Literature DB >> 28941210

Osteonecrosis of the jaw and survival of patients with cancer: a nationwide cohort study in Denmark.

Priscila Corraini1, Uffe Heide-Jørgensen1, Morten Schiødt2, Sven Erik Nørholt3, John Acquavella1, Henrik Toft Sørensen1, Vera Ehrenstein1.   

Abstract

Osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) is an adverse effect of bone-targeted therapies, which are used to prevent symptomatic skeletal events following bone malignancy. We examined the association between ONJ and survival among cancer patients treated with bone-targeted agents. Using nationwide registries and databases in Denmark, we identified 184 cancer patients with incident ONJ between 2010 and 2015, and a comparison cohort of 1067 cancer patients without ONJ and with a history of hospital-administered treatment with bisphosphonates or denosumab initiating from cancer diagnosis. At the date of confirmed ONJ diagnosis, the comparison cohort was matched to the ONJ patients on age, cancer site, year of cancer diagnosis, and stage at diagnosis. The patients were followed up for survival until emigration or 15 June 2016. We computed overall survival and estimated mortality rate ratios adjusted for sex, and for the presence of distant metastases and other comorbidity at start of follow-up. A match was found for 149 of the 184 ONJ patients. The 1- and 3-year survival among all 184 cancer patients with ONJ was 70% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 63%-76%) and 42% (95% CI: 34%-51%), respectively. Among the matched patients, ONJ was associated with an adjusted mortality rate ratio of 1.31 (95% CI: 1.01-1.71). ONJ was associated with reduced survival among cancer patients treated with bone-targeted agents. ONJ may be a marker of advanced disease or of survival-related lifestyle characteristics.
© 2017 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bisphosphonates; bone density conservation agents; drug-related side effects and adverse reactions; mortality; osteonecrosis

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28941210      PMCID: PMC5633555          DOI: 10.1002/cam4.1173

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Med        ISSN: 2045-7634            Impact factor:   4.452


Introduction

Bone‐targeted agents, such as bisphosphonates or denosumab, are used in patients with bone malignancy to prevent symptomatic skeletal events: pathological fractures, spinal cord compression, or need for radiation or surgery to bone 1, 2. The bone malignancies include multiple myeloma and bone metastases from solid tumors, primarily of prostate, breast, or lung 1. Preventing symptomatic skeletal events improves quality of life. In multiple myeloma and in the adjuvant setting of breast cancer, bone‐targeted therapy may also delay disease progression and prolong survival 3, 4, 5, 6. Osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ), first described in 2003 after intravenous bisphosphonate use 7, is a potentially severe adverse effect of bone‐targeted therapy 8. Among currently or previously treated patients, ONJ is diagnosed in the presence of exposed bone or bone that can be probed through a fistula in the maxillofacial region 8. The lesion must persist for at least 8 weeks in the absence of signs of malignancy or history of radiotherapy to the jaws 8. In clinical trials, up to 5% of cancer patients develop ONJ as late as 3 years of bone‐targeted therapy 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14. Treatment of ONJ may involve discontinuation of bone‐targeted agents 15, 16, 17, despite their therapeutic benefits 11, 14. Data on survival following ONJ among cancer patients will help contribute to the understanding of risk–benefit trade‐offs associated with bone‐targeted therapy for cancer. Previously, survival following ONJ was studied in a cohort of 21 renal cell carcinoma patients treated with zoledronic acid, whereby patients developing ONJ (N = 6) had a 17‐month longer median survival compared with patients not developing ONJ 15. Since follow‐up started at cancer diagnosis, which may precede ONJ by years, the observed association could be likely a result of immortal time bias 18. We conducted a nationwide cohort study in Denmark to examine the association between ONJ and survival among cancer patients treated with bone‐targeted agents.

Materials and Methods

Setting

Denmark provides tax‐funded health care to all its residents, and Danish registries and databases contain extensive individual‐level health care data, including data on cancer therapies from 1999 19. Individual‐level data from all data sources are linkable, enabling virtually complete follow‐up 20.

