Benefit with aromatase inhibitors in the adjuvant setting for postmenopausal women with breast cancer

The third-generation aromatase inhibitors, letrozole, anastrozole, and exemestane, have been shown to be effective both as alternatives to tamoxifen in first-line treatment of hormone-sensitive advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women and following failure of first-line tamoxifen for endocrine therapy. These 3 agents are now being investigated as adjuvant therapy of early breast cancer, as alternative or complementary treatments to the standard, tamoxifen. Three treatment strategies are under investigation: replacement of tamoxifen as adjuvant therapy for 5 years (early adjuvant therapy), sequencing of tamoxifen before or after an aromatase inhibitor during the first 5 years (early sequential adjuvant therapy), or following 5 years of tamoxifen (extended adjuvant therapy). In the first adjuvant trial (Arimidex, Tamoxifen Alone or in Combination [ATAC]), anastrozole was significantly superior to tamoxifen in reducing risk of disease recurrence, and recently, the Breast International Group (BIG) trial BIG 1-98 demonstrated the significant superiority of letrozole over tamoxifen in improving disease-free survival. A large trial (International Collaborative Cancer Group [ICCG] trial 96) investigated sequencing of 2 to 3 years of exemestane after 2 to 3 years of tamoxifen and found that switching to exemestane was significantly superior in disease-free survival compared with continuing on tamoxifen. The Arimidex or Nolvadex (ARNO) and the small ITA (Italian Tamoxifen Arimidex) trials similarly sequenced anastrozole after tamoxifen and also found that sequencing reduced the hazard of recurrence compared with remaining on tamoxifen. Trial MA.17 evaluated extended adjuvant therapy with letrozole vs placebo following 5 years of tamoxifen. Disease-free survival was significantly improved with letrozole vs placebo, irrespective of whether patients had lymph node-positive or node-negative tumors. All 3 aromatase inhibitors were generally well tolerated. Results of these trials indicate that aromatase inhibitors provide important benefits relative to tamoxifen in each of these adjuvant treatment settings, but the optimal approach still needs to be defined. Other trials continue to investigate some of these adjuvant treatment strategies.     

A summary of second-line randomized studies of aromatase inhibitors

The new generation of selective aromatase inhibitors (anastrozole, letrozole and exemestane) offer a significant efficacy and safety advantage over both older agents in this class (aminoglutethimide) and the progestins (megestrol acetate (MA)), as second-line treatment for postmenopausal women with advanced hormone-dependent breast cancer who have failed on tamoxifen therapy. Exemestane, a steroidal aromatase inhibitor, has been shown to have activity after failure with the non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors, anastrozole and letrozole, and could be used as third-line treatment. Although the newer aromatase inhibitors belong to the same class and appear, from indirect comparisons, to have similar efficacy compared with the older therapies, they have different pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles, suggesting the potential for clinical differences. Compared with exemestane and letrozole, anastrozole shows greater selectivity for aromatase, as it lacks any evidence of an effect on adrenal steroidogenesis and has no androgenic effects. Therefore, it is clear that these agents should not be considered to be similar in all respects. In summary, the introduction of the aromatase inhibitors represents a significant step forward in the treatment of advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women. Studies in the adjuvant setting will ultimately determine whether the differences in pharmacokinetics and phamacodynamics will be of clinical relevance.     

Where do selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) and aromatase inhibitors (AIs) now fit into breast cancer treatment algorithms?

The agents used for endocrine therapy in patients with breast cancer have changed markedly over the past decade. Tamoxifen remains the anti-oestrogen of choice, but could be replaced by the oestrogen receptor down-regulator ICI 182780 or by the fixed ring triphenylethylene arzoxifene (previously SERM III) soon. Whilst aminoglutethimide and 4-OH androstenedione were the aromatase inhibitors of choice, they have been replaced by non-steroidal (anastrozole and letrozole) and steroidal (exemestane) inhibitors of high potency and low side effect profile. Previously, often used treatments such as progestogens (megestrol acetate and medroxyprogesterone acetate) and androgens are now rarely used or confined to fourth or fifth line treatments. The LHRH agonist, goserelin, remains the treatment of choice for pre-menopausal patients with advanced breast cancer although recent randomised trials indicate a response, time to progression and survival advantage for the combination of goserelin and tamoxifen compared with goserelin alone.

