Advertisement

Denosumab treatment for giant-cell tumor of bone: a systematic review of the literature

  • Gonzalo Luengo-Alonso
  • Maria Mellado-Romero
  • Shai Shemesh
  • Luis Ramos-Pascua
  • Juan Pretell-MazziniEmail author
Orthopaedic Surgery
  • 43 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Denosumab is a human monoclonal antibody (mAb) that specifically inhibits tumor-associated bone lysis through the RANKL pathway and has been used as neoadjuvant therapy for giant-cell tumor of bone (GCTB) in surgical as well as non-surgical cases. The purpose of this systematic review of the literature, therefore, is to investigate: (1) demographic characteristics of patients affected by GCTBs treated with denosumab and the clinical impact, as well as, possible complications associated with its use (2) oncological outcomes in terms of local recurrence rate (LRR) and development of lung metastasis, and (3) characteristics of its treatment effect in terms of clinical, radiological, and histological response.

Methods

A systematic review of the literature was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, and COCHRANE search including the following terms and Boolean operators: “Denosumab” AND “primary bone tumor”, “denosumab” AND “giant cell tumor”, “denosumab” AND “treatment”, and finally, “denosumab” AND “giant cell tumor” AND “treatment” since 2000. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 19 articles were included. The quality of the included studies was assessed using STROBE for the assessment of observational studies.

Results

A total of 1095 patients were included across all 19 studies. Across all the studies included, there were 615 females and 480 males. The mean patient age was 33.7 ± 8.3 years when starting the denosumab treatment. The pooled weighted local recurrence rate was 9% (95% CI 6–12%) and the pooled weighted metastases rate was 3% (95% CI 1–7%). The most common adverse event was fatigue and muscular pain. Radiologic response was estimated to occur in 66–100% of the patients. A significant reduction in pain under denosumab treatment was reported in seven studies and additional improvement in function and mobility was reported by several authors. Only two studies reported musculoskeletal tumor society (MSTS) scores which were better after denosumab treatment.

Conclusions

The use of denosumab as an adjuvant treatment of GCTB has shown a positive but variable histological response with consistent radiological changes and several types of adverse effects. There is a positive clinical response in terms of pain relief with decrease on the morbidity of surgical procedures to be performed. Finally, oncological outcomes are disparate with neither effect on metastatic disease nor local recurrence rates.

Level of evidence

IV.