Cancer population

The study eligibility period started on 15 October 2010, the date when the first ONJ case in a cancer patient was recorded in the Danish ONJ database (described below). We used the Danish Cancer Registry (DCR) and the Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR) to identify all cancer patients who were alive and residing in Denmark between 15 October 2010 and 31 December 2015. The DCR has recorded all incident cancers in Denmark since 1943 21 and is virtually complete 22. Recorded data include diagnosis date, cancer site and stage at diagnosis. Since the DCR was updated until 2013 at the time of this study, we used the DNPR to identify cancer patients diagnosed in 2014–2015. The completeness of the DNPR compared with the DCR is 87–96% 23, 24. The DNPR contains information on all hospitalizations since 1977 and on all outpatient clinic visits since 1995. Diagnoses were registered using the International Classification of Diseases, Eighth Revision (ICD‐8) through 1993 and the ICD‐10 thereafter. In Denmark, cancer treatments, including denosumab and intravenous bisphosphonates, are administered in hospitals. Intravenous bisphosphonates were introduced to the Danish hospital sector in 1997, 2 years after their approval in the European Union for multiple myeloma and 1 year after their approval for prevention of skeletal events following bone metastasis. Denosumab was introduced for skeletal events prevention in 2011 25.

The ONJ cohort

The ONJ cohort consisted of patients from the cancer population with incident clinically confirmed ONJ, as recorded in the Danish ONJ database. This research database was established to register ONJ events nationwide 26. In Denmark, all patients with suspected ONJ are referred to hospital‐based departments of oral and maxillofacial surgery 26. Specialists in these departments (physicians, dentists, or oral surgeons) report the confirmed ONJ diagnoses to the Danish ONJ database. The database was established in October 2011; confirmed ONJs diagnosed between October 2010 and September 2011 were registered retrospectively using information from medical records.

The comparison cohort

We used the DNPR and the Danish ONJ database to construct a comparison cohort of cancer patients without ONJ and with a record of hospital‐administered treatment with bisphosphonates or denosumab. Cancer patients receiving treatment exclusively for osteoporosis have a lower ONJ risk 27 and presumably a better prognosis. Therefore, we selected only treatment records initiating from cancer diagnosis date and before the date of confirmed ONJ diagnosis (defined as the index date). For each ONJ patient, we randomly sampled up to 10 patients from the treated cancer population who were alive and without ONJ on the index date, matched on birth year (within 3 years), cancer site, year of cancer diagnosis, and distant stage at cancer diagnosis. Patients with records of diagnostic codes indicative of ONJ in the DNPR before the index date were not eligible to enter the comparison cohort 28.

Covariates

From the DNPR, we obtained information on recorded diagnoses of distant metastases at the index date, and on the comorbidity level, since 1977, expressed using the Charlson Comorbidity Index score (excluding cancer), as 0, 1–2, or 3+ 29, 30. Table S1 lists definitions of the study variables.

Statistical analysis

Patients were followed from the index date until the earliest of death, emigration, or 15 June 2016. We used the Kaplan–Meier estimator to compute and display survival both for the ONJ patients and the comparison cohort. Furthermore, we constructed adjusted survival curves using stabilized weights that represented each patient's inverse probability of having ONJ. Briefly, these weights were estimated in a logistic regression model with ONJ as the dependent variable, and sex, distant metastasis, and comorbidity level on the index date as the independent variables 31. We used stratified Cox regression to compute hazard ratios as estimates of mortality rate ratios (MRRs) and the associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) adjusted for sex, and for the presence of distant metastasis, and the level of other comorbidity on the index date. The proportionality assumption was examined using Kolmogorov‐type supremum tests 32. To assess the impact of potential incomplete registration of ONJ before 2012, we performed a sensitivity analysis restricted to patients enrolled between 2012 and 2015. Finally, we performed an additional sensitivity analysis restricted to patients without a diagnosis of osteoporosis. Analyses were conducted using SAS software version 9.4 (SAS Inc., Cary, NC). The study was approved by the Danish Data Protection Agency (record number 2012‐41‐0045). Patient consent is not required by Danish law for studies based on routine electronic data.

Results

During the study period, we identified 184 patients for inclusion in the ONJ cohort and 1067 patients for inclusion in the comparison cohort (Table 1). Eighty‐nine percent of patients had breast cancer or prostate cancer. Median age at index date was 68 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 63–74 years). Median time from cancer diagnosis to confirmed ONJ was 6.3 years (IQR: 2.9–11 years). Thirty‐five patients in the ONJ cohort (80% of whom had cancers at sites other than breast and prostate) could not be matched to anyone with a history of bone‐targeted therapy, resulting in a matched ONJ cohort of 149 patients (Table 1). The median time from first‐recorded therapy to the index date was 2.1 years (IQR: 1.2–3.6 years) in the matched ONJ cohort, and 1.4 years in the comparison cohort (IQR: 0.6–2.9 years).
Table 1

Characteristics of the osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) cohort and the comparison cohort

