Faculty Bibliography

Therapeutic advances and the availability of novel agents have significantly improved outcomes in myeloma; yet, it remains incurable and strategies to improve survival continue to be sought. One approach is to prolong the duration of response and increase progression-free survival (PFS) through consolidation or maintenance treatment with regimens that have low toxicity profiles, and do not negatively impact on quality of life. Data from several studies with thalidomide, lenalidomide and bortezomib consistently show improvements in response and PFS, although results have still to be confirmed with respect to overall survival (OS). Despite the promising data, the optimal use of consolidation and maintenance treatment in terms of regimen, dose and duration has yet to be defined. Given the evidence to date, the UK Myeloma Forum believes that both maintenance and consolidation therapy should be considered as treatment options for patients with myeloma. Patients should be encouraged to enrol in clinical studies. This document reviews the current position of maintenance and consolidation for patients with myeloma treated in the UK.

In recent years significant progress has been made in the understanding of multiple myeloma (MM) biology and its treatment. Current strategies for the treatment of MM involve the concept of sequential blocks of therapy given as an induction followed by consolidation and maintenance. In an age characterized by emerging and more powerful laboratory techniques, it is of primary importance to understand the biology of MM and how this biology can guide the development of new treatment strategies. This review focuses on the genetic basis of myeloma, including the most common genetic abnormalities and pathways affected and the effects that these have on MM treatment strategies. MM biology is discussed also in the light of more recent theory of intraclonal heterogeneity.

In this report, a panel of European myeloma experts discuss the role of pomalidomide in the treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Based on the available evidence, the combination of pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone is a well-tolerated and effective treatment option for patients with RRMM who have exhausted treatment with lenalidomide and bortezomib. The optimal starting dose of pomalidomide is 4 mg given on days 1-21 of each 28-day cycle, whereas dexamethasone is administered at a dose of 40 mg weekly (reduced to 20 mg for patients aged >75 years). The treatment should continue until evidence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Dose-modification schemes have been established for patients who develop neutropenia, thrombocytopaenia and other grade 3-4 adverse events during pomalidomide therapy. Guidance on the prevention and management of infections and venous thromboembolism is provided, based on the available clinical evidence and the experience of panel members. The use of pomalidomide in special populations, such as patients with advanced age, renal impairment or unfavourable cytogenetic features, is also discussed.

Although intratumor heterogeneity has been inferred in multiple myeloma (MM), little is known about its subclonal phylogeny. To describe such phylogenetic trees in a series of patients with MM, we perform whole-exome sequencing and single-cell genetic analysis. Our results demonstrate that at presentation myeloma is composed of two to six different major clones, which are related by linear and branching phylogenies. Remarkably, the earliest myeloma-initiating clones, some of which only had the initiating t(11;14), were still present at low frequencies at the time of diagnosis. For the first time in myeloma, we demonstrate parallel evolution whereby two independent clones activate the RAS/MAPK pathway through RAS mutations and give rise subsequently to distinct subclonal lineages. We also report the co-occurrence of RAS and interferon regulatory factor 4 (IRF4) p.K123R mutations in 4% of myeloma patients. Lastly, we describe the fluctuations of myeloma subclonal architecture in a patient analyzed at presentation and relapse and in NOD/SCID-IL2Rγ(null) xenografts, revealing clonal extinction and the emergence of new clones that acquire additional mutations. This study confirms that myeloma subclones exhibit different survival properties during treatment or mouse engraftment. We conclude that clonal diversity combined with varying selective pressures is the essential foundation for tumor progression and treatment resistance in myeloma.

