Aremed 1

Aremed 1 is indicated for the:

- Treatment of hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women.

Aremed 1 is indicated for the:

- Treatment of hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women.

- Adjuvant treatment of hormone receptor-positive early invasive breast cancer in postmenopausal women.

- Adjuvant treatment of hormone receptor-positive early invasive breast cancer in postmenopausal women who have received 2 to 3 years of adjuvant tamoxifen.

Posology

The recommended dose of Aremed 1 for adults including the elderly is one 1 mg tablet once a day.

For postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early invasive breast cancer, the recommended duration of adjuvant endocrine treatment is 5 years.

Special populations

Paediatric population

Aremed 1 is not recommended for use in children and adolescents due to insufficient data on safety and efficacy.

Renal impairment

No dose change is recommended in patients with mild or moderate renal impairment. In patients with severe renal impairment, administration of Aremed 1 should be performed with caution.

Hepatic impairment

No dose change is recommended in patients with mild hepatic disease. Caution is advised in patients with moderate to severe hepatic impairment.

Method of administration

Aremed 1 should be taken orally.

Posology

The recommended dose of Aremed 1 for adults including the elderly is one 1 mg tablet once a day.

For postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early invasive breast cancer, the recommended duration of adjuvant endocrine treatment is 5 years.

Special populations

Paediatric population

Aremed 1 is not recommended for use in children and adolescents due to insufficient data on safety and efficacy.

Renal impairment

No dose change is recommended in patients with mild or moderate renal impairment. In patients with severe renal impairment, administration of Aremed 1 should be performed with caution.

Hepatic impairment

No dose change is recommended in patients with mild hepatic disease. Caution is advised in patients with moderate to severe hepatic impairment.

Method of administration

Aremed 1 should be taken orally.

Aremed 1 is contraindicated in:

- Pregnant or breastfeeding women.

-

General

Aremed 1 should not be used in premenopausal women. The menopause should be defined biochemically (luteinizing-hormone [LH], follicle stimulating hormone [FSH], and/or estradiol levels) in any patient where there is doubt about menopausal status. There are no data to support the use of Aremed 1 with LHRH analogues.

Co-administration of tamoxifen or estrogen-containing therapies with Aremed 1 should be avoided as this may diminish its pharmacological action.

Effect on bone mineral density

As Aremed 1 lowers circulating estrogen levels it may cause a reduction in bone mineral density with a possible consequent increased risk of fracture.

Women with osteoporosis or at risk of osteoporosis, should have their bone mineral density formally assessed at the commencement of treatment and at regular intervals thereafter. Treatment or prophylaxis for osteoporosis should be initiated as appropriate and carefully monitored. The use of specific treatments, e.g., bisphosphonates, may stop further bone mineral loss caused by Aremed 1 in postmenopausal women and could be considered.

Hepatic impairment

Aremed 1 has not been investigated in breast cancer patients with moderate or severe hepatic impairment. Exposure to Aremed 1 can be increased in subjects with hepatic impairment ; administration of Aremed 1 in patients with moderate and severe hepatic impairment should be performed with caution. Treatment should be based on a benefit-risk evaluation for the individual patient.

Renal impairment

Aremed 1 has not been investigated in breast cancer patients with severe renal impairment.); in patients with severe renal impairment, administration of Aremed 1 should be performed with caution.

Paediatric population

Aremed 1 is not recommended for use in children as safety and efficacy have not been established in this group of patients.

Aremed 1 should not be used in boys with growth hormone deficiency in addition to growth hormone treatment. In the pivotal clinical trial, efficacy was not demonstrated and safety was not established. Since Aremed 1 reduces estradiol levels, Aremed 1 must not be used in girls with growth hormone deficiency in addition to growth hormone treatment. Long-term safety data in children and adolescents are not available.

Hypersensitivity to lactose

This product contains lactose. Patients with rare hereditary problems of galactose intolerance, the Lapp lactase deficiency or glucose-galactose malabsorption should not take this medicine.

General

Aremed 1 should not be used in premenopausal women. The menopause should be defined biochemically (luteinizing-hormone [LH], follicle stimulating hormone [FSH], and/or estradiol levels) in any patient where there is doubt about menopausal status. There are no data to support the use of Aremed 1 with LHRH analogues.

Co-administration of tamoxifen or estrogen-containing therapies with Aremed 1 should be avoided as this may diminish its pharmacological action.

Effect on bone mineral density

As Aremed 1 lowers circulating estrogen levels it may cause a reduction in bone mineral density with a possible consequent increased risk of fracture.

Women with osteoporosis or at risk of osteoporosis, should have their bone mineral density formally assessed at the commencement of treatment and at regular intervals thereafter. Treatment or prophylaxis for osteoporosis should be initiated as appropriate and carefully monitored. The use of specific treatments, e.g. bisphosphonates, may stop further bone mineral loss caused by Aremed 1 in postmenopausal women and could be considered.

Hepatic impairment

Aremed 1 has not been investigated in breast cancer patients with moderate or severe hepatic impairment. Exposure to anastrozole can be increased in subjects with hepatic impairment ; administration of Aremed 1 in patients with moderate and severe hepatic impairment should be performed with caution. Treatment should be based on a benefit-risk evaluation for the individual patient.