Keywords

Denosumab Local recurrence Metastasis Systematic review Fatigue 

Notes

Funding

The authors, their immediate family, and any research foundation with which they are affiliated did not receive any financial payments or other benefits from any commercial entity related to the subject of this article. All authors significantly contributed to the document and have reviewed the final manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Mendenhall WM, Zlotecki RA, Scarborough MT, Gibbs CP, Mendenhall NP (2006) Giant cell tumor of bone. Am J Clin Oncol 29(1):96–99. Available from: https://insights.ovid.com/crossref?an=00000421-200602000-00019. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  2. 2.
    Atkins GJ, Haynes DR, Graves SE, Evdokiou A, Hay S, Bouralexis S et al (2000) Expression of osteoclast differentiation signals by stromal elements of giant cell tumors. J Bone Miner Res 15(4):640–649.  https://doi.org/10.1359/jbmr.2000.15.4.640 Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fletcher CDM, Unni KK, Mertens F, World Health Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer (2002) Pathology and genetics of tumours of soft tissue and bone. IARC Press, Geneva, p 427Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thomas DM (2012) RANKL, denosumab, and giant cell tumor of bone. Curr Opin Oncol 24(4):397–403. Available from: https://insights.ovid.com/crossref?an=00001622-201207000-00009. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  5. 5.
    Chen C-C, Liau C-T, Chang C-H, Hsu Y-H, Shih H-N (2016) Giant cell tumors of the bone with pulmonary metastasis. Orthopedics 39(1):e68–e73. Available from: http://www.healio.com/doiresolver?doi=10.3928/01477447-20151228-04. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  6. 6.
    Thomas D, Henshaw R, Skubitz K, Chawla S, Staddon A, Blay J-Y et al (2010) Denosumab in patients with giant-cell tumour of bone: an open-label, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol 11(3):275–280. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1470204510700103. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  7. 7.
    Lewiecki EM (2010) Clinical use of denosumab for the treatment for postmenopausal osteoporosis. Curr Med Res Opin 26(12):2807–2812.  https://doi.org/10.1185/03007995.2010.533651 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Branstetter DG, Nelson SD, Manivel JC, Blay J-Y, Chawla S, Thomas DM et al (2012) Denosumab induces tumor reduction and bone formation in patients with giant-cell tumor of bone. Clin Cancer Res 18(16):4415–4424.  https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-0578 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rekhi B, Verma V, Gulia A, Jambhekar NA, Desai S, Juvekar SL et al (2017) Clinicopathological features of a series of 27 cases of post-denosumab treated giant cell tumors of bones: a single institutional experience at a Tertiary Cancer Referral Centre, India. Pathol Oncol Res 23(1):157–164.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12253-016-0123-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M et al (2015) Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev 4(1):1.  https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Mulrow CD, Pocock SJ et al (2014) Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. Int J Surg 12(12):1500–1524. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1743919114002131. Accessed 28 Nov 2018
  12. 12.
    Goldschlager T, Dea N, Boyd M, Reynolds J, Patel S, Rhines LD et al (2015) Giant cell tumors of the spine: has denosumab changed the treatment paradigm? J Neurosurg Spine 22(5):526–33. Available from: https://thejns.org/view/journals/j-neurosurg-spine/22/5/article-p526.xml. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  13. 13.
    Martin-Broto J, Cleeland CS, Glare PA, Engellau J, Skubitz KM, Blum RH et al (2014) Effects of denosumab on pain and analgesic use in giant cell tumor of bone: interim results from a phase II study. Acta Oncol 53(9):1173–1179.  https://doi.org/10.3109/0284186X.2014.910313 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Müller DA, Beltrami G, Scoccianti G, Campanacci DA, Franchi A, Capanna R (2016) Risks and benefits of combining denosumab and surgery in giant cell tumor of bone-a case series. World J Surg Oncol 14(1):281.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-016-1034-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Palmerini E, Chawla NS, Ferrari S, Sudan M, Picci P, Marchesi E et al (2017) Denosumab in advanced/unresectable giant-cell tumour of bone (GCTB): for how long? Eur J Cancer 76:118–24. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0959804917307104. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  16. 16.
    Roitman PD, Jauk F, Farfalli GL, Albergo JI, Aponte-Tinao LA (2017) Denosumab-treated giant cell tumor of bone. Its histologic spectrum and potential diagnostic pitfalls. Hum Pathol 63:89–97. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0046817717300552. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  17. 17.
    Traub F, Singh J, Dickson BC, Leung S, Mohankumar R, Blackstein ME et al (2016) Efficacy of denosumab in joint preservation for patients with giant cell tumour of the bone. Eur J Cancer 59:1–12. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0959804916000447. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  18. 18.
    Ueda T, Morioka H, Nishida Y, Kakunaga S, Tsuchiya H, Matsumoto Y et al (2015) Objective tumor response to denosumab in patients with giant cell tumor of bone: a multicenter phase II trial. Ann Oncol Off J Eur Soc Med Oncol 26(10):2149–2154.  https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdv307 Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wojcik J, Rosenberg AE, Bredella MA, Choy E, Hornicek FJ, Nielsen GP et al (2016) Denosumab-treated giant cell tumor of bone exhibits morphologic overlap with malignant giant cell tumor of bone. Am J Surg Pathol 40(1):72–80. Available from: http://content.wkhealth.com/linkback/openurl?sid=WKPTLP:landingpage&an=00000478-201601000-00010. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  20. 20.
