The genomic profiling of high-risk smoldering myeloma patients treated with an intensive strategy unveils potential markers of resistance and progression.

Smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) precedes multiple myeloma (MM). The risk of progression of SMM patients is not uniform, thus different progression-risk models have been developed, although they are mainly based on clinical parameters. Recently, genomic predictors of progression have been defined for untreated SMM. However, the usefulness of such markers in the context of clinical trials evaluating upfront treatment in high-risk SMM (HR SMM) has not been explored yet, precluding the identification of baseline genomic alterations leading to drug resistance. For this reason, we carried out next-generation sequencing and fluorescent in-situ hybridization studies on 57 HR and ultra-high risk (UHR) SMM patients treated in the phase II GEM-CESAR clinical trial (NCT02415413). DIS3, FAM46C, and FGFR3 mutations, as well as t(4;14) and 1q alterations, were enriched in HR SMM. TRAF3 mutations were specifically associated with UHR SMM but identified cases with improved outcomes. Importantly, novel potential predictors of treatment resistance were identified: NRAS mutations and the co-occurrence of t(4;14) plus FGFR3 mutations were associated with an increased risk of biological progression. In conclusion, we have carried out for the first time a molecular characterization of HR SMM patients treated with an intensive regimen, identifying genomic predictors of poor outcomes in this setting.

Prognostic value of antigen expression in multiple myeloma: a PETHEMA/GEM study on 1265 patients enrolled in four consecutive clinical trials.

Persistence of minimal residual disease (MRD) after treatment for myeloma predicts inferior outcomes, but within MRD-positive patients there is great heterogeneity with both early and very late relapses. Among different MRD techniques, flow cytometry provides additional information about antigen expression on tumor cells, which could potentially contribute to stratify MRD-positive patients. We investigated the prognostic value of those antigens required to monitor MRD in 1265 newly diagnosed patients enrolled in the GEM2000, GEM2005MENOS65, GEM2005MAS65 and GEM2010MAS65 protocols. Overall, CD19pos, CD27neg, CD38lo, CD45pos, CD81pos, CD117neg and CD138lo expression predicted inferior outcomes. Through principal component analysis, we found that simultaneous CD38lowCD81posCD117neg expression emerged as the most powerful combination with independent prognostic value for progression-free survival (HR:1.69; P=0.002). This unique phenotypic profile retained prognostic value among MRD-positive patients. We then used next-generation flow to determine antigen stability throughout the course of the disease, and found that the expression of antigens required to monitor MRD is mostly stable from diagnosis to MRD stages, except for CD81 whose expression progressively increased from baseline to chemoresistant tumor cells (14 vs 28%). Altogether, we showed that the phenotypic profile of tumor cells provides additional prognostic information, and could be used to further predict risk of relapse among MRD-positive patients.

Bortezomib and thalidomide maintenance after stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma: a PETHEMA/GEM trial.

The phase III trial GEM05MENOS65 randomized 390 patients 65 years old or younger with newly diagnosed symptomatic multiple myeloma (MM) to receive induction with thalidomide/dexamethasone, bortezomib/thalidomide/dexamethasone and Vincristine, BCNU, melphalan, cyclophosphamide, prednisone/vincristine, BCNU, doxorubicin, dexamethasone bortezomib (VBMCP/VBAD/B) followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) with MEL-200. After ASCT, a second randomization was performed to compare thalidomide/bortezomib (TV), thalidomide (T) and alfa-2b interferon (alfa2-IFN). Maintenance treatment consisted of TV (thalidomide 100 mg daily plus one cycle of intravenous bortezomib at 1.3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8 and 11 every 3 months) versus T (100 mg daily) versus alfa2-IFN (3 MU three times per week) for up to 3 years. A total of 271 patients were randomized (TV: 91; T: 88; alfa2-IFN: 92). The complete response (CR) rate with maintenance was improved by 21% with TV, 11% with T and 17% with alfa2-IFN (P, not significant). After a median follow-up of 58.6 months, the progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly longer with TV compared with T and alfa2-IFN (50.6 vs 40.3 vs 32.5 months, P=0.03). Overall survival was not significantly different among the three arms. Grade 2-3 peripheral neuropathy was observed in 48.8%, 34.4% and 1% of patients treated with TV, T and alfa2-IFN, respectively. In conclusion, bortezomib and thalidomide maintenance resulted in a significantly longer PFS when compared with thalidomide or alfa2-IFN. (no. EUDRA 2005-001110-41).