The treatment of multiple myeloma has undergone significant changes and has resulted in the achievement of molecular remissions, the prolongation of remission duration, and extended survival becoming realistic goals, with a cure being possible in a small but growing number of patients. In addition, nowadays it is possible to categorize patients more precisely into different risk groups, thus allowing the evaluation of therapies in different settings and enabling a better comparison of results across trials. Here, we review the evidence from clinical studies, which forms the basis for our recommendations for the management of patients with myeloma. Treatment approaches depend on "fitness," with chronological age still being an important discriminator for selecting therapy. In younger, fit patients, a short three drug-based induction treatment followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) remains the preferred option. Consolidation and maintenance therapy are attractive strategies not yet approved by the European Medicines Agency, and a decision regarding post-ASCT therapy should only be made after detailed discussion of the pros and cons with the individual patient. Two- and three-drug combinations are recommended for patients not eligible for transplantation. Treatment should be administered for at least nine cycles, although different durations of initial therapy have only rarely been compared so far. Comorbidity and frailty should be thoroughly assessed in elderly patients, and treatment must be adapted to individual needs, carefully selecting appropriate drugs and doses. A substantial number of new drugs and novel drug classes in early clinical development have shown promising activity. Their introduction into clinical practice will most likely further improve treatment results.

Bisphosphonates are recommended in patients with osteolytic lesions secondary to multiple myeloma. We report on the safety of bisphosphonate therapy with long-term follow-up in the Medical Research Council Myeloma IX study. Patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma were randomised to zoledronic acid (ZOL; 4 mg intravenously every 21-28 d) or clodronate (CLO; 1600 mg/d orally) plus chemotherapy. Among 1960 patients (5.9-year median follow-up), both bisphosphonates were well tolerated. Acute renal failure events were similar between groups (ZOL 5.2% vs. CLO 5.8% at 2 years; incidence plateaued thereafter). The overall incidence of confirmed osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) was low, but higher with ZOL (ZOL 3.7% vs. CLO 0.5%; P < 0.0001). ONJ events were generally low grade and most occurred between 8 and 30 months (median time to ONJ, 23.7 months). Among 10 patients with ONJ recovery data, four patients in the ZOL group completely recovered, two patients improved, and three patients experienced no improvement; one CLO patient experienced no improvement. Dental surgery or trauma preceded ONJ in six ZOL patients. The incidence of renal adverse events was similar for ZOL and CLO. ONJ incidence remained low and was lower with CLO compared to ZOL. We have seen no further ONJ cases to date.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To determine the feasibility of whole-body diffusion-weighted (DW) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging for assessment of treatment response in myeloma. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:This prospective single-institution study was HIPAA-compliant with local research ethics committee approval. Written informed consent was obtained from each subject. Eight healthy volunteers (cohort 1a) and seven myeloma patients (cohort 1b) were imaged twice to assess repeatability of quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) estimates. Thirty-four additional myeloma patients (cohort 2) underwent whole-body DW imaging before treatment; 26 completed a posttreatment imaging. Whole-body DW data were compared before and after treatment by using qualitative (ie, observer scores) and quantitative (ie, whole-body segmentation of marrow ADC) methods. Serum paraproteins and/or light chains or bone marrow biopsy defined response. RESULTS:Whole-body DW imaging scores were significantly different between observers (P < .001), but change in scores between observers after treatment was not (P = .49). Sensitivity and specificity for detecting response according to observer scores were 86% (18 of 21 patients) and 80% (4 of 5 patients) for both observers. ADC measurement was repeatable: mean coefficient of variation was 3.8% in healthy volunteers and 2.8% in myeloma patients. Pretreatment ADC in cohort 2 was significantly different from that in cohort 1a (P = .03), but not from that in cohort 1b (P = .2). Mean ADC increased in 95% (19 of 20) of responding patients and decreased in all (five of five) nonresponders (P = .002). A 3.3% increase in ADC helped identify response with 90% sensitivity and 100% specificity; an 8% increase (greater than repeatability of cohort 1b) resulted in 70% sensitivity and 100% specificity. There was a significant negative correlation between change in ADC and change in laboratory markers of response (r = -0.614; P = .001). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Preliminary work demonstrates whole-body DW imaging is a repeatable, quantifiable technique for assessment of treatment response in myeloma.