    Rutkowski P, Ferrari S, Grimer RJ, Stalley PD, Dijkstra SPD, Pienkowski A et al (2015) Surgical downstaging in an open-label phase II trial of denosumab in patients with giant cell tumor of bone. Ann Surg Oncol 22(9):2860–2868.  https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4634-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Borkowska A, Goryń T, Pieńkowski A, Wągrodzki M, Jagiełło-Wieczorek E, Rogala P et al (2016) Denosumab treatment of inoperable or locally advanced giant cell tumor of bone. Oncol Lett 12(6):4312–8. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28101196. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  22. 22.
    Boye K, Jebsen NL, Zaikova O, Knobel H, Løndalen AM, Trovik CS et al (2017) Denosumab in patients with giant-cell tumor of bone in Norway: results from a nationwide cohort. Acta Oncol 56(3):479–83.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2016.1278305 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Chawla S, Henshaw R, Seeger L, Choy E, Blay J-Y, Ferrari S et al (2013) Safety and efficacy of denosumab for adults and skeletally mature adolescents with giant cell tumour of bone: interim analysis of an open-label, parallel-group, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol 14(9):901–8. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1470204513702778. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  24. 24.
    Deveci MA, Paydaş S, Gönlüşen G, Özkan C, Biçer ÖS, Tekin M (2017) Clinical and pathological results of denosumab treatment for giant cell tumors of bone: prospective study of 14 cases. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 51(1):1–6. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1017995X16302164. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  25. 25.
    Dubory A, Missenard G, Domont J, Court C (2016) Interest of denosumab for the treatment of giant-cells tumors and aneurysmal bone cysts of the spine. About Nine Cases. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 41(11):E654–E660. Available from: http://content.wkhealth.com/linkback/openurl?sid=WKPTLP:landingpage&an=00007632-201606010-00006. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  26. 26.
    Erdogan KE, DevecI MA, Paydas S, Gonlusen G (2016) Morphologic evaluation of the effect of denosumab on giant cell tumors of bone and a new grading scheme. Pol J Pathol (Internet) 67(4):392–397. Available from: http://www.termedia.pl/doi/10.5114/pjp.2016.65873. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  27. 27.
    Girolami I, Mancini I, Simoni A, Baldi GG, Simi L, Campanacci D et al (2016) Denosumab treated giant cell tumour of bone: a morphological, immunohistochemical and molecular analysis of a series. J Clin Pathol 69(3):240–247.  https://doi.org/10.1136/jclinpath-2015-203248 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Yasko AW (2001) Interferon therapy for vascular tumors of bone. Curr Opin Orthop 12(6):514–8. Available from: https://insights.ovid.com/crossref?an=00001433-200112000-00014. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  29. 29.
    Miller G, Bettelli G, Fabbri N, Capanna R (1990) Curettage of giant cell tumor of bone. Introduction–material and methods. Chir Organi Mov 75(1 Suppl):203. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2249532. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  30. 30.
    Chakarun CJ, Forrester DM, Gottsegen CJ, Patel DB, White EA, Matcuk GR (2013) Giant cell tumor of bone: review, mimics, and new developments in treatment. Radiographics 33(1):197–211.  https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.331125089 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Klenke FM, Wenger DE, Inwards CY, Rose PS, Sim FH (2011) Giant cell tumor of bone: risk factors for recurrence. Clin Orthop Relat Res 469(2):591–599.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-010-1501-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Jamshidi K, Gharehdaghi M, Hajialiloo SS, Mirkazemi M, Ghaffarzadehgan K, Izanloo A (2018) Denosumab in patients with giant cell tumor and its recurrence: a systematic review. Arch bone Jt Surg 6(4):260–8. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30175172. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  33. 33.
    Errani C, Tsukamoto S, Leone G, Righi A, Akahane M, Tanaka Y et al (2018) Denosumab may increase the risk of local recurrence in patients with giant-cell tumor of bone treated with curettage. J Bone Joint Surg Am 100(6):496–504. Available from: http://insights.ovid.com/crossref?an=00004623-201803210-00007. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  34. 34.
    Chan CM, Adler Z, Reith JD, Gibbs CP (2015) Risk factors for pulmonary metastases from giant cell tumor of bone. J Bone Joint Surg Am 97(5):420–8. Available from: https://insights.ovid.com/crossref?an=00004623-201503040-00010. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  35. 35.
    Rosario M, Kim H-S, Yun JY, Han I (2017) Surveillance for lung metastasis from giant cell tumor of bone. J Surg Oncol 116(7):907–913.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.24739 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wang B, Chen W, Xie X, Tu J, Huang G, Zou C et al (2017) Development and validation of a prognostic index to predict pulmonary metastasis of giant cell tumor of bone. Oncotarget 8(64):108054–63. Available from: http://www.oncotarget.com/fulltext/22478. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  37. 37.
    Tubbs WS, Brown LR, Beabout JW, Rock MG, Unni KK (1992) Benign giant-cell tumor of bone with pulmonary metastases: clinical findings and radiologic appearance of metastases in 13 cases. AJR Am J Roentgenol 158(2):331–334.  https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.158.2.1729794 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Tsukamoto S, Mavrogenis AF, Leone G, Righi A, Akahane M, Tanzi P et al (2018) Denosumab does not decrease the risk of lung metastases from bone giant cell tumour. Int Orthop. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30099641. Accessed 27 Nov 2018
  39. 39.
    Easterbrook PJ, Berlin JA, Gopalan R, Matthews DR (1991) Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet (London, England) 337(8746):867–872. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1672966. Accessed 27 Nov 2018

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hospital Universitario 12 de OctubreMadridSpain
  2. 2.Musculoskeletal Oncology Division, Department of Orthopedics, Miller School of MedicineUniversity of MiamiMiamiUSA
  3. 3.Department of Orthopedic SurgeryRabin Medical CenterPetach TikvaIsrael
  4. 4.Sackler Faculty of MedicineTel Aviv UniversityTel AvivIsrael

Personalised recommendations