Dunford, Andrew

Introduction Genomic alterations are common in multiple myeloma precursor stages, monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) and smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM). However, commonly used stratification systems do not include somatic alterations that play a role in the disease. To address this clinical need, we generated a comprehensive genomic map of MM and precursors by harmonizing and analyzing mostly WGS data from 1,030 patients. We used these data to define a simple MM-like score, that is able to discriminate which premalignant patients are at risk to progress. Methods We collected, enriched, and performed WGS of tumor plasma cells and matched normals from 138 participants with MGUS or SMM, including those in low, intermediate, and high-risk groups. We combined our precursor dataset with genomic profiles from MM (n=20) and external sources of 872 individuals with MGUS (n=18), SMM (n=62), and MM (n=792) for a cohort of 1,030 individuals with MM or a precursor condition. In 16 patients, we could perform WGS serially from the bone marrow or circulating tumor cells (n=39) and reassess the presence of mutations. Results To develop a simple score that reflects the similarity of precursor genomes to full-blown multiple myeloma disease, we searched among the 107 common driver events (occurring in >1% of patients) and initiating translocations for ones that are differently altered in precursor conditions versus MM. We found 26 differentially altered events: only MAF and MAFB translocations were enriched in MGUS/SMM whereas 24 events were enriched in MM, including known drivers MYC, KRAS, FAM46C, del(1p) and gain(1q). We then defined a simple “MM-like” score for each tumor as the number of MM-enriched drivers minus the number of MGUS-enriched drivers. As expected, the MM-like score in our cohort increased throughout MM development (MM-like score median of 1 in MGUS, 2 in SMM, and 3 in MM). Even among SMM patients, we found a gradual increase of the MM-like score from low- (median=1), to intermediate (median=2), to high-risk (median=3) groups that match the overall medians in MGUS, SMM and MM (p=2e-5). We tested whether the MM-like score can be used to estimate risk of progression. Among untreated SMM patients characterized with WGS, an MM-like score greater than 2 was associated with a higher likelihood of progression (HR=5.3, P=0.03). Using an independent dataset of 87 patients with SMM, we were able to validate that a MM-like score greater than 2 was indeed associated with a higher risk of progression (HR=3.3, P=5x10-5). 11 patients who did not progress and for whom we performed longitudinal WGS, has stable MM-like scores over time, while three patients clinically progressed and their MM-like score increased at the time of progression (due to newly detected mutations in KRAS and NRAS). For the two remaining patients, their MM-like score increased, and we observed growth of the subclone that acquired the additional MM-like driver. In the first patient with MGUS/low-risk SMM, a novel hyperdiploid clone was detected in addition to a TP53 bi-allelic hit and t(11;14) translocation and was shown to increase in clonal fraction with tumor burden (light chains +104% within three years). In the second non-progressor with an increasing MM-like score, a novel del(1p) was detected, and other subclones in the phylogenetic tree either shrank or were stable over three years. Finally, because the MM-like score can place tumors on a gradual axis of evolution towards a more genomically-mature tumor, we tested whether the MM-like score was also predictive of survival in patients treated with a newly diagnosed MM. To do so, we calculated the MM-like score in patients from the publicly available CoMMpass database. We found that an increased score significantly correlated with shorter progression-free survival (median PFS1: 3 years in high score, versus 5 years in low/intermediate score; p=1e-3) and overall survival (median OS: 4.5 years in high score, versus not reached in low/intermediate score; p=1e-5). Conclusion Overall, we demonstrate that it is possible to stratify precursor stages of MM by discovering drivers, detecting those that are associated with the stage of the disease, and defining a genomically-based score that can be used to assess risk of progression and is easy to implement in the clinic.

Abstract Multiple myeloma (MM) develops from well-defined precursor stages; however, invasive bone marrow (BM) biopsy limits screening and monitoring strategies for patients. We enumerated circulating tumor cells (CTC) from 261 patients (84 monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance, 155 smoldering multiple myeloma, and 22 MM), with neoplastic cells detected in 84%. We developed a novel approach, MinimuMM-seq, which enables the detection of translocations and copy-number abnormalities through whole-genome sequencing of highly pure CTCs. Application to CTCs in a cohort of 51 patients, 24 with paired BM, was able to detect 100% of clinically reported BM biopsy events and could replace molecular cytogenetics for diagnostic yield and risk classification. Longitudinal sampling of CTCs in 8 patients revealed major clones could be tracked in the blood, with clonal evolution and shifting dynamics of subclones over time. Our findings provide proof of concept that CTC detection and genomic profiling could be used clinically for monitoring and managing disease in MM. Significance: In this study, we established an approach enabling the enumeration and sequencing of CTCs to replace standard molecular cytogenetics. CTCs harbored the same pathognomonic MM abnormalities as BM plasma cells. Longitudinal sampling of serial CTCs was able to track clonal dynamics over time and detect the emergence of high-risk genetic subclones. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 247

