Cancer Treatment-induced Bone Loss Research Articles

Aromatase inhibitors, bone microstructure, and estimated bone strength in postmenopausal women with breast cancer: a 5-year prospective study.

Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) are the standard treatment for early breast cancer (EBC) and are typical causative agents of cancer treatment-induced bone loss. However, the effects of long-term treatment with these drugs on bone microstructure remain unclear. This prospective, single-arm observational study included postmenopausal, non-osteoporotic women with hormone receptor-positive EBC. Patients who underwent dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR-pQCT), and tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase-5b (TRACP-5b) or procollagen type I N-terminal propeptide levels were compared at baseline and at 60months after commencing AI treatment. Fifteen women were included in the study, with a median age of 58years and a quartile range of 56.5-62.5years. At 60months, HR-pQCT revealed that the cortical area and thickness decreased with increased cortical porosity in the cortical bone. In addition, the number of trabeculae decreased and trabecular separation increased trabecular bones decreases, and trabecular bone separation opens, resulting in a decrease in the trabecular bone volume fraction. Total bone mineral density (BMD), trabecular volumetric BMD, and cortical volumetric BMD, and estimated bone strength significantly decreased. DXA BMD values significantly decreased in the total hip and femoral neck but not the lumbar spine. TRACP-5b values after 5years of AI treatment showed a significant negative correlation with the rate of change in the total volumetric BMD in the distal tibia. Postmenopausal women who received AIs for 5years for EBC experienced significant deterioration in the bone microstructure, BMD, and estimated bone strength.

Bone health and body composition in prostate cancer: Meet-URO and AIOM consensus about prevention and management strategies

Prostate cancer (PCa) treatments are associated with a detrimental impact on bone health (BH) and body composition. However, the evidence on these issues is limited and contradictory. This consensus, based on the Delphi method, provides further guidance on BH management in PCa. In May 2023, a survey made up of 37 questions and 74 statements was developed by a group of oncologists and endocrinologists with expertise in PCa and BH. In June 2023, 67 selected Italian experts, belonging to the Italian scientific societies Italian Association of Medical Oncology and Italian Network for Research in Urologic-Oncology (Meet-URO), were invited by e-mail to complete it, rating their strength of agreement with each statement on a 5-point scale. An agreement ≥75% defined the statement as accepted. In non-metastatic hormone-sensitive PCa, the panel agreed that androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) alone implies sufficient fracture risk to warrant antifracture therapy with bone-targeting agents (BTAs) for cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) prevention (79%). Therefore, no consensus was reached (48%) for the treatment with BTAs of patients receiving short-term ADT (<6 months). All patients receiving active treatment for metastatic hormone-sensitive PCa (75%), non-metastatic castration-resistant PCa (89%) and metastatic castration-resistant PCa (mCRPC) without bone metastases (84%) should be treated with BTAs at the doses and schedule for CTIBL prevention. All mCRPC patients with bone metastasis should be treated with BTAs to reduce skeletal-related events (94%). In all settings, the panel analyzed the type and timing of treatments and examinations to carry out for BH monitoring. The panel agreed on the higher risk of sarcopenic obesity of these patients and its correlation with bone fragility. This consensus highlights areas lacking major agreement, like non-metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer patients undergoing short-term ADT. Evaluation of these issues in prospective clinical trials and identification of early biomarkers of bone loss are particularly urgent.

Approach to Bone Health in the Patient With Breast Cancer.

Treatment for breast cancer, including endocrine therapies, can contribute to bone loss and increase the risk of osteoporosis and fractures. Management of bone health in patients with cancer is often coordinated between oncologists, endocrinologists, and primary care physicians. In this article, we discuss the approach to screening for fracture risk among patients initiating treatments for breast cancer and recommendations for lifestyle modifications to optimize bone health. We will review 3 indications for pharmacologic bone-targeted therapies: prevention of cancer treatment-induced bone loss, adjuvant therapy to reduce recurrence, and management of bone metastases.