The newer treatments have led to questions concerning the optimum sequence of agents to use in advanced breast cancer and as neo-adjuvant and adjuvant therapy in relation to surgery. Two trials of anastrozole compared with tamoxifen and one trial of letrozole compared with tamoxifen indicate that the new triazole aromatase inhibitors have a significant advantage over the anti-oestrogen with respect to time to progression and survival. Similarly, triazole aromatase inhibitors give faster and more complete responses compared with tamoxifen when used in post-menopausal women before surgery.

Major research questions remain with respect to the aromatase inhibitors used as adjuvant therapy. Anastrozole is being tested alone or in combination with tamoxifen compared with tamoxifen in the ‘so-called’ ATAC trial. Over 9000 patients have been randomised to this important study: the results will be available late-2001. A similar study comparing letrozole and tamoxifen started recently under the auspices of the Breast International Group. Importantly, this trial is also comparing the sequence of tamoxifen followed by letrozole (or vice versa). A similar trial of exemestane given after 2–3 years of tamoxifen compared with 5 years of tamoxifen is recruiting well as is a study comparing letrozole (or placebo) for 5 years after 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen. These studies may show that aromatase inhibitors are superior to tamoxifen or that a sequence is preferable.

ICI 182780 causes complete oestrogen receptor down-regulation leading to a the lack of agonist activity of the drug. Two trials of ICI 182780 compared with anastrozole for advanced disease will report later this year and a comparison with tamoxifen next year. Arzoxifene (SERM III) is being tested against tamoxifen. These studies are likely to result in new anti-oestrogens being introduced into the clinic.

Most of our endocrine treatments deprived the tumour cell of oestradiol. In vitro experiments with MCF-7 cells indicate that tumour cells can adapt and then grow in response to low oestrogen concentrations in the tissue—culture medium. Importantly, the cells were shown to apoptose in response to high oestrogen concentrations. A recent clinical trial has demonstrated a high response rate to stilboestrol given after a median of four previous oestrogen depriving endocrine therapies. These data and the newer treatments available indicate a need to re-think our general approach to endocrine therapy and endocrine prevention.     

Are aromatase inhibitors superior to antiestrogens?

Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) have been in use to treat metastatic breast cancer for over 25 years. Recently potent and specific AIs have been introduced, which, because of their low toxicity profile, are being used in the adjuvant and neoadjuvant situation and also for the prevention of breast cancer. The two non-steroidal AIs, anastrozole and letrozole, and the steroidal AI, exemestane, have all shown superiority to tamoxifen as first-line treatment for advanced breast cancer. Interestingly, the oestrogen receptor downregulator, fulvestrant, was shown to be equivalent to anastrozole when compared as second-line therapy after the failure of tamoxifen. The first adjuvant AI trial began in 1996 and recruited over 9000 patients (ATAC trial). Anastrozole was compared with tamoxifen and a combination of the two drugs. There were no significant differences between tamoxifen and the combination. However, anastrozole showed about a 20% improvement in disease-free survival in ER+ disease compared with the other treatments. An overall survival analysis will be reported later this year. Two trials have compared 5 years of tamoxifen with 2–3 years of tamoxifen, followed by 2–3 years of AI (one trial (ITA) used anastrozole and another (intergroup) exemestane). Both trials show a disease-free advantage for the switch to AI. In another study (MA17) 5 years of tamoxifen was followed by a randomisation to letrozole or placebo and showed a significant disease-free advantage to the AI. Both letrozole and anastrozole show superiority to tamoxifen when used as a neoadjuvant therapy. Anastrozole significantly reduced contralateral breast cancer compared with tamoxifen, and this has led to two prevention trials: one in women at risk comparing anastrozole with placebo and the other after excision of DCIS comparing anastrozole with tamoxifen (IBIS II). The NCI Canada has also just initiated a trial of exemestane for prevention. Nearly all data available indicate that AIs are superior to tamoxifen. The important question is whether survival is improved when they are used as adjuvant therapy?     

