2012Journal of Clinical OncologyRequires access

Would warning of osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) have induced a change in the administration schedule of zoledronic acid (ZA)? A report from Toledo, Spain.

Ana Rosa Rubio Salvador, José Ignacio Chacón, Enriqueta Muñoz Platón, Begoña Martínez Carrasco, Nazaret Cordero Franco, José Manuel Martínez Sesmero, Laura Paniagua, Sonia Alonso Soler, Alberto San Juan del Moral, L. Fernández Franco, Carmen Esteban, Paloma Moya Gomez, M.Á. Cruz Mora

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

e19596 Background: ZA therapy has been associated with the development of ONJ. In Nov 8th, 2005, osteonecrosis of the jaw was elevated to a safety warning by Spanish Drug Agency (SDA). The aim of this study was to investigate if that warning has had any effect in the pattern of ZA administration in a general hospital. Methods: We retrospectively analysed database using pharmacy, medical and nurse claims data from the Oncobass integrated claims database for all pts diagnosed with cancer who had received treatment with ZA between Jan 1, 2002, and Dec 31, 2011. Delivered doses of ZA were stratified in 2 groups: used before the SDA warning and after the SDA warning. Main variable: time between two consecutive doses (TTCD). Secondary variables: age, sex and diagnosis. Descriptive statistical analysis were applied for both groups. Comparisons of means of TTCD before and after the warning were performed with Student’s test, or the Mann-Whitney test, as necessary. Statistic significance: p value < 0.05. Results: We identified 761 patients (374 (49.2%) male; 387 (50.8%) female), median age 64 y (25 – 92) who were delivered 7301 doses [mean: 9.6 doses/patient (d/p)]: 2,353 (32.2%) before the SDA warning and 4948 (67.8%) after. Pathologies: breast cancer (BC) 257 patients (pts) (33,77%), 2,918 doses (40%), mean 11.4 d/p; multiple myeloma (MM) 167 pts (21.94%), 2001 doses (27%), 12 d/p; prostate adenocarcinoma (PA) 129 pts (16.95%), 1,510 doses (20.7%), 11.7 d/p; lung cancer (LC), 112 pts (14.72%), mean 4.2 d/p, 465 doses (6.4%); other 96 pts (12.61%), 407 doses (5,5%), 4.2 d/p. 3,126 (43%) doses were delivered to male and 4,149 (57%) to female. TTCD was significantly increased after ths SDA warning [32.12 vs 33.87 days (d); p< 0.001; CI 95% (-0.79)- (-0.90)]. By pathologies, differences were significant only for MM [35.8 vs 44.4 d; p<0.001; CI 95% (-10.19)-(-6.99)] and for PA [28.67 vs 32.03; p < 0.001; CI 95% (-5.08)-(-1.63)], but not for the other pathologies. Median d/p was unchanged before and after warnings for all pathologies except for MM (13 d/p vs 8.3 d/p). Conclusions: In our environment, ONJ warnings have not changed substantially the ZA schedule pattern, except for MM.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

