Search

Additional file 1: Figure S1. Analysis of GPER1 mRNA in public datasets GSE9656 (A) and GSE61597 (B). GSE9656: we analyzed GPER1 mRNA in CD19-selected peripheral blood B cells (pBCs; n = 7), bone marrow B cells from WM (WM-BCs; n = 12), bone marrow plasma cells from healthy donors (BM-PCs; n = 10), and WM plasma cells (WM-PCs, n = 9). GSE61597: we analyzed GPER1 mRNA in normal bone marrow CD25+ (n = 7) and CD25– (n = 9) B cells, clonal B cells from newly diagnosed patients with IgM MGUS (n=22), smoldering (n = 17), and symptomatic WM (n = 10). Figure S2. A. qRT-PCR analysis of GPER1 mRNA in MCF7 breast cancer cell line (positive control), MWCL-1 and BCWM-1 WM cell lines, and CD19+ primary cells from four WM patients. B. WB analysis of GPER1 protein in a panel of six cancer cell lines (MCF7, MWCL-1, BCWM-1, DAUDI, RAJI, and MEC1). GAPDH was used as a loading control. C. CTG viability assay in BCWM-1 cells treated with indicated concentrations of GPER1 antagonists G15 and G-36. *Indicates p < 0.05 from a Student’s t-test. Ns indicates p > 0.05 from a Student’s t-test. Figure S3. A. WB analysis of p53, p21, BAX, and PUMA in primary CD19+ WM cells treated with G1 for 24 h. B. Wb analysis of Cyclin B1 in WM cell lines treated with indicated concentrations of G1. GAPDH was used as a loading control. C. Caspase 3/7 activity assay in WM cell lines treated with the indicated concentrations of G-1. Activity is represented relative to untreated cells. D. WB analysis of PARP, cleaved PARP, Caspase-3, and cleaved Caspase-3 in WM cell lines treated with the indicated concentrations of G-1. E. CTG viability assay and Caspase 3/7 activity assay in BCWM-1 cells, co-cultured for 48h with patient-derived bone marrow stromal cells and treated with G-1 [1 µM] or control. *Indicates p < 0.05 from a Student’s t-test.

Additional file 2. Methods.

8028 Background: Ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel), a chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) cell therapy with 2 B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)–targeting single-domain antibodies, led to early, deep, and durable responses in the phase 1b/2 CARTITUDE-1 study (NCT03548207) in heavily pretreated patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). At ̃1-year (y) median follow-up (MFU), overall response rate (ORR) was 97%; 67% of pts achieved stringent complete response (sCR). 1-y progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were 77% and 89%, respectively (Berdeja 2021). Updated results 2-y post last patient in (LPI) will be presented (̃30-month total MFU). Here, we report CARTITUDE-1 results at 21.7-month MFU. Methods: Eligible pts with RRMM received ≥3 prior lines of therapy (LOT) or were refractory to a proteasome inhibitor (PI) and immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) and had received a PI, IMiD, and anti-CD38 antibody. Bridging therapy was permitted after apheresis. Pts received a single cilta-cel infusion (target dose 0.75×106 CAR+ viable T cells/kg) 5–7 days after lymphodepletion. Primary objectives were to evaluate cilta-cel safety and efficacy. Response was assessed per International Myeloma Working Group criteria by independent review committee and minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity at 10-5 by next-generation sequencing. Results: As of July 22, 2021, 97 pts (59% male; median age 61 y) received cilta-cel. Pts had a median of 6 (range 3–18) prior LOT; 84% were penta-drug exposed, 88% were triple-class refractory, 42% were penta-drug refractory, and 99% were refractory to last LOT. ORR was 97.9% (95% CI 92.7–99.7), 94.9% achieved very good partial response, and 82.5% achieved sCR. Median times to first response, best response, and ≥CR were 1.0, 2.6, and 2.9 months (m), respectively; median duration of response was not reached (NR). Of 61 pts evaluable for MRD, 92% were MRD negative (10-5), sustained for ≥6 m in 44% (27/61) and ≥12 m in 18% (11/61). 2-y PFS was 60.5% (95% CI 48.5–70.4). Median PFS and OS were NR. 2-y PFS rates in pts with sustained MRD negativity for ≥6 m and ≥12 m were 91% and 100%, respectively. There were no new safety signals or new events of CAR-T cell neurotoxicity, movement and neurocognitive treatment-emergent adverse events, or treatment-related deaths since 1-y MFU. 15 second primary malignancies were reported in 11 pts over ̃2-y MFU. Conclusions: At ̃2-y MFU, a single cilta-cel infusion led to deepening and durable responses in heavily pretreated pts with RRMM with a manageable safety profile. Follow-up is ongoing, and landmark 2-y post LPI data (̃8 m additional follow-up; ̃30 m total MFU) will be presented. Further investigations of cilta-cel are ongoing in earlier LOT and outpatient settings across the CARTITUDE program (NCT04133636, NCT04181827, NCT04923893). Clinical trial information: NCT03548207.

