Treatment Of Myeloma Bone Disease Research Articles

Analysis of the efficacy and safety of bone disease treatment in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma treated with denosumab or zoledronic acid

Objective: This study investigated the efficacy and safety of denosumab (DENOS) versus zoledronic acid (ZOL) in the bone disease treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Methods: The clinical data of 80 patients with myeloma bone disease (MBD) at the Fifth Medical Center of PLA General Hospital between March 1, 2021 and June 30, 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. Eighteen patients with severe renal impairment (SRI, endogenous creatinine clearance rate<30 ml/min) were treated with DENOS, and 62 non-SRI patients were divided into DENOS (30 patients) and ZOL group (32 patients) . Results: Hypocalcemia was observed in 26 (33%) patients, and 22 patients developed hypocalcemia during the first treatment course. The incidence of hypocalcemia in the non-SRI patients of DENOS group was higher than that in the ZOL group [20% (6/30) vs 13% (4/32), P=0.028]. The incidence of hypocalcemia in SRI was 89% (16/18). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that endogenous creatinine clearance rate<30 ml/min was significantly associated with hypocalcemia after DENOS administration (P<0.001). After 1 month of antiresorptive (AR) drug application, the decrease in the serum β-C-terminal cross-linked carboxy-telopeptide of collagen type I concentrations of SRI and non-SRI patients in the DENOS group were significantly higher than that in the ZOL group (68% vs 59% vs 27%, P<0.001). The increase in serum procollagen type Ⅰ N-terminal propeptide concentrations of patients with or without SRI in the DENOS group were significantly higher than that in the ZOL group (34% vs 20% vs 11%, P<0.05). The level of intact parathyroid hormone in each group increased after AR drug treatment. None of the patients developed osteonecrosis of the jaw and renal adverse events, and no statistically significant differences in the overall response rate, complete remission and stringent complete remission rates were found among the groups (P>0.05), and the median PFS and OS time were not reached (P>0.05) . Conclusions: In the treatment of MBD, DENOS minimizes nephrotoxicity and has strong AR effect. Hypocalcemia is a common adverse event but is usually mild or moderate and manageable.

Novel Local "Off-the-Shelf" Immunotherapy for the Treatment of Myeloma Bone Disease.

Myeloma bone disease (MBD) is one of the major complications in multiple myeloma (MM)-the second most frequent hematologic malignancy. It is characterized by the formation of bone lesions due to the local action of proliferating MM cells, and to date, no effective therapy has been developed. In this study, we propose a novel approach for the local treatment of MBD with a combination of natural killer cells (NKs) and mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) within a fibrin scaffold, altogether known as FINM. The unique biological properties of the NKs and MSCs, joined to the injectable biocompatible fibrin, permitted to obtain an efficient "off-the-shelf" ready-to-use composite for the local treatment of MBD. Our in vitro analyses demonstrate that NKs within FINM exert a robust anti-tumor activity against MM cell lines and primary cells, with the capacity to suppress osteoclast activity (~60%) within in vitro 3D model of MBD. Furthermore, NKs' post-thawing cytotoxic activity is significantly enhanced (~75%) in the presence of MSCs, which circumvents the decrease of NKs cytotoxicity after thawing, a well-known issue in the cryopreservation of NKs. To reduce the tumor escape, we combined FINM with other therapeutic agents (bortezomib (BZ), and tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand (TRAIL)), observing a clear therapeutic synergistic effect in vitro. Finally, the therapeutic efficacy of FINM in combination with BZ and TRAIL was assessed in a mouse model of MM, achieving 16-fold smaller tumors compared to the control group without treatment. These results suggest the potential of FINM to serve as an allogeneic "off-the-shelf" approach to improve the outcomes of patients suffering from MBD.

Modulating glycosphingolipid metabolism and autophagy improves outcomes in pre-clinical models of myeloma bone disease

Patients with multiple myeloma, an incurable malignancy of plasma cells, frequently develop osteolytic bone lesions that severely impact quality of life and clinical outcomes. Eliglustat, a U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved glucosylceramide synthase inhibitor, reduced osteoclast-driven bone loss in preclinical in vivo models of myeloma. In combination with zoledronic acid, a bisphosphonate that treats myeloma bone disease, eliglustat provided further protection from bone loss. Autophagic degradation of TRAF3, a key step for osteoclast differentiation, was inhibited by eliglustat as evidenced by TRAF3 lysosomal and cytoplasmic accumulation. Eliglustat blocked autophagy by altering glycosphingolipid composition whilst restoration of missing glycosphingolipids rescued autophagy markers and TRAF3 degradation thus restoring osteoclastogenesis in bone marrow cells from myeloma patients. This work delineates both the mechanism by which glucosylceramide synthase inhibition prevents autophagic degradation of TRAF3 to reduce osteoclastogenesis as well as highlighting the clinical translational potential of eliglustat for the treatment of myeloma bone disease.

The guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of myeloma bone disease in China (2022)

The guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of myeloma bone disease in China (2022)

The role of bone-modifying agents in myeloma bone disease.

ABSTRACTBone disease is common in patients with multiple myeloma (MM), which manifests as bone pain and skeletal‐related events (SREs) such as pathological fractures and spinal cord compression. Myeloma bone disease (MBD) can adversely affect the quality of life of patients and have negative effects on morbidity and mortality. The pathogenesis of MBD is complex, and several factors are involved in the dysregulation of bone metabolism and uncoupling of bone remodeling, which result in net bone loss and devastating SREs. Broadly speaking, elevated osteoclast activity, suppressed osteoblast activity, and an aberrant marrow microenvironment play a role in MBD. Interaction of MM cells with the main bone cell osteocytes also promote further bone destruction. This review focuses on the role of bone‐modifying agents in the prevention and treatment of MBD. The mainstay of MBD prevention are antiresorptive agents, bisphosphonates and denosumab. However, these agents do not play a direct role in bone formation and repair of existing MBD. Newer agents with anabolic effects such as anti‐sclerostin antibodies, parathyroid hormone, anti‐Dickkopf‐1 antibodies, and others have shown potential in repair of MBD lesions. With the development of several new agents, the treatment landscape of MBD is likely to evolve in the coming years. © 2021 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Targeting aberrant DNA methylation in mesenchymal stromal cells as a treatment for myeloma bone disease

Multiple myeloma (MM) progression and myeloma-associated bone disease (MBD) are highly dependent on bone marrow mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs). MM-MSCs exhibit abnormal transcriptomes, suggesting the involvement of epigenetic mechanisms governing their tumor-promoting functions and prolonged osteoblast suppression. Here, we identify widespread DNA methylation alterations of bone marrow-isolated MSCs from distinct MM stages, particularly in Homeobox genes involved in osteogenic differentiation that associate with their aberrant expression. Moreover, these DNA methylation changes are recapitulated in vitro by exposing MSCs from healthy individuals to MM cells. Pharmacological targeting of DNMTs and G9a with dual inhibitor CM-272 reverts the expression of hypermethylated osteogenic regulators and promotes osteoblast differentiation of myeloma MSCs. Most importantly, CM-272 treatment prevents tumor-associated bone loss and reduces tumor burden in a murine myeloma model. Our results demonstrate that epigenetic aberrancies mediate the impairment of bone formation in MM, and its targeting by CM-272 is able to reverse MBD.

ER stress arm XBP1s plays a pivotal role in proteasome inhibition-induced bone formation

BackgroundBone destruction is a hallmark of multiple myeloma (MM). It has been reported that proteasome inhibitors (PIs) can reduce bone resorption and increase bone formation in MM patients, but the underlying mechanisms remain unclear.MethodsMesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) were treated with various doses of PIs, and the effects of bortezomib or carfilzomib on endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress signaling pathways were analyzed by western blotting and real-time PCR. Alizarin red S (ARS) and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) staining were used to determine the osteogenic differentiation in vitro. Specific inhibitors targeting different ER stress signaling and a Tet-on inducible overexpressing system were used to validate the roles of key ER stress components in regulating osteogenic differentiation of MSCs. Chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) assay was used to evaluate transcription factor-promoter interaction. MicroCT was applied to measure the microarchitecture of bone in model mice in vivo.ResultsWe found that both PERK-ATF4 and IRE1α-XBP1s ER stress branches are activated during PI-induced osteogenic differentiation. Inhibition of ATF4 or XBP1s signaling can significantly impair PI-induced osteogenic differentiation. Furthermore, we demonstrated that XBP1s can transcriptionally upregulate ATF4 expression and overexpressing XBP1s can induce the expression of ATF4 and other osteogenic differentiation-related genes and therefore drive osteoblast differentiation. MicroCT analysis further demonstrated that inhibition of XBP1s can strikingly abolish bortezomib-induced bone formation in mouse.ConclusionsThese results demonstrated that XBP1s is a master regulator of PI-induced osteoblast differentiation. Activation of IRE1α-XBP1s ER stress signaling can promote osteogenesis, thus providing a novel strategy for the treatment of myeloma bone disease.

