Stratification of Multiple Myeloma Patients Based on Ex Vivo Drug Sensitivity and Identification of New Treatments for Patients with High-Risk Relapsed/Refractory Disease

Introduction

Response to treatment for multiple myeloma (MM) patients is variable and often unpredictable, which may be attributed to the heterogeneous genomic landscape of the disease. However, the effect of recurrent molecular alterations on drug response is unclear. To address this, we systematically profiled 50 samples from 43 patients to assess ex vivo sensitivity to 308 anti-cancer drugs including standard of care and investigational drugs, with results correlated to genomic alterations. Our results reveal novel insights about patient stratification, therapies for high-risk (HR) patients, signaling pathway aberrations and ex-vivo-in-vivo correlation.

Methods

Bone marrow (BM) aspirates (n=50) were collected from MM patients (newly diagnosed n=17; relapsed/refractory n=33) and healthy individuals (n=8).  CD138+ plasma cells were enriched by Ficoll separation followed by immunomagnetic bead selection. Cells were screened against 308 oncology drugs tested in a 10,000-fold concentration range. Drug sensitivity scores were calculated based on the normalized area under the dose response curve (Yadav et al, Sci Reports, 2014). MM selective responses were determined by comparing data from MM patients with those of healthy BM cells. Clustering of drug sensitivity profiles was performed using unsupervised hierarchical ward-linkage clustering with Spearman and Manhattan distance measures of drug and sample profiles. Somatic alterations were identified by exome sequencing of DNA from CD138+ cells and skin biopsies from each patient, while cytogenetics were determined by fluorescence in situ hybridization.

Results

Comparison of the ex vivo chemosensitive profiles of plasma cells resulted in stratification of patients into four distinct subgroups that were highly sensitive (Group I), sensitive (Group II), resistant (Group III) or highly resistant (Group IV) to the panel of drugs tested.  Many of the drug responses were specific for CD138+ cells with little effect on CD138- cells from the same patient or healthy BM controls. We generated a drug activity profile for the individual drugs correlating sensitivity to recurrent alterations including mutations to KRAS, DIS3, NRAS, TP53, FAM46C, and cytogenetic alterations del(17p), t(4;14), t(14;16), t(11;14), t(14;20), +1q and -13. Cells from HR patients with del(17p) exhibited the most resistant profiles (enriched in Groups III and IV), but were sensitive to some drugs including HDAC and BCL2 inhibitors. Samples from patients with t(4;14) were primarily in Group II and very sensitive to IMiDs, proteasome inhibitors and several targeted drugs.  Along with known recurrently mutated genes in myeloma, somatic mutations were identified in genes involved in several critical signaling pathways including DNA damage response, IGF1R-PI3K-AKT, MAPK, glucocorticoid receptor signaling and NF-κB signaling pathways. The predicted impact of these mutations on the activity of the pathways often corresponded to the drug response. For example, all samples bearing NF1 (DSS=21±7.9) and 67% with NRAS (DSS=15±4.35) mutations showed higher sensitivity to MEK inhibitors compared to healthy controls (DSS=5±.21). However, sensitivity was less predictable for KRAS mutants with modest response only in 47% samples (DSS=7±2.14) . One sample bearing the activating V600E mutation to BRAF showed no sensitivity to vemurafenib, which otherwise has good activity towards V600E mutated melanoma and hairy-cell leukemia. Comparison of the chemosensitive subgroups with survival showed patients in Groups I and IV had high relapse rate and poor overall survival. The ex vivo drug sensitivity results were used to decide treatment for three HR patients with results showing good ex vivo-in vivocorrelation.

Summary

Our initial results suggest that ex vivo drug testing and molecular profiling of MM patients aids stratification. Grouping of patients based on their ex vivo chemosensitive profile proved extremely informative to predict clinical phenotype and identify responders from non-responders. While some molecular markers could be used to predict drug response, others were less predictive. Nevertheless, ex vivo drug testing identified active drugs, particularly for HR and relapsed/refractory patients, and is a powerful method to determine treatment for this group of patients.