Aromatase inhibitors as adjuvant therapies in patients with breast cancer

There is increasing evidence that endocrine therapy has an important role in patients with oestrogen receptor positive breast cancer. Several large meta-analyses have reinforced the value of both ovarian ablation and tamoxifen in improving survival. Over the past decade, aromatase inhibitors have become the treatment of choice for second-line therapy of metastatic breast cancer, and the third generation inhibitors have now an established reputation for good patient tolerability. Early studies indicated that aminoglutethimide/hydrocortisone could benefit postmenopausal patients with primary breast cancer, and in 2001, the ATAC study showed that the third generation aromatase inhibitor, anastrozole, seemed superior to tamoxifen in that anastrozole-treated patients had a longer disease-free survival. Other studies will report on the relative merits of the steroidal inhibitor exemestane as well as non-steroidal letrozole. The exact duration and sequencing of treatment, together with the long-term effects on bone are at present, unknown.     

Development and evolution of therapies targeted to the estrogen receptor for the treatment and prevention of breast cancer

This article describes the origins and evolution of "antiestrogenic" medicines for the treatment and prevention of breast cancer. Developing drugs that target the estrogen receptor (ER) either directly (tamoxifen) or indirectly (aromatase inhibitors) has improved the prognosis of breast cancer and significantly advanced healthcare. The development of the principles for treatment and the success of the concept, in practice, has become a model for molecular medicine and presaged the current testing of numerous targeted therapies for all forms of cancer. The translational research with tamoxifen to target the ER with the appropriate duration (5 years) of adjuvant therapy has contributed to the falling national death rates from breast cancer. Additionally, exploration of the endocrine pharmacology of tamoxifen and related nonsteroidal antiestrogen (e.g. keoxifene now known as raloxifene) resulted in the laboratory recognition of selective ER modulation and the translation of the concept to use raloxifene for the prevention of osteoporosis and breast cancer. However, the extensive evaluation of tamoxifen treatment revealed small but significant side effects such as endometrial cancer, blood clots and the development of acquired resistance. The solution was to develop drugs that targeted the aromatase enzyme specifically to prevent the conversion of androstenedione to estrone and subsequently estradiol. The successful translational research with the suicide inhibitor 4-hydroxyandrostenedione (known as formestane) pioneered the development of a range of oral aromatase inhibitors that are either suicide inhibitors (exemestane) or competitive inhibitors (letrozole and anastrozole) of the aromatase enzyme. Treatment with aromatase inhibitors is proving effective and is associated with reduction in the incidence of endometrial cancer and blood clots when compared with tamoxifen and there is also limited cross resistance so treatment can be sequential. Current clinical trials are addressing the value of aromatase inhibitors as chemopreventive agents for postmenopausal women.     

The intratumoral aromatase model: studies with aromatase inhibitors and antiestrogens

Aromatase inhibitors have now been approved as first-line treatment options for hormone-dependent advanced breast cancer. When compared to tamoxifen, these aromatase inhibitors provide significant survival and tolerability advantages. However, the optimal use of an aromatase inhibitor and tamoxifen remains to be established. To date, the intratumoral aromatase xenograft model has proved accurate in predicting the outcome of clinical trials. Utilizing this model, we performed long-term studies with tamoxifen and letrozole to determine time to disease progression with each of the treatment regimens. Aromatase-transfected MCF-7Ca human breast cancer cells were grown as tumor xenografts in female ovariectomized athymic nude mice in which androstenedione was converted to estrogen and stimulated tumor growth. When tumor volumes were approximately 300 mm³, the animals were grouped for continued supplementation with androstenedione only (control) or for treatment with letrozole 10 μg per day (long-term), tamoxifen 100 μg per day (long-term), letrozole alternating to tamoxifen (4-week rotation), tamoxifen alternating to letrozole (4-week rotation), or a combination of the two drugs. Tumors of control mice had doubled in volume in 3–4 weeks. In mice treated with tamoxifen and the combination, tumor doubling time was significantly shorter (16 and 18 weeks, respectively) than with letrozole (34 weeks). Furthermore, alternating letrozole and tamoxifen treatment every 4 weeks was less effective than letrozole alone. Tumors doubled in 17–18 weeks when the starting treatment was tamoxifen and in 22 weeks when the starting treatment was letrozole. Tumors progressing on tamoxifen remained sensitive to second-line therapy with letrozole (10 μg per day). However, when mice with letrozole-resistant tumors were switched to antiestrogen treatment, tumors did not respond to tamoxifen (100 μg per day) or faslodex (1 mg per day). This suggests that advanced breast cancers treated with letrozole may be insensitive to subsequent second-line hormonal agents. Thus, although letrozole was determined to be an effective second-line treatment option for tumors progressing on tamoxifen, antiestrogen therapy does not appear to be effective for tumors progressing on letrozole. However, response to second-line treatment was observed in a model where tumors that had progressed on letrozole were transplanted to new mice. These tumors had been allowed to grow in the presence of supplemented androstenedione but absence of letrozole. This suggests that resistance to letrozole may be reversible, allowing tumors to respond to subsequent antiestrogens and letrozole.     

