Roodman, G. David

Abstract The bone marrow microenvironment in MM is characterized by the presence of upregulated osteoclast activity (OCL) and increased angiogenesis. We have recently demonstrated that the HSP90 inhibitor 17-AAG (provided by the NCI) and the mTOR inhibitor rapamycin (LC Laboratories, MA) have synergistic inhibitory activity on MM cells. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of rapamycin, 17-AAG and the combination on OCL formation and angiogenesis. Rapamycin (0.01–100nM), 17-AAG (10–1000nM) and the combination was tested using an in vitro human OCL formation assay and a human angiogenesis assay (AngioKit, TCS Cellworks, UK). Nonadherent human marrow mononuclear cells (1 x 105/100 μL) were plated in 96-well plates in the presence or absence of DMSO, rapamycin, 17-AAG or the combination. RANKL (100ng/ml) and MCSF (20ng/ml) were added to all wells except control media and MCSF. After 3 weeks, cells were fixed, and the number of OCL-like multinucleated cells were scored. To test the effect of the agents on early OCL precursors, we added the inhibitory agents on days 1, 7 or 14 of the culture. The AngioKit is comprised of human endothelial cells in a 24 well plate. The endothelial cells proliferate and then migrate through the matrix to form tubular structures and anastomosing tubules by 2 weeks. Two control wells were treated with VEGF (+ve control) and two with suramin (−ve control). The optimized medium and test samples were replaced on days 4, 7, and 9 after initial treatment. On day 11, cultures were fixed and stained with antibodies to CD31 to detect vessel formation. The degree of tubule formation was quantitated using computerized image analysis (Angiosys, TCS Cellworks, UK). Single agent rapamycin (20–100nM) inhibited OCL formation by 35% as compared to control in all tested doses indicating that PI3K/mTOR is an important regulator of OCL formation. The effect was similar on day 7 and day 14 indicating that this pathway is important for early and late OCL formation. 17-AAG 100–600nM significantly inhibited OCL formation with 100nM 17-AAG inducing 12% OCL formation as compared to control, while 300 and 600nM completely abrogated OCLs (0% OCLs). This effect was similar at day 7. However, when 17-AAG was added on day 14, it only induced 50–60% reduction in OCL formation indicating that 17-AAG affects early OCL formation. The combination of the two agents completely inhibited OCL formation on day 1 and 7 and led to a 65% reduction in OCLs when added on day 14 of the culture. Rapamycin showed a marked decrease in angiogenesis (similar to the negative control suramin), even at the lowest level tested of 0.01nM. 17-AAG demonstrated some inhibition of angiogenesis at 10 nM, and completely abrogated angiogenesis at 500–1000nM. In summary, rapamycin and 17-AAG inhibit OCL formation and angiogenesis. The effect of 17-AAG was on early OCL formation while rapamycin was on both early and late OCL. These results are contradictory to previous data indicating that 17-AAG increases OCL activity in MM. Rapamycin had a significant inhibitory effect on angiogenesis even at low doses. These results demonstrate that the use of rapamycin analogues and 17-AAG in clinical trials may have a therapeutic effect, not only on MM cells, but also on the bone marrow microenvironment. Supported in part by an ASH Scholar Award and an MMRF grant.

Abstract We have previously demonstrated that the chemokine receptor CXCR4 and its ligand SDF-1 are important regulators of migration in MM. The objective of this study was to investigate the role of the CXCR4 inhibitor AMD3100 (Sigma, MO) on proliferation, survival, migration, adhesion and invasion in MM. MM cell lines (MM.1S, OPM2 and Kas6/1) were exposed to serial dilutions of SDF-1 (1–100nM) in the presence or absence of the CXCR4 inhibitor AMD3100 (20–100uM) incubated for 16 hrs or the CXCR4 inhibitory antibody MAB171 (RDSystems, MN) 10–800uM or its IgG2 isotype control. Inhibition of proliferation was measured using the MTT proliferation assay. Apoptosis was determined using Annexin V/PI FACS analysis. Migration was determined using a transwell migration assay (Costar, Corning, NY). Cells treated with serial concentrations of AMD3100 or vehicle (sterile water) were washed, placed in serum free medium for two hours, then placed in the migration chambers with 1% FCS medium in the presence of SDF–1 20nM (a concentration previously determined to induce maximum migration in MM cells). After 4 hours of incubation, cells that migrated to the lower chambers were counted. Similarly, adhesion was determined using an adhesion assay (EMD Biosciences, CA) with 96 well plated coated with fibronectin and using MM cells treated with serial dilutions of AMD3100 or vehicle in the presence or absence of serial concentrations of SDF-1 (10–30nM). Invasion was determined using the invasion assay (EMD Biosciences, CA). Serial concentrations of SDF-1 induced a bell-shaped migration curve in MM cells with 10–30nM inducing maximum migration (324% compared to untreated control) while higher doses of SDF-1 (100nM) did not induce migration in all MM cells tested. AMD3100 induced a dose dependent inhibition of migration in MM cells treated with 20nM SDF-1. The maximum effect was demonstrated at 25uM with 48% migration as compared to control. Higher doses of AMD3100 (50–100uM) did not further inhibit migration. The anti-CXCR4 antibody demonstrated a dose dependent inhibition of migration. Anti-CXCR4 10uM inhibited migration to 53% and 200uM to 35%. The effects of higher doses of anti-CXCR4 were not significantly different as compared to 200uM. Serial concentrations of SDF-1 (10–100) induced a dose-response increase in adhesion to fribronectin with 10nM increasing adhesion by 202% as compared to untreated cells and 100nM 462% indicating activation of alpha4 beta1 integrin on MM cells. AMD3100 100uM inhibited adhesion at all doses by 55% as compared to control. Using the invasion assay, SDF-1 100nM induced maximal invasion of MM cells. The effect of SDF-1 on invasion was not abrogated by AMD3100. AMD3100 did not induce significant apoptosis or inhibition of proliferation at all tested doses, in the presence or absence of 20–100nM SDF-1. In summary, AMD3100 inhibited migration and adhesion of MM cells, but not invasion indicating that invasion occurs through non-CXCR4 dependent mechanisms. AMD3100 did not induce apoptosis or inhibition of proliferation indicating that its effect is specific on migration and adhesion. Further experiments to test its role on homing of MM cells in vivo are underway. The future use of this novel agent as an inhibitor of homing of MM cells in clinical trials may be warranted. Supported in part by an ASH Scholar Award and an MMRF grant.

Abstract Background Clinical practice guidelines for MM list many alternative therapeutic options with an equivalent category of evidence but lack recommendations on the best approaches for individual patient cases. To provide clinicians with expert guidance on treatment options for defined patient scenarios, we developed and updated an interactive, online decision aid that allows users to enter specific disease and patient characteristics, enter their planned treatment, and then compare their choice of therapy with those of an MM expert panel for that scenario. Here we report data from the most recent version (2015) of this tool, capturing changes in expert recommendations and treatment trends for MM over time and evaluating the impact of this online tool on clinical care. Methods Each of 3 annual updates to the tool were developed with input from a panel of 5 MM experts. The individual experts provided treatment recommendations for multiple patient scenarios across the settings of induction therapy, maintenance therapy, and therapy for relapsed/refractory MM. A series of pull-down menus allowed users to select individual patient and disease characteristics identified by experts as important to consider when making treatment choices. These characteristics included: eligibility for autologous stem cell transplantation (for induction therapy only), results of chromosome analysis (cytogenetics/FISH), ECOG performance status, risk of renal insufficiency or peripheral neuropathy, previous therapy and depth of response (for maintenance and relapsed/refractory settings), and cardiac or pulmonary dysfunction (for relapsed/refractory setting). Users were then asked to state their intended management approach for that particular patient scenario. Once completed, recommendations for that scenario from each of the experts were displayed, and users were asked to indicate the impact of the expert recommendations on their treatment choice. Results Expert recommendations spanning the continuum of care were compiled in October 2012, November 2013, and March 2015 for the 3 different MM tool updates. As for earlier versions of the MM tool, each of the experts in the 2015 update provided recommendations for 32 case scenarios for induction therapy, for a total of 160 possible induction recommendations. Comparing overall induction therapy recommendations the use of bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone was approximately 40% in both 2013 and 2015, whereas the use of carfilzomib-containing regimens increased from 5% to 17%. None of the experts chose regimens with melphalan as induction therapy in 2015. In the relapsed/refractory setting, the use of newer therapeutic approaches continued to grow especially in the setting of patients who did not respond to induction therapy or relapsed within 6 months. For example, in those with prior proteasome inhibitor (PI) therapy, the selection of carfilzomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone by experts rose from 11% to 38% from 2013 to 2015 with pomalidomide and lenalidomide selected for 20% to 25% of cases in the most recent tool. For prior IMiD and PI, the experts selected a new combination of pomalidomide with a PI (either bortezomib or carfilzomib) and dexamethasone in 55% of the case scenarios in 2015. To date, 170 different clinicians sought guidance on more than 259 patient case scenarios using the 2015 decision support tool. In the subset of cases (n = 104) in which users reported how the tool affected their management of patients with MM, 68% indicated the expert recommendations either confirmed or changed their intended treatment (22% changed; 46% confirmed), whereas 17% indicated that there would be barriers to implementing the expert recommendations, and 5% said they disagreed with the experts' recommendations. Conclusions Expert opinions regarding optimal MM therapy continue to evolve with new evidence. Our data show that interactive online therapy decision aids that provide expert recommendations to clinicians for specific case scenarios can aid decision making and capture practice trends in this rapidly evolving environment. Preliminary data suggest that most clinicians using the online decision aid either confirmed or changed their treatment approaches for specific MM patient case scenarios based on expert recommendations. A detailed and updated analysis of expert and user data will be presented. Disclosures Kumar: Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Skyline: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding. Lentzsch:BMS: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Axiom: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Lonial:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Roodman:Amgen: Consultancy; Eli Lilly: Research Funding. Mortimer:AstraZeneca: Other: spouse is an employee of and has equity ownership in.