S1604 EFFECTIVENESS OF DENOSUMAB COMPARED TO ZOLEDRONIC ACID IN BONE DISEASE TREATMENT OF MULTIPLE MYELOMA (MM): A META‐ANALYSIS

Background:About 80% of multiple myeloma patients at diagnosis presents myeloma bone disease (MBD) leading to bone pain and pathological fractures, significantly affecting patients’ quality of life. Bisphosphonates are the treatment of choice for myeloma bone disease. Several studies clarified the mechanisms involved in MM‐induced osteoclast formation and activation, leading to the identification of new possible targets and the development of better bone‐directed therapies.Aims:The aim of this study was to meta‐analyze currently available data comparing zoledronic acid to denosumab for the prevention of skeletal‐related events in patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma. Also, to assess the survival benefit and gauge which is more prone to most common and dreaded adverse events.Methods:A literature search until April 2018 for randomized, controlled trials comparing zoledronic acid to denosumab among patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma revealed two published studies. Statistical analysis was performed using fixed effects model meta‐analysis.This review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018095190) Available from: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42018095190 Results:Time to first SRE favors the denosumab group with statistically significant effect size compared to zoledronic acid (MD −1.22; 95% CI −1.93, −0.55; z = 3.36, p = 0.0008). Overall survival at 24 months was not statistically different between patients receiving denosumab and zoledronic acid (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.87, 1.13; z = 3.36; p = 0.87). For adverse events, hypocalcemia was lower in patients treated with zoledronic acid (RR 1.35; 95% CI 1.08, 1.69). Jaw osteonecrosis was noted to lean more into the denosumab arm (RR 1.51; 95% CI 0.93, 2.46).Summary/Conclusion:Our analysis supports the use of zoledronic acid as the mainstay first line treatment of MBD with statistically significant longer time to first SRE. However, while patients on zoledronic acid do experience longer time to first SRE as compared to denosumab which may make their life more comfortable, less incidence of pain and pathologic fractures, these agents clearly have no survival benefit.imageOne of the strengths of our meta‐analysis is the high rate of agreement between studies for the adverse events. This is a factor many hematologists take into account when recommending bone‐targeted agent – the potential for adverse events such as the most common hypocalcemia and the dreaded complication of jaw osteonecrosis.Our study has limitations, including key differences in the two studies. We believe that the paucity of information addressing the relative risks &amp; benefits of these two drugs and the difference in conclusions drawn from the results of each study makes this pooled analysis worthwhile.In conclusion, our analysis still supports the use of zoledronic acid as a first line bone‐targeted agent for MBD based on longer time to first SRE &amp; lesser rates of the most common &amp; dreaded complications such as hypocalcemia and jaw osteonecrosis, respectively. In addition, since denosumab doesn’t require renal function for use, our findings suggest that denosumab is an effective second‐line agent for patients who has contraindications with zoledronic acid use due to renal dysfunction. Lastly, treatment of myeloma bone disease whichever agent doesn’t change the overall survival of multiple myeloma patients.

Inhibition of microRNA-138 enhances bone formation in multiple myeloma bone marrow niche.

Myeloma bone disease is a devastating complication of multiple myeloma (MM) and is caused by dysregulation of bone remodeling processes in the bone marrow microenvironment. Previous studies showed that microRNA-138 (miR-138) is a negative regulator of osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) and that inhibiting its function enhances bone formation in vitro. In this study, we explored the role of miR-138 in myeloma bone disease and evaluated the potential of systemically delivered locked nucleic acid (LNA)-modified anti-miR-138 oligonucleotides in suppressing myeloma bone disease. We showed that expression of miR-138 was significantly increased in MSCs from MM patients (MM-MSCs) and myeloma cells compared to those from healthy subjects. Furthermore, inhibition of miR-138 resulted in enhanced osteogenic differentiation of MM-MSCs in vitro and increased the number of endosteal osteoblastic lineage cells (OBCs) and bone formation rate in mouse models of myeloma bone disease. RNA sequencing of the OBCs identified TRPS1 and SULF2 as potential miR-138 targets that were de-repressed in anti-miR-138-treated mice. In summary, these data indicate that inhibition of miR-138 enhances bone formation in MM and that pharmacological inhibition of miR-138 could represent a new therapeutic strategy for treatment of myeloma bone disease.

