Functional variant rs9344 at 11q13.3 regulates CCND1 expression in multiple myeloma with t(11;14).

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a plasma cell (PC) malignancy characterized by cytogenetic abnormalities, such as t(11;14)(q13;q32), resulting in CCND1 overexpression. The rs9344 G allele within CCND1 is the most significant susceptibility allele for t(11;14). Sequencing data from 2 independent cohorts, CoMMpass (n = 698) and Mayo Clinic (n = 661), confirm the positive association between the G allele and t(11;14). Among 80% of individuals heterozygous for rs9344 with t(11;14), the t(11;14) event occurs on the G allele, demonstrating a biological preference for the G allele in t(11;14). Within t(11;14), the G allele is associated with higher CCND1 expression and elevated H3K27ac and H3K4me3. CRISPR/Cas9 mediated A to G conversion resulted in increased H3K27ac over CCND1 and elevated CCND1 expression. ENCODE ChIP-seq data supported a PAX5 binding site within the enhancer region covering rs9344, showing preferential binding to the G allele. Overexpression of PAX5 resulted in increased CCND1 expression. These results support the importance of rs9344 G enhancer in increasing CCND1 expression in MM.

Comparison of progression risk of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance by method of detection.

Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) is an asymptomatic pre-malignant disorder. The current standard of care is not to screen for MGUS, so it is often incidentally diagnosed in the clinic. It is unknown whether the outcomes of screened versus clinically detected MGUS differ. We compared the progression risk between screened versus clinical MGUS cohorts and assessed whether the MGUS detection method impacted risk prediction of established clinical factors (score). We included 379 screened MGUS from the Olmsted County population based study and 1384 MGUS patients diagnosed during routine clinical evaluation at Mayo Clinic. Median follow-up time for the screened versus clinical cohort was 26.6 and 40.1 years, respectively. Accounting for death as a competing risk, the cumulative incidence of progression at 25 years was similar in the screened (11.1% [95% CI 8.3-14.8]) versus clinical (10.1% [95% CI 8.6-11.8%]) MGUS cohorts, even when stratified by sex, age, or the baseline MGUS risk score. Overall, 0.9 (95% CI 0.6-1.2) screened versus 1.0 (95% CI 0.9-1.2) clinically detected MGUS patients experienced disease progression for every 100 person years of follow-up. MGUS detection method did not modify the association between MGUS risk score and progression risk (pinteraction=0.217) and did not add to known risk factors for progression (likelihood ratio test, p=0.839). Here we show that progression risk among patients with screened versus clinically detected heavy-chain MGUS was similar. Future studies are needed to assess if tailored follow-up of screened MGUS patients affects clinical outcomes.

Dexamethasone dose intensity does not impact outcomes in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: a secondary SWOG analysis.

Dexamethasone is a key component of induction for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) despite common toxicities including hyperglycemia and insomnia. In the randomized ECOG E4A03 trial, dexamethasone 40 milligrams (mg) once weekly was associated with lower mortality than higher doses of dexamethasone. However, the performance of dexamethasone dose reductions below this threshold with regard to progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in NDMM have not been fully characterized. We conducted a secondary pooled analysis of the S0777 and S1211 SWOG studies of NDMM, which employed lenalidomide-dexamethasone (Rd) alone with or without bortezomib (VRd) and with or without elotuzumab (Elo-VRd). Planned dexamethasone intensity was 40-60 mg weekly in all arms. Patients were categorized into FD-DEX (full-dose dexamethasone maintained throughout induction) or LD-DEX (lowered-dose dexamethasone or discontinuation; only permitted for Grade 3+ toxicities per both study protocols). Of 541 evaluated patients, the LD-DEX group comprised 373 patients (69%). There was no difference in PFS or OS between the FD-DEX or LD-DEX groups, which were balanced in terms of age, stage, and performance status. Predictors of PFS and OS in multivariate models were treatment arm, age ≥70, and thrombocytopenia; FD-DEX did not significantly improve either outcome. Our study suggests that dexamethasone dose reductions are common in multiple myeloma, even within clinical trials. Given dexamethasone's many toxicities and unclear benefit in the era of modern treatment regimens, dexamethasone dose reduction during NDMM induction warrants further prospective study. NCT00644228, NCT01668719.

