2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Management of bone metastasis and cancer treatment-induced bone loss during the COVID-19 pandemic: An international perspective and recommendations

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Optimum management of patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic has proved extremely challenging. Patients, clinicians and hospital authorities have had to balance the risks to patients of attending hospital, many of whom are especially vulnerable, with the risks of delaying or modifying cancer treatment. Those whose care has been significantly impacted include patients suffering from the effects of cancer on bone, where delivering the usual standard of care for bone support has often not been possible and clinicians have been forced to seek alternative options for adequate management.

          At a virtual meeting of the Cancer and Bone Society in July 2020, an expert group shared experiences and solutions to this challenge, following which a questionnaire was sent internationally to the symposium’s participants, to explore the issues faced and solutions offered. 70 respondents, from 9 countries (majority USA, 39%, followed by UK, 19%) included 50 clinicians, spread across a diverse range of specialties (but with a high proportion, 64%, of medical oncologists) and 20 who classified themselves as non-clinical (solely lab-based). Spread of clinician specialty across tumour types was breast (65%), prostate (27%), followed by renal, myeloma and melanoma.

          Analysis showed that management of metastatic bone disease in all solid tumour types and myeloma, adjuvant bisphosphonate breast cancer therapy and cancer treatment induced bone loss, was substantially impacted. Respondents reported delays to routine CT scans (58%), standard bone scans (48%) and MRI scans (46%), though emergency scans were less affected. Delays in palliative radiotherapy for bone pain were reported by 31% of respondents with treatments often involving only a single dose without fractionation. Delays to, or cancellation of, prophylactic surgery for bone pain were reported by 35% of respondents. Access to treatments with intravenous bisphosphonates and subcutaneous denosumab was a major problem, mitigated by provision of drug administration at home or in a local clinic, reduced frequency of administration or switching to oral bisphosphonates taken at home. The questionnaire also revealed damaging delays or complete stopping of both clinical and laboratory research.

          In addition to an analysis of the questionnaire, this paper presents a rationale and recommendations for adaptation of the normal guidelines for protection of bone health during the pandemic.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Bone metastases

          Bone is the most frequent site for metastasis for many cancers, notably for tumours originating in the breast and the prostate. Tumour cells can escape from the primary tumour site and colonize the bone microenvironment. Within the bone, these disseminated tumour cells, as well as those arising in the context of multiple myeloma, may assume a state of dormancy, remaining quiescent for years before resuming proliferation and causing overt metastasis, which causes bone destruction via activation of osteoclast-mediated osteolysis. This structural damage can lead to considerable morbidity, including pain, fractures and impaired quality of life. Although treatment of bone metastases and myeloma bone disease is rarely curative, disease control is often possible for many years through the use of systemic anticancer treatments on a background of multidisciplinary supportive care. This care should include bone-targeted agents to inhibit tumour-associated osteolysis and prevent skeletal morbidity as well as use of appropriate local treatments such as radiation therapy, orthopaedic surgery and specialist palliative care to minimize the impact of metastatic bone disease on physical functioning. In this Primer, we provide an overview of the clinical features, the pathophysiology and the specific treatment approaches to prevent and treat bone metastases from solid tumours as well as myeloma bone disease.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Use of Adjuvant Bisphosphonates and Other Bone-Modifying Agents in Breast Cancer: A Cancer Care Ontario and American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline.