Biology and treatment of myeloma related bone disease

Myeloma bone disease (MBD) is the most common complication of multiple myeloma (MM), resulting in skeleton-related events (SREs) such as severe bone pain, pathologic fractures, vertebral collapse, hypercalcemia, and spinal cord compression that cause significant morbidity and mortality. It is due to an increased activity of osteoclasts coupled to the suppressed bone formation by osteoblasts. Novel molecules and pathways that are implicated in osteoclast activation and osteoblast inhibition have recently been described, including the receptor activator of nuclear factor-kB ligand/osteoprotegerin pathway, activin-A and the wingless-type signaling inhibitors, dickkopf-1 (DKK-1) and sclerostin. These molecules interfere with tumor growth and survival, providing possible targets for the development of novel drugs for the management of lytic disease in myeloma but also for the treatment of MM itself. Currently, bisphosphonates are the mainstay of the treatment of myeloma bone disease although several novel agents such as denosumab and sotatercept appear promising. This review focuses on recent advances in MBD pathophysiology and treatment, in addition to the established therapeutic guidelines.

Impact of denosumab (DMB) compared with zoledronic acid (ZA) on renal function in the treatment of myeloma bone disease.

8005 Background: Osteolytic bone disease and renal dysfunction are complications of multiple myeloma. ZA, used for the prevention and treatment of bone complications, can be nephrotoxic. DMB inhibits RANKL and thereby osteoclast function, and is not renally cleared. This international, phase III, randomized, double blind study evaluates the efficacy and safety of DMB compared with ZA in newly diagnosed myeloma patients (pts). Methods: Eligible pts were randomized 1:1 to DMB 120mg SC Q4W or ZA 4mg (renally adjusted) IV Q4W along with anti-myeloma therapy. Pts with baseline CrCl&lt;30mL/min were excluded due to ZA dosing restrictions. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of DMB to ZA with respect to time to first on-study SRE. Overall survival (OS) was a secondary endpoint; progression-free survival (PFS) was an exploratory endpoint. Renal toxicity and safety were assessed. Results: 1718 pts were randomized, 859 to each arm. Baseline renal insufficiency (CrCl ≤ 60mL/min) was reported in 26.7% of pts. DMB was non-inferior to ZA ( P = 0.01) in delaying time to first on-study SRE. Fewer AEs potentially related to renal toxicity were reported with DMB compared to ZA overall (10.0% vs 17.1%, P &lt; 0.001) in those with baseline CrCl &gt; 60mL/min (8.8% vs 14.2%) and particularly in those with baseline CrCl ≤ 60mL/min (12.9% vs 26.4%). 12.5% of pts on DMB experienced an increase in creatinine, compared to 20.8% of those on ZA. Median cumulative exposure (Q1, Q3) to DMB was 15.75 months (8.18, 25.79) compared to 14.78 months (7.46, 24.87) for ZA. PFS yielded a HR (95%CI) of 0.82 (0.68, 0.99); descriptive P = 0.036. OS HR (95%CI) between DMB and ZA was 0.9 ([0.70, 1.16]; P = 0.41), with fewer deaths in DMB (121 [14.1%]) than in ZA (129 [15.0%]). Conclusions: DMB achieved the primary endpoint of non-inferiority to ZA in delaying time to first on study SRE in pts with newly diagnosed MM. Pts on DMB had a significantly lower rate of renal AEs compared to ZA; more importantly this rate was 2-fold lower in pts with renal insufficiency (CrCl≤60mL/min). The bone specific benefits in combination with the renal function results and possible prolongation of PFS with DMB therapy is promising. Clinical trial information: NCT01345019.

