Disease heterogeneity, prognostication and the role of targeted therapy in multiple myeloma

References

• Landgren O, Kyle RA, Pfeiffer RM, et al. Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) consistently precedes multiple myeloma: a prospective study. Blood. 2009;113(22):5412–5417.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rajkumar SV, Kumar S. Multiple myeloma current treatment algorithms. Blood Cancer J. 2020;10(9):94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sonneveld P, Avet-Loiseau H, Lonial S, et al. Treatment of multiple myeloma with high-risk cytogenetics: a consensus of the International Myeloma Working Group. Blood. 2016;127(24):2955–2962.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar SK, Dispenzieri A, Lacy MQ, et al. Continued improvement in survival in multiple myeloma: changes in early mortality and outcomes in older patients. Leukemia. 2014;28(5):1122–1128.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hervé AL, Florence M, Philippe M, et al. Molecular heterogeneity of multiple myeloma: pathogenesis, prognosis, and therapeutic implications. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(14):1893–1897.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergsagel PL, Kuehl WM. Chromosome translocations in multiple myeloma. Oncogene. 2001;20(40):5611–5622.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chesi M, Bergsagel PL. Molecular pathogenesis of multiple myeloma: basic and clinical updates. Int J Hematol. 2013;97(3):313–323.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hurt EM, Wiestner A, Rosenwald A, et al. Overexpression of c-maf is a frequent oncogenic event in multiple myeloma that promotes proliferation and pathological interactions with bone marrow stroma. Cancer Cell. 2004;5(2):191–199.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergsagel PL, Kuehl WM, Zhan F, et al. Cyclin D dysregulation: an early and unifying pathogenic event in multiple myeloma. Blood. 2005;106(1):296–303.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang H, Sloan S, Li D, et al. The t(4;14) is associated with poor prognosis in myeloma patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplant. Br J Haematol. 2004;125(1):64–68.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gertz MA, Lacy MQ, Dispenzieri A, et al. Clinical implications of t(11;14)(q13;q32), t(4;14)(p16.3;q32), and –17p13 in myeloma patients treated with high-dose therapy. Blood. 2005;106(8):2837–2840.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fonseca R, Barlogie B, Bataille R, et al. Genetics and cytogenetics of multiple myeloma: a workshop report. Cancer Res. 2004;64(4):1546–1558.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Turner N, Grose R. Fibroblast growth factor signalling: from development to cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2010;10(2):116–129.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hudlebusch HR, Santoni-Rugiu E, Simon R, et al. The histone methyltransferase and putative oncoprotein MMSET is overexpressed in a large variety of human tumors. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17(9):2919–2933.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palumbo A, Avet-Loiseau H, Oliva S, et al. Revised international staging system for multiple myeloma: a report from international myeloma working group. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(26):2863–2869.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mikhael JR, Dingli D, Roy V, et al. Management of newly diagnosed symptomatic multiple myeloma: updated mayo stratification of myeloma and risk-adapted therapy (mSMART) consensus guidelines 2013. Mayo Clin Proc. 2013;88(4):360–376.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker BA, Wardell CP, Murison A, et al. APOBEC family mutational signatures are associated with poor prognosis translocations in multiple myeloma. Nat Commun. 2015;6(1):6997.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maura F, Petljak M, Lionetti M, et al. Biological and prognostic impact of APOBEC-induced mutations in the spectrum of plasma cell dyscrasias and multiple myeloma cell lines. Leukemia. 2018;32(4):1043–1047.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Touzeau C, Dousset C, Le Gouill S, et al. The Bcl-2 specific BH3 mimetic ABT-199: a promising targeted therapy for t(11;14) multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2014;28(1):210–212.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bodet L, Gomez-Bougie P, Touzeau C, et al. ABT-737 is highly effective against molecular subgroups of multiple myeloma. Blood. 2011;118(14):3901–3910.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rajan AM, Rajkumar SV. Interpretation of cytogenetic results in multiple myeloma for clinical practice. Blood Cancer J. 2015;5(10):e365.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avet-Loiseau H, Attal M, Campion L, et al. Long-term analysis of the IFM 99 trials for myeloma: cytogenetic abnormalities [t(4;14), del(17p), 1q gains] play a major role in defining long-term survival. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(16):1949–1952.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fonseca R, Blood E, Rue M, et al. Clinical and biologic implications of recurrent genomic aberrations in myeloma. Blood. 2003;101(11):4569–4575.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar SK, Rajkumar V, Kyle RA, et al. Multiple myeloma. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2017;3(1):17046.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker BA, Mavrommatis K, Wardell CP, et al. A high-risk, Double-Hit, group of newly diagnosed myeloma identified by genomic analysis. Leukemia. 