Abstract Background In 2015, the FDA approved 5 new agents and/or combination regimens for the treatment of patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) MM. In addition, new clinical data support using new regimens in the first-line setting. This rapid expansion of available treatment options has greatly increased the complexity of treatment decisions for patients in this disease setting. Clinical practice guidelines list multiple preferred treatment options for MM and can be challenging to apply to specific patients with a mixture of presenting features. Since 2013, we have developed and updated an MM online decision support tool designed to provide clinicians with expert guidance on optimal treatment for defined patient scenarios. An analysis of the tool over the years has shown that experts rapidly integrate new data and available agents into practice whereas many tool users do not. Here we report data from the most recent version (2016) of this tool, capturing the impact of the rapid expansion of new therapies on expert treatment recommendations. Methods In June 2016, a panel of 5 experts provided treatment recommendations for 688 case scenarios across 3 settings: induction, maintenance, and R/R disease. These distinct scenarios were defined by key patient and disease characteristics that the experts considered important when making treatment choices, including: eligibility for autologous stem cell transplantation, results of chromosome analysis (cytogenetics/FISH), ECOG performance status, previous therapy and response, and preexisting comorbidities. To use the tool, these patient and disease factors and the intended treatment for that specific patient were entered through drop-down menus to display the expert choices for that case. Users were then asked to indicate the impact of the expert recommendations on planned treatment. Results We compared expert recommendations from the 2 most recent versions of our MM tool, compiled in March 2015 and June 2016, to assess the impact of the new data and FDA approvals on treatment patterns. The experts are generally not recommending these agents as induction or maintenance therapy. Three out of 5 experts recommended carfilzomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone as induction therapy for preexisting peripheral neuropathy (PN) and 1 expert recommended ixazomib-based regimens as induction and maintenance therapy for patients with high-risk cytogenetics and both renal insufficiency and PN. The new agents did have a substantial impact on expert recommendation in the R/R setting. In the 2016 tool, the type of previous therapy was the primary factor affecting expert selections, whereas the number of previous lines of therapy (1-3 vs >3) had minimal impact in the R/R setting. For example, in patients refractory to previous proteasome inhibitor (PI) therapy, regimens containing either elotuzumab (30%) or daratumumab (25%) were selected frequently by experts with pomalidomide-containing regimens recommended in another 40% of these specific cases. In the 2016 tool, the use of lenalidomide/dexamethasone alone without a newly approved agent was not recommended by any expert in the R/R setting, although it had been recommended by experts in 25% of R/R case scenarios in the 2015 tool. For patient scenarios refractory to previous immunomodulatory drugs and PIs, the experts recommended daratumumab-based regimens in 67.5% of the cases in the 2016 tool whereas the use of carfilzomib/pomalidomide/dexamethasone fell from 45% in 2015 to 10% of the cases in 2016. None of the experts recommended regimens with panobinostat as their preferred choice in any patient scenario in either 2015 or 2016. Conclusions Expert opinions regarding optimal MM therapy continue to evolve with new evidence and FDA approvals. Our data show that newly approved therapies are having a large impact on expert recommendations for specific case scenarios in the relapsed/refractory MM setting. A detailed and updated analysis of expert and user data that captures practice trends in this rapidly evolving environment will be presented. Disclosures Kumar: Kesios: Consultancy; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Skyline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Glycomimetics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Noxxon Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding. Lentzsch:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy. Lonial:Merck: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy. Roodman:Amgen: Consultancy. Anderson:Oncopep: Other: Scientific Founder; Acetylon: Other: Scientific Founder; Sonofi Aventis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Purpose To update guideline recommendations on the role of bone-modifying agents in multiple myeloma. Methods An update panel conducted a targeted systematic literature review by searching PubMed and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, clinical practice guidelines, and observational studies. Results Thirty-five