence, and fracture risks are increased when zoledronic acid treatment is delayed.

Clinical guidelines

The updated 2010 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) guidelines recommend that postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer consider incorporating AI therapy during adjuvant treatment. Additionally, these guidelines note that women who are either pre- or perimenopausal at the time of diagnosis should be treated with 5 years of tamoxifen. Furthermore, AI therapy should not extend beyond 5 years, and switching from an AI to tamoxifen is recommended around 2 to 3 years into treatment. Finally, ASCO guidelines advise clinicians to consider sADRs, patient preferences, and preexisting conditions when determining appropriate adjuvant endocrine therapies.

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend that clinicians base their decisions on the results of ongoing trials. The International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) guidelines recommend BMD assessment in patients at risk for bone loss because of age (women aged ≥65 years and men aged ≥70 years), risk factors that include prior fragility fracture, medication use, or disease or medical condition that is associated with low bone mass or bone loss (43). Moreover, BMD assessments are recommended in patients for whom treatment decisions may be affected by bone health status and to monitor treatment effects in patients who are being treated for bone loss (43). Patients receiving adjuvant therapy for breast cancer typically fall into several of these categories (Table 2). AIs are associated with lower risk of thromboembolic events and endometrial cancer, but higher risk of bone loss and fractures (44). Interventions to prevent bone loss and fractures include calcium, vitamin D, and bisphosphonates. National Osteoporosis Foundation guidelines recommend treating all women with osteoporosis and those women with osteopenia who, upon FRAX® calculation (45), have a 10 year risk of fractures of 20% or 3% risk for hip fracture (46). Clinical trials with risedronate and zoledronic acid have demonstrated preservation of bone mass, although trials have not demonstrated a reduction in fracture risk due to their limited sample size (47–49).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Clinical guidelines for osteoporosis therapy

Clinical guidelines published by Hadji and colleagues advise that all patients initiating AI therapy receive calcium and vitamin D supplements, that clinicians monitor patients who have T-scores ≥ −2.0 and no additional risk factors every 1 to 2 years to assess changes in BMD, and that patients with T-scores < −2.0 who are on AI receive bisphosphonate therapy (50). Additionally, it is recommend that bisphosphonate therapy be administered to patients receiving AIs with 2 of the following risk factors: T score < −1.5, body mass index of <20 kg/m2, family history of hip fracture, personal history of fragility fracture after age 50, oral corticosteroid use for longer than 6 months, smoking, or are over 65 years of age. BMD should be monitored every 2 years, and bisphosphonate therapy should be continued for at least 2 years (50).

Discussion

This case series serves to illustrate several points: hip fractures in breast cancer survivors present at an earlier age than in postmenopausal osteoporosis, result in clinically important functional decline, and occur at higher BMD than in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis.

First hip fractures in breast cancer survivors may present at an earlier age than in postmenopausal osteoporosis where hip fractures occur in the 8-decade of life (mean age 74 years). Notably, breast cancer survivors can present with hip fractures as early as the sixth decade of life.

Second, hip fractures are associated with functional decline among middle-aged breast cancer patients. Greater awareness of the functional and quality of life impact of CTIBL fracture complications in cancer survivors is necessary. Hip fractures in older women account for considerable functional impairment, morbidity, hospitalizations, and increased mortality (7–10). Osteoporotic fractures such as wrist, vertebral and hip fractures are associated with functional decline (51–54). The functional impact of osteoporotic fractures include a 1.7- to 3.0-fold increase in difficulty bending, lifting, reaching, walking, climbing stairs, and descending stairs and are significantly associated with 1.9 to 6.7 times more difficulty in dressing, cooking, shopping, and performing heavy housework. Hip fractures are more strongly associated with difficulty walking and descending stairs, whereas spine fractures demonstrated a stronger association with difficulty bending, and lifting (54). To date, there is a paucity of pharmacovigilance studies that assess the safety of chemotherapy and adjuvant therapy in early stage breast cancer patients.

Third, it would appear that most of the hip fractures reported occurred in women with osteopenia. Hence, this group of women is not currently recommended to receive osteoporosis therapy per ASCO clinical guidelines. No specific osteoporosis therapy is advocated (55), as bone health guidelines state “Breast cancer patients found to have osteopenia based on BMD results (T- score between ≤1 and ≤ -2.5) should have their therapy individualized, but current evidence cannot support routine intervention with bisphosphonates for this group” (55). This raises concern that the intervention threshold may exclude women with osteopenia at high-risk for fractures. Within the FDA AERS database, 102 (44.7%) reports documented concomitant use of bisphosphonates. The most common bisphosphonate was zoledronic acid (n = 44, 19.3%).