Renal impairment

Aremed 1 has not been investigated in breast cancer patients with severe renal impairment.); in patients with severe renal impairment, administration of Aremed 1 should be performed with caution.

Paediatric population

Aremed 1 is not recommended for use in children and adolescents as safety and efficacy have not been established in this group of patients.

Aremed 1 should not be used in boys with growth hormone deficiency in addition to growth hormone treatment. In the pivotal clinical trial, efficacy was not demonstrated and safety was not established. Since anastrozole reduces estradiol levels, Aremed 1 must not be used in girls with growth hormone deficiency in addition to growth hormone treatment. Long-term safety data in children and adolescents are not available.

Hypersensitivity to lactose

This product contains lactose. Patients with rare hereditary problems of galactose intolerance, the Lapp lactase deficiency or glucose-galactose malabsorption should not take this medicine.

The following table presents adverse reactions from clinical trials, post-marketing studies or spontaneous reports. Unless specified, the frequency categories were calculated from the number of adverse events reported in a large phase III study conducted in 9366 postmenopausal women with operable breast cancer given adjuvant treatment for five years (the Aremed 1, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination [ATAC] study).

Adverse reactions listed below are classified according to frequency and System Organ Class (SOC). Frequency groupings are defined according to the following convention: very common (> 1/10), common (> 1/100 to < 1/10), uncommon (> 1/1,000 to < 1/100), rare (> 1/10,000 to <1/1,000), and very rare (<1/10,000). The most frequently reported adverse reactions were headache, hot flushes, nausea, rash, arthralgia, joint stiffness, arthritis, and asthenia.

Table 1. Adverse reactions by System Organ Class and frequency

* Events of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome have been reported in patients receiving Aremed 1 treatment in clinical trials in greater numbers than those receiving treatment with tamoxifen. However, the majority of these events occurred in patients with identifiable risk factors for the development of the condition.

** Since cutaneous vasculitis and Henoch-Schönlein purpura was not observed in ATAC, the frequency category for these events can be considered as 'Rare' (> 0.01% and < 0.1%) based on the worst value of the point estimate.

*** Vaginal bleeding has been reported commonly, mainly in patients with advanced breast cancer during the first few weeks after changing from existing hormonal therapy to treatment with Aremed 1. If bleeding persists, further evaluation should be considered.

The table below presents the frequency of pre-specified adverse events in the ATAC study after a median follow-up of 68 months, irrespective of causality, reported in patients receiving trial therapy and up to 14 days after cessation of trial therapy.

Table 2. ATAC study pre-specified adverse events

Fracture rates of 22 per 1000 patient-years and 15 per 1000 patient-years were observed for the Aremed 1 and tamoxifen groups, respectively, after a median follow-up of 68 months. The observed fracture rate for Aremed 1 is similar to the range reported in age-matched postmenopausal populations. The incidence of osteoporosis was 10.5% in patients treated with Aremed 1 and 7.3% in patients treated with tamoxifen.

It has not been determined whether the rates of fracture and osteoporosis seen in ATAC in patients on Aremed 1 treatment reflect a protective effect of tamoxifen, a specific effect of Aremed 1, or both.

The following table presents adverse reactions from clinical trials, post-marketing studies or spontaneous reports. Unless specified, the frequency categories were calculated from the number of adverse events reported in a large phase III study conducted in 9,366 postmenopausal women with operable breast cancer given adjuvant treatment for five years (the Aremed 1, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination [ATAC] study).

Adverse reactions listed below are classified according to frequency and System Organ Class (SOC). Frequency groupings are defined according to the following convention: very common (> 1/10), common (> 1/100 to < 1/10), uncommon (> 1/1,000 to < 1/100), rare (> 1/10,000 to <1/1,000), and very rare (<1/10,000). The most frequently reported adverse reactions were headache, hot flushes, nausea, rash, arthralgia, joint stiffness, arthritis, and asthenia.

Table 1 Adverse reactions by System Organ Class and frequency

*Events of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome have been reported in patients receiving Aremed 1 treatment in clinical trials in greater numbers than those receiving treatment with tamoxifen. However, the majority of these events occurred in patients with identifiable risk factors for the development of the condition.

**Since cutaneous vasculitis and Henoch-Schönlein purpura was not observed in ATAC, the frequency category for these events can be considered as 'Rare' (> 0.01% and < 0.1%) based on the worst value of the point estimate.

***Vaginal bleeding has been reported commonly, mainly in patients with advanced breast cancer during the first few weeks after changing from existing hormonal therapy to treatment with Aremed 1. If bleeding persists, further evaluation should be considered.

The table below presents the frequency of pre-specified adverse events in the ATAC study after a median follow-up of 68 months, irrespective of causality, reported in patients receiving trial therapy and up to 14 days after cessation of trial therapy.