Correlation between bone mineral density, vitamin D deficiency, and oral health in women with breast cancer

Breast cancer (BC) survivors treated with aromatase inhibitors (AIs) typically exhibit various pathological issues, including bone loss, poor oral health, and vitamin D deficiency. Nonetheless, chronic oral disorders are even often neglected in women with BC, and explicit indications regarding oral health screening, evaluation, and treatment to prevent cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) are lacking. A close link between oral health status and CTIBL might be explained, in part, by the systemic inflammation that characterizes both conditions. In this scenario, the effects of vitamin D (as an inflammation down-regulator) on immune systems are widely acknowledged. Vitamin D might facilitate upregulation of MAP kinases and inhibit the NF-kB signaling pathway, with crucial implications for cytokine serum levels, the prostaglandin inflammation pathway, and the immune cell system. Vitamin D deficiency, smoking, and insufficient usage of dental floss have been found to harm oral health in women with BC receiving AIs. Consequently, vitamin D deficiency screening and supplementation and an appropriate oral rehabilitation strategy should be advised and implemented in the comprehensive therapeutic approach to women with BC treated with AIs. KEY WORDS: Vitamin D, vitamin D deficiency, oral health, periodontal diseases, breast cancer.

Management of cancer treatment-induced bone loss in patients with breast and hormone sensitive prostate cancer: AIOM survey.

Cancer treatment-induced bone loss is a side effect of hormonal therapy that can severely affect patients' quality of life. The aim of this survey was to obtain an updated picture of management of bone health in patients with breast cancer undergoing adjuvant hormonal therapy and in patients with hormone sensitive prostate cancer according to Italian oncologists. Our survey was made up of 21 multiple-choice questions: the first part dealt with the respondents' characteristics, while the second with management of bone health in the described setting. An invitation to complete the survey was sent by e-mail to 2336 oncologists, members of Italian Association of Medical Oncology, in October 2022. Overall, 121 (5.2%) Italian oncologists completed the survey. In most cases (57%) the oncologist personally took charge of the management of bone health in patients at risk for cancer treatment-induced bone loss. At the beginning of hormonal therapy, most respondents reported to require bone health diagnostic exams, such as dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (89%), repeated with different timing. Main reported reasons (not mutually exclusive) for prescribing antiresorptive drugs were modifying fracture risk (87%), densitometry values (75%) or prognosis (34%). Answers about the management of antiresorptive therapy were heterogeneous. A heterogeneous approach on the management of cancer treatment-induced bone loss in Italy arises from this survey. This scenario highlights the need for a major consensus of the Italian scientific community on the diagnostic and therapeutic approach of cancer treatment-induced bone loss and for a greater awareness of this topic among Italian oncologists.

Cancer treatment-induced bone loss.

Cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTBL) is associated with anti-tumor treatments, including endocrine therapies, chemotherapeutic treatments, radiotherapy, glucocorticoids, and tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Osteoporosis, characterized by the loss of bone mass, can increase the risk of fractures, leading to mortality and long-term disability, even after cancer remission. Cancer and osteoporosis have marked clinical and pathogenetic similarities. Both have a multifactorial etiology, affect the geriatric population, and markedly influence quality of life. Lifestyle management, including calcium and vitamin D supplementation, is recommended but the supporting evidence is limited. Oral and injectable bisphosphonates are effective for osteoporosis and malignant bone disease. Bisphosphonates increase bone mineral density (BMD) in patients with CTBL. Denosumab is also used in the management of CTBL; in clinical trials, it improved BMD and reduced the risk of fracture. Currently, there are no bone anabolic therapies for patients with cancer. Appropriate therapies are necessary to maintain optimal bone health, particularly in patients at heightened risk.

Whole-cycle management norms of bone health in breast cancer

Bone health management of breast cancer runs through the whole cycle of patient treatment. During the process of adjuvant treatment for early breast cancer, clinicians should be pay attention to the prevention of bone loss caused by treatment. Adjuvant use of bone-modifying agents can help improve the prognosis of some patients, and patients with bone metastases should be given multidisciplinary comprehensive treatment and use bone-modifying agents to prevent the occurrence bone related adverse events. Therefore, no matter for the treatment of early or advanced breast cancer, it is necessary to manage bone health, formulate appropriate treatment strategies, and deal with adverse events of drugs. Good bone health management will help improve the quality of life and survival of patients. The breast cancer expert committee of the National Cancer Quality Control Center organized relevant experts to deeply explore the full cycle management of bone health in breast cancer based on Evidence-based medicine evidence. The risk classification and treatment strategy of cancer treatment-induced bone loss in early breast cancer, the applicable population and benefits of adjuvant treatment of bone modifying drugs, the diagnosis and treatment of bone metastasis in advanced breast cancer, and the treatment of adverse reactions of bone modifying drugs were elaborated in detail. We hope to guide clinicians to better deal with bone health problems in clinical practice by putting forward reasonable suggestions for patients with breast cancer.

