Faculty Bibliography

To date, the choice of therapy for an individual multiple myeloma patient has been based on clinical factors such as age and co-morbidities. The widespread evolution, validation and clinical utilization of molecular technologies, such as fluorescent in-situ hybridization and next generation sequencing has enabled the identification of a number of prognostic and predictive biomarkers for progression free, overall survival and treatment response. In this review we argue that in order to continue to improve myeloma patient outcomes incorporating such biomarkers into the routine diagnostic workup of patients will allow for the use of personalized, biologically based treatments.

The original version of this Article contained an error in the spelling of a member of the PRACTICAL Consortium, Manuela Gago-Dominguez, which was incorrectly given as Manuela Gago Dominguez. This has now been corrected in both the PDF and HTML versions of the Article. Furthermore, in the original HTML version of this Article, the order of authors within the author list was incorrect. The PRACTICAL consortium was incorrectly listed after Richard S. Houlston and should have been listed after Nora Pashayan. This error has been corrected in the HTML version of the Article; the PDF version was correct at the time of publication.

BACKGROUND:Tolerability of treatments for multiple myeloma can depend on the characteristics of the patient being treated. We aimed to develop and validate a risk profile, using routinely collected data, that could predict overall survival in patients with multiple myeloma who were ineligible for stem-cell transplantation. METHODS:We used patient data from two randomised controlled trials done in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for stem-cell transplantation (the NCRI Myeloma XI study [NCRI-XI, n=1852] and the MRC Myeloma IX study [MRC-IX, n=520]), to develop the UK Myeloma Research Alliance Risk Profile (MRP) for overall survival. We used multivariable Cox regression with a least absolute shrinkage and selection operator penalty term. Multiple imputation by chained equations was used to account for missing data in the development and internal validation of the model. The MRP was internally validated in NCRI-XI and externally validated in MRC-IX. The D-statistic was estimated in the developed model and used to internally and externally validate the model according to prespecified criteria. FINDINGS/RESULTS:The MRP included WHO performance status, International Staging System, age, and C-reactive protein concentration as prognostic variables. The MRP was prognostic of overall survival and was successfully internally validated in NCRI-XI and externally validated in MRC-IX (D-statistic NCRI-XI: 0·840 [95% CI 0·718-0·963] and MRC-IX: 0·654 [0·497-0·811]). The MRP groups defining low-risk, medium-risk, and high-risk patients were associated with progression-free survival and early mortality. A decrease in the percentage of protocol dose delivered and quality of life at baseline were associated with increased risk. The MRP groups remained prognostic in patients exposed to different therapeutic combinations and in patients with genetic high-risk disease defined according to both the UK and International Myeloma Working Group definitions. INTERPRETATION/CONCLUSIONS:We have developed and externally validated a risk profile for overall survival containing widely available clinical parameters. This risk profile could aid decision making in patients with multiple myeloma ineligible for stem-cell transplantation, but further external validation is required. FUNDING/BACKGROUND:Medical Research Council, Novartis, Schering Health Care, Chugai, Pharmion, Celgene, Ortho Biotech, Cancer Research UK, Celgene, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Amgen.

The emergence of treatment resistant sub-clones is a key feature of relapse in multiple myeloma. Therapeutic attempts to extend remission and prevent relapse include the maximisation of response and use of maintenance therapy. We used whole exome sequencing to study the genetics of paired presentation and relapse samples from 56 newly diagnosed patients, following induction therapy, randomised to receive either lenalidomide maintenance or observation as part of the Myeloma XI trial. Patients included were considered high risk, relapsing within 30 months of maintenance randomisation. Patients achieving a complete response had predominantly branching evolutionary patterns leading to relapse, characterised by a greater mutational burden, an altered mutational profile, bi-allelic inactivation of tumour suppressor genes, and acquired structural aberrations. Conversely, in patients achieving a partial response the evolutionary features were predominantly stable with a similar mutational and structural profile. There were no significant differences between patients relapsing after maintenance lenalidomide vs observation. This study shows that the depth of response is a key determinant of the evolutionary patterns seen at relapse.