Table 2 ATAC study pre-specified adverse events

Fracture rates of 22 per 1,000 patient-years and 15 per 1,000 patient-years were observed for the Aremed 1 and tamoxifen groups, respectively, after a median follow-up of 68 months. The observed fracture rate for Aremed 1 is similar to the range reported in age-matched postmenopausal populations. The incidence of osteoporosis was 10.5% in patients treated with Aremed 1 and 7.3% in patients treated with tamoxifen.

It has not been determined whether the rates of fracture and osteoporosis seen in ATAC in patients on Aremed 1 treatment reflect a protective effect of tamoxifen, a specific effect of Aremed 1, or both.

Reporting of suspected adverse reactions

Reporting suspected adverse reactions after authorisation of the medicinal product is important. It allows continued monitoring of the benefit/risk balance of the medicinal product. Healthcare professionals are asked to report any suspected adverse reactions via the Yellow Card Scheme website: www.mhra.gov.uk/yellowcard.

There is limited clinical experience of accidental overdose.

In animal studies, Aremed 1 demonstrated low acute toxicity.

Clinical trials have been conducted with various dosages of Aremed 1, up to 60 mg in a single dose given to healthy male volunteers, and up to 10 mg daily given to postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer; these dosages were well tolerated. A single dose of Aremed 1 that results in life-threatening symptoms has not been established.

There is no specific antidote to overdose and treatment must be symptomatic.

In the management of an overdose, consideration should be given to the possibility that multiple agents may have been taken. Vomiting may be induced if the patient is alert. Dialysis may be helpful because Aremed 1 is not highly protein-bound. General supportive care, including frequent monitoring of vital signs and close observation of the patient, is indicated.

There is limited clinical experience of accidental overdose. In animal studies, anastrozole demonstrated low acute toxicity. Clinical trials have been conducted with various dosages of Aremed 1, up to 60 mg in a single dose given to healthy male volunteers and up to 10 mg daily given to postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer; these dosages were well tolerated. A single dose of Aremed 1 that results in life-threatening symptoms has not been established. There is no specific antidote to overdose and treatment must be symptomatic.

In the management of an overdose, consideration should be given to the possibility that multiple agents may have been taken. Vomiting may be induced if the patient is alert. Dialysis may be helpful because Aremed 1 is not highly protein bound. General supportive care, including frequent monitoring of vital signs and close observation of the patient, is indicated.

Pharmacotherapeutic group: Enzyme inhibitors

ATC Code: L02B G03

Mechanism of action and pharmacodynamic effects

Aremed 1 is a potent and highly selective non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor. In postmenopausal women, estradiol is produced primarily by the conversion of androstenedione to estrone through the aromatase enzyme complex in peripheral tissues. Estrone is subsequently converted to estradiol. Reducing circulating estradiol levels has been shown to produce a beneficial effect in women with breast cancer.

In postmenopausal women, Aremed 1 at a daily dose of 1 mg produced estradiol suppression of greater than 80% using a highly sensitive assay.

Aremed 1 does not possess any progestogenic, androgenic or estrogenic activity.

Daily doses of Aremed 1 up to 10 mg do not have any effect on cortisol or aldosterone secretion, measured before or after standard adrenocorticotrophic hormone (ACTH) challenge testing. Corticoid supplements are therefore not needed.

Clinical efficacy and safety

Advanced breast cancer

First-line therapy in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer

Two double-blind, controlled clinical studies of similar design (Study 1033IL/0030 and Study 1033IL/0027) were conducted to assess the efficacy of Aremed 1 compared with tamoxifen as first-line therapy for hormone receptor-positive or hormone receptor-unknown locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer in postmenopausal women. A total of 1,021 patients were randomised to receive 1 mg of Aremed 1 once daily or 20 mg of tamoxifen once daily. The primary endpoints for both trials were time to tumour progression, objective tumour response rate, and safety.

For the primary endpoints, Study 1033IL/0030 showed that Aremed 1 had a statistically significant advantage over tamoxifen for time to tumour progression (Hazard ratio (HR) 1.42, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) [1.11, 1.82], Median time to progression 11.1 and 5.6 months for Aremed 1 and tamoxifen respectively, p=0.006); objective tumour response rates were similar for Aremed 1 and tamoxifen. Study 1033IL/0027 showed that Aremed 1 and tamoxifen had similar objective tumour response rates and time to tumour progression. Results from the secondary endpoints were supportive of the results of the primary efficacy endpoints. There were too few deaths occurring across treatment groups of both trials to draw conclusions on overall survival differences.

Second-line therapy in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer

Aremed 1 was studied in two controlled clinical trials (Study 0004 and Study 0005) in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer who had disease progression following tamoxifen therapy for either advanced or early breast cancer. A total of 764 patients were randomised to receive either a single daily dose of 1 mg or 10 mg of Aremed 1 or megestrol acetate 40 mg four times a day. Time to progression and objective response rates were the primary efficacy variables. The rate of prolonged (more than 24 weeks) stable disease, the rate of progression, and survival were also calculated. In both studies there were no significant differences between treatment arms with respect to any of the efficacy parameters.