relevant studies were identified, and updated evidence supports the current recommendations. Recommendations For patients with active symptomatic multiple myeloma that requires systemic therapy with or without evidence of lytic destruction of bone or compression fracture of the spine from osteopenia on plain radiograph(s) or other imaging studies, intravenous administration of pamidronate 90 mg over at least 2 hours or zoledronic acid 4 mg over at least 15 minutes every 3 to 4 weeks is recommended. Denosumab has shown to be noninferior to zoledronic acid for the prevention of skeletal-related events and provides an alternative. Fewer adverse events related to renal toxicity have been noted with denosumab compared with zoledronic acid and may be preferred in this setting. The update panel recommends that clinicians consider reducing the initial pamidronate dose in patients with preexisting renal impairment. Zoledronic acid has not been studied in patients with severe renal impairment and is not recommended in this setting. The update panel suggests that bone-modifying treatment continue for up to 2 years. Less frequent dosing has been evaluated and should be considered in patients with responsive or stable disease. Continuous use is at the discretion of the treating physician and the risk of ongoing skeletal morbidity. Retreatment should be initiated at the time of disease relapse. The update panel discusses measures regarding osteonecrosis of the jaw. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/hematologic-malignancies-guidelines and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki .

Purpose The aim of the International Myeloma Working Group was to develop practice recommendations for the management of multiple myeloma (MM) –related bone disease. Methodology An interdisciplinary panel of clinical experts on MM and myeloma bone disease developed recommendations based on published data through August 2012. Expert consensus was used to propose additional recommendations in situations where there were insufficient published data. Levels of evidence and grades of recommendations were assigned and approved by panel members. Recommendations Bisphosphonates (BPs) should be considered in all patients with MM receiving first-line antimyeloma therapy, regardless of presence of osteolytic bone lesions on conventional radiography. However, it is unknown if BPs offer any advantage in patients with no bone disease assessed by magnetic resonance imaging or positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Intravenous (IV) zoledronic acid (ZOL) or pamidronate (PAM) is recommended for preventing skeletal-related events in patients with MM. ZOL is preferred over oral clodronate in newly diagnosed patients with MM because of its potential antimyeloma effects and survival benefits. BPs should be administered every 3 to 4 weeks IV during initial therapy. ZOL or PAM should be continued in patients with active disease and should be resumed after disease relapse, if discontinued in patients achieving complete or very good partial response. BPs are well tolerated, but preventive strategies must be instituted to avoid renal toxicity or osteonecrosis of the jaw. Kyphoplasty should be considered for symptomatic vertebral compression fractures. Low-dose radiation therapy can be used for palliation of uncontrolled pain, impending pathologic fracture, or spinal cord compression. Orthopedic consultation should be sought for long-bone fractures, spinal cord compression, and vertebral column instability.

Abstract Purpose: The phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/AKT/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway and the heat shock protein family are up-regulated in multiple myeloma and are both regulators of the cyclin D/retinoblastoma pathway, a critical pathway in multiple myeloma. Inhibitors of mTOR and HSP90 protein have showed in vitro and in vivo single-agent activity in multiple myeloma. Our objective was to determine the effects of the mTOR inhibitor rapamycin and the HSP90 inhibitor 17-allylamino-17-demethoxygeldanamycin (17-AAG) on multiple myeloma cells. Experimental Design: Multiple myeloma cell lines were incubated with rapamycin (0.1-100 nmol/L) and 17-AAG (100-600 nmol/L) alone and in combination. Results: In this study, we showed that the combination of rapamycin and 17-AAG synergistically inhibited proliferation, induced apoptosis and cell cycle arrest, induced cleavage of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase and caspase-8/caspase-9, and dysregulated signaling in the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/AKT/mTOR and cyclin D1/retinoblastoma pathways. In addition, we showed that both 17-AAG and rapamycin inhibited angiogenesis and osteoclast formation, indicating that these agents target not only multiple myeloma cells but also the bone marrow microenvironment. Conclusions: These studies provide the basis for potential clinical evaluation of this combination for multiple myeloma patients.