2019;33(1):159–170.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thanendrarajan S, Tian E, Qu P, et al. The level of deletion 17p and bi-allelic inactivation of TP53 has a significant impact on clinical outcome in multiple myeloma. Haematologica. 2017;102(9):e364–e367.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• An G, Li Z, Tai YT, et al. The impact of clone size on the prognostic value of chromosome aberrations by fluorescence in situ hybridization in multiple myeloma. Clin Cancer Res. 2015;21(9):2148–2156.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lakshman A, Painuly U, Rajkumar SV, et al. Impact of acquired del(17p) in multiple myeloma. Blood Advances. 2019;3(13):1930–1938.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fonseca R, Van Wier SA, Chng WJ, et al. Prognostic value of chromosome 1q21 gain by fluorescent in situ hybridization and increase CKS1B expression in myeloma. Leukemia. 2006;20(11):2034–2040.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avet-Loiseau H, Li C, Magrangeas F, et al. Prognostic significance of copy-number alterations in multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(27):4585–4590.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shah V, Sherborne AL, Walker BA, et al. Prediction of outcome in newly diagnosed myeloma: a meta-analysis of the molecular profiles of 1905 trial patients. Leukemia. 2018;32(1):102–110.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abdallah N, Greipp P, Kapoor P, et al. Clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma with chromosome 1q abnormalities. Blood Advances. 2020;4(15):3509–3519.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidt TM, Barwick BG, Joseph N, et al. Gain of chromosome 1q is associated with early progression in multiple myeloma patients treated with lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone. Blood Cancer J. 2019;9(12):94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhan F, Huang Y, Colla S, et al. The molecular classification of multiple myeloma. Blood. 2006;108(6):2020–2028.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyd KD, Ross FM, Walker BA, et al. Mapping of chromosome 1p deletions in myeloma identifies FAM46C at 1p12 and CDKN2C at 1p32.3 as being genes in regions associated with adverse survival. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17(24):7776–7784.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qazilbash MH, Saliba RM, Ahmed B, et al. Deletion of the short arm of chromosome 1 (del 1p) is a strong predictor of poor outcome in myeloma patients undergoing an autotransplant. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2007;13(9):1066–1072.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hebraud B, Leleu X, Lauwers-Cances V, et al. Deletion of the 1p32 region is a major independent prognostic factor in young patients with myeloma: the IFM experience on 1195 patients. Leukemia. 2014;28(3):675–679.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rasmussen T, Kuehl M, Lodahl M, et al. Possible roles for activating RAS mutations in the MGUS to MM transition and in the intramedullary to extramedullary transition in some plasma cell tumors. Blood. 2005;105(1):317–323.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chng WJ, Gonzalez-Paz N, Price-Troska T, et al. Clinical and biological significance of RAS mutations in multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2008;22(12):2280–2284.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shirazi F, Jones RJ, Singh RK, et al. Activating KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF mutants enhance proteasome capacity and reduce endoplasmic reticulum stress in multiple myeloma. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2020;117(33):20004–20014.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mulligan G, Lichter DI, Di Bacco A, et al. Mutation of NRAS but not KRAS significantly reduces myeloma sensitivity to single-agent bortezomib therapy. Blood. 2014;123(5):632–639.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker BA, Boyle EM, Wardell CP, et al. Mutational spectrum, copy number changes, and outcome: results of a sequencing study of patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(33):3911–3920.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kortüm KM, Mai EK, Hanafiah NH, et al. Targeted sequencing of refractory myeloma reveals a high incidence of mutations in CRBN and Ras pathway genes. Blood. 2016;128(9):1226–1233.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robiou Du Pont S, Cleynen A, Fontan C, et al. Genomics of multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(9):963–967.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avet-Loiseau H, Gerson F, Magrangeas F, et al. Rearrangements of the c-myc oncogene are present in 15% of primary human multiple myeloma tumors. Blood. 2001;98(10):3082–3086.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gabrea A, Martelli ML, Qi Y, et al. Secondary genomic rearrangements involving immunoglobulin or MYC loci show similar prevalences in hyperdiploid and nonhyperdiploid myeloma tumors. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2008;47(7):573–590.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker BA, Wardell CP, Brioli A, et al. Translocations at 8q24 juxtapose MYC with genes that harbor superenhancers resulting in overexpression and poor prognosis in myeloma patients. Blood Cancer J. 2014;4(3):e191.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Misund K, Keane N, Stein CK, et al. MYC dysregulation in the progression of multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2020;34(1):322–326.