Bone mineral density (BMD)

In the phase III/IV study (Study of Aremed 1 with the Bisphosphonate Risedronate [SABRE]), 234 postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer scheduled for treatment with Aremed 1 1 mg/day were stratified to low, moderate and high risk groups according to their existing risk of fragility fracture. The primary efficacy parameter was the analysis of lumbar spine bone mass density using DEXA scanning. All patients received treatment with vitamin D and calcium. Patients in the low risk group received Aremed 1 alone (N=42), those in the moderate group were randomised to Aremed 1 plus risedronate 35 mg once a week (N=77) or Aremed 1 plus placebo (N=77) and those in the high risk group received Aremed 1 plus risedronate 35 mg once a week (N=38). The primary endpoint was change from baseline in lumbar spine bone mass density at 12 months.

The 12-month main analysis has shown that patients already at moderate to high risk of fragility fracture showed no decrease in their bone mass density (assessed by lumbar spine bone mineral density using DEXA scanning) when managed by using Aremed 1 1 mg/day in combination with risedronate 35 mg once a week.

In addition, a decrease in BMD which was not statistically significant was seen in the low risk group treated with Aremed 1 1 mg/day alone. These findings were mirrored in the secondary efficacy variable of change from baseline in total hip BMD at 12 months.

This study provides evidence that the use of bisphosphonates could be considered in the management of possible bone mineral loss in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer scheduled to be treated with Aremed 1.

Paediatric population

Aremed 1 is not indicated for use in children and adolescents.).

The European Medicines Agency has waived the obligation to submit the results of studies with Aremed 1 in one or several subsets of the paediatric population in short stature due to growth hormone deficiency (GHD), testotoxicosis, gynaecomastia, and McCune-Albright syndrome.

Short stature due to Growth Hormone Deficiency

A randomised, double-blind, multi-centre study evaluated 52 pubertal boys (aged 11 to 16 years inclusive) with GHD treated for 12 to 36 months with Aremed 1 1 mg/day or placebo in combination with growth hormone. Only 14 subjects on Aremed 1 completed 36 months.

No statistically significant difference from placebo was observed for the growth related parameters of predicted adult height, height, height SDS (standard deviation score), and height velocity. Final height data were not available. While the number of children treated was too limited to draw any reliable conclusions on safety, there was an increased fracture rate and a trend towards reduced bone mineral density in the Aremed 1 arm compared to placebo.

Testotoxicosis

An open-label, non-comparative, multi-centre study evaluated 14 male patients (aged 2 to 9 years) with familial male-limited precocious puberty, also known as testotoxicosis, treated with combination of Aremed 1 and bicalutamide. The primary objective was to assess the efficacy and safety of this combination regimen over 12 months. Thirteen out of the 14 patients enrolled completed 12 months of combination treatment (one patient was lost to follow-up). There was no significant difference in growth rate after 12 months of treatment, relative to the growth rate during the 6 months prior to entering the study.

Gynaecomastia studies

Trial 0006 was a randomised, double-blind, multi-centre study of 82 pubertal boys (aged 11-18 years inclusive) with gynaecomastia of greater than 12 months duration treated with Aremed 1 1 mg/day or placebo daily for up to 6 months. No significant difference in the number of patients who had a 50% or greater reduction in total breast volume after 6 months of treatment was observed between the Aremed 1 1 mg treated group and the placebo group.

Trial 0001 was an open-label, multiple-dose pharmacokinetic study of Aremed 1 1 mg/day in 36 pubertal boys with gynaecomastia of less than 12 months duration. The secondary objectives were to evaluate the proportion of patients with reductions from baseline in the calculated volume of gynaecomastia of both breasts combined of at least 50% between day 1 and after 6 months of study treatment, and patient tolerability and safety. A decrease in 50% or more of total breast volume was seen in 56% (20/36) of the boys after 6 months.

McCune-Albright Syndrome study

Trial 0046 was an international, multi-centre, open-label exploratory trial of Aremed 1 in 28 girls (aged 2 to ≤ 10 years) with McCune-Albright Syndrome (MAS). The primary objective was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Aremed 1 1 mg/day in patients with MAS. The efficacy of study treatment was based on the proportion of patients fulfilling defined criteria relating to vaginal bleeding, bone age, and growth velocity.

No statistically significant change in the frequency of vaginal bleeding days on treatment was observed. There were no clinically significant changes in Tanner staging, mean ovarian volume, or mean uterine volume. No statistically significant change in the rate of increase in bone age on treatment compared to the rate during baseline was observed. Growth rate (in cm/year) was significantly reduced (p<0.05) from pre-treatment through month 0 to month 12, and from pre-treatment to the second 6 months (month 7 to month 12).

Pharmacotherapeutic group: Enzyme inhibitors, ATC code: L02B G03

Mechanism of action and pharmacodynamic effects

Aremed 1 is a potent and highly selective non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor. In postmenopausal women, estradiol is produced primarily from the conversion of androstenedione to estrone through the aromatase enzyme complex in peripheral tissues. Estrone is subsequently converted to estradiol. Reducing circulating estradiol levels has been shown to produce a beneficial effect in women with breast cancer. In postmenopausal women, Aremed 1 at a daily dose of 1 mg produced estradiol suppression of greater than 80% using a highly sensitive assay.