A computed tomography radiomics-based model for predicting osteoporosis after breast cancer treatment.

Many treatments against breast cancer decrease the level of estrogen in blood, resulting in bone loss, osteoporosis and fragility fractures in breast cancer patients. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate a novel opportunistic screening for cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) in breast cancer patients using CT radiomics. Between 2011 and 2021, a total of 412 female breast cancer patients who received treatment and were followed up in our institution, had post-treatment dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) examination of the lumbar vertebrae and had post-treatment chest CT scan that encompassed the L1 vertebra, were included in this study. Results indicated that the T-score of L1 vertebra had a strongly positive correlation with the average T-score of L1-L4 vertebrae derived from DXA (r = 0.91, p < 0.05). On multivariable analysis, four clinical variables (age, body weight, menopause status, aromatase inhibitor exposure duration) and three radiomic features extracted from the region of interest of L1 vertebra (original_firstorder_RootMeanSquared, wavelet.HH_glcm_InverseVariance, and wavelet.LL_glcm_MCC) were selected for building predictive models of L1 T-score and bone health. The predictive model combining clinical and radiomic features showed the greatest adjusted R2 value (0.557), sensitivity (83.6%), specificity (74.2%) and total accuracy (79.4%) compared to models that relied solely on clinical data, radiomic features, or Hounsfield units. In conclusion, the clinical-radiomic predictive model may be used as an opportunistic screening tool for early identification of breast cancer survivors at high risk of CTIBL based on non-contrast CT images of the L1 vertebra, thereby facilitating early intervention for osteoporosis.

2088P Management of cancer treatment-induced bone loss in patients with breast and hormone sensitive prostate cancer: AIOM survey among Italian oncologists

2088P Management of cancer treatment-induced bone loss in patients with breast and hormone sensitive prostate cancer: AIOM survey among Italian oncologists

A cross-sectional study on Chinese oncology nurses’ knowledge of bone health among cancer patients

ObjectiveTo understand the knowledge status, obstacle factors, and management confidence of oncology nurses on the bone health of cancer patients, and in addition to provide reference for establishing bone health knowledge training system for oncology nurses and guiding them to manage bone health of cancer patients.MethodsA total of 602 nurses engaged in oncology nursing in 6 hospitals in Hebei Province were selected by cluster sampling, and an online anonymous survey was conducted by sending questionnaires to oncology nurses from the Hebei Cancer Prevention and Control Association. The questionnaire was developed by the study team. There are 4 parts, namely general information, nurses’ role and job responsibilities, knowledge of skeletal-related events (SREs) and cancer treatment–induced bone loss (CTIBL), and understanding and confidence in bone health management, for a total of 33 questions.ResultsThirty-seven percent of oncology nurses received training on bone health and other related contents; 40.48% of oncology nurses used domestic and foreign guidelines when managing patients with bone metastases or CTIBL. Only approximately one-third of oncology nurses had confidence in managing the side effects of bone metastases and bone modification drugs and identifying patients at risk of CTIBL and fracture; only 33.04% of oncology nurses believed that weight-bearing exercise can prevent bone loss; less than 50% of oncology nurses believed that aromatase inhibitor therapy, ovarian suppression therapy, androgen deprivation therapy, and low body weight were risk factors for pathological fractures. The reasons that hindered oncology nurses from optimizing the management of patients with bone metastases and understanding the preventive measures and risk factors for bone loss mainly included lack of relevant knowledge training, lack of understanding of effective intervention measures, and lack of training and professionalism of specialized nurses, including insufficient development time and guidelines for clinical nursing practice.ConclusionManagers must continuously improve the training system of oncology nurses, enrich the content of training pertaining to bone health for cancer patients, formulate clinical nursing practice guidelines, and give oncology nurses more time for professional development.

Validation of JSBMR's CTIBL manual for Japanese men receiving androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer.