            Purpose To make recommendations regarding the use of bisphosphonates and other bone-modifying agents as adjuvant therapy for patients with breast cancer. Methods Cancer Care Ontario and ASCO convened a Working Group and Expert Panel to develop evidence-based recommendations informed by a systematic review of the literature. Results Adjuvant bisphosphonates were found to reduce bone recurrence and improve survival in postmenopausal patients with nonmetastatic breast cancer. In this guideline, postmenopausal includes patients with natural menopause or that induced by ovarian suppression or ablation. Absolute benefit is greater in patients who are at higher risk of recurrence, and almost all trials were conducted in patients who also received systemic therapy. Most studies evaluated zoledronic acid or clodronate, and data are extremely limited for other bisphosphonates. While denosumab was found to reduce fractures, long-term survival data are still required. Recommendations It is recommended that, if available, zoledronic acid (4 mg intravenously every 6 months) or clodronate (1,600 mg/d orally) be considered as adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal patients with breast cancer who are deemed candidates for adjuvant systemic therapy. Further research comparing different bone-modifying agents, doses, dosing intervals, and durations is required. Risk factors for osteonecrosis of the jaw and renal impairment should be assessed, and any pending dental or oral health problems should be dealt with prior to starting treatment. Data for adjuvant denosumab look promising but are currently insufficient to make any recommendation. Use of these agents to reduce fragility fractures in patients with low bone mineral density is beyond the scope of the guideline. Recommendations are not meant to restrict such use of bone-modifying agents in these situations. Additional information at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-adjuvant-bisphosphonates-guideline , www.asco.org/guidelineswiki , https://www.cancercareontario.ca/guidelines-advice/types-of-cancer/breast .
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Clinical Features of 24 Patients With Rebound-Associated Vertebral Fractures After Denosumab Discontinuation: Systematic Review and Additional Cases.

              We aimed to study the clinical and imaging characteristics of patients sustaining vertebral fractures after denosumab discontinuation. For this purpose, we conducted a computerized advanced literature search that identified 13 published cases, and we additionally included another 11 new cases from our centers. Twenty-four postmenopausal women with vertebral fracture(s) after denosumab discontinuation, experiencing 112 fractures in total, were analyzed. The mean number of fractures per patient was 4.7. The most commonly affected vertebrae were T12 and L1. All fractures occurred 8 to 16 months after the last denosumab injection. Eighty-three percent of the patients were treatment naïve, whereas 33% had prevalent vertebral fractures. Five (23%) patients were on concurrent aromatase inhibitor treatment. When patients were divided according to treatment duration with an arbitrary cut-off of 2 years, those with ≤2 years of denosumab treatment had fewer fractures compared with those with >2 years (mean ± SEM fractures 3.2 ± 0.7 versus 5.2 ± 1.4, p = 0.055). Vertebroplasty was used in 5 patients, resulting in additional clinical vertebral fractures in all cases. We conclude that vertebral fracture(s) after denosumab discontinuation are in the majority of patients multiples, and they occur a few months after the effect of the last dose is depleted. Therefore, patients should not delay or omit denosumab doses. Fractures are typically osteoporotic, located at the lower thoracic and the upper lumbar spine. Vertebroplasty is an unsuccessful treatment strategy for such patients. © 2017 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Bone Oncol
                J Bone Oncol
                Journal of Bone Oncology
                Published by Elsevier GmbH.
                2212-1366
                2212-1374
                11 June 2021
                11 June 2021
                : 100375
                Affiliations
                [a ]Academic Unit of Clinical Oncology, Department of Oncology & Metabolism, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
                [b ]Directorate of Oncology, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK
                [c ]Department of Rheumatology South of Hospices Civils de Lyon and INSERM UMR1033, University of Lyon, Lyon, France
                [d ]Department of Hematology, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Tokushima University Graduate School, Japan
                [e ]Division of Oncology, Washington University, St. Louis, USA
                [f ]Department of Bone Oncology, Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine, Krankenhaus Nordwest, Frankfurt, Germany
                [g ]Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, USA
                [h ]Tennessee Valley Healthcare System, Department of Veterans Affairs, Nashville, USA
                [i ]Nuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, Oxford UK
                [j ]Bone Biology, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, Australia
                [k ]Biomedical Innovation Department, Center for Scientific Research and Higher Education, Ensenada, México
                [l ]Department of Biomedical Sciences and Clinical Oncology, University of Bari Aldo Moro, Italy
                [m ]M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, USA
                [n ]University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author
                [1]

                These authors contributed equally.

                Article
                S2212-1374(21)00030-0 100375
                10.1016/j.jbo.2021.100375
                8192265
                7e5d592f-2320-4ebe-a5af-6d31b2932fd5
                © 2021 Published by Elsevier GmbH.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                : 16 March 2021
                : 8 May 2021
                : 10 May 2021
                Categories
                Research Paper

                covid-19,bone metastasis,bisphosphonates,zoledronic acid,denosumab,bone health

                Comments

                Comment on this article