Article ID Journal Published Year Pages File Type
2136246 Journal of Bone Oncology 2013 9 Pages PDF
Abstract

BackgroundBone-targeted agents are usually administered to breast cancer patients with bone metastases every 3–4 weeks. Less frequent (‘de-escalated’) treatment may provide similar benefits with improved safety and reduced cost.MethodsTo systematically review randomised trials comparing de-escalated treatment with bone-targeted agents (i.e. every 12–16 weeks) to standard treatment (i.e. every 3–4 weeks), a formal systematic review of the literature was performed. Two individuals independently screened citations and full text articles. Random effects meta-analyses of clinically important outcomes were planned provided homogeneous studies were identified.ResultsFive relevant studies (n=1287 patients) were identified. Sample size ranged from 38 to 425. Information on outcomes including occurrence of SREs, bone pain, urinary N-telopeptide concentrations, serum C-telopeptide concentrations, pain medication use and safety outcomes was not consistently available. Two trials were non-inferiority studies, two dose-response evaluations and one was a pilot study. Bone-targeted agents use varied between studies, as did duration of prior therapy. Patient populations were considered heterogeneous in several ways, and thus no meta-analyses were performed. Observations from the included studies suggest there is potential that 3 month de-escalated treatment may provide similar benefits compared to 3–4 weekly treatment and that lower doses of zoledronic acid and denosumab might be equally effective.ConclusionsStudies comparing standard and de-escalated treatment with bone-targeted agents in breast cancer are rare. The benefits of standard treatment compared to de-escalated therapy on important clinical outcomes remain unclear. Future pragmatic studies must be conducted to determine the merits of this approach.

Related Topics
Life Sciences Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology Cancer Research
Authors
, , , , , ,