Fourth, safety warnings in the Arimidex package insert report the most common side effects (>10%) seen in ATAC were osteoporosis and fractures (56). The Letrozole (Femara) and Exemestane package inserts, however, only describe bone loss (57, 58). The European Medicine Agency notes that Anastrozole was approved in 1995 in the United Kingdom. The safety profile was considered to be well established. Moreover, no product-specific pharmacovigilance issues or pre- or postauthorizations that were not adequately covered by the product label were identified (59). In 2006, the European Drug Watch reported that anastrozole was the only drug with mature safety and tolerability data, and that the drug presented a favorable risk-benefit profile compared to tamoxifen for a full 5-year treatment period (60). Although aromastase inhibitors are associated with increased risk of osteoporotic fracture, bone problems with AIs are considered to be both predictable and manageable (61). In Germany, the Portal fur Medicine and Gesundheit noted in 2006 that women with a normal BMD who received a 5-year course of treatment with anastrozole would not be at risk of developing osteoporosis. These researchers found that the rate of bone fracture among women taking anastrozole was comparable to the normal patient population of that age group contrasting with the work of other researchers (34, 62). In 2004, Canada Health approved the use of anastrozole with certain conditions, namely bone loss, fractures and hyperlipidemia (63).

Fifth, drug-induced osteoporosis as seen with chronic glucocorticoid treatment has been associated with rapid and significant bone loss characterized by osteocyte and osteoblast apoptosis and a major loss of trabecular connectivity (64–66); thus, an increased vertebral fracture risk occurs at higher BMD thresholds in glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (67). The characteristics of architectural changes induced by chemotherapy and AIs are yet to be determined. Studies corroborate fracture occurrence with T-score > −2.5 in the setting of abnormal bone architecture (68). In the Rotterdam study, nonvertebral fractures occurred in 56% and 79% of women and men, with a T-score above ≥ -2.5 (69). In the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures, 54% of patients with nonvertebral fracture had a baseline central T-score ≥ −2.0 (68). Trabecular bone is composed of interconnected vertical and horizontal struts, which impart its compressive strength. In osteoporotic bone, trabeculae are thinner, less abundant, and spaced at greater distances, which greatly reduces structural integrity (70). Deterioration in bone microarchitecture is associated with increased vertebral fracture risk (71). Analysis of bone biopsies in the Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation (MORE) trial showed greater disruption of the trabecular lattice per area and trabecular bone pattern factor in women with vertebral fractures than in those without (72). In an analysis of individuals with and without vertebral fractures (71), there was significantly greater deterioration in bone microarchitecture in the group with vertebral fracture (71).

Of the more than 200,000 cases of breast cancer in the United States each year, 25% occur before menopause (73). In these women, chemotherapy induced menopause (74), ovarian ablation (75, 76), and hormone therapy all contribute to accelerated bone loss (77). The consequences of hip fractures are sizable, including hospitalizations (78), and need for long term care (79). Vertebral fractures may lead to hospitalization (80), with recurrent vertebral fractures often resulting in impairment in pulmonary function and predisposing affected individuals to respiratory infections (78, 81, 82). Fracture of the wrist may be less severe, but they can impair the ability to cook or clean. Therefore, although chemotherapy and adjuvant therapy prolong disease-free survival for patients with breast carcinoma (74), these therapies can induce long-term side effects, such as functionally disabling osteoporotic fractures.

Given the association between functional impairment with distinct skeletal sites, there is concern that the functional impact of fractures may be underestimated in current cancer clinical trials. The latest version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE, version 4.03, 2010) lists fractures according to specific skeletal site, including hip, spinal, and wrist fractures. As noted from this literature review, many of the consequences of fractures depend on the skeletal site, thus this recent modification of the adverse event of fractures with fracture site identification allows for more comprehensive adverse event reportingreporting (83).

The third-generation AIs are now an important adjuvant option for the treatment of estrogen positive early breast cancer, and are recommended as the preferred therapy by clinical guidelines: ASCO, the NCCN, and the St. Gallen International Expert Consensus (84–86). The cost effectiveness of Anastrozole and other AIs have been well documented (87–91). As the number of cancer survivors increase, survivorship issues become more pressing. In 2005, the Institute of Medicine report highlighted shortfalls in the clinical care provided to the more than 10 million cancer survivors in the United States, with breast cancer accounting for more than 22% of cases (92). Young and middle-aged women are more likely to receive toxic multimodal treatments that contribute to ovarian failure and early menopause, putting this group of women at high risk for CTIBL, osteoporosis, fractures, and years of productive life lost. Reducing this risk is critical as young survivors have the greatest longevity. Available clinical guidelines for management of CTIBL set intervention thresholds too low for effective prevention in many women with CTIBL bisphosphonates have demonstrated effective prevention of bone loss associated with ovarian ablation and AIs use (48, 93).