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer causes cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL), increases the fracture risk 2-3 times, and worsens life prognoses. The Japan Society of Bone and Mineral Research (JSBMR) created a CTIBL treatment manual in 2020; however, no study has validated its use in patients with ADT/CTIBL prostate cancer. This study classified 124 patients with prostate cancer without bone metastasis who received ADT into high- and low-risk groups using the JSBMR CTIBL algorithm. Comparisons were made with the period to incident vertebral fracture and the existing International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) classification. The median age was 74years; the median observation period was 81months. At 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9years, the prevalence of incident vertebral fractures was, respectively, 3.3%, 10.7%, 17.9%, 21.4%, and 31.2% in the entire population; 13%, 27%, 36%, 42%, and 58% in the high-risk group (19%); and 1%, 7%, 14%, 17%, and 25% in the low-risk group (81%). The hazard ratio between the two groups was 3.57 (p = 0.0004). Based on multivariate analysis, age, previous vertebral fracture and femoral neck bone density were significant risk factors for incidental vertebral fracture. The JSBMR had a hazard ratio of 3.26 (p = 0.04) relative to 1.13 (p = 0.84) for the IOF, indicating the JSBMR classification performed better. Taking preventive measures against fractures is necessary, including starting bone-modifying agents early in patients with a high fracture risk. The JSBMR CTIBL manual may be useful for this purpose.

Cancer Treatment-induced Bone Loss in the Elderly: Progress and Ongoing Challenges.

Cancer Treatment-induced Bone Loss in the Elderly: Progress and Ongoing Challenges.

PartII: Interactive case:Drug‐inducedendocrine disorders

Part<scp>II</scp>: Interactive case:<scp>Drug‐induced</scp>endocrine disorders

Management of cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) in patients with breast cancer or prostate cancer.

Breast cancer and prostate cancer are sex hormone-dependent cancers, and estrogen or androgen suppression therapy is the standard treatment. Cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL): bone loss and osteoporosis have become important side effects of these therapies. To summarize the current evidences, (1) Endocrine therapy for breast cancer and prostate cancer is associated with a significant decrease in bone mineral density. (2) Aromatase inhibitors (AI) for breast cancer are associated with a significant increase in fractures, and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer is likely to be associated with an increase in fractures. (3) Administration of bisphosphonates and denosumab increases bone mass in patients undergoing endocrine therapy for breast cancer. Administration of bisphosphonates, denosumab, and SERMs increased bone mass in patients undergoing ADT therapy for prostate cancer. (4) Bisphosphonates and denosumab reduce fracture risk in patients on AI for breast cancer, and toremifene and denosumab in patients on ADT for prostate cancer.

MRONJ in breast cancer patients under bone modifying agents for cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL): a multi-hospital-based case series

BackgroundCancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) is the most common adverse event experienced by patients affected by breast cancer (BC) patients, without bone metastases. Bone modifying agents (BMAs) therapy is prescribed for the prevention of CTIBL, but it exposes patients to the risk of MRONJ.MethodsThis multicentre hospital-based retrospective study included consecutive non-metastatic BC patients affected by MRONJ related to exposure to low-dose BMAs for CTIBL prevention. Patients’ data were retrospectively collected from the clinical charts of seven recruiting Italian centres.ResultsMRONJ lesions were found in fifteen females (mean age 67.5 years), mainly in the mandible (73.3%). The mean duration of BMAs therapy at MRONJ presentation was 34.9 months. The more frequent BMAs was denosumab (53.3%). Ten patients (66.7%) showed the following local risk factors associated to MRONJ development: periodontal disease (PD) in three cases (20%) and the remaining six (40%) have undergone PD-related tooth extractions. One patient presented an implant presence-triggered MRONJ (6.7%). In five patients (33.3%) no local risk factors were observed.ConclusionsThis is the first case series that investigated BC patients under BMAs for CTIBL prevention suffering from MRONJ. These patients seem to have similar probabilities of developing MRONJ as osteo-metabolic ones. Breast cancer patients under BMAs for CTIBL prevention need a regular prevention program for MRONJ, since they may develop bone metastases and be treated with higher doses of BMAs, potentially leading to a high-risk of MRONJ.

Management of bone loss due to endocrine therapy during cancer treatment.

