OBJECTIVES: Disrupted skeletal homeostasis is common in patients with prostate cancer. Low bone density is common at diagnosis, and fracture risk is further elevated by the effects of androgen-deprivation therapy. Later in the disease course, bone metastases can result in skeletal morbidity. Although prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels can provide important insights into overall disease progression, convenient, noninvasive tools for monitoring skeletal health are lacking. Biochemical markers released into serum and urine as a result of bone turnover might fulfill this unmet need. The objectives of this article are to assess current evidence examining the potential utility of bone turnover markers for monitoring skeletal health, bone disease progression, and response to antiresorptive therapies in the prostate cancer setting. METHODS: Published articles and abstracts from major oncology or urology congresses pertaining to the use of bone turnover markers to monitor skeletal health and disease progression were identified and assessed for relevance and methodologic stringency. RESULTS: Several randomized trials and correlative studies support the utility of bone marker level changes to assess disease progression in the metastatic setting, bone health during hormonal therapy, and response to bisphosphonate therapy. The available data support potential associations between levels of the collagen type I telopeptides (NTX and CTX) and the severity of metastatic bone disease as well as outcomes during antiresorptive therapy. Evidence linking bone marker level changes with early diagnosis of skeletal metastases is emerging. Although several markers have shown promising results in correlative studies, results from ongoing prospective trials are needed to establish the role of bone markers in this setting. CONCLUSIONS: Bone marker levels reflect ongoing skeletal metabolism and can provide important insights into bone health and response to bisphosphonate therapy in patients with prostate cancer. The data supporting a role for bone markers to monitor skeletal disease progression and response to zoledronic acid therapy are especially strong. Bone marker assessments may complement established diagnostic and monitoring paradigms in prostate cancer.
OBJECTIVES: Disrupted skeletal homeostasis is common in patients with prostate cancer. Low bone density is common at diagnosis, and fracture risk is further elevated by the effects of androgen-deprivation therapy. Later in the disease course, bone metastases can result in skeletal morbidity. Although prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels can provide important insights into overall disease progression, convenient, noninvasive tools for monitoring skeletal health are lacking. Biochemical markers released into serum and urine as a result of bone turnover might fulfill this unmet need. The objectives of this article are to assess current evidence examining the potential utility of bone turnover markers for monitoring skeletal health, bone disease progression, and response to antiresorptive therapies in the prostate cancer setting. METHODS: Published articles and abstracts from major oncology or urology congresses pertaining to the use of bone turnover markers to monitor skeletal health and disease progression were identified and assessed for relevance and methodologic stringency. RESULTS: Several randomized trials and correlative studies support the utility of bone marker level changes to assess disease progression in the metastatic setting, bone health during hormonal therapy, and response to bisphosphonate therapy. The available data support potential associations between levels of the collagen type I telopeptides (NTX and CTX) and the severity of metastatic bone disease as well as outcomes during antiresorptive therapy. Evidence linking bone marker level changes with early diagnosis of skeletal metastases is emerging. Although several markers have shown promising results in correlative studies, results from ongoing prospective trials are needed to establish the role of bone markers in this setting. CONCLUSIONS: Bone marker levels reflect ongoing skeletal metabolism and can provide important insights into bone health and response to bisphosphonate therapy in patients with prostate cancer. The data supporting a role for bone markers to monitor skeletal disease progression and response to zoledronic acid therapy are especially strong. Bone marker assessments may complement established diagnostic and monitoring paradigms in prostate cancer.
Authors: Azizbek Ramankulov; Michael Lein; Glen Kristiansen; Hellmuth-A Meyer; Stefan A Loening; Klaus Jung Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2007-05-04 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Matthew R Smith; Richard J Cook; Robert Coleman; Janet Brown; Allan Lipton; Pierre Major; Yong Jiang Hei; Fred Saad Journal: Urology Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Ron S Israeli; Steven J Rosenberg; Daniel R Saltzstein; James E Gottesman; Howard R Goldstein; Gerald W Hull; Diep Nh Tran; Ghulam M Warsi; Leo V Lacerna Journal: Clin Genitourin Cancer Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 2.872
Authors: Andreas Pettersson; Julie L Kasperzyk; Stacey A Kenfield; Erin L Richman; June M Chan; Walter C Willett; Meir J Stampfer; Lorelei A Mucci; Edward L Giovannucci Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2012-02-07 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Meng Yang; Stacey A Kenfield; Erin L Van Blarigan; Kathryn M Wilson; Julie L Batista; Howard D Sesso; Jing Ma; Meir J Stampfer; Jorge E Chavarro Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2015-06-03 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Matthew R Smith; Fred Saad; Blair Egerdie; Paul Sieber; Teuvo Lj Tammela; Benjamin Z Leder; Chunlei Ke; Carsten Goessl Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Michelle L Thompson; Juan M Jimenez-Andrade; Stephane Chartier; James Tsai; Elizabeth A Burton; Gaston Habets; Paul S Lin; Brian L West; Patrick W Mantyh Journal: Pain Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 7.926
Authors: A Alcaraz; R González-López; J Morote; C de la Piedra; C Meseguer; E Esteban; M Climent; B González-Gragera; J-L Alvarez-Ossorio; I Chirivella; B Mellado; P-C Lara; F Vázquez; J-A Contreras; J Carles; A Murias; V Calderero; J Comet-Batlle; A González-Del Alba; L León-Mateos; A Mañas; J Segarra; A Lassa; C González-Enguita; M-J Méndez; P Samper; M Unda; I Mahillo-Fernández; J Bellmunt Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2013-06-25 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Harald Rief; Georg Omlor; Michael Akbar; Thomas Bruckner; Stefan Rieken; Robert Förster; Ingmar Schlampp; Thomas Welzel; Tilman Bostel; Heinz Jürgen Roth; Jürgen Debus Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2016-03-17 Impact factor: 4.430