Additional file 3 Figures S1–S30. Supplementary figures.

It is essential that there be consistency in the conduct, analysis, and reporting of clinical trial results in myeloma. The goal of the International Myeloma Workshop Consensus Panel 1 was to develop a set of guidelines for the uniform reporting of clinical trial results in myeloma. This paper provides a summary of the current response criteria in myeloma, detailed definitions for patient populations, lines of therapy, and specific endpoints. We propose that future clinical trials in myeloma follow the guidelines for reporting results proposed in this manuscript.

BackgroundGenome-wide association studies (GWAS) in European populations have identified genetic risk variants associated with multiple myeloma.MethodsWe performed association testing of common variation in eight regions in 1,318 patients with multiple myeloma and 1,480 controls of European ancestry and 1,305 patients with multiple myeloma and 7,078 controls of African ancestry and conducted a meta-analysis to localize the signals, with epigenetic annotation used to predict functionality.ResultsWe found that variants in 7p15.3, 17p11.2, 22q13.1 were statistically significantly (P < 0.05) associated with multiple myeloma risk in persons of African ancestry and persons of European ancestry, and the variant in 3p22.1 was associated in European ancestry only. In a combined African ancestry-European ancestry meta-analysis, variation in five regions (2p23.3, 3p22.1, 7p15.3, 17p11.2, 22q13.1) was statistically significantly associated with multiple myeloma risk. In 3p22.1, the correlated variants clustered within the gene body of ULK4 Correlated variants in 7p15.3 clustered around an enhancer at the 3' end of the CDCA7L transcription termination site. A missense variant at 17p11.2 (rs34562254, Pro251Leu, OR, 1.32; P = 2.93 × 10-7) in TNFRSF13B encodes a lymphocyte-specific protein in the TNF receptor family that interacts with the NF-κB pathway. SNPs correlated with the index signal in 22q13.1 cluster around the promoter and enhancer regions of CBX7 CONCLUSIONS: We found that reported multiple myeloma susceptibility regions contain risk variants important across populations, supporting the use of multiple racial/ethnic groups with different underlying genetic architecture to enhance the localization and identification of putatively functional alleles.ImpactA subset of reported risk loci for multiple myeloma has consistent effects across populations and is likely to be functional. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 25(12); 1609-18. ©2016 AACR.

All cancers are caused by somatic mutations; however, understanding of the biological processes generating these mutations is limited. The catalogue of somatic mutations from a cancer genome bears the signatures of the mutational processes that have been operative. Here we analysed 4,938,362 mutations from 7,042 cancers and extracted more than 20 distinct mutational signatures. Some are present in many cancer types, notably a signature attributed to the APOBEC family of cytidine deaminases, whereas others are confined to a single cancer class. Certain signatures are associated with age of the patient at cancer diagnosis, known mutagenic exposures or defects in DNA maintenance, but many are of cryptic origin. In addition to these genome-wide mutational signatures, hypermutation localized to small genomic regions, 'kataegis', is found in many cancer types. The results reveal the diversity of mutational processes underlying the development of cancer, with potential implications for understanding of cancer aetiology, prevention and therapy.