Bone modifying agents BMAs (oral and IV bisphosphonates, denosumab) are used to treat bone loss due to endocrine therapy in patients with hormone receptor positive (HR +) early breast cancer and non-metastatic prostate cancer (NMPC). Timely initiation of appropriate sequential therapy is imperative to reduce cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL). This narrative review summarizes current literature regarding management of CTIBL in HR + early breast cancer and NMPC patients. Risk factors for fragility fractures, screening strategies, optimal timing for the treatment, dosing/duration of therapy, and post treatment monitoring have not been clearly defined in HR + early breast and NMPC patients receiving endocrine therapy. This review aims to discuss the utility of fracture risk assessment (FRAX) tool for the prevention and management of CTIBL, osteoanabolic therapy for imminent fracture risk reduction, and sequential therapy options. Using predefined terms, PubMed, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar were searched for studies on CTIBL in HR + breast and NMPC patients. We included randomized clinical trials, meta-analysis, evidence-based reviews, observational studies, and clinical practice guidelines. Fracture risk assessment tools (FRAX) guide therapy for osteoporosis in patients with early HR + breast cancer and NMPC. BMAs to prevent bone loss should be initiated at higher T-score than recommended by FRAX in premenopausal HR + breast cancer patients with chemotherapy-induced ovarian failure, oophorectomy and gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) therapy, post-menopausal women with HR + breast cancer receiving aromatase inhibitor therapy, and NMPC patients with androgen deprivation therapy. Sequential therapy with osteoanabolic agents as first line treatment offers a potential therapeutic strategy in patients with high imminent fracture risk. Due to limited data in cancer patients regarding management of osteoporosis, a dosing schedule similar to osteoporosis is considered appropriate. Risk stratification to identify vulnerable patient population, choosing the appropriate sequential therapy, and close monitoring of patients at the risk of bone loss can potentially reduce the mortality, morbidity, and health care cost related to CTIBL.

Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw: A Cross-Sectional Survey among Urologists in Switzerland, Germany, and Austria.

Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) is a potentially preventable adverse side effect of mainly antiresorptive drugs. MRONJ is expected to become a growing clinical problem due to the aging population and the increasing number of patients requiring antiresorptive agents. Knowledge and awareness about MRONJ and elimination of the oral and dental risk factors before starting antiresorptive therapy (AR) are fundamental to reducing the incidence of MRONJ. In urology, ARs are used primarily in patients suffering from bone metastases due to prostate cancer and to prevent cancer-treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) in prostate cancer patients receiving endocrine therapy. This postal survey aimed to evaluate disease-related knowledge and awareness about implementing oral examinations for patients starting AR among Swiss, German, and Austrian urologists. A total of 176 urologists returned the completed questionnaire, yielding a response rate of 11.7%. Of the respondents, 44.9% (n = 79) and 24.4% (n = 43) stated that they give more than five first-time prescriptions of denosumab and of intravenous or oral bisphosphonates per year, respectively. Only 14.8% (n = 26) of the participating urologists had never encountered MRONJ cases related to BPs. Of the participants, 89.8% (n = 158) had implemented referrals to dentists for oral examination before initiating AR. The mean percentage of correct answers regarding the knowledge about MRONJ was 70.9% ± 11.2%. In contrast to previous surveys on MRONJ among physicians, this study showed that the participating urologists were sufficiently informed about MRONJ, as reflected by the high number of participants implementing preventive dental screenings.

Bone Health Care Pathway for Non-metastatic Prostate Cancer Patients on Radiation and Androgen Deprivation Therapy.

Survival rates of prostate cancer (PCa) patients have improved considerably as a result of earlier diagnosis and therapies, including radiotherapy (RT) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Patients on ADT develop cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL) and a high risk of fragility fractures. Bone health (BH) assessment is strongly recommended, together with timely initiation of treatments, to counteract CTIBL and preserve bone strength. Therefore, we decided to develop an interdisciplinary pathway of care (IPC) dedicated to non-metastatic PCa patients on long-term ADT and RT. An interdisciplinary team allocated resources to support an IPC to manage patients' CTIBL and prevent fragility fractures. The team provided a diagnostic and therapeutic workflow according to patients' and professional perspectives, consistent with recommendations and healthcare policies. The hospital's quality department certified the IPC, the Ethical Committee approved procedures over the workflow. The Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) standards inspired services and professionals' activities and interactions. Preliminary data support the feasibility of the IPC from professionals' and patients' perspectives. Median age of the enrolled patients was 75 years, more than a half (58.9%) had low grade osteopenia or normal BMD (T-score ≥-1.5 standard deviation, SD), while 23.5% and 17.6% had osteoporosis and osteopenia, respectively. The IPC meets the requirements of a FLS concerning crucial indicators. Our IPC was a suitable approach to assure timely identification, assessment, initiation, and monitoring of adherence to anti-fracture treatments among non-metastatic PCa patients on long-term ADT and RT. Further data are required to show its effectiveness on fragility fracture prevention.