Contact of myeloma cells induces a characteristic transcriptome signature in skeletal precursor cells –Implications for myeloma bone disease

Physical interaction of skeletal precursors with multiple myeloma cells has been shown to suppress their osteogenic potential while favoring their tumor-promoting features. Although several transcriptome analyses of myeloma patient-derived mesenchymal stem cells have displayed differences compared to their healthy counterparts, these analyses insufficiently reflect the signatures mediated by tumor cell contact, vary due to different methodologies, and lack results in lineage-committed precursors.To determine tumor cell contact-mediated changes on skeletal precursors, we performed transcriptome analyses of mesenchymal stem cells and osteogenic precursor cells cultured in contact with the myeloma cell line INA-6. Comparative analyses confirmed dysregulation of genes which code for known disease-relevant factors and additionally revealed upregulation of genes that are associated with plasma cell homing, adhesion, osteoclastogenesis, and angiogenesis. Osteoclast-derived coupling factors, a dysregulated adipogenic potential, and an imbalance in favor of anti-anabolic factors may play a role in the hampered osteoblast differentiation potential of mesenchymal stem cells. Angiopoietin-Like 4 (ANGPTL4) was selected from a list of differentially expressed genes as a myeloma cell contact-dependent target in skeletal precursor cells which warranted further functional analyses. Adhesion assays with full-length ANGPTL4-coated plates revealed a potential role of this protein in INA-6 cell attachment.This study expands knowledge of the myeloma cell contact-induced signature in the stromal compartment of myelomatous bones and thus offers potential targets that may allow detection and treatment of myeloma bone disease at an early stage.

English

English

The pharmacological profile of a novel highly potent bisphosphonate, OX14 (1-fluoro-2-(imidazo-[1,2 alpha]pyridin-3-yl)ethyl-bisphosphonate), with reduced bone affinity, which is as effective as zoledronate in the treatment of myeloma bone disease in JJN3-NOD/SCID-[gamma] mice

The pharmacological profile of a novel highly potent bisphosphonate, OX14 (1-fluoro-2-(imidazo-[1,2 alpha]pyridin-3-yl)ethyl-bisphosphonate), with reduced bone affinity, which is as effective as zoledronate in the treatment of myeloma bone disease in JJN3-NOD/SCID-[gamma] mice

NOD/SCID-GAMMA mice are an ideal strain to assess the efficacy of therapeutic agents used in the treatment of myeloma bone disease.

Animal models of multiple myeloma vary in terms of consistency of onset, degree of tumour burden and degree of myeloma bone disease. Here we describe five pre-clinical models of myeloma in NOD/SCID-GAMMA mice to specifically study the effects of therapeutic agents on myeloma bone disease. Groups of 7–8 week old female irradiated NOD/SCID-GAMMA mice were injected intravenously via the tail vein with either 1x106 JJN3, U266, XG-1 or OPM-2 human myeloma cell lines or patient-derived myeloma cells. At the first signs of morbidity in each tumour group all animals were sacrificed. Tumour load was measured by histological analysis, and bone disease was assessed by micro-CT and standard histomorphometric methods. Mice injected with JJN3, U266 or OPM-2 cells showed high tumour bone marrow infiltration of the long bones with low variability, resulting in osteolytic lesions. In contrast, mice injected with XG-1 or patient-derived myeloma cells showed lower tumour bone marrow infiltration and less bone disease with high variability. Injection of JJN3 cells into NOD/SCID-GAMMA mice resulted in an aggressive, short-term model of myeloma with mice exhibiting signs of morbidity 3 weeks later. Treating these mice with zoledronic acid at the time of tumour cell injection or once tumour was established prevented JJN3-induced bone disease but did not reduce tumour burden, whereas, carfilzomib treatment given once tumour was established significantly reduced tumour burden. Injection of U266, XG-1, OPM-2 and patient-derived myeloma cells resulted in less aggressive longer-term models of myeloma with mice exhibiting signs of morbidity 8 weeks later. Treating U266-induced disease with zoledronic acid prevented the formation of osteolytic lesions and trabecular bone loss as well as reducing tumour burden whereas, carfilzomib treatment only reduced tumour burden. In summary, JJN3, U266 or OPM-2 cells injected into NOD/SCID-GAMMA mice provide robust models to study anti-myeloma therapies, particularly those targeting myeloma bone disease.

Myeloma bone disease: pathogenesis, current treatments and future targets.