Limitations to this study include the low data quality regarding completeness and accuracy of FDA AERS reports, as these reports have limited clinical and basic science data. Additionally, data in these reports are de-identified, which further limits case identification and ability to eliminate redundancy.

Although the outcome for early stage breast cancer is excellent, the occurrence of CTIBL and its resulting complications such as hip fractures, raise concern about the long-term benefits to breast cancer survivors. It is imperative that future studies assess the efficacy of current intervention thresholds for bone health management in breast cancer patients.

Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest

No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Grant Support

This work, from the Research on Adverse Drug events And Reports (RADAR) project, was supported by grants 3 R01 CA125077–01 A1 S1 (B. J. Edwards), K01 CA13455401 (J. M. McKoy), and 1 R01 CA125077–01 A1 (D.W. Raisch) from the National Institutes of Health.

The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

  • Received June 15, 2010.
  • Revision received October 6, 2010.
  • Accepted October 25, 2010.
  • ©2011 American Association for Cancer Research.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Cummings SR,
    2. Nevitt MC,
    3. Browner WS,
    4. Stone K,
    5. Fox KM,
    6. Ensrud KE,
    7. et al.
    Risk factors for hip fracture in white women. N Engl J Med 1995;332:767–73.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Richmond J,
    2. Aharonoff GB,
    3. Zuckerman JD,
    4. Koval KJ
    . Mortality risk after hip fracture. J Orthop Trauma 2003;17:53–6.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Caliri A,
    2. De Filippis L,
    3. Bagnato GL,
    4. Bagnato GF
    . Osteoporotic fractures: mortality and quality of life. Panminerva Med 2007;49:21–7.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Brenneman SK,
    2. Barrett-Connor E,
    3. Sajjan S,
    4. Markson LE,
    5. Siris ES
    . Impact of recent fracture on health-related quality of life in postmenopausal women. J Bone Miner Res 2006;21:809–16.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Johnell O,
    2. Kanis JA
    . An estimate of the worldwide prevalence and disability associated with osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporos Int 2006;17:1726–33.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Magaziner J,
    2. Hawkes W,
    3. Hebel JR,
    4. Zimmerman SI,
    5. Fox KM,
    6. Dolan M,
    7. et al.
    Recovery from hip fracture in eight areas of function. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2000;55:M498–507.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Leibson CL,
    2. Tosteson AN,
    3. Gabriel SE,
    4. Ransom JE,
    5. Melton LJ
    . Mortality, disability, and nursing home use for persons with and without hip fracture: a population-based study. J Am Geriatr Soc 2002;50: 1644–50.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Fink HA,
    2. Ensrud KE,
    3. Nelson DB,
    4. Kerani RP,
    5. Schreiner PJ,
    6. Zhao Y,
    7. et al.
    Disability after clinical fracture in postmenopausal women with low bone density: the fracture intervention trial (FIT). Osteop Int 2003;14:69–76.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Keene GS,
    2. Parker MJ,
    3. GA P
    . Mortality and morbidity after hip fractures. BMJ 1993;307:1248–50.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    1. Cauley JA,
    2. Thompson DE,
    3. Ensrud KC,
    4. Scott JC,
    5. Black D
    . Risk of mortality following clinical fractures. Osteoporos Int 2000;11:556–61.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Lasser KE,
    2. Allen PD,
    3. Woolhandler SJ,
    4. Himmelstein DU,
    5. Wolfe SM,
    6. Bor DH
    . Timing of new black box warnings and withdrawals for prescription medications. JAMA 2002;287:2215–20.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    Anastrozole Alone or in Combination with Tamoxifen versus Tamoxifen Alone for Adjuvant Treatment of Postmenopausal Women with Early-Stage Breast Cancer Results of the ATAC (Arimidex, Tamoxifen Alone or in Combination) Trial Efficacy and Safety Update Analyses. Cancer 2003;98:1802–10.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. Howell A,
    2. Cuzick J,
    3. Baum M,
    4. Buzdar A,
    5. Dowsett M,
    6. Forbes JF,
    7. et al.
    ATAC Trialists' Group. Results of the ATAC (Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination) trial after completion of 5 years' adjuvant treatment for breast cancer. Lancet 2005;365:60–2.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Thurlimann B,
    2. Keshaviah A,
    3. Coates AS,
    4. Mouridsen H,
    5. Mauriac L,
    6. Forbes JF,
    7. et al.
    Breast International Group (BIG) 1–98 Collaborative Group. A comparison of letrozole and tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2005;353:2747–57.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Coombes RC,
    2. Hall E,
    3. Gibson LJ,
    4. et al.
    A randomized trial of exemestane after two to three years of tamoxifen therapy in postmenopausal women with primary breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2004:1081–92.
  16. 16.↵
    1. Lonning PE,
    2. Geisler J,
    3. Krag LE,
    4. Erikstein B,
    5. Bremnes Y,
    6. Hagen AI,
    7. et al.