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chng WJ, Chung TH, Kumar S, et al. Gene signature combinations improve prognostic stratification of multiple myeloma patients. Leukemia. 2016;30(5):1071–1078.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Beers EH, van Vliet MH, Kuiper R, et al. Prognostic validation of SKY92 and its combination with ISS in an independent cohort of patients with multiple myeloma. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2017;17(9):555–562.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kapoor P, Kumar SK, Dispenzieri A, et al. Importance of achieving stringent complete response after autologous stem-cell transplantation in multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(36):4529–4535.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lonial S, Anderson KC. Association of response endpoints with survival outcomes in multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2014;28(2):258–268.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Munshi NC, Avet-Loiseau H, Rawstron AC, et al. Association of minimal residual disease with superior survival outcomes in patients with multiple myeloma: a meta-analysis. JAMA Oncol. 2017;3(1):28–35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perrot A, Lauwers-Cances V, Corre J, et al. Minimal residual disease negativity using deep sequencing is a major prognostic factor in multiple myeloma. Blood. 2018;132(23):2456–2464.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Medina A, Puig N, Flores-Montero J, et al. Comparison of next-generation sequencing (NGS) and next-generation flow (NGF) for minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment in multiple myeloma. Blood Cancer J. 2020;10(10):108.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flores-Montero J, Sanoja-Flores L, Paiva B, et al. Next generation flow for highly sensitive and standardized detection of minimal residual disease in multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2017;31(10):2094–2103.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Touzeau C, Maciag P, Amiot M, et al. Targeting Bcl-2 for the treatment of multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2018;32(9):1899–1907.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar S, Kaufman JL, Gasparetto C, et al. Efficacy of venetoclax as targeted therapy for relapsed/refractory t(11;14) multiple myeloma. Blood. 2017;130(22):2401–2409.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moreau P, Chanan-Khan A, Roberts AW, et al. Promising efficacy and acceptable safety of venetoclax plus bortezomib and dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory MM. Blood. 2017;130(22):2392–2400.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• San Miguel JF, Schlag R, Khuageva NK, et al. Bortezomib plus melphalan and prednisone for initial treatment of multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(9):906–917.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pineda-Roman M, Zangari M, Haessler J, et al. Sustained complete remissions in multiple myeloma linked to bortezomib in total therapy 3: comparison with total therapy 2. Br J Haematol. 2008;140(6):625–634.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avet-Loiseau H, Leleu X, Roussel M, et al. Bortezomib plus dexamethasone induction improves outcome of patients with t(4;14) myeloma but not outcome of patients with del(17p). J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(30):4630–4634.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar SK, Jacobus SJ, Cohen AD, et al. Carfilzomib or bortezomib in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma without intention for immediate autologous stem-cell transplantation (ENDURANCE): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(10):1317–1330.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rajkumar SV. Multiple myeloma: 2020 update on diagnosis, risk-stratification and management. Am J Hematol. 2020;95(5):548–567.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tam EL, Iberri DJ, Liedtke M, et al. Impact of proteasome inhibitor vs. IMiD maintenance therapy on outcomes of patients with high-risk multiple myeloma (HRMM). J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(15_suppl):e20557.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trudel S, Bergsagel PL, Singhal S, et al. A phase I study of the safety and pharmacokinetics of escalating doses of MFGR1877S, a fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 (FGFR3) antibody, in patients with relapsed or refractory t(4;14)-positive multiple myeloma. Blood. 2012;120(21):4029.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheid C, Reece D, Beksac M, et al. Phase 2 study of dovitinib in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma with or without t(4;14) translocation. Eur J Haematol. 2015;95(4):316–324.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lakshman A, Painuly U, Rajkumar SV, et al. Natural history of multiple myeloma with de novo del(17p). Blood Cancer J. 2019;9(3):32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corre J, Perrot A, Caillot D, et al. del(17p) without TP53 mutation confers a poor prognosis in intensively treated newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma. Blood. 2021;137(9):1192–1195.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cavo M, Gay FM, Patriarca F, et al. Double autologous stem cell transplantation significantly prolongs progression-free survival and overall survival in comparison with single autotransplantation in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: an analysis of phase 3 EMN02/HO95 study. Blood. 2017;130(Supplement 1):401.