Patients with myeloma develop localized and generalized bone loss leading to hypercalcaemia, accelerated osteoporosis, vertebral wedge fractures, other pathological fractures, spinal cord compression and bone pain. Bone loss is mediated by a variety of biological modifiers including osteoclast-activating factors (OAF) and osteoblast (OB) inhibitory factors produced either directly by malignant plasma cells (MPCs) or as a consequence of their interaction with the bone marrow microenvironment (BMM). Raised levels of OAFs such as receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappa B ligand (RANKL), macrophage inflammatory protein 1 alpha, tumour necrosis factor-alpha and interleukin 6 stimulate bone resorption by recruiting additional osteoclasts. Via opposing mechanisms, increases in OB inhibitory factors, such as dickkopf-1 (Dkk-1), soluble frizzled-related protein-3 and hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), suppress bone formation by inhibiting the differentiation and recruitment of OBs. These changes result in an uncoupling of physiological bone remodelling, leading to myeloma bone disease (MBD). Moreover, the altered BMM provides a fertile ground for the growth and survival of MPCs. Current clinical management of MBD is both reactive (to pain and fractures) and preventive, with bisphosphonates (BPs) being the mainstay of pharmacological treatment. However, side effects and uncertainties associated with BPs warrant the search for more targeted treatments for MBD. This review will summarize recent developments in understanding the intimate relationship between MBD and the BMM and the novel ways in which they are being therapeutically targeted. All data included were sourced and referenced from PubMed. The clinical utility of BP therapy is well established. However, there is general acknowledgement that BPs are only partially successful in the treatment of MBD. The number of skeletal events attributable to myeloma are reduced by BPs but not totally eliminated. Furthermore, existing damage is not repaired. It is widely recognized that more effective treatments are needed. There remains controversy concerning the duration of BP therapy. Whether denosumab is a viable alternative to BP therapy is also contested. Many of the new therapeutic strategies discussed are yet to translate to clinical practice and demonstrate equal efficacy or superiority to BP therapy. It also remains controversial whether reported anti-tumour effects of bone-modulating therapies are clinically significant. The potential clinical utility of bone anabolic therapies including agents such as anti-Dkk-1, anti-sclerostin and anti-HGF is becoming increasingly recognized. Further research effectively targeting the mediators of MBD, targeting both bone resorption and bone formation, is urgently needed. This should translate promptly to clinical trials of combination therapy comprising anti-resorptives and bone anabolic therapies to demonstrate efficacy and improved outcomes over BPs.

Novel therapeutic targets in myeloma bone disease.

Multiple myeloma is a neoplastic disorder of plasma cells characterized by clonal proliferation within the bone marrow. One of the major clinical features of multiple myeloma is the destructive osteolytic bone disease that occurs in the majority of patients. Myeloma bone disease is associated with increased osteoclast activity and suppression of osteoblastogenesis. Bisphosphonates have been the mainstay of treatment for many years; however, their use is limited by their inability to repair existing bone loss. Therefore, research into novel approaches for the treatment of myeloma bone disease is of the utmost importance. This review will discuss the current advances in our understanding of osteoclast stimulation and osteoblast suppression mechanisms in myeloma bone disease and the treatments that are under development to target this destructive and debilitating feature of myeloma.

Management of bone disease in multiple myeloma

Osteolytic bone disease is the most common complication of multiple myeloma, resulting in skeletal complications that cause significant morbidity and mortality. Currently, bisphosphonates (BPs) are the mainstay for the treatment of myeloma bone disease. Zoledronic acid which has been found to be superior to clodronate, both in terms of reduction of skeletal-related events (SREs) and survival, and pamidronate are used for the management of myeloma-related bone disease. Patients with active disease (not in CR or VGPR) should receive BPs (especially zoledronic acid) even after two years of administration. Radiotherapy and surgical interventions can also be used for specific conditions, such as pathological fractures, spinal cord compression or uncontrolled pain. The better understanding of the biology of myeloma bone disease has led to the production of several novel agents, such as denosumab (targeting RANKL), sotatercept (activin-A antagonist) and romosozumab (targeting sclerostin) that appear very promising and have entered to clinical development.

Bone disease in multiple myeloma: pathophysiology and management.

Myeloma bone disease (MBD) is a devastating complication of multiple myeloma (MM). More than 80% of MM patients suffer from destructive bony lesions, leading to pain, fractures, mobility issues, and neurological deficits. MBD is not only a main cause of disability and morbidity in MM patients but also increases the cost of management. Bone destruction and lack of bone formation are main factors in the development of MBD. Some novel factors are found to be involved in the pathogenesis of MBD, eg, receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligand (RANKL), osteoprotegerin (OPG) system (RANKL/OPG), Wingless (Wnt), dickkopf-1 (Wnt/DKK1) pathway. The addition of novel agents in the treatment of MM, use of bisphosphonates and other supportive modalities such as radiotherapy, vertebroplasty/kyphoplasty, and surgical interventions, all have significant roles in the treatment of MBD. This review provides an overview on the pathophysiology and management of MBD.