Abstract Introduction: Multiple Myeloma (MM) is an incurable plasma cell malignancy commonly preceded by the asymptomatic stage smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM). MM is characterized with significant genomic heterogeneity of chromosomal gains and losses (CNVs), translocations, and point mutations (SNVs); alterations that are also observed in SMM patients. However, current SMM risk models rely solely on clinical markers and do not accurately capture progression risk. While incorporating some genomic biomarkers improves prediction, using all MM genomic features to comprehensively stratify patients may increase risk stratification precision in SMM. Methods: We obtained a total of 214 patient samples at SMM diagnosis. We performed whole-exome sequencing on 166 tumors; of these, RNA sequencing was performed on 100. Targeted capture was done on 48 additional tumors. Upon binarization of DNA features, we performed consensus non-negative matrix factorization to identify distinct molecular clusters. We then trained a random forest classifier on translocations, SNVs, and CNVs. The predicted clinical outcomes for the molecular subtypes were further validated in an independent SMM cohort of 74 patients. Results: We identified six genomic subtypes, four with hyperdiploidy (>48 chromosomes, HMC, HKR, HNT, HNF) and two with IgH translocations (FMD, CND) (Table 1). In multivariate analysis accounting for IMWG (20-2-20) clinical risk stages, high-risk (HMC, FMD, HKR) and intermediate-risk (HNT, HNF) genetic subtypes were independent predictors of progression (Hazards ratio [HR]: 3.8 and 5.5, P = 0.016 and 0.001, respectively). The low-risk, CND subtype harboring translocation (11;14) was enriched for the previously defined CD-2 MM signature defined by the B cell markers CD20 and CD79A (FDR = 0.003 ), showed upregulation of CCND1, E2F1, and E2F7 (FDR = 0.01, 0.0004, 0.08), and was enriched for G2M checkpoint, heme metabolism, and monocyte cell signature (FDR = 0.003, 0.003, 0.003, respectively). The FMD subtype with IgH translocations (4;14) and (14;16) was enriched for P53, mTORC1, unfolded protein signaling pathways and plasmacytoid dendritic cell signatures (FDR = 0.01, 0.005, 0.008, respectively). The HKR tumors were enriched for inflammatory cytokine signaling, MYC target genes, T regulatory cell signature, and the MM proliferative (PR) signatures (FDR = 0.02, 0.03, 0.007, 0.02, respectively). The APOBEC mutational signature was enriched in HMC and FMD tumors (P = 0.005), while there was no statistical difference across subtypes in the AID signature. The median follow-up for the primary cohort is 7.1 years. Median TTP for patients in HMC, FMD, and HKR was 3.8, 2.6, and 2.2 years, respectively; TTP for HNT and HNF was 4.3 and 5.2, respectively, while it was 11 years in CND patients (P = 0.007). Moreover, by analyzing the changes in MM clinical biomarkers over time, we found that patients from high-risk subgroups had higher odds of developing evolving hemoglobin and monoclonal protein levels over time (P = 0.01 and 0.002, respectively); Moreover, the absolute increase in M-protein was significantly higher in patients from the high-risk genetic subtypes at one, two, and five years from diagnosis (P = 0.001, 0.03, and 0,01, respectively). Applying the classifier to the external cohort replicated our findings where intermediate and high-risk genetic subgroups conferred increased risk of progression to MM in multivariate analysis after accounting for IMWG staging (HR: 5.5 and 9.8, P = 0.04 and 0.005, respectively). Interestingly, within the intermediate-risk clinical group in the primary cohort, patients in the high-risk genetic subgroups had increased risk of progression (HR: 5.2, 95% CI 1.5 - 17.3, P = 0.007). In the validation cohort, these patients also had an increased risk of progression to MM (HR: 6.7, 95% CI 1.2 - 38.3, P = 0.03), indicating that molecular classification improves the clinical risk-stratification models. Conclusion: We identified and validated in an independent dataset six SMM molecular subgroups with distinct DNA alterations, transcriptional profiles, dysregulated pathways, and risks of progression to active MM. Our results underscore the importance of molecular classification in addition to clinical evaluation in better identifying high-risk SMM patients. Moreover, these subgroups may be used to identify tumor vulnerabilities and target them with precision medicine efforts. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Bustoros: Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Casneuf: Janssen: Current Employment. Kastritis: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genesis Pharma: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Walker: Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Sanofi: Speakers Bureau. Davies: Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Dimopoulos: Amgen: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Beigene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Bergsagel: Genetech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Patents & Royalties: human CRBN mouse; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Yong: BMS: Research Funding; Autolus: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Morgan: BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jansen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Getz: IBM, Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Scorpion Therapeutics: Consultancy, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ghobrial: AbbVie, Adaptive, Aptitude Health, BMS, Cellectar, Curio Science, Genetch, Janssen, Janssen Central American and Caribbean, Karyopharm, Medscape, Oncopeptides, Sanofi, Takeda, The Binding Site, GNS, GSK: Consultancy.