Fracture risk and assessment in adults with cancer.

Individuals with cancer face unique risk factors for osteoporosis and fractures. Clinicians must consider the additive effects of cancer-specific factors, including treatment-induced bone loss, and premorbid fracture risk, utilizing FRAX score and bone mineral densitometry when available. Pharmacologic therapy should be offered as per cancer-specific guidelines, when available, or local general osteoporosis guidelines informed by clinical judgment and patient preferences. Our objective was to review and summarize the epidemiologic burden of osteoporotic fracture risk and fracture risk assessment in adults with cancer, and recommended treatment thresholds for cancer treatment-induced bone loss, with specific focus on breast, prostate, thyroid, gynecological, multiple myeloma, and hematopoietic stem cell transplant.This narrative review was informed by PubMed searches to July 25, 2022, that combined terms for cancer, stem cell transplantation, fracture, bone mineral density (BMD), trabecular bone score, FRAX, Garvan nomogram or fracture risk calculator, QFracture, prediction, and risk factors. The literature informs that cancer can impact bone health in numerous ways, leading to both systemic and localized decreases in BMD. Many cancer treatments can have detrimental effects on bone health. In particular, hormone deprivation therapies for hormone-responsive cancers such as breast cancer and prostate cancer, and hematopoietic stem cell transplant for hematologic malignancies, adversely affect bone turnover, resulting in osteoporosis and fractures. Surgical treatments such as hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy for gynecological cancers can also lead to deleterious effects on bone health. Radiation therapy is well documented to cause localized bone loss and fractures. Few studies have validated the use of fracture risk prediction tools in the cancer population. Guidelines on cancer-specific treatment thresholds are limited, and major knowledge gaps still exist in fracture risk and fracture risk assessment in patients with cancer.Despite the limitations of current knowledge on fracture risk assessment and treatment thresholds in patients with cancer, clinicians must consider the additive effects of bone damaging factors to which these patients are exposed and their premorbid fracture risk profile. Pharmacologic treatment should be offered as per cancer-specific guidelines when available, or per local general osteoporosis guidelines, in accordance with clinical judgment and patient preferences.

Incidence of antiresorptive agent-related osteonecrosis of the jaw: A multicenter retrospective epidemiological study in Hyogo Prefecture, Japan

Background/purposeThe incidence of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw is increasing worldwide, mostly due to the use of antiresorptive agents (ARAs) such as bisphosphonate (BP) and denosumab (Dmab). However, the proportion of BP-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ) and Dmab-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (DRONJ) among all ARA-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (ARONJ) cases is not clear; this hinders appropriate treatment, recurrence-prevention planning, and avoidance of unnecessary Dmab withdrawal. Moreover, the causative drug administered at each disease stage remains unknown. Therefore, we conducted a retrospective study of patients with ARONJ who visited oral and maxillofacial surgery departments at hospitals in Hyogo Prefecture, Japan, over 3 years to classify and compare patient characteristics with those having BRONJ and DRONJ. We sought to identify the proportion of DRONJ in ARONJ. Materials and methodsAfter excluding stage 0 patients, 1021 patients were included (471 high-dose; 560 low-dose). ARA treatment for bone metastases of malignant tumors and multiple myeloma was considered high dose, while that for cancer treatment-induced bone loss and osteoporosis was low dose. ResultsLow doses of BP and Dmab accounted for >50% patients; the results differed from those in other countries. DRONJ accounted for 58% and 35% of high-dose and low-dose cases, respectively. Stage 3 ARONJ cases comprised 92 (19.5%) low-dose BRONJ, 39 (20.1%) high-dose BRONJ, 24 (30%) low-dose DRONJ, and 68 (24.5%) high-dose DRONJ. Eighty-nine patients who received switch therapy were divided into BRONJ or DRONJ, but there was no difference in the ratio of each stage compared to the non-switch therapy. ConclusionTo the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to clarify the proportion of BRONJ and DRONJ cases, causative drug, and its doses by disease stages. DRONJ accounted for approximately 30% of the ARONJ, approximately 60% of which was due to high doses.