UK Patient Perspectives of Bisphosphonate Treatment Highlight a Lack of Knowledge On Therapeutic Benefits and Strong Preferences for Choice and Location of Treatment

AbstractAbstract 2074 Background:Around 75% of myeloma patients have evidence of myeloma bone disease at diagnosis and most develop it at some point. Bisphosphonates - pamidronate, sodium clodronate and zoledronic acid - have revolutionised the treatment of myeloma bone disease and form a significant part of the myeloma treatment pathway. It is therefore important to understand patient perspectives of and preferences for this important treatment. Aims:To understand the information patients receive from clinicians and the impact this has on their understanding of bisphosphonates, to establish what patient preferences are for how and where they receive bisphosphonates and to determine whether patients are satisfied with the level of decision-making input they have about their bisphosphonate treatment. Results:Patients were asked to complete a 36 question survey, devised by Myeloma UK, which was available in paper copy and online. 606 patients responded to the survey of which 95.3% had received bisphosphonates. When asked about the information they were given by their clinicians when prescribed bisphosphonates, 81.7% received a verbal explanation, 23.7% received written information and 2.7% received details of a website/helpline. 30.6% used a product leaflet and 30.1% sourced a patient organisation information sheet. 80% of patients thought the information was ‘easy to understand'. When asked why they had been prescribed bisphosphonates, patients accurately reported that it was ‘to strengthen the bones' (82.5%), ‘to delay the progression of myeloma' (28.7%) and ‘to prevent/reduce high levels of calcium in the blood' (15.7%). 16.6% of patients wrongly thought that bisphosphonates were prescribed ‘to heal the bones' and 5.8% had no understanding of bisphosphonates.51.7% of patients received their current or last bisphosphonates ‘by monthly infusion in hospital' and 39.1% ‘by tablet form at home'. 9.2% stated ‘other' referring to more flexible methods of prescribing. When asked how they would prefer to receive their bisphosphonates, 46.5% selected ‘by regular visits for infusion in hospital' and 41.1% ‘by daily tablets taken at home'. Patients who preferred to receive bisphosphonates ‘by regular visits for infusion in hospital' reported this was due to ‘confidence in quality of care in hospital' (80.7%), ‘there is medical support on hand' (54.4%), ‘it keeps a check on my myeloma' (64.9%), ‘I prefer monthly rather than daily treatment' (52.1%) and ‘I can get my blood tests done at the same time’ (59.1%). Patients who preferred to receive bisphosphonates by ‘daily tablets taken at home', reported this was due to ‘convenience' (93.3%), ‘ease' (71.4%), ‘it reduces hospital visits’ (61.6%) and allows them to ‘avoid infusions' (37.9%).On a scale of (1) no input and (5) full input, patients gave the level of decision-making input they had over how and where to receive bisphosphonates an average rating of 2.1 – 64.6% rated (1), 6.2% rated (2), 4.9% rated (3), 2.8% rated (4), 21.5% rated (5). When asked if they were satisfied with this level of input, 79.5% of patients were satisfied, 20.3% would have preferred more input and 0.2% less. Conclusions:Patients who received information about bisphosphonates were generally satisfied it was good quality and helped them understand why they were prescribed bisphosphonates. A significant proportion of patients did not receive a verbal explanation and/or did not receive written information from a clinician or source information themselves, which explains the high percentage of patients who did not understand why they had been prescribed bisphosphonates.Patients have different and individual preferences for how and where they want to receive bisphosphonates. Patients were polarised between their preferences for receiving their bisphosphonates intravenously or by tablet form and when responses were cross-referenced, their preferences were approximately correlated with their most recent bisphosphonate. The survey also shows approximately 1 in 5 patients would have preferred more decision-making input on their choice of bisphosphonate treatment.In the UK, there is variation in uptake of oral and intravenous bisphosphonates despite evidence showing improved efficacy of intravenous zoledronic acid over oral sodium clodronate. Further investigation is warranted to determine the link between patient's preferences and uptake of different bisphosphonates. Disclosures:Low:Novartis UK Limited: Research Funding. Morgan:Novartis UK Limited: Research Funding.