BACKGROUND:Patients with multiple myeloma treated with lenalidomide maintenance therapy have improved progression-free survival, primarily following autologous stem-cell transplantation. A beneficial effect of lenalidomide maintenance therapy on overall survival in this setting has been inconsistent between individual studies. Minimal data are available on the effect of maintenance lenalidomide in more aggressive disease states, such as patients with cytogenetic high-risk disease or patients ineligible for transplantation. We aimed to assess lenalidomide maintenance versus observation in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, including cytogenetic risk and transplantation status subgroup analyses. METHODS:The Myeloma XI trial was an open-label, randomised, phase 3, adaptive design trial with three randomisation stages done at 110 National Health Service hospitals in England, Wales, and Scotland. There were three potential randomisations in the study: induction treatment (allocation by transplantation eligibility status); intensification treatment (allocation by response to induction therapy); and maintenance treatment. Here, we report the results of the randomisation to maintenance treatment. Eligible patients for maintenance randomisation were aged 18 years or older and had symptomatic or non-secretory multiple myeloma, had completed their assigned induction therapy as per protocol and had achieved at least a minimal response to protocol treatment, including lenalidomide. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1 from Jan 13, 2011, to Jun 27, 2013, and 2:1 from Jun 28, 2013, to Aug 11, 2017) to lenalidomide maintenance (10 mg orally on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle) or observation, and stratified by allocated induction and intensification treatment, and centre. The co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival, analysed by intention to treat. Safety analysis was per protocol. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN49407852, and clinicaltrialsregister.eu, number 2009-010956-93, and has completed recruitment. FINDINGS/RESULTS:Between Jan 13, 2011, and Aug 11, 2017, 1917 patients were accrued to the maintenance treatment randomisation of the trial. 1137 patients were assigned to lenalidomide maintenance and 834 patients to observation. After a median follow-up of 31 months (IQR 18-50), median progression-free survival was 39 months (95% CI 36-42) with lenalidomide and 20 months (18-22) with observation (hazard ratio [HR] 0·46 [95% CI 0·41-0·53]; p<0·0001), and 3-year overall survival was 78·6% (95% Cl 75·6-81·6) in the lenalidomide group and 75·8% (72·4-79·2) in the observation group (HR 0·87 [95% CI 0·73-1·05]; p=0·15). Progression-free survival was improved with lenalidomide compared with observation across all prespecified subgroups. On prespecified subgroup analyses by transplantation status, 3-year overall survival in transplantation-eligible patients was 87·5% (95% Cl 84·3-90·7) in the lenalidomide group and 80·2% (76·0-84·4) in the observation group (HR 0·69 [95% CI 0·52-0·93]; p=0·014), and in transplantation-ineligible patients it was 66·8% (61·6-72·1) in the lenalidomide group and 69·8% (64·4-75·2) in the observation group (1·02 [0·80-1·29]; p=0·88). By cytogenetic risk group, in standard-risk patients, 3-year overall survival was 86·4% (95% CI 80·0-90·9) in the lenalidomide group compared with 81·3% (74·2-86·7) in the observation group, and in high-risk patients, it was 74.9% (65·8-81·9) in the lenalidomide group compared with 63·7% (52·8-72·7) in the observation group; and in ultra-high-risk patients it was 62·9% (46·0-75·8) compared with 43·5% (22·2-63·1). Since these subgroup analyses results were not powered they should be interpreted with caution. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events for patients taking lenalidomide were haematological, including neutropenia (362 [33%] patients), thrombocytopenia (72 [7%] patients), and anaemia (42 [4%] patients). Serious adverse events were reported in 494 (45%) of 1097 patients receiving lenalidomide compared with 150 (17%) of 874 patients on observation. The most common serious adverse events were infections in both the lenalidomide group and the observation group. 460 deaths occurred during maintenance treatment, 234 (21%) in the lenalidomide group and 226 (27%) in the observation group, and no deaths in the lenalidomide group were deemed treatment related. INTERPRETATION/CONCLUSIONS:Maintenance therapy with lenalidomide significantly improved progression-free survival in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma compared with observation, but did not improve overall survival in the intention-to-treat analysis of the whole trial population. The manageable safety profile of this drug and the encouraging results in subgroup analyses of patients across all cytogenetic risk groups support further investigation of maintenance lenalidomide in this setting. FUNDING/BACKGROUND:Cancer Research UK, Celgene, Amgen, Merck, and Myeloma UK.