Aremed 1 does not possess any progestogenic, androgenic, or estrogenic activity.

Daily doses of Aremed 1 up to 10 mg do not have any effect on cortisol or aldosterone secretion, measured before or after standard adrenocorticotrophic hormone (ACTH) challenge testing. Corticoid supplements are therefore not needed.

Clinical efficacy and safety

Advanced breast cancer

First-line therapy in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer

Two double-blind, controlled clinical studies of similar design (Study 1033IL/0030 and Study 1033IL/0027) were conducted to assess the efficacy of Aremed 1 compared with tamoxifen as first-line therapy for hormone receptor-positive or hormone receptor-unknown locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer in postmenopausal women. A total of 1,021 patients were randomised to receive 1 mg of Aremed 1 once daily or 20 mg of tamoxifen once daily. The primary endpoints for both trials were time to tumour progression, objective tumour response rate, and safety.

For the primary endpoints, Study 1033IL/0030 showed that Aremed 1 had a statistically significant advantage over tamoxifen for time to tumour progression (Hazard ratio (HR) 1.42, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) [1.11, 1.82], Median time to progression 11.1 and 5.6 months for Aremed 1 and tamoxifen respectively, p=0.006); objective tumour response rates were similar for Aremed 1 and tamoxifen. Study 1033IL/0027 showed that Aremed 1 and tamoxifen had similar objective tumour response rates and time to tumour progression. Results from the secondary endpoints were supportive of the results of the primary efficacy endpoints. There were too few deaths occurring across treatment groups of both trials to draw conclusions on overall survival differences.

Second-line therapy in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer

Aremed 1 was studied in two controlled clinical trials (Study 0004 and Study 0005) in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer who had disease progression following tamoxifen therapy for either advanced or early breast cancer. A total of 764 patients were randomised to receive either a single daily dose of 1 mg or 10 mg of Aremed 1 or megestrol acetate 40 mg four times a day. Time to progression and objective response rates were the primary efficacy variables. The rate of prolonged (more than 24 weeks) stable disease, the rate of progression, and survival were also calculated. In both studies there were no significant differences between treatment arms with respect to any of the efficacy parameters.

Adjuvant treatment of early invasive breast cancer for hormone receptor-positive patients

In a large phase III study conducted in 9,366 postmenopausal women with operable breast cancer treated for 5 years (see below), Aremed 1 was shown to be statistically superior to tamoxifen in disease-free survival. A greater magnitude of benefit was observed for disease-free survival in favour of Aremed 1 versus tamoxifen for the prospectively defined hormone receptor-positive population.

Table 3 ATAC endpoint summary: 5-year treatment completion analysis

a Disease-free survival includes all recurrence events and is defined as the first occurrence of loco-regional recurrence, contralateral new breast cancer, distant recurrence or death (for any reason).

b Distant disease-free survival is defined as the first occurrence of distant recurrence or death (for any reason).

c Time to recurrence is defined as the first occurrence of loco-regional recurrence, contralateral new breast cancer, distant recurrence or death due to breast cancer.

d Time to distant recurrence is defined as the first occurrence of distant recurrence or death due to breast cancer.

e Number (%) of patients who had died.

The combination of Aremed 1 and tamoxifen did not demonstrate any efficacy benefits in comparison with tamoxifen in all patients as well as in the hormone receptor-positive population. This treatment arm was discontinued from the study.

With an updated follow-up at a median of 10 years, long-term comparison of the treatment effects of Aremed 1 relative to tamoxifen were shown to be consistent with previous analyses.

Adjuvant treatment of early invasive breast cancer for hormone receptor-positive patients being treated with adjuvant tamoxifen

In a phase III trial (Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group [ABCSG] 8) conducted in 2,579 postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer who had received surgery with or without radiotherapy and no chemotherapy (see below), switching to Aremed 1 after 2 years adjuvant treatment with tamoxifen was statistically superior in disease-free survival when compared to remaining on tamoxifen, after a median follow-up of 24 months.

Table 4 ABCSG 8 trial endpoint and results summary

Two further similar trials (GABG/ARNO 95 and ITA), in one of which patients had received surgery and chemotherapy, as well as a combined analysis of ABCSG 8 and GABG/ARNO 95, supported these results.

The Aremed 1 safety profile in these 3 studies was consistent with the known safety profile established in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer.

Bone mineral density (BMD)

In the phase III/IV study (Study of Anastrozole with the Bisphosphonate Risedronate [SABRE]), 234 postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer scheduled for treatment with Aremed 1 1 mg/day were stratified to low, moderate and high risk groups according to their existing risk of fragility fracture. The primary efficacy parameter was the analysis of lumbar spine bone mass density using DEXA scanning. All patients received treatment with vitamin D and calcium. Patients in the low risk group received Aremed 1 alone (N=42), those in the moderate group were randomised to Aremed 1 plus risedronate 35 mg once a week (N=77) or Aremed 1 plus placebo (N=77) and those in the high risk group received Aremed 1 plus risedronate 35 mg once a week (N=38). The primary endpoint was change from baseline in lumbar spine bone mass density at 12 months.