CharacteristicsONJ cohort (N = 184)Matched ONJ cohort (N = 149)Comparison cohort (N = 1067)
N % N % N %
Age on the index date (years)
36–54189.78149.40696.47
55–644423.93825.526124.5
65–799752.78255.067963.6
80–942513.61510.1585.44
Sex
Female11562.59664.468764.4
Index year
2010–201194.8964.03302.81
2012–201517595.114396.0103797.2
Year of cancer diagnosis
1980–1994179.24106.71726.75
1995–1999147.61128.05938.72
2000–20032212.01610.712912.1
2004–201312467.410570.572868.2
2014–201573.8064.03454.22
Cancer site
Breast8948.48456.464560.4
Prostate4625.04429.533131.0
Kidney158.1542.6840.37
Multiple myeloma94.8985.37625.81
Lung84.3564.03201.87
Other cancer sites179.2432.0150.47
Cancer stage at diagnosis
Local or regional9853.38154.467062.8
Distant metastasis4725.53825.520018.7
Unknown stage2714.72214.813512.7
N/A (nonsolid tumors)126.5285.37625.81
Distant metastasis on the index date11160.39161.147044.1
Years from cancer diagnosis to the index date, median (IQR)6.3 (2.9–11)6.1 (2.9–9.9)6.6 (3.2–10)
History of hospital‐based therapy with bone‐targeted agents15885.914194.61067100
History of osteoporosis2513.6149.4018617.4
Charlson Comorbidity Index scorea
09953.88758.470666.2
1–26937.54832.229527.7
3+168.70149.40666.19

Other cancer sites included other primary and secondary cancers. IQR, interquartile range; N, number of individuals; Comparison cohort, cohort within the cancer population without ONJ and with a recorded history of hospital‐based therapy with bone‐targeted agents starting from cancer diagnosis date; N/A, nonapplicable.

Excluding cancer.

Characteristics of the osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) cohort and the comparison cohort Other cancer sites included other primary and secondary cancers. IQR, interquartile range; N, number of individuals; Comparison cohort, cohort within the cancer population without ONJ and with a recorded history of hospital‐based therapy with bone‐targeted agents starting from cancer diagnosis date; N/A, nonapplicable. Excluding cancer. During median follow‐up of 1.4 years (IQR: 0.7–2.3 years) in the ONJ cohort, 1‐year survival was 70% (95% CI: 63%–76%) and 3‐year survival was 42% (95% CI: 34%–51%). One‐year survival in the ONJ cohort was 77% (95% CI: 67%–85%) among breast cancer patients and 66% (95% CI: 50%–78%) among prostate cancer patients. Three‐year survival was 47% (95% CI: 35%–58%) among breast cancer patients with ONJ and 29% (95% CI: 13%–47%) among prostate cancer patients with ONJ. The comparison cohort had a median follow‐up of 1.8 years (IQR: 0.9–2.6 years), and the 1‐ and 3‐year survival estimates were 80% (95% CI: 77%–82%) and 54% (95% CI: 50%–58%), respectively (Fig. 1A).
Figure 1

Overall survival and corresponding 95% CIs (shaded areas) in the osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ, N = 149) and in the matched comparison cohort (N = 1067). (A) Unadjusted survival curves and (B) adjusted survival curves using inverse probability weights. The ONJ confirmation date served as the index date for the ONJ cohort and matched members of the comparison cohort.

Overall survival and corresponding 95% CIs (shaded areas) in the osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ, N = 149) and in the matched comparison cohort (N = 1067). (A) Unadjusted survival curves and (B) adjusted survival curves using inverse probability weights. The ONJ confirmation date served as the index date for the ONJ cohort and matched members of the comparison cohort. Among the matched patients, ONJ was associated with an adjusted MRR of 1.31 (95% CI: 1.01–1.71) (Table 2 and Fig. 1B). The estimated median survival time was 2.1 years in the ONJ cohort and 3.4 years in the matched comparison cohort. Although imprecisely measured, the MRR was higher for prostate cancer than for breast cancer patients (Table 2). The sensitivity analyses restricted to the 2012–2015 eligibility period or to cancer patients without a diagnosis of osteoporosis produced consistent results compared with the main analysis (Table S2).
Table 2

All‐cause mortality rates and mortality rate ratios (MRRs) in cancer patients with osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ), relative to the comparison cohort

Cancer siteCohort N N deathsPerson‐yearsAll‐cause mortality
Mortality rateMortality rate ratios
Ratea 95% CIUnadjusted95% CIAdjustedb 95% CI
AllONJ1498025331.625.0–39.31.481.14–1.921.311.01–1.71
Comparison1067417199420.919.0–23.0ReferenceReference
BreastONJ844216525.518.4–34.51.340.95–1.901.130.80–1.60
Comparison645250127619.617.2–22.2ReferenceReference
ProstateONJ44266043.428.4–63.61.721.08–2.741.600.99–2.58
Comparison33112754023.519.6–28.0ReferenceReference
OtherONJ21122941.721.5–72.8 c c
Comparison914017822.416.0–30.5

Stratified analyses by cancer site are provided according to: breast cancer, prostate cancer and other cancer sites. N, number of individuals; Comparison cohort, comparison cohort from the cancer population without ONJ and with a record of bone‐targeted therapy initiating from cancer diagnosis date.

