Background Hypercalcemia of malignancy (HCM) is a common complication of advanced cancer. PTH-independent HCM may be mediated through different mechanisms: (1) humoral HCM, caused by the secretion of PTH-related peptide (PTHrP), (2) local osteolysis resulting from metastatic lesions, and (3) calcitriol-mediated hypercalcemia. Calcitriol-mediated HCM in patients with nonlymphomatous solid tumors is thought to be rare. Methods We performed a retrospective chart review from 2008 to 2017 to characterize further patients at our institution with solid tumors who had HCM with concomitant elevations in calcitriol. Patients with PTH-dependent hypercalcemia and patients with evidence of granulomatous disease were excluded, as were patients with hematologic malignancies. We hypothesized that patients with HCM and elevated calcitriol levels would respond less favorably to treatment with antiresorptive therapy compared with patients with HCM but without calcitriol elevation. We also aimed to assess mortality and determine if PTHrP and phosphorus levels correlate with calcitriol because both factors may alter calcitriol levels. Results Of 101 eligible patients, calcitriol was elevated in 45 (45%). PTHrP was elevated in 76% of patients with elevated calcitriol compared with 52% of patients without calcitriol elevation. The mean PTHrP value did not differ between patients with HCM and elevated calcitriol (36.3 ± 22 pg/mL) and those without calcitriol elevation (37.4 ± 19 pg/mL). Those with elevated calcitriol levels generally did not respond completely to antiresorptive treatment (80% incomplete response rate), whereas most patients without an elevation in calcitriol responded well to antiresorptive treatment (78% response rate: P < .001). There was no significant difference in the percentage of patients with metastatic bone disease among the 2 groups (49% vs. 55%, respectively). There was no difference in mortality between the 2 groups (P = .14). A weak but significant negative correlation was found between phosphorus and calcitriol (Pearson r = -0.261, P = .016). This correlation was only significant in patients without calcitriol elevation (Pearson r = -0.4, P = .0082). Also, a significant negative correlation was found between PTHrP and phosphorus, again only in patients without calcitriol elevation. Discussion In the setting of HCM, patients with calcitriol elevation are much less likely to respond to antiresorptive therapy than patients without calcitriol elevation. Because calcitriol elevation did not appear to be correlated with hypophosphatemia or elevated PTHrP, it would appear that calcitriol production under these conditions is autonomous, and not subject to normal physiological controls. These observations indicate that calcitriol elevations in patients with HCM have clinical significance.

Learning Objectives: On successful completion of this activity, participants should be able to describe (1) the benefits and limitations of evaluating bone mineral density by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry and FRAX to assess fracture risk; (2) the uses of various pharmacologic therapies available for the treatment of osteoporosis; and (3) the process of monitoring and ensuring patient response to osteoporosis therapy.Financial Disclosure: Dr. Farooki has received consulting fees from Amgen and has been an Amgen advisory board member. Dr. Bilezikian has received consulting fees from Radius and Amgen. This work was supported in part by NIH/NCI Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center support grant P30 CA008748. The authors of this article have indicated no other relevant relationships that could be perceived as a real or apparent conflict of interest. CME Credit: SNMMI is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) to sponsor continuing education for physicians. SNMMI designates each JNM continuing education article for a maximum of 2.0 AMA PRA Category 1 Credits. Physicians should claim only credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. For CE credit, SAM, and other credit types, participants can access this activity through the SNMMI website (http://www.snmmilearningcenter.org) through April 2024.Bone mineral density (BMD) measurement by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is an internationally accepted standard-of-care screening tool used to assess fragility-fracture risk. Society guidelines have recommended which populations may benefit from DXA screening and the use of the fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX) to guide decisions regarding pharmacologic treatment for osteoporosis. According to the U.S. National Osteoporosis Foundation guidelines, postmenopausal women and men at least 50 y old with osteopenic BMD warrant pharmacologic treatment if they have a FRAX-calculated 10-y probability of at least 3% for hip fracture or at least 20% for major osteoporotic fracture. Patients with osteoporosis defined by a clinical event, namely a fragility fracture, or with an osteoporotic BMD should also be treated. Patients who are treated for osteoporosis should be monitored regularly to track expected gains in BMD by serial DXA scans. With some drug therapies, BMD targets can be reached whereby further improvements in BMD are not associated with further reductions in fracture risk. Although reaching this target might suggest a stopping point for therapy, the reversibility of most treatments for osteoporosis, except for the bisphosphonates, has dampened enthusiasm for this approach. In the case of denosumab, it is now apparent that stopping therapy at any point can lead to an increase in multiplefracture risk. For patients who do not respond to antiosteoporosis pharmacologic therapy with an improvement in BMD, or who have an incident fragility fracture on therapy, secondary causes of osteoporosis or non-compliance with medical therapy should be consider...

Potent antiresorptive drugs (bisphosphonate and denosumab) are often used to protect bone health in postmenopausal breast cancer patients. In addition, clinical trials have shown that these drugs increase disease-free survival, though the mechanism of adjuvant benefit is largely unknown. Here we review the bone health and adjuvant data for both classes of antiresorptive drugs and highlight differences in their pharmacology. Inhibition of bone resorption is vitally important to protect against osteoporotic fractures, and may also contribute to adjuvant survival benefits by making the bone microenvironment less amenable to breast cancer metastasis. After a course of therapy, stoppage of bisphosphonates yields a persistent antiresorptive effect, whereas discontinuation of denosumab causes a rebound increase in bone resorption markers and a loss of bone mineral density to baseline levels. Whether the potential adjuvant benefits of denosumab are also rapidly lost after drug discontinuation deserves further investigation. esized to prevent skeletal metastases from developing [7]. A multitude of randomized adjuvant bisphosphonate studies Key ligands in this article are hyperlinked to corresponding entries in http://www.guidetopharmacology.org, the common portal for data from the IUPHAR/BPS Guide to PHARMACOLOGY [49].