The 12-month main analysis has shown that patients already at moderate to high risk of fragility fracture showed no decrease in their bone mass density (assessed by lumbar spine bone mineral density using DEXA scanning) when managed by using Aremed 1 1 mg/day in combination with risedronate 35 mg once a week. In addition, a decrease in BMD which was not statistically significant was seen in the low risk group treated with Aremed 1 1 mg/day alone. These findings were mirrored in the secondary efficacy variable of change from baseline in total hip BMD at 12 months.

This study provides evidence that the use of bisphosphonates could be considered in the management of possible bone mineral loss in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer scheduled to be treated with Aremed 1.

Paediatric population

Aremed 1 is not indicated for use in children and adolescents.).

The European Medicines Agency has waived the obligation to submit the results of studies with Aremed 1 in one or several subsets of the paediatric population in short stature due to growth hormone deficiency (GHD), testotoxicosis, gynaecomastia, and McCune-Albright syndrome.

Short stature due to Growth Hormone Deficiency

A randomised, double-blind, multi-centre study evaluated 52 pubertal boys (aged 11 to 16 years inclusive) with GHD treated for 12 to 36 months with Aremed 1 1 mg/day or placebo in combination with growth hormone. Only 14 subjects on Aremed 1 completed 36 months.

No statistically significant difference from placebo was observed for the growth related parameters of predicted adult height, height, height SDS (standard deviation score), and height velocity. Final height data were not available. While the number of children treated was too limited to draw any reliable conclusions on safety, there was an increased fracture rate and a trend towards reduced bone mineral density in the Aremed 1 arm compared to placebo.

Testotoxicosis

An open-label, non-comparative, multi-centre study evaluated 14 male patients (aged 2 to 9 years) with familial male-limited precocious puberty, also known as testotoxicosis, treated with combination of Aremed 1 and bicalutamide. The primary objective was to assess the efficacy and safety of this combination regimen over 12 months. Thirteen out of the 14 patients enrolled completed 12 months of combination treatment (one patient was lost to follow-up). There was no significant difference in growth rate after 12 months of treatment, relative to the growth rate during the 6 months prior to entering the study.

Gynaecomastia studies

Trial 0006 was a randomised, double-blind, multi-centre study of 82 pubertal boys (aged 11-18 years inclusive) with gynaecomastia of greater than 12 months duration treated with Aremed 1 1 mg/day or placebo daily for up to 6 months. No significant difference in the number of patients who had a 50% or greater reduction in total breast volume after 6 months of treatment was observed between the Aremed 1 1 mg treated group and the placebo group.

Trial 0001 was an open-label, multiple-dose pharmacokinetic study of Aremed 1 1 mg/day in 36 pubertal boys with gynaecomastia of less than 12 months duration. The secondary objectives were to evaluate the proportion of patients with reductions from baseline in the calculated volume of gynaecomastia of both breasts combined of at least 50% between day 1 and after 6 months of study treatment, and patient tolerability and safety. A decrease in 50% or more of total breast volume was seen in 56% (20/36) of the boys after 6 months.

McCune-Albright Syndrome study

Trial 0046 was an international, multi-centre, open-label exploratory trial of Aremed 1 in 28 girls (aged 2 to ≤10 years) with McCune-Albright Syndrome (MAS). The primary objective was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Aremed 1 1 mg/day in patients with MAS. The efficacy of study treatment was based on the proportion of patients fulfilling defined criteria relating to vaginal bleeding, bone age, and growth velocity.

No statistically significant change in the frequency of vaginal bleeding days on treatment was observed. There were no clinically significant changes in Tanner staging, mean ovarian volume, or mean uterine volume. No statistically significant change in the rate of increase in bone age on treatment compared to the rate during baseline was observed. Growth rate (in cm/year) was significantly reduced (p<0.05) from pre-treatment through month 0 to month 12, and from pre-treatment to the second 6 months (month 7 to month 12).

Absorption of Aremed 1 is rapid and maximum plasma concentrations typically occur within two hours of dosing (under fasted conditions).

Food slightly decreases the rate but not the extent of absorption. The small change in the rate of absorption is not expected to result in a clinically significant effect on steady-state plasma concentrations during once daily dosing of Aremed 1 1 mg tablets. Approximately 90% to 95% of plasma Aremed 1 steady-state concentrations are attained after 7 daily doses, and accumulation is 3- to 4-fold. There is no evidence of time or dose-dependency of Aremed 1 pharmacokinetic parameters.

Aremed 1 pharmacokinetics are independent of age in postmenopausal women.

Aremed 1 is only 40% bound to plasma proteins.

Aremed 1 is eliminated slowly with a plasma elimination half-life of 40 to 50 hours. Aremed 1 is extensively metabolised by postmenopausal women with less than 10% of the dose excreted in the urine unchanged within 72 hours of dosing. Metabolism of Aremed 1 occurs by N-dealkylation, hydroxylation and glucuronidation. The metabolites are excreted primarily via the urine. Triazole, a major metabolite in plasma and urine, does not inhibit aromatase.

