Effectiveness and safety of bone protective interventions to mitigate bone loss and skeletal fractures experienced by patients with non-metastatic breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) and skeletal fractures are potential consequences of anticancer therapies used in the treatment of non-metastatic breast cancer (BC). This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to synthesise the available evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of bone protective interventions in the mitigation of CTIBL and skeletal fractures. Multiple databases including MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase and Cochrane, clinical trial registries and grey literature were systematically searched for experimental and observational studies, investigating the use of bisphosphonates, denosumab, calcium or vitamin D supplementation. Outcomes of interest were change in bone mineral density (BMD), the incidence of skeletal fractures, change in bone turnover markers, the incidence of adverse events (AEs), the presence of aromatase inhibitor musculoskeletal symptoms and quality of life. A total of 88 studies were included in our systematic review and meta-analysis, with sample sizes ranging from 11 to 4819 participants. For change in BMD outcomes able to be meta-analysed, bisphosphonates demonstrated a significant benefit compared to controls (pooled mean difference estimate; lumbar spine: 4.17, p = 0.0; total hip: 1.81, p = 0.034; femoral neck: 2.35, p = 0.001). Incidence of skeletal fractures significantly decreased with bisphosphonates compared to controls (pooled relative risk estimate; 0.77, p < 0.001). Denosumab demonstrated similar effects on BMD and skeletal fracture incidence; however, meta-analysis was not possible due to the lack of randomised controlled trials. Osteonecrosis of the jaw represents the most concerning AE with bisphosphonates. Considering the effectiveness and safety, and the level of evidence available, bisphosphonates present as the preferred bone protective intervention for the management of bone health in patients with non-metastatic BC.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Osteoporosis International
Published
2026-02-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-025-07786-6
Primary Topic
Bone health and treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Effectiveness and safety of bone protective interventions to mitigate bone loss and skeletal fractures experienced by patients with non-metastatic breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Joanne M. Bowen, Tania N. Crotti, Bonnie Williams, Micaela J. Quinn
Osteoporosis International
Bone health and treatments
article

Effectiveness and safety of bone protective interventions to mitigate bone loss and skeletal fractures experienced by patients with non-metastatic breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Joanne M. Bowen, Tania N. Crotti, Bonnie Williams, Micaela J. Quinn
article en

Abstract

Cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) and skeletal fractures are potential consequences of anticancer therapies used in the treatment of non-metastatic breast cancer (BC). This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to synthesise the available evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of bone protective interventions in the mitigation of CTIBL and skeletal fractures. Multiple databases including MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase and Cochrane, clinical trial registries and grey literature were systematically searched for experimental and observational studies, investigating the use of bisphosphonates, denosumab, calcium or vitamin D supplementation. Outcomes of interest were change in bone mineral density (BMD), the incidence of skeletal fractures, change in bone turnover markers, the incidence of adverse events (AEs), the presence of aromatase inhibitor musculoskeletal symptoms and quality of life. A total of 88 studies were included in our systematic review and meta-analysis, with sample sizes ranging from 11 to 4819 participants. For change in BMD outcomes able to be meta-analysed, bisphosphonates demonstrated a significant benefit compared to controls (pooled mean difference estimate; lumbar spine: 4.17, p = 0.0; total hip: 1.81, p = 0.034; femoral neck: 2.35, p = 0.001). Incidence of skeletal fractures significantly decreased with bisphosphonates compared to controls (pooled relative risk estimate; 0.77, p < 0.001). Denosumab demonstrated similar effects on BMD and skeletal fracture incidence; however, meta-analysis was not possible due to the lack of randomised controlled trials. Osteonecrosis of the jaw represents the most concerning AE with bisphosphonates. Considering the effectiveness and safety, and the level of evidence available, bisphosphonates present as the preferred bone protective intervention for the management of bone health in patients with non-metastatic BC.

Osteoporosis International
The University of Adelaide (AU)
Australian Government, University of Adelaide
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 54%
Bone health and treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.