PURPOSE Smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) is a precursor condition of multiple myeloma (MM) with a 10% annual risk of progression. Various prognostic models exist for risk stratification; however, those are based on solely clinical metrics. The discovery of genomic alterations that underlie disease progression to MM could improve current risk models. METHODS We used next-generation sequencing to study 214 patients with SMM. We performed whole-exome sequencing on 166 tumors, including 5 with serial samples, and deep targeted sequencing on 48 tumors. RESULTS We observed that most of the genetic alterations necessary for progression have already been acquired by the diagnosis of SMM. Particularly, we found that alterations of the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway ( KRAS and NRAS single nucleotide variants [SNVs]), the DNA repair pathway (deletion 17p, TP53, and ATM SNVs), and MYC (translocations or copy number variations) were all independent risk factors of progression after accounting for clinical risk staging. We validated these findings in an external SMM cohort by showing that patients who have any of these three features have a higher risk of progressing to MM. Moreover, APOBEC associated mutations were enriched in patients who progressed and were associated with a shorter time to progression in our cohort. CONCLUSION SMM is a genetically mature entity whereby most driver genetic alterations have already occurred, which suggests the existence of a right-skewed model of genetic evolution from monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance to MM. We identified and externally validated genomic predictors of progression that could distinguish patients at high risk of progression to MM and, thus, improve on the precision of current clinical models.

Abstract Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is a genetically heterogeneous disease characterized by multiple low-frequency alterations including somatic mutations, copy number alterations (CNAs) and chromosomal rearrangements. We sought to identify previously unrecognized low-frequency genetic events, integrate recurrent alterations into comprehensive signatures and associate these signatures with clinical parameters. For these reasons, our multi-institutional international group assembled a cohort of 304 primary DLBCLs from newly diagnosed patients, 87% of whom were uniformly treated with state-of-the-art therapy (rituximab-containing CHOP regimen) and had long term followup. Tumors were subjected to whole exome sequencing with an extended bait set that included custom probes designed to capture recurrent chromosomal rearrangements. In this cohort, 47% of samples had available transcriptional profiling and assignment to associated disease subtypes. Analytical pipelines developed at the Broad Institute were used to detect mutations (MuTect), CNAs (Recapseq+Allelic Capseq) and chromosomal rearrangements (dRanger+Breakpointer) and assess clonality (Absolute). To analyze formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumors without paired normals we developed a method which utilized 8334 unrelated normal samples to stringently filter recurrent germline events and artifacts. Significant mutational drivers were identified using the MutSig2CV algorithm and recurrent CNAs were assessed with GISTIC2.0. In addition, we utilized a recently developed algorithm, CLUMPS2, to prioritize somatic mutations which cluster in 3-dimensional protein structure. With this approach, we identified > 90 recurrently mutated genes, 34 focal amplifications and 41 focal deletions, 20 arm-level events and > 200 chromosomal rearrangements in the DLBCL series. Of note, 33% of the mutational drivers were also perturbed by chromosomal rearrangements or CNAs, underscoring the importance of a comprehensive genetic analysis. In the large DLBCL series, we identified several previously unrecognized but potentially targetable alterations including mutations in NOTCH2 (8%) and TET2 (5%). The majority of identified chromosomal rearrangements involved translocations of potent regulatory regions to intact gene coding sequences. The most frequently rearrangements involved Ig regulatory elements which were translocated to BCL2, MYC, BCL6 and several additional genes with known roles in germinal center B-cell biology. After identifying recurrent somatic mutations, CNAs and chromosomal rearrangements, we performed hierarchical clustering and identified subsets of DLBCLs with comprehensive signatures comprised of specific alterations. A large subset of tumors shared recurrent alterations previously associated with follicular lymphoma including mutations of chromatin modifiers such as CREBBP, MLL2, and EZH2 in association with alterations of TNFRSF14 and GNA13 and translocations of BCL2. This cluster was enriched in GCB-type DLBCLs and contained a subset with select genetic alterations associated with an unfavorable outcome. An additional cohort of tumors was characterized by alterations perturbing B-cell differentiation including recurrent BCL6 translocations or alterations of PRDM1. A subset of these DLBCLs had alterations of NOTCH2 and additional pathway components or mutations of MYD88 in association with TNFAIP3, CD70 and EBF1, a master regulator of B-cell differentiation. An additional group of DLBCLs exhibited frequent MYD88 mutations in association with alterations of CD79B, PIM1, TBL1XR1 and ETV6 and BCL2 copy gain; these tumors were highly enriched for ABC-type DLBCLs. This coordinate signature and additional alterations of p53 pathway components were associated with outcome. We explored bases for the identified genetic alterations in DLBCL by performing an in silico mutational signature analysis. The most frequent mutational signatures were those of spontaneous deamination (aging) and AID with rare cases of microsatellite instability. We also assessed the clonality of identified genetic features to define cancer cell fraction and establish the timing of specific genetic events. The comprehensive genetic signatures of clinically annotated DLBCLs provide new insights regarding approaches to targeted therapy. Disclosures Link: Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding. Rodig:Perkin Elmer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Research Funding. Pfreundschuh:Boehringer Ingelheim, Celegene, Roche, Spectrum: Other: Advisory board; Roche: Honoraria; Amgen, Roche, Spectrum: Research Funding. Shipp:Gilead: Consultancy; Sanofi: Research Funding; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.