Adjuvant endocrine therapy for postmenopausal breast cancer in the era of aromatase inhibitors: an update

There is overwhelming evidence that optimal adjuvant endocrine therapy for hormone sensitive breast cancer in postmenopausal women should include a third generation aromatase inhibitor (AI). On current evidence, adjuvant anstrozole or letrozole should be used upfront in such patients especially in those with high risk disease (node positive and/or tumours > 2 cm). The sequential approach of tamoxifen for 2–3 years followed by exemestane or anastrozole for 2–3 years is a reasonable alternative to 5 years of AI monotherapy in patients with low risk disease (node negative and tumour smaller than 2 cm) especially if the tumour is positive for estrogen and progesterone receptors.Node-positive patients completing 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen should be offered letrozole for up 48 months. Further research is required to establish the long-term cardiovascular safety of AIs especially that of letrozole and exmestane, the optimal AI to use, duration of AI therapy and whether monotherapy with an AI for 5 years is superior to sequencing an AI after 2–3 years of tamoxifen.The bone mineral density (BMD) should be measured at baseline and monitored during therapy in women being treated with AIs. Anti-osteoporosis agents should such as bisphosphonates should be considered in patients at high risk of bone fractures.     

Adjuvant endocrine therapy in postmenopausal hormone-sensitive breast cancer: to start, to switch or to extend?

From the big randomized clinical trials there are evidences that adjuvant endocrine therapy for hormone-sensitive early breast cancer in postmenopausal women should include an aromatase inhibitor (AI). Anastrozole or letrozole should be used upfront for 5 years (ATAC and BIG 1-98), the sequential approach of tamoxifen for 2-3 years, followed by anastrozole or exemestane for 2-3 years is a reasonable alternative (ABCSG8, ARNO 95, IES, ITA), and mostly in patients with node-positive disease completing 5 years of tamoxifen should be offered letrozole up to 4-5 years (MA-17). In each of these trials incorporation of an AI resulted in significant improvement in study endpoints. Further results will be needed to establish the optimal beneficial effect, use, duration and safety of adjuvant AI therapies.     

'Arimidex' (anastrozole) versus tamoxifen as adjuvant therapy in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer--efficacy overview