    Effects of exemestane administered for 2 years versus placebo on bone mineral density, bone biomarkers, and plasma lipids in patients with surgically resected early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:5126–37.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. 17.↵
    1. Coombes RC,
    2. Kilburn LS,
    3. Snowdon CF,
    4. Paridaens R,
    5. Coleman RE,
    6. Jones SE,
    7. et al.
    Survival and safety of exemestane versus tamoxifen after 2–3 years' tamoxifen treatment (Intergroup Exemestane Study): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2007;369:559–70.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Forbes J,
    2. Cuzick J,
    3. Buzdar A,
    4. Howell A,
    5. Tobias JS,
    6. Baum M
    . Effect of anastrazole and tamoxifen as adjuvant treatment for the treatment of early-stage breast cancer:100-month analysis of the ATAC trial. Lancet Oncol 2008;9:45–53.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Edwards BJ,
    2. Langman CB,
    3. Bunta AD,
    4. Vicuna M,
    5. Favus M
    . Secondary factors for bone loss in osteoporotic hip fractures. Osteoporos Int 2008;19:991–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. Fitti JE,
    2. Kovar MG
    . The Supplement on aging to the 1984 National Health Interview Survey. Vital Health Stat 1987:1–115.
  21. 21.↵
    1. Nelson HD,
    2. Nevitt MC,
    3. Scott JC,
    4. Stone KL,
    5. Cummings SR
    . Smoking, alcohol, and neuromuscular and physical function of older women. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group. JAMA 1994;272: 1825–31.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    1. Vogt MT,
    2. Cauley JA,
    3. Kuller LH,
    4. Nevitt MC
    . Functional status and mobility among elderly women with lower extremity arterial disease: the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures. J Am Geriatr Soc 1994;42:923–9.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Lin MY,
    2. Gutierrez PR,
    3. Stone KL,
    4. Yaffe K,
    5. Ensrud K,
    6. Fink HA,
    7. et al.
    Vision impairment and combined vision and hearing impairment predict cognitive and functional decline in older women. J Am Geriatr Soc 2004;52:1996–2002.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. 24.↵
    1. Rodgers W,
    2. Miller B
    . A comparative analysis of ADL questions in surveys of older people. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 1997;5221–36.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Kosorok MR,
    2. Omenn GS,
    3. Diehr P,
    4. Koepsell TD,
    5. Patrick DL
    . Restricted activity days among older adults. Am J Public Health 1992;82:1263–7.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    1. Elston JM,
    2. Koch GG,
    3. Weissert WG
    . Regression-adjusted small area estimates of functional dependency in the noninstitutionalized American population age 65 and over. Am J Public Health 1991;81:335–43.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    1. Marcus R,
    2. Feldman D,
    3. Kelsey J
    1. Kleerekoper M
    . Evaluation of the patient with osteoporosis or at risk for osteoporosis. In:Marcus R, Feldman D, Kelsey J, editors. Osteoporosis. Vol 2. San Diego: Academic Press; 2001:403–8.
  28. 28.↵
    1. Tannenbaum C,
    2. Clark J,
    3. Schwartzman K,
    4. Wallenstein S,
    5. Lapinski R,
    6. Meier D,
    7. et al.
    Yield of laboratory testing to identify secondary contributor to osteoporosis in otherwise healthy women. J Clin Endocr Metab 2002;87:4431–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    1. Lin MY,
    2. Gutierrez PR,
    3. Stone KL,
    4. et al.
    Vision impairment and combined vision and hearing impairment predict cognitive and functional decline in older women. J Am Ger Soc 2004;52:1996–2002.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. 30.↵
    1. Mincey BA,
    2. Duh MS,
    3. Thomas SK,
    4. Moyneur E,
    5. Marynchencko M,
    6. Boyce SP,
    7. et al.
    Risk of cancer treatment-associated bone loss and fractures among women with breast cancer receiving aromatase inhibitors. Clin Breast Cancer 2006;7:127–32.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  31. 31.↵
    1. Chen Z,
    2. Maricic M,
    3. Bassford TL,
    4. Pettinger M,
    5. Ritenbaugh C,
    6. Lopez AM,
    7. et al.
    Fracture risk among breast cancer survivors: results from the Women's Health Initiative Observational Study. Arch Intern Med 2005;165:552–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. 32.↵
    1. Chen HF,
    2. Ho CA,
    3. Li CY
    . Increased risks of hip fracture in diabetic patients of Taiwan: a population-based study. Diabetes Care 2008;31:75–80.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  33. 33.↵
    1. Kanis JA,
    2. McCloskey EV,
    3. Powles T,
    4. Paterson AH,
    5. Ashley S,
    6. Spector T
    . A high incidence of vertebral fracture in women with breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1999;79:1179–81.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. 34.↵
    1. Vestergaard P,
    2. Rejnmark L,
    3. Mosekilde L
    . Effect of tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors on the risk of fractures in women with breast cancer. Calcif Tissue Int 2008;82:334–40.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. 35.↵
    1. Delmas PD,
    2. Balena R,
    3. Confravreux E,
    4. Hardouin C,
    5. Hardy P,
    6. Bremond A