Per 100 person‐years.

Adjusted for record of distant metastasis (yes/no) registered on/before the index date, level of other comorbidity, and for sex (except in analyses for prostate cancer and for breast cancer).

Proportionality assumption was not fulfilled, as verified using Kolmogorov‐type supremum tests (unadjusted model, P = 0.014; adjusted model, P = 0.010).

All‐cause mortality rates and mortality rate ratios (MRRs) in cancer patients with osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ), relative to the comparison cohort Stratified analyses by cancer site are provided according to: breast cancer, prostate cancer and other cancer sites. N, number of individuals; Comparison cohort, comparison cohort from the cancer population without ONJ and with a record of bone‐targeted therapy initiating from cancer diagnosis date. Per 100 person‐years. Adjusted for record of distant metastasis (yes/no) registered on/before the index date, level of other comorbidity, and for sex (except in analyses for prostate cancer and for breast cancer). Proportionality assumption was not fulfilled, as verified using Kolmogorov‐type supremum tests (unadjusted model, P = 0.014; adjusted model, P = 0.010).

Discussion

In this cohort study of cancer patients treated with bone‐targeted agents, 1‐year survival after incident ONJ was 70%. Less than half of the ONJ‐affected patients survived for 3 years. After adjustment for measured prognostic factors, ONJ was associated with a mortality rate ratio of 1.31 compared with patients without ONJ. This finding contradicts the previously reported prolonged survival associated with ONJ 15. We report results from the largest nationwide cohort of cancer patients to date with clinically confirmed ONJ, with complete follow‐up for death and migrations. Although ascertainment of ONJ was potentially incomplete before 2012, our results did not materially change after restriction to a period with more complete ONJ ascertainment. Among cancer patients, the positive predictive value of a DNPR‐recorded hospital administration of intravenous bisphosphonate is 98% 33. However, the indication for bone‐targeted therapies is not recorded in the DNPR. Although the prevalence of osteoporosis was higher in the comparison cohort (17%) than in the ONJ cohort (9%), excluding patients with osteoporosis did not affect our MRRs. A smaller proportion of cancer patients without osteoporosis could nevertheless have received bone‐targeted agents to prevent cancer treatment‐induced bone loss 1, 34. It is not known whether cancer therapy‐induced bone loss affects survival aside from its associated cancer stage. Therefore, we have not considered it as a potential confounder in our study. The association of ONJ with mortality remaining after adjustment for measured prognostic factors may be due to ONJ being a marker of underlying advanced disease, or of behaviors associated with survival, such as smoking 35, 36. Missing data on cancer stage at diagnosis was observed in nearly 13–15% of the cohorts. Subsequently, missing registration on distant cancer stage is expected to be higher during the median period of 6 years from cancer diagnosis until the index date. Nonetheless, assuming most cancer patients received bone‐targeted therapy for bone malignancy 33, 34, and that time elapsed from first therapy record to the index date was longer in the ONJ than in the comparison cohort, ONJ patients could have more advanced bone disease at start follow‐up than members of the comparison cohort. In conclusion, ONJ was associated with reduced survival among cancer patients treated with bone‐targeted agents. ONJ may be a marker of advanced disease or of survival‐related lifestyle characteristics.

Conflict of Interest

The authors have declared no conflicts of interest. Table S1. Definitions of study variables by their specific ICD and procedure codes. Table S2. Sensitivity analyses of the association between ONJ and mortality among cancer patients treated with bone‐targeted agents, restricting the study eligibility period to 2012–2015, or to patients without osteoporosis. Click here for additional data file.
  35 in total

1.  A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation.

Authors:  M E Charlson; P Pompei; K L Ales; C R MacKenzie
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1987

2.  Bone health in cancer patients: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Authors:  R Coleman; J J Body; M Aapro; P Hadji; J Herrstedt
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2014-04-29       Impact factor: 32.976

3.  Quality of ICD-10 colorectal cancer diagnosis codes in the Danish National Registry of Patients.

Authors:  L Helqvist; R Erichsen; H Gammelager; M B Johansen; H T Sørensen
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Care (Engl)       Date:  2012-04-18       Impact factor: 2.520

4.  The Danish Cancer Registry.

Authors:  Marianne Lundkjær Gjerstorff
Journal:  Scand J Public Health       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 3.021

5.  Delaying skeletal-related events in a randomized phase 3 study of denosumab versus zoledronic acid in patients with advanced cancer: an analysis of data from patients with solid tumors.