ATAC, a randomized, double-blind trial, compared tamoxifen (20 mg) with anastrozole (‘Arimidex’) (1 mg) alone, and the combination of anastrozole plus tamoxifen (combination), as adjuvant endocrine treatment for postmenopausal patients with early breast cancer. Patients with operable invasive breast cancer following completion of primary therapy, who were candidates to receive adjuvant endocrine therapy, were eligible for this study. Primary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS) and tolerability. Other endpoints included time to recurrence (TTR: censoring non-breast cancer deaths before recurrence) and the incidence of contralateral breast cancer. A total of 9366 patients were included in this study (N=3125, 3116 and 3125 for anastrozole, tamoxifen and the combination, respectively). Median duration of therapy was 30.7 months and median follow-up was 33.3 months. The total numbers of events were 317, 379 and 383 for anastrozole, tamoxifen and the combination, respectively. DFS was significantly improved in the overall population for anastrozole versus tamoxifen (hazard ratio (HR)=0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.71–0.96), P=0.013). Anastrozole showed improved TTR compared with tamoxifen (HR=0.79, CI (0.67–0.94), P=0.008), which improved even further in the ER+ and/or PR+ subgroup (HR=0.73, CI (0.59–0.90), P=0.003). The incidences of hot flushes, thromboembolic events, ischaemic cerebrovascular events, vaginal bleeding/discharge and endometrial cancer were significantly reduced with anastrozole compared with tamoxifen (P<0.03 for all). Musculoskeletal disorders and fractures were significantly reduced in patients receiving tamoxifen compared with those on anastrozole (P<0.03 for both). No increase in hip fractures was seen for anastrozole versus tamoxifen (11 versus 13, respectively). Combination treatment was equivalent to tamoxifen in terms of both efficacy and tolerability. Anastrozole showed superior efficacy to tamoxifen for DFS, TTR and contralateral breast cancer. Early findings show anastrozole to be an effective and well-tolerated endocrine option for the treatment of postmenopausal patients with early breast cancer. For the first time a choice now exists for adjuvant endocrine treatment for postmenopausal women with hormone responsive tumours. Longer follow-up will further define the benefit/risk of anastrozole adjuvant therapy.     

Women Commencing Anastrozole,Letrozole or Tamoxifen for Early Breast Cancer: The Impact of Comorbidity and Demographics on Initial Choice

Background

Australian clinical guidelines recommend endocrine therapy for all women with hormone-dependent early breast cancer. Guidelines specify tamoxifen as first-line therapy for pre-menopausal women, and tamoxifen or an aromatase inhibitor (AI) for post-menopausal women depending on the risk of recurrence based on tumour characteristics including size. Therapies have different side effect profiles; therefore comorbidity may also influence choice. We examined comorbidity, and the clinical and demographic characteristics of women commencing different therapies.

Patients and Methods

We identified the first dispensing of tamoxifen, anastrozole or letrozole for women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer in the 45 and Up Study from 2004–2009 (N = 1266). Unit-level pharmacy and medical service claims, hospital, Cancer Registry, and self-reported data were linked to determine menopause status at diagnosis, tumour size, age, comorbidities, and change in subsidy restrictions. Chi-square tests and generalised regression models were used to compare the characteristics of women commencing different therapies.

Results

Most pre-menopausal women commenced therapy with tamoxifen (91%). Anastrozole was the predominant therapy for post-menopausal women (57%), followed by tamoxifen (28%). Women with osteoporosis were less likely to commence anastrozole compared with tamoxifen (anastrozole RR = 0.7, 95% CI = 0.5–0.9). Women with arthritis were 1.6-times more likely to commence letrozole than anastrozole (95% CI = 1.1–2.1). Tamoxifen was more often initiated in women with tumours >1 cm, who were also ≥75 years. Subsidy restriction changes were associated with substantial increases in the proportion of women commencing AIs (anastrozole RR = 4.3, letrozole RR = 8.3).

Conclusions

The findings indicate interplay of comorbidity and therapy choice for women with invasive breast cancer. Most post-menopausal women commenced therapy with anastrozole; however, letrozole and tamoxifen were more often initiated for women with comorbid arthritis and osteoporosis, respectively. Tamoxifen was also more common for women with tumours >1 cm and aged ≥75 years. Subsidy restrictions appear to have strongly influenced therapy choice.     

Letrozole versus tamoxifen in the treatment of advanced breast cancer and as neoadjuvant therapy

Letrozole, a third generation aromatase inhibitor, has been compared with tamoxifen in the treatment of advanced breast cancer and as neoadjuvant therapy. In a first-line trial in advanced disease, 939 post menopausal women were randomised double blind to receive treatment with letrozole 2.5 mg daily or tamoxifen 20 mg daily. Letrozole was significantly superior in terms of median time to progression (9.4 months versus 6.1 months, P = 0.0001), objective response (30% versus 20%, P = 0.0006), and clinical benefit (49% versus 38%, P = 0.0001). Superiority of letrozole was independent of disease site, receptor status, or prior adjuvant anti-oestrogen therapy. In an extended phase of this trial, 200 patients were crossed over to tamoxifen after letrozole, compared with 197 crossed over to letrozole after tamoxifen. Median overall survival was 34 months for letrozole versus 30 months for tamoxifen (not significant).