Renal or hepatic impairment

The apparent clearance (CL/F) of Aremed 1, following oral administration, was approximately 30% lower in volunteers with stable hepatic cirrhosis than in matched controls (Study 1033IL/0014). However, plasma Aremed 1 concentrations in the volunteers with hepatic cirrhosis were within the range of concentrations seen in normal subjects in other trials. Plasma Aremed 1 concentrations observed during long-term efficacy trials in patients with hepatic impairment were within the range of plasma Aremed 1 concentrations seen in patients without hepatic impairment.

The apparent clearance (CL/F) of Aremed 1, following oral administration, was not altered in volunteers with severe renal impairment (GFR <30ml/min) in Study 1033IL/0018, consistent with the fact that Aremed 1 is eliminated primarily by metabolism. Plasma Aremed 1 concentrations observed during long-term efficacy trials in patients with renal impairment were within the range of plasma Aremed 1 concentrations seen in patients without renal impairment. In patients with severe renal impairment, administration of Aremed 1 should be performed with caution.

Paediatric population

In boys with pubertal gynaecomastia (10-17 years), Aremed 1 was rapidly absorbed, was widely distributed, and was eliminated slowly with a half-life of approximately 2 days. Clearance of Aremed 1 was lower in girls (3-10 years) than in the older boys and exposure higher. Aremed 1 in girls was widely distributed and slowly eliminated.

Absorption

Absorption of anastrozole is rapid and maximum plasma concentrations typically occur within two hours of dosing (under fasted conditions). Food slightly decreases the rate but not the extent of absorption. The small change in the rate of absorption is not expected to result in a clinically significant effect on steady-state plasma concentrations during once daily dosing of Aremed 1 tablets. Approximately 90 to 95% of plasma anastrozole steady-state concentrations are attained after 7 daily doses, and accumulation is 3- to 4-fold. There is no evidence of time or dose-dependency of anastrozole pharmacokinetic parameters.

Anastrozole pharmacokinetics are independent of age in postmenopausal women.

Distribution

Anastrozole is only 40% bound to plasma proteins.

Elimination

Anastrozole is eliminated slowly with a plasma elimination half-life of 40 to 50 hours. Anastrozole is extensively metabolised by postmenopausal women with less than 10% of the dose excreted in the urine unchanged within 72 hours of dosing. Metabolism of anastrozole occurs by N-dealkylation, hydroxylation and glucuronidation. The metabolites are excreted primarily via the urine. Triazole, the major metabolite in plasma, does not inhibit aromatase.

Renal or hepatic impairment

The apparent clearance (CL/F) of anastrozole, following oral administration, was approximately 30% lower in volunteers with stable hepatic cirrhosis than in matched controls (Study 1033IL/0014). However, plasma anastrozole concentrations in the volunteers with hepatic cirrhosis were within the range of concentrations seen in normal subjects in other trials. Plasma anastrozole concentrations observed during long-term efficacy trials in patients with hepatic impairment were within the range of plasma anastrozole concentrations seen in patients without hepatic impairment.

The apparent clearance (CL/F) of anastrozole, following oral administration, was not altered in volunteers with severe renal impairment (GFR <30ml/min) in Study 1033IL/0018, consistent with the fact that anastrozole is eliminated primarily by metabolism. Plasma anastrozole concentrations observed during long-term efficacy trials in patients with renal impairment were within the range of plasma anastrozole concentrations seen in patients without renal impairment. In patients with severe renal impairment, administration of Aremed 1 should be performed with caution.

Paediatric population

In boys with pubertal gynaecomastia (10-17 years), anastrozole was rapidly absorbed, was widely distributed, and was eliminated slowly with a half-life of approximately 2 days. Clearance of anastrozole was lower in girls (3-10 years) than in the older boys and exposure higher. Anastrozole in girls was widely distributed and slowly eliminated.

Non-clinical data reveal no special hazard for humans based on conventional studies of safety pharmacology, repeated dose toxicity, genotoxicity, carcinogenic potential, toxicity to reproduction for the indicated population.

Acute toxicity

In animal studies toxicity was only seen at high doses. In acute toxicity studies in rodents, the median lethal dose of Aremed 1 was greater than 100 mg/kg/day by the oral route and greater than 50 mg/kg/day by the intraperitoneal route. In an oral acute toxicity study in the dog, the median lethal dose was greater than 45 mg/kg/day.

Chronic toxicity

In animal studies adverse effects were only seen at high doses. Multiple dose toxicity studies utilized rats and dogs. No no-effect levels were established for Aremed 1 in the toxicity studies, but those effects that were observed at the low doses (1 mg/kg/day) and mid doses (dog 3 mg/kg/day; rat 5 mg/kg/day) were related to either the pharmacological or enzyme inducing properties of Aremed 1 and were unaccompanied by significant toxic or degenerative changes.

Mutagenicity

Genetic toxicology studies with Aremed 1 show that it is not a mutagen or a clastogen.

Reproductive toxicology

In a fertility study weanling male rats were dosed orally with 50 or 400 mg/l Aremed 1 via their drinking water for 10 weeks. Measured mean plasma concentrations were 44.4 (±14.7) ng/ml and 165 (±90) ng/ml respectively. Mating indices were adversely affected in both dose groups, whilst a reduction in fertility was evident only at the 400 mg/l dose level. The reduction was transient as all mating and fertility parameters were similar to control group values following a 9 week treatment-free recovery period.

Oral administration of Aremed 1 to female rats produced a high incidence of infertility at 1 mg/kg/day and increased pre-implantation loss at 0.02 mg/kg/day. These effects occurred at clinically relevant doses. An effect in man cannot be excluded. These effects were related to the pharmacology of the compound and were completely reversed after a 5-week compound withdrawal period.

Oral administration of Aremed 1 to pregnant rats and rabbits caused no teratogenic effects at doses up to 1.0 and 0.2 mg/kg/day respectively. Those effects that were seen (placental enlargement in rats and pregnancy failure in rabbits) were related to the pharmacology of the compound.

The survival of litters born to rats given Aremed 1 at 0.02 mg/kg/day and above (from Day 17 of pregnancy to Day 22 post-partum) was compromised. These effects were related to the pharmacological effects of the compound on parturition. There were no adverse effects on behaviour or reproductive performance of the first generation offspring attributable to maternal treatment with Aremed 1.

Carcinogenicity

A two-year rat oncogenicity study resulted in an increase in incidence of hepatic neoplasms and uterine stromal polyps in females and thyroid adenomas in males at the high dose (25 mg/kg/day) only. These changes occurred at a dose which represents 100-fold greater exposure than occurs at human therapeutic doses, and are considered not to be clinically relevant to the treatment of patients with Aremed 1.

A two-year mouse oncogenicity study resulted in the induction of benign ovarian tumours and a disturbance in the incidence of lymphoreticular neoplasms (fewer histiocytic sarcomas in females and more deaths as a result of lymphomas). These changes are considered to be mouse-specific effects of aromatase inhibition and not clinically relevant to the treatment of patients with Aremed 1.

Non-clinical data reveal no special hazard for humans based on conventional studies of safety pharmacology, repeated dose toxicity, genotoxicity, carcinogenic potential, toxicity to reproduction for the indicated population.

Acute toxicity

In animal studies toxicity was only seen at high doses. In acute toxicity studies in rodents, the median lethal dose of anastrozole was greater than 100 mg/kg/day by the oral route and greater than 50 mg/kg/day by the intraperitoneal route. In an oral acute toxicity study in the dog, the median lethal dose was greater than 45 mg/kg/day.

Chronic toxicity

In animal studies adverse effects were only seen at high doses. Multiple dose toxicity studies utilised rats and dogs. No no-effect levels were established for anastrozole in the toxicity studies, but those effects that were observed at the low doses (1 mg/kg/day) and mid doses (dog 3 mg/kg/day; rat 5 mg/kg/day) were related to either the pharmacological or enzyme inducing properties of anastrozole and were unaccompanied by significant toxic or degenerative changes.

Mutagenicity

Genetic toxicology studies with anastrozole show that it is not a mutagen or a clastogen.

Reproductive toxicology

In a fertility study weanling male rats were dosed orally with 50 or 400 mg/l anastrozole via their drinking water for 10 weeks. Measured mean plasma concentrations were 44.4 (± 14.7) ng/ml and 165 (±90) ng/ml respectively. Mating indices were adversely affected in both dose groups, whilst a reduction in fertility was evident only at the 400 mg/l dose level. The reduction was transient as all mating and fertility parameters were similar to control group values following a 9-week treatment-free recovery period.

Oral administration of anastrozole to female rats produced a high incidence of infertility at 1 mg/kg/day and increased pre-implantation loss at 0.02 mg/kg/day. These effects occurred at clinically relevant doses. An effect in man cannot be excluded. These effects were related to the pharmacology of the compound and were completely reversed after a 5-week compound withdrawal period.

Oral administration of anastrozole to pregnant rats and rabbits caused no teratogenic effects at doses up to 1.0 and 0.2 mg/kg/day respectively. Those effects that were seen (placental enlargement in rats and pregnancy failure in rabbits) were related to the pharmacology of the compound.

The survival of litters born to rats given anastrozole at 0.02 mg/kg/day and above (from Day 17 of pregnancy to Day 22 post-partum) was compromised. These effects were related to the pharmacological effects of the compound on parturition. There were no adverse effects on behaviour or reproductive performance of the first generation offspring attributable to maternal treatment with anastrozole.

Carcinogenicity

A two-year rat oncogenicity study resulted in an increase in incidence of hepatic neoplasms and uterine stromal polyps in females and thyroid adenomas in males at the high dose (25 mg/kg/day) only. These changes occurred at a dose which represents 100-fold greater exposure than occurs at human therapeutic doses, and are considered not to be clinically relevant to the treatment of patients with anastrozole.

A two-year mouse oncogenicity study resulted in the induction of benign ovarian tumours and a disturbance in the incidence of lymphoreticular neoplasms (fewer histiocytic sarcomas in females and more deaths as a result of lymphomas). These changes are considered to be mouse-specific effects of aromatase inhibition and not clinically relevant to the treatment of patients with anastrozole.

No special requirements.

Any unused medicinal product or waste material should be disposed of in accordance with local requirements.