   Google Scholar
• Cavo M, Gay F, Beksac M, et al. Autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation versus bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone, with or without bortezomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone consolidation therapy, and lenalidomide maintenance for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (EMN02/HO95): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 study. Lancet Haematol. 2020;7(6):e456–e468.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stadtmauer EA, Pasquini MC, Blackwell B, et al. Autologous transplantation, consolidation, and maintenance therapy in multiple myeloma: results of the BMT CTN 0702 trial. J Clin Oncol. 2019;37(7):589–597.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nooka AK, Kaufman JL, Muppidi S, et al. Consolidation and maintenance therapy with lenalidomide, bortezomib and dexamethasone (RVD) in high-risk myeloma patients. Leukemia. 2014;28(3):690–693.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sonneveld P, Schmidt-Wolf IG, van der Holt B, et al. Bortezomib induction and maintenance treatment in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: results of the randomized phase III HOVON-65/GMMG-HD4 trial. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(24):2946–2955.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saha MN, Jiang H, Jayakar J, et al. MDM2 antagonist nutlin plus proteasome inhibitor velcade combination displays a synergistic anti-myeloma activity. Cancer Biol Ther. 2010;9(11):936–944.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bar-Sagi D, Knelson EH, Sequist LV. A bright future for KRAS inhibitors. Nat Cancer. 2020;1(1):25–27.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hong DS, Fakih MG, Strickler JH, et al. krasg12c inhibition with sotorasib in advanced solid tumors. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(13):1207–1217.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Annunziata CM, Hernandez L, Davis RE, et al. A mechanistic rationale for MEK inhibitor therapy in myeloma based on blockade of MAF oncogene expression. Blood. 2011;117(8):2396–2404.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holkova B, Zingone A, Kmieciak M, et al. A phase II trial of AZD6244 (selumetinib, ARRY-142886), an oral MEK1/2 inhibitor, in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22(5):1067–1075.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chapman MA, Lawrence MS, Keats JJ, et al. Initial genome sequencing and analysis of multiple myeloma. Nature. 2011;471(7339):467–472.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raje N, Chau I, Hyman DM, et al. Vemurafenib in patients with relapsed refractory multiple myeloma harboring BRAFV600 mutations: a cohort of the histology-independent VE-BASKET study. J Clin Oncol Precision Oncol. 2018;2:1–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mey UJM, Renner C, von Moos R. Vemurafenib in combination with cobimetinib in relapsed and refractory extramedullary multiple myeloma harboring the BRAF V600E mutation. Hematol Oncol. 2017;35(4):890–893.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jethava Y, Mitchell A, Zangari M, et al. Dose-dense and less dose-intense total therapy 5 for gene expression profiling-defined high-risk multiple myeloma. Blood Cancer J. 2016;6(7):e453.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Usmani SZ, Ailawadhi S, Sexton R, et al. Primary analysis of the randomized phase II trial of bortezomib, lenalidomide, dexamthasone with/without elotuzumab for newly diagnosed, high-risk multiple myeloma (SWOG-1211). J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(15_suppl):8507.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Voorhees PM, Kaufman JL, Laubach J, et al. Daratumumab, lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone for transplant-eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: the GRIFFIN trial. Blood. 2020;136(8):936–945.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moreau P, Attal M, Hulin C, et al. Bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone with or without daratumumab before and after autologous stem-cell transplantation for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (CASSIOPEIA): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 study. Lancet. 2019;394(10192):29–38.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Munshi NC, Anderson LD, Jr, Shah N, et al. Idecabtagene vicleucel in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(8):705–716.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weisel K, Asemissen AM, Besemer B, et al. Depth of response to isatuximab, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (Isa-KRd) in front-line treatment of high-risk multiple myeloma: interim analysis of the GMMG-CONCEPT trial. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(15_suppl):8508–8508.
   Google Scholar
• Zanwar S, Nandakumar B, Kumar S. Immune-based therapies in the management of multiple myeloma. Blood Cancer J. 2020;10(8):84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shah NN, Fry TJ. Mechanisms of resistance to CAR T cell therapy. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2019;16(6):372–385.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mikhael J. Treatment options for triple-class refractory multiple myeloma. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2020;20(1):1–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar