The role of minimal residual disease testing in myeloma treatment selection and drug development: Current value and future applications

Kenneth C. Anderson, Daniel Auclair, Gary J. Kelloff, Caroline C. Sigman, Hervé Avet-Loiseau, Ann T. Farrell, Nicole J. Gormley, Shaji K Kumar, Ola Landgren, Nikhil C. Munshi, Michele Cavo, Faith E. Davies, Alessandra Di Bacco, Jennifer S. Dickey, Steven I. Gutman, Howard R. Higley, Mohamad A. Hussein, J. Milburn Jessup, Ilan R. Kirsch, Richard F. LittleRobert D. Loberg, Jens G. Lohr, Lata Mukundan, James L. Omel, Trevor J. Pugh, Gregory H. Reaman, Michael D. Robbins, A. Kate Sasser, Nancy Valente, Elena Zamagni

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

34 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

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 105 to 106 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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)3980-3993
Number of pages14
JournalClinical Cancer Research
Volume23
Issue number15
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2017

Fingerprint

Residual Neoplasm
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Drug Approval
Therapeutics
Bone Marrow
Disease Management
Disease-Free Survival
Decision Making
Biomarkers
Technology
DNA

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Cancer Research

Cite this

Anderson, K. C., Auclair, D., Kelloff, G. J., Sigman, C. C., Avet-Loiseau, H., Farrell, A. T., ... Zamagni, E. (2017). The role of minimal residual disease testing in myeloma treatment selection and drug development: Current value and future applications. Clinical Cancer Research, 23(15), 3980-3993. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-2895

The role of minimal residual disease testing in myeloma treatment selection and drug development : Current value and future applications. / Anderson, Kenneth C.; Auclair, Daniel; Kelloff, Gary J.; Sigman, Caroline C.; Avet-Loiseau, Hervé; Farrell, Ann T.; Gormley, Nicole J.; Kumar, Shaji K; Landgren, Ola; Munshi, Nikhil C.; Cavo, Michele; Davies, Faith E.; Di Bacco, Alessandra; Dickey, Jennifer S.; Gutman, Steven I.; Higley, Howard R.; Hussein, Mohamad A.; Jessup, J. Milburn; Kirsch, Ilan R.; Little, Richard F.; Loberg, Robert D.; Lohr, Jens G.; Mukundan, Lata; Omel, James L.; Pugh, Trevor J.; Reaman, Gregory H.; Robbins, Michael D.; Sasser, A. Kate; Valente, Nancy; Zamagni, Elena.

In: Clinical Cancer Research, Vol. 23, No. 15, 01.08.2017, p. 3980-3993.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Anderson, KC, Auclair, D, Kelloff, GJ, Sigman, CC, Avet-Loiseau, H, Farrell, AT, Gormley, NJ, Kumar, SK, Landgren, O, Munshi, NC, Cavo, M, Davies, FE, Di Bacco, A, Dickey, JS, Gutman, SI, Higley, HR, Hussein, MA, Jessup, JM, Kirsch, IR, Little, RF, Loberg, RD, Lohr, JG, Mukundan, L, Omel, JL, Pugh, TJ, Reaman, GH, Robbins, MD, Sasser, AK, Valente, N & Zamagni, E 2017, 'The role of minimal residual disease testing in myeloma treatment selection and drug development: Current value and future applications', Clinical Cancer Research, vol. 23, no. 15, pp. 3980-3993. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-2895
Anderson, Kenneth C. ; Auclair, Daniel ; Kelloff, Gary J. ; Sigman, Caroline C. ; Avet-Loiseau, Hervé ; Farrell, Ann T. ; Gormley, Nicole J. ; Kumar, Shaji K ; Landgren, Ola ; Munshi, Nikhil C. ; Cavo, Michele ; Davies, Faith E. ; Di Bacco, Alessandra ; Dickey, Jennifer S. ; Gutman, Steven I. ; Higley, Howard R. ; Hussein, Mohamad A. ; Jessup, J. Milburn ; Kirsch, Ilan R. ; Little, Richard F. ; Loberg, Robert D. ; Lohr, Jens G. ; Mukundan, Lata ; Omel, James L. ; Pugh, Trevor J. ; Reaman, Gregory H. ; Robbins, Michael D. ; Sasser, A. Kate ; Valente, Nancy ; Zamagni, Elena. / The role of minimal residual disease testing in myeloma treatment selection and drug development : Current value and future applications. In: Clinical Cancer Research. 2017 ; Vol. 23, No. 15. pp. 3980-3993.
@article{636aeeec84244677805f25f1c7514b1b,
title = "The role of minimal residual disease testing in myeloma treatment selection and drug development: Current value and future applications",
abstract = "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 105 to 106 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.",
author = "Anderson, {Kenneth C.} and Daniel Auclair and Kelloff, {Gary J.} and Sigman, {Caroline C.} and Herv{\'e} Avet-Loiseau and Farrell, {Ann T.} and Gormley, {Nicole J.} and Kumar, {Shaji K} and Ola Landgren and Munshi, {Nikhil C.} and Michele Cavo and Davies, {Faith E.} and {Di Bacco}, Alessandra and Dickey, {Jennifer S.} and Gutman, {Steven I.} and Higley, {Howard R.} and Hussein, {Mohamad A.} and Jessup, {J. Milburn} and Kirsch, {Ilan R.} and Little, {Richard F.} and Loberg, {Robert D.} and Lohr, {Jens G.} and Lata Mukundan and Omel, {James L.} and Pugh, {Trevor J.} and Reaman, {Gregory H.} and Robbins, {Michael D.} and Sasser, {A. Kate} and Nancy Valente and Elena Zamagni",
year = "2017",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-2895",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "23",
pages = "3980--3993",
journal = "Clinical Cancer Research",
issn = "1078-0432",
publisher = "American Association for Cancer Research Inc.",
number = "15",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The role of minimal residual disease testing in myeloma treatment selection and drug development

T2 - Current value and future applications

AU - Anderson, Kenneth C.

AU - Auclair, Daniel

AU - Kelloff, Gary J.

AU - Sigman, Caroline C.

AU - Avet-Loiseau, Hervé

AU - Farrell, Ann T.

AU - Gormley, Nicole J.

AU - Kumar, Shaji K

AU - Landgren, Ola

AU - Munshi, Nikhil C.

AU - Cavo, Michele

AU - Davies, Faith E.

AU - Di Bacco, Alessandra

AU - Dickey, Jennifer S.

AU - Gutman, Steven I.

AU - Higley, Howard R.

AU - Hussein, Mohamad A.

AU - Jessup, J. Milburn

AU - Kirsch, Ilan R.

AU - Little, Richard F.

AU - Loberg, Robert D.

AU - Lohr, Jens G.

AU - Mukundan, Lata

AU - Omel, James L.

AU - Pugh, Trevor J.

AU - Reaman, Gregory H.

AU - Robbins, Michael D.

AU - Sasser, A. Kate

AU - Valente, Nancy

AU - Zamagni, Elena

PY - 2017/8/1

Y1 - 2017/8/1

N2 - 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 105 to 106 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.

AB - 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 105 to 106 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.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85027183313&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85027183313&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-2895

DO - 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-2895

M3 - Article

C2 - 28428191

AN - SCOPUS:85027183313

VL - 23

SP - 3980

EP - 3993

JO - Clinical Cancer Research

JF - Clinical Cancer Research

SN - 1078-0432

IS - 15

ER -