We measured immunosuppression at myeloma diagnosis and assessed the impact on survival in 5826 UK myeloma trial patients. Polyclonal immunoglobulin levels were below normal in 85% of patients and above normal in only 0.4% of cases for IgA, 0.2% for IgM and no cases for IgG. Immunoparesis had a greater impact in recent trials: median overall survival (OS) was up to 3 years longer for patients without immunoparesis compared to the old trials, less than 1 year longer. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 39%, 36% and 57% longer for patients with normal IgG, IgA and IgM levels, respectively. The depth of IgM suppression, but not the depth of IgG or IgA suppression, was prognostic for survival: the most severely suppressed IgM tertile of patients OS was 0.9 years shorter than those in the top tertile, and 2.6 years shorter than OS of those with normal IgM levels (p = .007). The degree of suppression of polyclonal IgM levels below normal was associated with worse PFS (p = .0002). Infection does not appear to be the main mechanism through which immunoparesis affects survival. We hypothesise that IgM immunoparesis impacts through a combination of being associated with more aggressive disease and reduced immune surveillance against relapse.

Robust establishment of survival in multiple myeloma (MM) and its relationship to recurrent genetic aberrations is required as outcomes are variable despite apparent similar staging. We assayed copy number alterations (CNA) and translocations in 1036 patients from the NCRI Myeloma XI trial and linked these to overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival. Through a meta-anlysis of these data with data from MRC Myeloma IX trial, totalling 1905 newly diagnosed MM patients (NDMM), we confirm the association of t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), del(17p) and gain(1q21) with poor prognosis with hazard ratios (HRs) for OS of 1.60 (P=4.77 × 10^-7), 1.74 (P=0.0005), 1.90 (P=0.0089), 2.10 (P=8.86 × 10^-14) and 1.68 (P=2.18 × 10^-14), respectively. Patients with 'double-hit' defined by co-occurrence of at least two adverse lesions have an especially poor prognosis with HRs for OS of 2.67 (P=8.13 × 10^-27) for all patients and 3.19 (P=1.23 × 10^-18) for intensively treated patients. Using comprehensive CNA and translocation profiling in Myeloma XI we also demonstrate a strong association between t(4;14) and BIRC2/BIRC3 deletion (P=8.7 × 10^-15), including homozygous deletion. Finally, we define distinct sub-groups of hyperdiploid MM, with either gain(1q21) and CCND2 overexpression (P<0.0001) or gain(11q25) and CCND1 overexpression (P<0.0001). Profiling multiple genetic lesions can identify MM patients likely to relapse early allowing stratification of treatment.

BACKGROUND:Multiple myeloma (MM) patients with t(14;20) have a poor prognosis and their outcome has not improved following the introduction of bortezomib (Bzb). The mechanism underlying the resistance to proteasome inhibitors (PIs) for this subset of patients is unknown. METHODS:IC50 of Bzb and carfilzomib (CFZ) in human myeloma cell lines (HMCLs) were established by MTT assay. Gene Expression profile (GEP) analysis was used to determine gene expression in primary myeloma cells. Immunoblotting analysis was performed for MAFb and caspase family proteins. Immunofluorescence staining was used to detect the location of MAFb protein in MM cells. Lentiviral infections were used to knock-down MAFb expression in two lines. Apoptosis detection by flow cytometry and western blot analysis was performed to determine the molecular mechanism MAFb confers resistance to proteasome inhibitors. RESULTS:We found high levels of MAFb protein in cell lines with t(14;20), in one line with t(6;20), in one with Igλ insertion into MAFb locus, and in primary plasma cells from MM patients with t(14;20). High MAFb protein levels correlated with higher IC50s of PIs in MM cells. Inhibition of GSK3β activity or treatment with Bzb or CFZ prevented MAFb protein degradation without affecting the corresponding mRNA level indicating a role for GSK3 and proteasome inhibitors in regulation of MAFb stability. Silencing MAFb restored sensitivity to Bzb and CFZ, and enhanced PIs-induced apoptosis and activation of caspase-3, - 8, - 9, PARP and lamin A/C suggesting that high expression of MAFb protein leads to insensitivity to proteasome inhibitors. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:These results highlight the role of post-translational modification of MAFb in maintaining its protein level, and identify a mechanism by which proteasome inhibitors induced stabilization of MAFb confers resistance to proteasome inhibitors, and provide a rationale for the development of targeted therapeutic strategies for this subset of patients.