Temporal Genomic Dynamics Shape Clinical Trajectory in Multiple Myeloma.

To comprehensively unravel the temporal relationship between initiating and driver events and its impact on clinical outcomes, we analyzed 421 whole-genome sequencing profiles from 382 patients. Using clock-like mutational signatures, we estimated a time lag of 2-4 decades between initiating events and diagnosis. In patients with hyperdiploidy, we demonstrate that trisomies of odd-numbered chromosomes can be acquired simultaneously with other chromosomal gains, such as 1q gain. We provide evidence that hyperdiploidy is acquired after canonical IGH translocation when both events are present. Finally, patients with early 1q gain had adverse outcomes similar to those with 1q amplification (>1 extra-copies), but faring worse than those with late 1q gain. This underscores that the prognostic impact of 1q gain/amp depends more on the timing of acquisition than on the number of extra copies gained. Overall, this study contributes to a better understanding of the life history of MM and may have prognostic implications.

Progression-free survival as a surrogate endpoint in myeloma clinical trials: an evolving paradigm.

Measurement of overall survival (OS) remains the gold standard for interpreting the impact of new therapies for multiple myeloma in phase 3 trials. However, as outcomes have improved, it is increasingly challenging to use OS as the primary endpoint if timely approval of novel agents is to be ensured to enable maximum benefit for patients. Surrogate endpoints of OS, such as progression-free survival (PFS) and response to treatment, have contributed to approval decisions by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency as endpoints demonstrating clinical benefit, and the FDA has recently supported the use of minimal residual disease (MRD) as an accelerated approval endpoint in multiple myeloma. This review aims to address situations in which the use of PFS as a surrogate endpoint warrants careful interpretation especially for specific subgroups of patients and considers ways to ensure that studies can be designed to account for possible discordance between PFS and OS. The utility of subgroup analyses, including the potential for those not pre-specified, to identify target populations for new agents is also discussed.

Clinical features associated with poor response and early relapse following BCMA-directed therapies in multiple myeloma.

Three classes of BCMA-directed therapy (BDT) exist: antibody drug-conjugates (ADCs), CAR-T, and T-cell engagers (TCEs), each with distinct strengths and weaknesses. To aid clinicians in selecting between BDTs, we reviewed myeloma patients treated at Mayo Clinic with commercial or investigational BDT between 2018-2023. We identified 339 individuals (1-exposure = 297, 2-exposures = 38, 3-exposures = 4) who received 385 BDTs (ADC = 59, TCE = 134, CAR-T = 192), with median follow-up of 21-months. ADC recipients were older, with more lines of therapy (LOT), and penta-refractory disease. Compared to ADCs, CAR-T (aHR = 0.29, 95%CI = 0.20-0.43) and TCEs (aHR = 0.62, 95%CI = 0.43-0.91) had better progression-free survival (PFS) on analysis adjusted for age, the presence of extramedullary (EMD), penta-refractory disease, multi-hit high-risk cytogenetics, prior BDT, and the number of LOT in the preceding 1-year. Likewise, compared to ADCs, CAR-T (aHR = 0.28, 95%CI = 0.18-0.44) and TCEs (aHR = 0.60, 95%CI = 0.39-0.93) had superior overall survival. Prior BDT exposure negatively impacted all classes but was most striking in CAR-T, ORR 86% vs. 50% and median PFS 13-months vs. 3-months. Of relapses, 54% were extramedullary in nature, and a quarter of these cases had no history of EMD. CAR-T demonstrates superior efficacy and where feasible, should be the initial BDT. However, for patients with prior BDT or rapidly progressive disease, an alternative approach may be preferable.