    . Bisphosphonate risedronate prevents bone loss in women with artificial menopause due to chemotherapy of breast cancer: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. J Clin Oncol 1997;15:955–62.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  36. 36.↵
    1. Yonehara Y,
    2. Iwamoto I,
    3. Kosha S,
    4. Rai Y,
    5. Sagara Y,
    6. Douchi T
    . Aromatase inhibitor-induced bone mineral loss and its prevention by bisphosphonate administration in postmenopausal breast cancer patients. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2007;33:696–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. 37.↵
    1. Greenspan SL,
    2. Brufsky A,
    3. Lembersky BC,
    4. Bhattacharya R,
    5. Vujevich KT,
    6. Perera S,
    7. et al.
    Risedronate prevents bone loss in breast cancer survivors: a 2-year, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:2644–52.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  38. 38.↵
    1. Waltman NL,
    2. Twiss JJ,
    3. Ott CD,
    4. Gross GJ,
    5. Lindsey AM,
    6. Moore TE,
    7. et al.
    Testing an intervention for preventing osteoporosis in postmenopausal breast cancer survivors. J Nurs Scholarsh 2003;35:333–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. 39.↵
    1. Lester JE,
    2. Dodwell D,
    3. Purohit OP,
    4. Gutcher SA,
    5. Ellis SP,
    6. Thorpe R,
    7. et al.
    Prevention of anastrozole-induced bone loss with monthly oral ibandronate during adjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy for breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2008;14:6336–42.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  40. 40.↵
    1. Saarto T,
    2. Vehmanen L,
    3. Blomqvist C,
    4. Elomaa I
    . Ten-year follow-up of 3 years of oral adjuvant clodronate therapy shows significant prevention of osteoporosis in early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:4289–95.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  41. 41.↵
    1. Brufsky AM,
    2. Bosserman LD,
    3. Caradonna RR,
    4. Haley BB,
    5. Jones CM,
    6. Moore HC,
    7. et al.
    Zoledronic acid effectively prevents aromatase inhibitor-associated bone loss in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer receiving adjuvant letrozole: Z-FAST study 36-month follow-up results. Clin Breast Cancer 2009;9:77–85.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  42. 42.↵
    1. Eidtmann H,
    2. de Boer R,
    3. Bundred N,
    4. Llombart-Cussac A,
    5. Davidson N,
    6. Neven P,
    7. et al.
    Efficacy of zoledronic acid in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer receiving adjuvant letrozole: 36-month results of the ZO-FAST Study. Ann Oncol 2010.
  43. 43.↵
    1. Writing Group for the ISCD
    . Position Development conference: indications and reporting for dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. J Clin Densitom 2004;7:37–44.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  44. 44.↵
    1. Theriault RL,
    2. Biermann JS,
    3. Brown E,
    4. Brufsky A,
    5. Demers L,
    6. Grewal RK,
    7. et al.
    NCCN task force report: bone health and cancer care. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2006;4(Suppl 2):S1–20; quiz S21–22.
  45. 45.↵
    1. World Health Organization
    . FRAX WHO Fracture risk assessment tool. 2009.
  46. 46.↵
    1. National Osteoporosis Foundation
    . NOF's Clinician's Guide to Prevention and Treatment of Osteoporosis 2009.
  47. 47.↵
    1. Confavreux CB,
    2. Fontana A,
    3. Guastalla JP,
    4. Munoz F,
    5. Brun J,
    6. Delmas PD
    . Estrogen-dependent increase in bone turnover and bone loss in postmenopausal women with breast cancer treated with anastrozole. Prevention with bisphosphonates. Bone 2007;41:346–52.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  48. 48.↵
    1. Gnant MF,
    2. Mlineritsch B,
    3. Luschin-Ebengreuth G,
    4. Grampp S,
    5. Kaessmann H,
    6. Schmid M,
    7. et al.
    Zoledronic acid prevents cancer treatment-induced bone loss in premenopausal women receiving adjuvant endocrine therapy for hormone-responsive breast cancer: a report from the Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:820–8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  49. 49.↵
    1. Hershman DL,
    2. McMahon DJ,
    3. Crew KD,
    4. Cremers S,
    5. Irani D,
    6. Cucchiara G,
    7. et al.
    Zoledronic acid prevents bone loss in premenopausal women undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:4739–45.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  50. 50.↵
    1. Hadji P,
    2. Body JJ,
    3. Aapro MS,
    4. Brufsky A,
    5. Coleman RE,
    6. Guise T,
    7. et al.
    Practical guidance for the management of aromatase inhibitor-associated bone loss. Ann Oncol 2008;19:1407–16.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  51. 51.↵
    1. Magaziner J,
    2. Fredman L,
    3. Hawkes W,
    4. Hebel JR,
    5. Zimmerman S,
    6. Orwig DL,
    7. et al.
    Changes in functional status attributable to hip fracture: a comparison of hip fracture patients to community-dwelling aged. Am J Epid 2003;157:1023–31.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  52. 52.↵
    1. Edwards BJ,
    2. Song JS,
    3. Dunlop D,
    4. Fink H
    . Functional decline after incident wrist fracture: the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures. Br Med J. 2010;341:c3324.