Authors:  David Henry; Saroj Vadhan-Raj; Vera Hirsh; Roger von Moos; Vania Hungria; Luis Costa; Penella J Woll; Giorgio Scagliotti; Geoffrey Smith; Amy Feng; Susie Jun; Roger Dansey; Howard Yeh
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2013-10-26       Impact factor: 3.603

6.  Incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of osteonecrosis of the jaw: integrated analysis from three blinded active-controlled phase III trials in cancer patients with bone metastases.

Authors:  F Saad; J E Brown; C Van Poznak; T Ibrahim; S M Stemmer; A T Stopeck; I J Diel; S Takahashi; N Shore; D H Henry; C H Barrios; T Facon; F Senecal; K Fizazi; L Zhou; A Daniels; P Carrière; R Dansey
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2011-10-10       Impact factor: 32.976

7.  The predictive value of ICD-10 diagnostic coding used to assess Charlson comorbidity index conditions in the population-based Danish National Registry of Patients.

Authors:  Sandra K Thygesen; Christian F Christiansen; Steffen Christensen; Timothy L Lash; Henrik T Sørensen
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2011-05-28       Impact factor: 4.615

8.  American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons position paper on medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw--2014 update.

Authors:  Salvatore L Ruggiero; Thomas B Dodson; John Fantasia; Reginald Goodday; Tara Aghaloo; Bhoomi Mehrotra; Felice O'Ryan
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2014-05-05       Impact factor: 2.136

9.  Denosumab for the prevention of skeletal complications in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: comparison of skeletal-related events and symptomatic skeletal events.

Authors:  M R Smith; R E Coleman; L Klotz; K Pittman; P Milecki; S Ng; K N Chi; A Balakumaran; R Wei; H Wang; A Braun; K Fizazi
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2014-11-25       Impact factor: 32.976

10.  The Frequency of and Risk Factors for the Use of Bisphosphonates in the Adjuvant Setting of Primary Breast Cancer in Germany.

Authors:  Eva-Maria Fick; Alexander Katalinic; Annika Waldmann
Journal:  Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2015-01-05       Impact factor: 4.679

View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  Bone Health in Patients With Prostate Cancer: An Evidence-Based Algorithm.

Authors:  Eric D Johnson; Katerina Butler; Sumati Gupta
Journal:  Fed Pract       Date:  2021-08

2.  Denosumab Related Osteonecrosis of Jaw: a Case Report.

Authors:  Marco Vinícius de Sales Lima; Jaqueline Rizzato; Daniella Varzea Gracindo Marques; Dárcio Kitakawa; Felipe da Silva Peralta; Alexandre Prado Scherma; Luis Felipe C S Carvalho
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Res       Date:  2018-12-30

3.  The association with xerostomia from sialadenitis and the jaw osteonecrosis in head and neck cancer population: a nationwide cohort study.

Authors:  Yi-Fang Huang; Chih-Hsin Muo; Chun-Hao Tsai; Shih-Ping Liu; Chung-Ta Chang
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2018-05-03       Impact factor: 3.573

4.  Osteonecrosis of the jaw and survival of patients with cancer: a nationwide cohort study in Denmark.

Authors:  Priscila Corraini; Uffe Heide-Jørgensen; Morten Schiødt; Sven Erik Nørholt; John Acquavella; Henrik Toft Sørensen; Vera Ehrenstein
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2017-09-21       Impact factor: 4.452

5.  Exposure to alendronate is associated with a lower risk of bone metastases in osteoporotic women with early breast cancer.

Authors:  Vanessa Rouach; Inbal Goldshtein; Ido Wolf; Raphael Catane; Gabriel Chodick; Amit Iton; Naftali Stern; Daniel Cohen
Journal:  J Bone Oncol       Date:  2018-08-08       Impact factor: 4.072

6.  Factors influencing harmonized health data collection, sharing and linkage in Denmark and Switzerland: A systematic review.

Authors:  Lester Darryl Geneviève; Andrea Martani; Maria Christina Mallet; Tenzin Wangmo; Bernice Simone Elger
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-12-12       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.