Multiple myeloma: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk-stratification, and management.

DISEASE OVERVIEW: Multiple myeloma accounts for approximately 10% of hematologic malignancies. DIAGNOSIS: The diagnosis requires ≥10% clonal bone marrow plasma cells or a biopsy proven plasmacytoma plus evidence of one or more multiple myeloma defining events (MDE): CRAB (hypercalcemia, renal failure, anemia, or lytic bone lesions) attributable to the plasma cell disorder, bone marrow clonal plasmacytosis ≥60%, serum involved/uninvolved free light chain (FLC) ratio ≥100 (provided involved FLC is ≥100 mg/L and urine monoclonal protein is ≥200 mg/24 h), or >1 focal lesion on magnetic resonance imaging. RISK STRATIFICATION: The presence of del(17p), t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), gain 1q, del 1p, or p53 mutation is considered high-risk multiple myeloma. Presence of any two high risk factors is considered double-hit myeloma; three or more high risk factors is triple-hit myeloma. RISK-ADAPTED INITIAL THERAPY: In patients who are candidates for autologous stem cell transplantation, induction therapy consists of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody plus bortezomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone (VRd) followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Selected standard risk patients can delay transplant until first relapse. Frail patients who not candidates for transplant are treated with VRd for approximately 8-12 cycles followed by maintenance or alternatively with daratumumab, lenalidomide, dexamethasone (DRd) until progression. MAINTENANCE THERAPY: Standard risk patients need lenalidomide maintenance, while bortezomib plus lenalidomide maintenance is needed for high-risk myeloma. MANAGEMENT OF RELAPSED DISEASE: A triplet regimen is usually needed at relapse, with the choice of regimen varying with each successive relapse. Chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) cell therapy and bispecific antibodies are additional options.

Three-dimensional telomere profiling predicts risk of progression in smoldering multiple myeloma.

Smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) is a precursor stage that precedes multiple myeloma (MM). SMM is heterogenous with nearly 40% of patients progressing to MM in the first 5 years. The high rate of progression of SMM patients highlights the need for early intervention, which underscores the importance of identifying SMM patients with the highest risk of progression. Several risk stratification models showed utility in identifying high-risk SMM patients; however, these systems showed limited sensitivity. To date, identifying high-risk SMM patients remains an important clinical need. In this study, we present the 3-dimensional telomere profiling as a structural biomarker capable of stratifying SMM patients as a function of genomic instability. Quantifying telomere dysfunction using the TeloView technology showed utility in risk stratification of cancer patients, particularly hematological malignancies. In this study, we analyzed 168 SMM patients. We report an AUC in ROC analysis of 0.8 using a subset of the patients as a training dataset. We then conducted a blind validation on a different cohort and demonstrated a positive predictive value of 85% and negative predictive value of 73%, with sensitivity and specificity of 83% and 76%, respectively. We examined the correlation between the TeloView prediction and the 20-2-20 scoring system, and cytogenetic abnormalities. We report a correlation of 53% with the 20-2-20 scores and over 60% correlation with cytogenetic abnormalities. The result of this study presents the telomere profiling as an effective biomarker able to stratify SMM patients to their respective risk groups with high sensitivity and specificity.

Simplified Risk Stratification Model for Patients With Waldenström Macroglobulinemia.