    OpenUrl
  53. 53.↵
    1. Huang C,
    2. Ross PD,
    3. Wasnich RD
    . Vertebral fracture and other predictors of physical impairment and health care utilization. Arch Intern Med 1996;156:2469–75.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  54. 54.↵
    1. Greendale GA,
    2. Barrett-Connor E,
    3. Ingles S,
    4. Haile R
    . Late physical and functional effects of osteoporotic fracture in women: the Rancho Bernardo Study. J Am Geriatr Soc 1995;43:955–61.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  55. 55.↵
    1. Hillner BE,
    2. Ingle JN,
    3. Chlebowski RT,
    4. Gralow J,
    5. Yee GC,
    6. Janjan NA,
    7. et al.
    American Society of Clinical Oncology 2003 update on the role of bisphosphonates and bone health issues in women with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:4042–57. Erratum in: (2004) J Clin Oncol 4022:1351.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  56. 56.↵
    1. Astra Zeneca labs
    . Arimidex, prescribing information. 2008.
  57. 57.↵
    1. Novartis Labs
    . Femara, prescribing information. 2008.
  58. 58.↵
    1. Pfizer Labs
    . Aromasin, prescribing information. 2008.
  59. 59.↵
    1. Medicines Evaluation Board in the Netherlands
    . Public Assessment Report:Zolkir 1 mg (generic Anastrozole). 2007.
  60. 60.↵
    1. Watch D
    . Evidence based recommendations: Anastrazole. 2006.
  61. 61.↵
    1. Portal fur Medizin and Gesundheit
    . Clinical experience for ‘Arimidex' (anastrozole) passes two million patient years milestone. 2006.
  62. 62.↵
    1. Guise TA
    . Bone loss and fracture risk associated with cancer therapy. Oncologist 2006;11:1121–31.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  63. 63.↵
    1. Canada Health
    . Arimidex: Letter to Health Care Professionals. 2004.
  64. 64.↵
    1. Dalle Carbonare L,
    2. Arlot ME,
    3. Chavassieux PM,
    4. Roux JP,
    5. Portero NR,
    6. Meunier PJ
    . Comparison of trabecular bone microarchitecture and remodeling in glucocorticoid-induced and postmenopausal osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res 2001;16:97–103.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  65. 65.↵
    1. Chappard D,
    2. Legrand E,
    3. Basle MF,
    4. Fromont P,
    5. Racineux JL,
    6. Rebel A,
    7. et al.
    Altered trabecular architecture induced by corticosteroids: a bone histomorphometric study. J Bone Miner Res 1996;11:676–85.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  66. 66.↵
    1. Weinstein RS,
    2. Manolagas SC
    . Apoptosis and osteoporosis. Am J Med 2000;108:153–64.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  67. 67.↵
    1. Luengo M,
    2. Picado C,
    3. Del Rio L,
    4. Guanabens N,
    5. Montserrat JM,
    6. Setoain J
    . Vertebral fractures in steroid dependent asthma and involutional osteoporosis: a comparative study. Thorax 1991;46:803–6.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  68. 68.↵
    1. Wainwright SA,
    2. Marshall LM,
    3. Ensrud K,
    4. Cauley J,
    5. Black D,
    6. Hillier TA,
    7. et al.
    Hip fracture in women without osteoporosis. J Clin Endocr Metab 2005;90:2787–93.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  69. 69.↵
    1. Schuit SC,
    2. Van der Klift M,
    3. Weel AE,
    4. de Laet CE,
    5. Burger H,
    6. Seeman E,
    7. et al.
    Fracture incidence and association with bone mineral density in elderly men and women: the Rotterdam Study. Bone 2004;34:195–202.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  70. 70.↵
    1. Guo XE,
    2. Kim CH
    . Mechanical consequence of trabecular bone loss and its treatment: a three-dimensional model simulation. Bone 2002;30:404–11.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  71. 71.↵
    1. Legrand E,
    2. Chappard D,
    3. Pascaretti C,
    4. Duquenne M,
    5. Krebs S,
    6. Rohmer V,
    7. et al.
    Trabecular bone microarchitecture, bone mineral density, and vertebral fractures in male osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res 2000;15:13–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  72. 72.↵
    1. Oleksik A,
    2. Ott SM,
    3. Vedi S,
    4. Bravenboer N,
    5. Compston J,
    6. Lips P
    . Bone structure in patients with low bone mineral density with or without vertebral fractures. J Bone Miner Res 2000;15:1368–75.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  73. 73.↵
    1. Jemal A,
    2. Tiwari RC,
    3. Murray T,
    4. Ghafoor A,
    5. Samuels A,
    6. Ward E,
    7. et al.
    Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 2004;54:8–29.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  74. 74.↵
    1. Cummings SR
    . Prevention of hip fractures in older women: a population-based perspective. Osteoporos Int 1998;8:S8–12.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  75. 75.↵
    1. Jonat W,
    2. Kaufmann M,
    3. Sauerbrei W,
    4. Blamey R,
    5. Cuzick J,
    6. Namer M,
    7. et al.
    Goserelin versus cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil as adjuvant therapy in premenopausal patients with node-positive breast cancer: the Zoladex Early Breast Cancer Research Association Study. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:4628–35.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  76. 76.↵
    1. Castiglione-Gertsch M,
    2. O'Neill A,
    3. Price KN,
    4. et al.
    Adjuvant chemotherapy followed by goserelin versus either modality alone for premenopausal lymph node-negative breast cancer: a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:1833–46.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  77. 77.↵
    1. Miller WR
    . Aromatase inhibitors. Endocrine-related Cancer 1996;3: 65–79
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  78. 78.↵
    1. Harrison RA,
    2. Siminoski K,
    3. Vethanayagam D,
    4. Majumdar SR
    . Osteoporosis-related kyphosis and impairments in pulmonary function: a systematic review. J Bone Miner Res 2007;22:447–57.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  79. 79.↵
    1. Ray NF,
    2. Chan JK,
    3. Thamer M,
    4. Melton LJ
    . 3rd Medical expenditures for the treatment of osteoporotic fractures in the United States in 1995: report from the National Osteoporosis Foundation. J Bone Miner Res 1997;12:24–35.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  80. 80.↵
    1. Chrischilles E,
    2. Shireman T,
    3. Wallace R
    . Costs and health effects of osteoporotic fractures. Bone 1994;15:377–86.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  81. 81.↵
    1. Leech JA,
    2. Dulberg C,
    3. Kellie S,
    4. Pattee L,
    5. Gay J
    . Relationship of lung function to severity of osteoporosis in women. Am Rev Respir Dis 1990;141:68–71.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  82. 82.↵
    1. Lombardi I Jr.,
    2. Oliveira LM,
    3. Mayer AF,
    4. Jardim JR,
    5. Natour J
    . Evaluation of pulmonary function and quality of life in women with osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 2005;16:1247–53.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  83. 83.↵
    1. Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program
    . Common terminology criteria for adverse events, version 4.03, 2010.
  84. 84.↵
    1. Goldhirsch A,
    2. Glick JH,
    3. Gelber RD,
    4. Coates AS,
    5. Thurlimann B,
    6. Senn HJ,
    7. et al.
    Meeting highlights: International Expert Consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2005;16:1569–83.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  85. 85.↵
    1. Rieber AG,
    2. Theriault RL
    . Aromatase inhibitors in postmenopausal breast cancer patients. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2005;3:309–14.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  86. 86.↵
    1. Winer EP,
    2. Hudis C,
    3. Burstein HJ,
    4. Chlebowski RT,
    5. Ingle JN,
    6. Edge SB,
    7. et al.
    American Society of Clinical Oncology technology assessment on the use of aromatase inhibitors as adjuvant therapy for women with hormone receptor positive breast cancer: status report 2002. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:3317–27.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  87. 87.↵
    1. Karnon J
    . Aromatase inhibitors in breast cancer: a review of cost considerations and cost effectiveness. Pharmacoeconomics 2006;24:215–32.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  88. 88.↵
    1. Dunn C,
    2. Keam SJ
    . Letrozole: a pharmacoeconomic review of its use in postmenopausal women with breast cancer. Pharmacoeconomics 2006;24:495–517.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  89. 89.↵
    1. Thompson D,
    2. Taylor DC,
    3. Montoya EL,
    4. Winer EP,
    5. Jones SE,
    6. Weinstein MC
    . Cost-effectiveness of switching to exemestane after 2 to 3 years of therapy with tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer. Value Health 2007;10:367–76.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  90. 90.↵
    1. Gil JM,
    2. Rubio-Terres C,
    3. Del Castillo A,
    4. Gonzalez P,
    5. Canorea F
    . Pharmacoeconomic analysis of adjuvant therapy with exemestane, anastrozole, letrozole or tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with operable and estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Clin Transl Oncol 2006;8:339–48.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  91. 91.↵
    1. Delea TE,
    2. Karnon J,
    3. Smith RE,
    4. Johnston SR,
    5. Brandman J,
    6. Sung JC,
    7. et al.
    Cost-effectiveness of extended adjuvant letrozole therapy after 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen therapy in postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer. Am J Manag Care 2006;12:374–86.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  92. 92.↵
    1. Hewitt M GS,
    2. Stovall E
    1. Committee on cancer survivorship: Improving care and quality of life
    . Executive summary. In:Hewitt M GS, Stovall E, editors. From Cancer Patient to Cancer Survivor: Lost in Transition. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2005:1–14.
  93. 93.↵
    1. Brufsky A
    . Management of cancer-treatment-induced bone loss in postmenopausal women undergoing adjuvant breast cancer therapy: a Z-FAST update. Semin Oncol 2006;33:S13–17.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  94. 94.↵
    1. Osteoporosis:
    review of the evidence for prevention, diagnosis and treatment and cost-effectiveness analysis. Executive summary. Osteoporos Int 1998;8:S3–S6.
    OpenUrl
  95. 95.↵
    1. WHO
    . FRAX WHO Fracture Risk Assessment Tool. 2008.
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Clinical Cancer Research: 17 (3)
February 2011
Volume 17, Issue 3
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by Author