e19596 Background: ZA therapy has been associated with the development of ONJ. In Nov 8th, 2005, osteonecrosis of the jaw was elevated to a safety warning by Spanish Drug Agency (SDA). The aim of this study was to investigate if that warning has had any effect in the pattern of ZA administration in a general hospital. Methods: We retrospectively analysed database using pharmacy, medical and nurse claims data from the Oncobass integrated claims database for all pts diagnosed with cancer who had received treatment with ZA between Jan 1, 2002, and Dec 31, 2011. Delivered doses of ZA were stratified in 2 groups: used before the SDA warning and after the SDA warning. Main variable: time between two consecutive doses (TTCD). Secondary variables: age, sex and diagnosis. Descriptive statistical analysis were applied for both groups. Comparisons of means of TTCD before and after the warning were performed with Student’s test, or the Mann-Whitney test, as necessary. Statistic significance: p value < 0.05. Results: We identified 761 patients (374 (49.2%) male; 387 (50.8%) female), median age 64 y (25 – 92) who were delivered 7301 doses [mean: 9.6 doses/patient (d/p)]: 2,353 (32.2%) before the SDA warning and 4948 (67.8%) after. Pathologies: breast cancer (BC) 257 patients (pts) (33,77%), 2,918 doses (40%), mean 11.4 d/p; multiple myeloma (MM) 167 pts (21.94%), 2001 doses (27%), 12 d/p; prostate adenocarcinoma (PA) 129 pts (16.95%), 1,510 doses (20.7%), 11.7 d/p; lung cancer (LC), 112 pts (14.72%), mean 4.2 d/p, 465 doses (6.4%); other 96 pts (12.61%), 407 doses (5,5%), 4.2 d/p. 3,126 (43%) doses were delivered to male and 4,149 (57%) to female. TTCD was significantly increased after ths SDA warning [32.12 vs 33.87 days (d); p< 0.001; CI 95% (-0.79)- (-0.90)]. By pathologies, differences were significant only for MM [35.8 vs 44.4 d; p<0.001; CI 95% (-10.19)-(-6.99)] and for PA [28.67 vs 32.03; p < 0.001; CI 95% (-5.08)-(-1.63)], but not for the other pathologies. Median d/p was unchanged before and after warnings for all pathologies except for MM (13 d/p vs 8.3 d/p). Conclusions: In our environment, ONJ warnings have not changed substantially the ZA schedule pattern, except for MM.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

e19596 Background: ZA therapy has been associated with the development of ONJ. In Nov 8th, 2005, osteonecrosis of the jaw was elevated to a safety warning by Spanish Drug Agency (SDA). The aim of this study was to investigate if that warning has had any effect in the pattern of ZA administration in a general hospital. Methods: We retrospectively analysed database using pharmacy, medical and nurse claims data from the Oncobass integrated claims database for all pts diagnosed with cancer who had received treatment with ZA between Jan 1, 2002, and Dec 31, 2011. Delivered doses of ZA were stratified in 2 groups: used before the SDA warning and after the SDA warning. Main variable: time between two consecutive doses (TTCD). Secondary variables: age, sex and diagnosis. Descriptive statistical analysis were applied for both groups. Comparisons of means of TTCD before and after the warning were performed with Student’s test, or the Mann-Whitney test, as necessary. Statistic significance: p value < 0.05. Results: We identified 761 patients (374 (49.2%) male; 387 (50.8%) female), median age 64 y (25 – 92) who were delivered 7301 doses [mean: 9.6 doses/patient (d/p)]: 2,353 (32.2%) before the SDA warning and 4948 (67.8%) after. Pathologies: breast cancer (BC) 257 patients (pts) (33,77%), 2,918 doses (40%), mean 11.4 d/p; multiple myeloma (MM) 167 pts (21.94%), 2001 doses (27%), 12 d/p; prostate adenocarcinoma (PA) 129 pts (16.95%), 1,510 doses (20.7%), 11.7 d/p; lung cancer (LC), 112 pts (14.72%), mean 4.2 d/p, 465 doses (6.4%); other 96 pts (12.61%), 407 doses (5,5%), 4.2 d/p. 3,126 (43%) doses were delivered to male and 4,149 (57%) to female. TTCD was significantly increased after ths SDA warning [32.12 vs 33.87 days (d); p< 0.001; CI 95% (-0.79)- (-0.90)]. By pathologies, differences were significant only for MM [35.8 vs 44.4 d; p<0.001; CI 95% (-10.19)-(-6.99)] and for PA [28.67 vs 32.03; p < 0.001; CI 95% (-5.08)-(-1.63)], but not for the other pathologies. Median d/p was unchanged before and after warnings for all pathologies except for MM (13 d/p vs 8.3 d/p). Conclusions: In our environment, ONJ warnings have not changed substantially the ZA schedule pattern, except for MM.

Key concepts: Medicine, Osteonecrosis of the jaw, Zoledronic acid, Prostate cancer, Mann–Whitney U test, Internal medicine, Statistical significance, Cancer

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Would warning of osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) have induced a change in the administration schedule of zoledronic acid (ZA)? A report from Toledo, Spain. — Research Paper | ScholarLens