PURPOSE: Patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) have disparate outcomes. Newer therapies have emerged since the development of International Prognostic Scoring System, and MYD88L265P mutation is now frequently assessed at diagnosis, warranting reexamination of the prognostic parameters. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed records of 889 treatment-naïve patients with active WM, consecutively seen between January 01, 1996, and December 31, 2017, to identify clinical predictors of overall survival (OS) in univariate analyses. Patients with complete data for the parameters significant on the univariate analyses (n = 341) were included in a multivariable analysis to derive a prognostic model, subsequently validated in a multi-institutional cohort. RESULTS: In the derivation cohort (n = 341), age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.9 [95% CI, 1.2 to 2.1]; P = .0009), serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) above upper limit of normal (HR, 2.3 [95% CI, 1.3 to 4.5]; P = .007), and serum albumin <3.5 g/dL (HR, 1.5 [95% CI, 0.99 to 2.3]; P = .056) were independently prognostic. By assigning a score of 1 point each to albumin <3.5 g/dL (HR, 1.5) and age 66-75 years (HR 1.4) and 2 points for age >75 years (HR, 2.6) or elevated LDH (HR, 2.3), four groups with distinct outcomes were observed on the basis of the composite scores. Five-year OS was 93% for the low-risk (score 0), 82% for low-intermediate risk (score 1), 69% for intermediate-risk (score 2), and 55% for the high-risk (score ≥3; P < .0001) groups. In the validation cohort (N = 335), the model maintained its prognostic value, with a 5-year OS of 93%, 90%, 75%, and 57% for the four groups, respectively (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: Modified Staging System for WM (MSS-WM), utilizing age, albumin, and LDH is a simple, clinically useful, and externally validated prognostic model that reliably risk-stratifies patients with symptomatic WM into four groups with distinct prognosis.

Once-weekly versus twice-weekly bortezomib in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: a real-world analysis.

Induction regimens for multiple myeloma (MM) commonly include bortezomib, which has typically been administered twice weekly despite studies demonstrating comparable efficacy and less peripheral neuropathy (PN) with once-weekly bortezomib. We aimed to analyze the real-world prevalence and efficacy of once-weekly versus twice-weekly bortezomib regimens in newly diagnosed MM. We analyzed 2497 US patients aged 18-70 years treated with commercial first-line bortezomib using nationwide Flatiron Health electronic health record-derived data, including 910 (36.4%) patients who received twice-weekly and 1522 (63.2%) who received once-weekly bortezomib. Once-weekly bortezomib use increased over time, from 57.7% in 2017 to 73.1% in 2022. Multivariate analysis identified worsened performance status and more recent year of diagnosis with higher odds of receiving once-weekly bortezomib. Real-world progression-free survival (median 37.2 months with once-weekly versus 39.6 months with twice-weekly, p = 0.906) and overall survival (medians not reached in either cohort, p = 0.800) were comparable. PN rates were higher in patients receiving twice-weekly bortezomib (34.7% versus 18.5%, p < 0.001). In conclusion, once-weekly bortezomib is clearly associated with similar efficacy and fewer toxicities compared to twice-weekly bortezomib. Our findings support once-weekly bortezomib as a standard-of-care regimen for newly diagnosed patients with MM.

Outcomes of patients with multiple myeloma refractory to standard dose vs low dose lenalidomide.

Refractoriness to lenalidomide is an important factor determining the choice of therapy at first relapse in multiple myeloma (MM). It remains debatable if resistance to lenalidomide varies among MM refractory to standard doses vs low dose maintenance doses. In this study, we assessed the outcomes with subsequent therapies in patients with MM refractory to standard dose vs low dose lenalidomide. We retrospectively reviewed all patients with MM at our institution who received first line therapy with lenalidomide containing regimens, and assessed progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival for these patients for second line therapy, and with lenalidomide retreatment. For second line therapy, we found no difference in the PFS between standard dose refractory and low dose refractory groups (median PFS 14 months vs 14 months, p = 0.95), while the PFS for both these groups was inferior to the not refractory group (median PFS 30 months, p < 0.001 for both pairs). Similar trends were seen among these groups on lenalidomide retreatment, and on multivariable analysis. These data suggest that refractoriness to lenalidomide is not dose dependent, and definition of lenalidomide refractoriness should not depend on the dose of lenalidomide to which the disease was considered refractory.