Therapeutic Choices for Genitourinary Syndrome of Menopause (GSM) in Breast Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and Update.

(1) Background: Genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) is a medical condition that can affect breast cancer survivors (BCS). This is a complication that often can occur as a result of breast cancer treatment, causing symptoms such as vaginal dryness, itching, burning, dyspareunia, dysuria, pain, discomfort, and impairment of sexual function. BCS who experience these symptoms negatively impact multiple aspects of their quality of life to the point that some of them fail to complete adjuvant hormonal treatment; (2) Methods: In this systematic review of the literature, we have analyzed possible pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for GSM in BCS. We reviewed systemic hormone therapy, local hormone treatment with estrogens and androgens, the use of vaginal moisturizers and lubricants, ospemifene, and physical therapies such as radiofrequency, electroporation, and vaginal laser; (3) Results: The data available to date demonstrate that the aforementioned treatments are effective for the therapy of GSM and, in particular, vulvovaginal atrophy in BCS. Where possible, combination therapy often appears more useful than using a single line of treatment; (4) Conclusions: We analyzed the efficacy and safety data of each of these options for the treatment of GSM in BCS, emphasizing how often larger clinical trials with longer follow-ups are needed.

Use of aromatase inhibitors in patients with breast cancer is associated with deterioration of bone microarchitecture and density

ABSTRACT Objective: To evaluate changes in bone density and architecture in postmenopausal women with breast cancer (BC) and use of aromatase inhibitor (AI). Subjects and methods: Thirty-four postmenopausal women with BC, without bone metastasis, renal function impairment and who were not receiving bone-active drugs were selected from a population of 523 outpatients treated for BC. According to the presence of hormonal receptors, HER2 and Ki67, seventeen had positive hormonal receptors and received anastrozole (AI group), and seventeen were triple-negative receptors (non-AI group), previously treated with chemotherapy. Areal bone mineral density (aBMD) and vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) analyses were performed by DXA; vBMD and bone microarchitecture were evaluated by HR-pQCT. Fracture risk was estimated using the FRAX tool. Results: No patient referred previous low-impact fracture, and VFA detected one moderate vertebral fracture in a non-AI patient. AI patients showed lower aBMD and BMD T-scores at the hip and 33% radius and a higher proportion of osteoporosis diagnosis on DXA (47%) vs non-AI (17.6%). AI group had significantly lower values for vBMD at the entire, cortical and trabecular bone compartments, cortical and trabecular thickness and BV/TV. They also had a higher risk for major fractures and for hip fractures estimated by FRAX. Several HR-pQCT parameters evaluated at distal radius and distal tibia were significantly associated with fracture risk. Conclusion: AI is associated with alterations in bone density and microarchitecture of both the cortical and trabecular compartments. These findings explain the overall increase in fracture risk in this specific population.

Use of aromatase inhibitors in patients with breast cancer is associated with deterioration of bone microarchitecture and density.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate changes in bone density and architecture in postmenopausal women with breast cancer (BC) and use of aromatase inhibitor (AI). METHODS: Thirty-four postmenopausal women with BC, without bone metastasis, renal function impairment and who were not receiving bone-active drugs were selected from a population of 523 outpatients treated for BC. According to the presence of hormonal receptors, HER2 and Ki67, seventeen had positive hormonal receptors and received anastrozole (AI group), and seventeen were triple-negative receptors (non-AI group), previously treated with chemotherapy. Areal bone mineral density (aBMD) and vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) analyses were performed by DXA; vBMD and bone microarchitecture were evaluated by HR-pQCT. Fracture risk was estimated using the FRAX tool. RESULTS: No patient referred previous low-impact fracture, and VFA detected one moderate vertebral fracture in a non-AI patient. AI patients showed lower aBMD and BMD T-scores at the hip and 33% radius and a higher proportion of osteoporosis diagnosis on DXA (47%) vs non-AI (17.6%). AI group had significantly lower values for vBMD at the entire, cortical and trabecular bone compartments, cortical and trabecular thickness and BV/TV. They also had a higher risk for major fractures and for hip fractures estimated by FRAX. Several HR-pQCT parameters evaluated at distal radius and distal tibia were significantly associated with fracture risk. CONCLUSION: AI is associated with alterations in bone density and microarchitecture of both the cortical and trabecular compartments. These findings explain the overall increase in fracture risk in this specific population.