Purpose: Myeloma is a plasma cell malignancy characterized by the overproduction of immunoglobulin, and is therefore susceptible to therapies targeting protein homeostasis. We hypothesized that heat shock factor 1 (HSF1) was an attractive therapeutic target for myeloma due to its direct regulation of transcriptional programs implicated in both protein homeostasis and the oncogenic phenotype. Here, we interrogate HSF1 as a therapeutic target in myeloma using bioinformatic, genetic, and pharmacologic means.Experimental Design: To assess the clinical relevance of HSF1, we analyzed publicly available patient myeloma gene expression datasets. Validation of this novel target was conducted in in vitro experiments using shRNA or inhibitors of the HSF1 pathway in human myeloma cell lines and primary cells as well as in in vivo human myeloma xenograft models.Results: Expression of HSF1 and its target genes were associated with poorer myeloma patient survival. ShRNA-mediated knockdown or pharmacologic inhibition of the HSF1 pathway with a novel chemical probe, CCT251236, or with KRIBB11, led to caspase-mediated cell death that was associated with an increase in EIF2α phosphorylation, CHOP expression and a decrease in overall protein synthesis. Importantly, both CCT251236 and KRIBB11 induced cytotoxicity in human myeloma cell lines and patient-derived primary myeloma cells with a therapeutic window over normal cells. Pharmacologic inhibition induced tumor growth inhibition and was well-tolerated in a human myeloma xenograft murine model with evidence of pharmacodynamic biomarker modulation.Conclusions: Taken together, our studies demonstrate the dependence of myeloma cells on HSF1 for survival and support the clinical evaluation of pharmacologic inhibitors of the HSF1 pathway in myeloma. Clin Cancer Res; 24(10); 2395-407. ©2018 AACRSee related commentary by Parekh, p. 2237.

Understanding the profile of oncogene and tumor suppressor gene mutations with their interactions and impact on the prognosis of multiple myeloma (MM) can improve the definition of disease subsets and identify pathways important in disease pathobiology. Using integrated genomics of 1273 newly diagnosed patients with MM, we identified 63 driver genes, some of which are novel, including IDH1, IDH2, HUWE1, KLHL6, and PTPN11 Oncogene mutations are significantly more clonal than tumor suppressor mutations, indicating they may exert a bigger selective pressure. Patients with more driver gene abnormalities are associated with worse outcomes, as are identified mechanisms of genomic instability. Oncogenic dependencies were identified between mutations in driver genes, common regions of copy number change, and primary translocation and hyperdiploidy events. These dependencies included associations with t(4;14) and mutations in FGFR3, DIS3, and PRKD2; t(11;14) with mutations in CCND1 and IRF4; t(14;16) with mutations in MAF, BRAF, DIS3, and ATM; and hyperdiploidy with gain 11q, mutations in FAM46C, and MYC rearrangements. These associations indicate that the genomic landscape of myeloma is predetermined by the primary events upon which further dependencies are built, giving rise to a nonrandom accumulation of genetic hits. Understanding these dependencies may elucidate potential evolutionary patterns and lead to better treatment regimens.