In a similar randomised double-blind neoadjuvant trial, 337 post menopausal patients with large ER/or PgR positive T2–T4 cancers, either requiring mastectomy or locally advanced, were randomised to preoperative letrozole or tamoxifen for 4 months prior to surgery. Overall response was 55% for letrozole versus 36% for tamoxifen (P < 0.001). Conservative surgery was possible in 45% of patients treated with letrozole versus 35% with tamoxifen (P = 0.022).

In both trials, both treatments were well tolerated with no significant differences in side effects.

These results indicate that letrozole is more active than tamoxifen both as neoadjuvant therapy and as first-line treatment in advanced disease. They support the importance of current adjuvant trials comparing the two treatments.     

Surgical issues surrounding use of aromatase inhibitors

There are important surgical issues related to the use of the third generation aromatase inhibitors in both the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings. Neoadjuvant hormone therapy is effective at downstaging tumours, particularly large tumours initially thought to be inoperable or requiring mastectomy. Randomised trials have shown that the newer aromatase inhibitors letrozole and anastrozole increase the numbers of women who are suitable for breast-conservation compared with tamoxifen, and that letrozole is superior to tamoxifen in terms of clinical response.

Aromatase inhibitors are most effective in ER-rich tumours and are clinically and biologically effective in both HER2 positive and negative tumours, whereas HER2 positive tumours show a level of resistance to tamoxifen.

In neoadjuvant studies comparing aromatase inhibitors with tamoxifen, the duration of use has been 3–4 months, by which time any response is usually evident but longer treatment periods produce continued shrinkage and response. The re-excision rate following breast conservation surgery after neoadjuvant hormone therapy is favourable compared with the rates following immediate wide local excision. Local recurrence rates are acceptable in patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy and breast-conserving surgery providing post-operative radiotherapy is given.

Adjuvant aromatase inhibitors, as well as having an effect on metastatic disease and survival, reduce local and regional recurrence.     

Aromatase inhibitors and inactivators in the treatment of advanced breast cancer

Advanced breast cancer remains incurable. For these patients, durable response and minimal toxicity are the main goals of current therapy. The antiestrogen tamoxifen has proved to be a significant advance in the treatment of breast cancer. Due to its partial estrogen activity, long term medication with tamoxifen has been found to cause endometrium proliferation wich can result in cancer in some patients. Reduction of estrogen production identified the aromatase inhibitors. Both steroidal substrate analog, type I inactivator, wich inactivate the enzyme and non-steroidal competitive reversible, type II inhibitors, are now avaiable. Two new 3(rd) generation aromatase inactivators have recently completed phase III evaluation (anastrozole and letrozole) and we have some results investigating one of the new 3(rd) generation aromatase inhibitors (exemestane). The 3(rd) generation aromatase inhibitors and inactivators are better tolerated and more effective than each of our current standard 2(nd) line endocrin therapies. These agents are being directly compared with standard adjuvant medication, tamoxifen, or are being evaluated in different sequences.     

Growth inhibition of estrogen receptor-positive and aromatase-positive human breast cancer cells in monolayer and spheroid cultures by letrozole, anastrozole, and tamoxifen

Two third-generation aromatase inhibitors, letrozole and anastrozole, and the antiestrogen tamoxifen, were compared for growth-inhibiting activity in two estrogen receptor (ER)-positive aromatase-overexpressing human breast cancer cell lines, MCF-7aro and T-47Daro. Inhibition of hormone (1 nM testosterone)-stimulated proliferation was evaluated in both monolayer cultures and in three-dimensional spheroid cultures. Letrozole and anastrozole were also compared for effectiveness of aromatase inhibition, and relative affinity for aromatase, under both monolayer and spheroid growth conditions. Letrozole was an effective inhibitor of MCF-7aro monolayer cell proliferation, with an estimated 50% inhibitory concentration (IC50) of 50-100 nM, whereas an IC50 was not reached with anastrozole at any concentration tested (100-500 nM). An IC50 of tamoxifen was 1000 nM. Proliferation of T-47Daro monolayer cells was more sensitive to inhibition by all three agents; as with MCF-7aro cells, letrozole was the most effective inhibitor. MCF-7aro spheroids were slightly less sensitive than monolayer cells proliferation-inhibiting effects of letrozole (IC50 about 200 nM), and there was no significant inhibition with 100-200 nM anastrozole or 200-1000 nM tamoxifen. Letrozole and anastrozole significantly inhibited T-47Daro spheroid cell proliferation, at 15-25 and 50 nM, respectively, consistent with the greater sensitivity of T-47Daro monolayer cells to inhibition of proliferation by these agents. Tamoxifen failed to significantly inhibit T-47Daro spheroid cell proliferation over a 100-500 nM concentration range. Determination of aromatase inhibition in monolayers of both cell lines by a direct-access microsomal assay and an intact-cell assay revealed that letrozole was more active than anastrozole in monolayers of both cell lines and in both assays. In MCF-7aro spheroids following cell lysis, only letrozole significantly inhibited aromatase activity, supporting the conclusion that letrozole binds stronger to aromatase than anastrozole does. Our results demonstrate that MCF-7aro and T-47Daro spheroids could be a suitable model for evaluation of growth-inhibitory effects of agents used in hormonal therapy of breast cancer.     

Aromatase and its inhibitors

Inhibitors of aromatase (estrogen synthetase) have been developed as treatment for postmenopausal breast cancer. Both steroidal substrate analogs, type I inhibitors, which inactivate the enzyme and non-steroidal competitive reversible, type II inhibitors, are now available. 4-hydroxyandrostenedione (4-OHA), the first selective aromatase inhibitor, has been shown to reduce serum estrogen concentrations and cause complete and partial responses in approximately 25% of patients with hormone responsive disease who have relapsed from previous endocrine treatment. Letrozole (CGS 20, 269) and anastrozole (ZN 1033) have been recently approved for treatment. Both suppress serum estrogen levels to the limit of assay detection. Letrozole has been shown to be significantly superior to megace in overall response rates and time to treatment failure, whereas anastrozole was found to improve survival in comparison to megace. Both were better tolerated than the latter. The potential of aromatase within the breast as a significant source of estrogen mediating tumor proliferation and which might determine the outcome of inhibitor treatment was explored. Using immunocytochemistry and in situ hybridization, aromatase and mRNA_arom was detected mainly in the epithelial cells of the terminal ductal lobular units (TDLU) of the normal breast and also in breast tumor epithelial cells as well as some stromal cells. Increase in proliferation, measured by increased thymidine incorporation into DNA and by PCNA immunostaining in response to testosterone was observed in histocultures of breast cancer samples. This effect could be inhibited by 4-OHA and implies that intratumoral aromatase has functional significance. An intratumoral aromatase model in the ovariectomized nude mouse was developed which simulated the hormone responsive postmenopausal breast cancer patient. This model also allows evaluation of the efficacy of aromatase inhibitors and antiestrogens in tumors of estrogen receptor positive, human breast carcinoma cells transfected with the human aromatase gene. Thus, the cells synthesized estrogen which stimulated tumor formation. Both aromatase inhibitors and antiestrogens were effective in suppressing tumor growth in this model. However, letrozole was more effective than tamoxifen. When the aromatase inhibitors were combined with tamoxifen, tumor growth was suppressed to about the same extent as with the aromatase inhibitors alone. Thus, there was no additive or synergistic effects of combining tamoxifen with aromatase inhibitors. This suggests that sequential treatment with these agents is likely to be more beneficial to the patient in terms of longer response to treatment.     

Managing Bone Health in Breast Cancer

ObjectiveOsteoporosis is a common condition that can be caused or exacerbated by estrogen deficiency.MethodsThis narrative review will discuss optimizing bone health in the setting of adjuvant endocrine treatments for hormone receptor–positive breast cancer and the current use of antiresorptive agents as adjuvant therapy and as bone modifying agents.ResultsAdjuvant endocrine treatments for hormone receptor–positive breast cancer (tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors) affect bone health. The exact effect depends on the agent used and the menopausal state of the woman. Antiresorptive medications for osteoporosis, bisphosphonates and denosumab, lower the risk of bone loss from aromatase inhibitors. Use of bisphosphonates as adjuvant treatment in breast cancer, regardless of hormone receptor status, is increasing because of benefits seen to cancer relapse and survival.ConclusionOptimizing bone health in women with breast cancer during and after cancer treatment is informed by an understanding of breast cancer treatment and its skeletal effect.     

Aromatase resistance mechanisms in model systems in vivo

Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) have now been shown to be more effective than the anti-estrogen (AE) tamoxifen and have few side effects in ER+ breast cancer patients. However, some patients may not respond and resistance to treatment may develop in others. To investigate the mechanisms involved in the loss of sensitivity of the tumors to AIs, we have studied athymic mice with tumors grown from human estrogen receptor (ER) positive breast cancer cells (MCF-7) stably transfected with aromatase (MCF-7Ca). Treatment with letrozole upregulated Her-2 after four weeks despite continued responsiveness of tumor growth to letrozole. Furthermore, the level of Her-2 protein in letrozole refractory tumors was found to be six fold higher than the control tumors. Cells isolated from these tumors also had increased levels of Her-2 along with lower expression of ERα and aromatase and apparent estradiol independent growth. When Her-2 was inhibited by trastuzumab (antibody against Her-2) ERα levels in the cells were restored indicating that Her-2 is a negative regulator of ERα. This interaction between Her-2 and ER suggests that inhibition of both the Her-2 and estrogen signaling pathways is required to prolong the responsiveness of the tumors to endocrine therapies. Thus, when treatment with trastuzumab and letrozole was combined, ER was restored and tumor growth markedly inhibited compared to treatment with either drug alone. These findings demonstrate that tumor cells under the stress of treatment can adapt and utilize alternate pathways. Thus, when letrozole treatment was stopped, tumor Her-2 levels declined and ER levels were restored to those of hormone sensitive tumors. A second course of letrozole treatment inhibited tumors growth to the same extent and for as long as the initial treatment. These and other strategies to restore aromatase and ERα resulting in sensitivity to hormone therapy could be of substantial benefit to patients who have acquired resistance to AIs.     

The development, application and limitations of breast cancer cell lines to study tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitor resistance

Estrogen plays important roles in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Endocrine therapies, such as the antiestrogen tamoxifen, antagonize the binding of estrogen to estrogen receptor (ER), whereas aromatase inhibitors (AIs) directly inhibit the production of estrogen. Understanding the mechanisms of endocrine resistance and the ways in which we may better treat these types of resistance has been aided by the development of cellular models for resistant breast cancers. In this review, we will discuss what is known thus far regarding both de novo and acquired resistance to tamoxifen or AIs. Our laboratory has generated a collection of AI- and tamoxifen-resistant cell lines in order to comprehensively study the individual types of resistance mechanisms. Through the use of microarray analysis, we have determined that our cell lines resistant to a particular AI (anastrozole, letrozole, or exemestane) or tamoxifen are distinct from each other, indicating that these mechanisms can be quite complex. Furthermore, we will describe two novel de novo AI-resistant cell lines that were generated from our laboratory. Initial characterization of these cells reveals that they are distinct from our acquired AI-resistant cell models. In addition, we will review potential therapies which may be useful for overcoming resistant breast cancers through studies using endocrine resistant cell lines. Finally, we will discuss the benefits and shortcomings of cell models. Together, the information presented in this review will provide us a better understanding of acquired and de novo resistance to tamoxifen and AI therapies, the use of appropriate cell models to better study these types of breast cancer, which are valuable for identifying novel treatments and strategies for overcoming both tamoxifen and AI-resistant breast cancers.