Multiple myeloma is an incurable plasma cell malignancy with a complex and incompletely understood molecular pathogenesis. Here we use whole-exome sequencing, copy-number profiling and cytogenetics to analyse 84 myeloma samples. Most cases have a complex subclonal structure and show clusters of subclonal variants, including subclonal driver mutations. Serial sampling reveals diverse patterns of clonal evolution, including linear evolution, differential clonal response and branching evolution. Diverse processes contribute to the mutational repertoire, including kataegis and somatic hypermutation, and their relative contribution changes over time. We find heterogeneity of mutational spectrum across samples, with few recurrent genes. We identify new candidate genes, including truncations of SP140, LTB, ROBO1 and clustered missense mutations in EGR1. The myeloma genome is heterogeneous across the cohort, and exhibits diversity in clonal admixture and in dynamics of evolution, which may impact prognostic stratification, therapeutic approaches and assessment of disease response to treatment.

All cancers are caused by somatic mutations; however, understanding of the biological processes generating these mutations is limited. The catalogue of somatic mutations from a cancer genome bears the signatures of the mutational processes that have been operative. Here we analysed 4,938,362 mutations from 7,042 cancers and extracted more than 20 distinct mutational signatures. Some are present in many cancer types, notably a signature attributed to the APOBEC family of cytidine deaminases, whereas others are confined to a single cancer class. Certain signatures are associated with age of the patient at cancer diagnosis, known mutagenic exposures or defects in DNA maintenance, but many are of cryptic origin. In addition to these genome-wide mutational signatures, hypermutation localized to small genomic regions, 'kataegis', is found in many cancer types. The results reveal the diversity of mutational processes underlying the development of cancer, with potential implications for understanding of cancer aetiology, prevention and therapy.

Treatment of myeloma has benefited from the introduction of more effective and better tolerated agents, improvements in supportive care, better understanding of disease biology, revision of diagnostic criteria, and new sensitive and specific tools for disease prognostication and management. Assessment of minimal residual disease (MRD) in response to therapy is one of these tools, as longer progression-free survival (PFS) is seen consistently among patients who have achieved MRD negativity. Current therapies lead to unprecedented frequency and depth of response, and next-generation flow and sequencing methods to measure MRD in bone marrow are in use and being developed with sensitivities in the range of 10−5 to 10−6 cells. These technologies may be combined with functional imaging to detect MRD outside of bone marrow. Moreover, immune profiling methods are being developed to better understand the immune environment in myeloma and response to immunomodulatory agents while methods for molecular profiling of myeloma cells and circulating DNA in blood are also emerging. With the continued development and standardization of these methodologies, MRD has high potential for use in gaining new drug approvals in myeloma. The FDA has outlined two pathways by which MRD could be qualified as a surrogate endpoint for clinical studies directed at obtaining accelerated approval for new myeloma drugs. Most importantly, better understanding of MRD should also contribute to better treatment monitoring. Potentially, MRD status could be used as a prognostic factor for making treatment decisions and for informing timing of therapeutic interventions. Clin Cancer Res; 23(15); 3980–93. ©2017 AACR.

Epigenetic mechanisms play a crucial role in the normal development of the mammalian organism and are essential for maintaining the cell identity and normal functionality. Global changes in the epigenetic landscape associated with aberrant gene expression are a hallmark of cancer. Current knowledge indicates that both epigenetic alterations and genetic aberrations play an important role in the onset and progression of cancer. Recent findings have demonstrated that in cancer extensive reprogramming of all components of the epigenetic machinery (including DNA methylation, histone modifications and miRNA expression) takes place and have furthermore revealed the existence of a dynamic interplay between the different components. However, the exact sequence of events and underlying molecular mechanism contributing to carcinogenesis are only just beginning to be uncovered. Interestingly, the reversal of aberrant epigenetic modifications has emerged as a potential treatment strategy of cancer. Here, we describe the role of the epigenetic alterations in the pathogenesis of cancer focusing on the hematological malignancy multiple myeloma. In addition, recent advances regarding the relationship between histone modifications, chromatin-modifying enzymes, DNA methylation and miRNA expression are discussed.