Sign up for alerts

View this article with LENS

Open full page PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for sharing this Clinical Cancer Research article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Cancer Therapy Associated Bone Loss: Implications for Hip Fractures in Mid-Life Women with Breast Cancer
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Clinical Cancer Research
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Clinical Cancer Research.
Citation Tools
Cancer Therapy Associated Bone Loss: Implications for Hip Fractures in Mid-Life Women with Breast Cancer
Beatrice J. Edwards, Dennis W. Raisch, Veena Shankaran, June M. McKoy, William Gradishar, Andrew D. Bunta, Athena T. Samaras, Simone N. Boyle, Charles L. Bennett, Dennis P. West and Theresa A. Guise
Clin Cancer Res February 1 2011 (17) (3) 560-568; DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-1595

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Cancer Therapy Associated Bone Loss: Implications for Hip Fractures in Mid-Life Women with Breast Cancer
Beatrice J. Edwards, Dennis W. Raisch, Veena Shankaran, June M. McKoy, William Gradishar, Andrew D. Bunta, Athena T. Samaras, Simone N. Boyle, Charles L. Bennett, Dennis P. West and Theresa A. Guise
Clin Cancer Res February 1 2011 (17) (3) 560-568; DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-1595
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest
    • Grant Support
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Advertisement

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Andecaliximab alone and combined in gastric/GEJ cancer
  • Tumor growth inhibition-OS model for atezolizumab in NSCLC
  • Impact of baseline tumor size on outcomes in melanoma
Show more Cancer Therapy: Clinical
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Feedback
Facebook  Twitter  LinkedIn  YouTube  RSS

Articles

  • Online First
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • CCR Focus Archive
  • Meeting Abstracts

Info for

  • Authors
  • Subscribers
  • Advertisers
  • Librarians
  • Reviewers

About Clinical Cancer Research

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Permissions
  • Submit a Manuscript
AACR logo

Copyright © 2018 by the American Association for Cancer Research.

Clinical Cancer Research
eISSN: 1557-3265
ISSN: 1078-0432

Advertisement