1. Introduction
Multiple myeloma (MM) is the second most common blood malignancy. MM is typically characterized by the proliferation of plasma cells in the bone marrow, which produces a monoclonal immunoglobulin [ 1 ]. Most patients with MM exhibit signs or symptoms related to the accumulation of plasma cells in bone or organs, or kidney damage caused by immunoglobulin deposition [ 2 ]. The clinical presentation of MM includes calcium level elevation, renal insufficiency, anemia, and bone disease (abbreviated as CRAB). MM generally occurs in elderly individuals with a median age of 69 years at diagnosis. The median overall survival of patients with MM is 6 to 7 years. Survival is hindered by comorbidities and MM bone disease (MBD). Bone destruction with osteolytic lesions, osteopenia, or pathologic fractures is a sign of myeloma in up to 70 to 80% of cases. Over 80% of patients demonstrate skeletal-related events (SREs), such as vertebral compression fractures, which may result in cord compression, hypercalcemia, and pathologic fractures [ 3 , 4 ].
MBD is a serious complication of MM that affects the performance and survival of myeloma patients. Osteocytes and the related microenvironment appear to be crucial in the development of MBD. In addition to other factors, they contribute to pathogenesis, including increased osteoclast (OC) activity, enhanced osteoblast (OB) inhibition, bidirectional signaling to activate OCs and suppress OBs, and immunomodulation of the bone marrow microenvironment, and all this results in the deregulation of bone turnover as well as osteopenia and SREs.
Newly identified pathways have created new opportunities to identify effective therapeutic agents and develop novel therapeutic strategies to prevent SREs. In this review, we discuss the mechanisms of MM-related SREs, and summarize current antiresorptive therapies such as bisphosphonate (BP) and the denosumab monoclonal antibody (moAb) -targeting receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-κB) ligand (RANKL) and anti-MM therapies, which include autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and bortezomib-based regimens to prevent MBD. The review also discusses potential bone-anabolic agents that are currently in development using preclinical models.
2. Pathophysiology
In normal physiological settings, the activities of OBs and OCs result in a balance between bone formation and bone resorption. OCs and OBs are the core cells involved in bone remodeling. Osteocytes, cytokines, and hormones contribute to this process. OCs are derived from monocytes and reabsorb the bone matrix via enzyme secretion. OBs originate from mesenchymal stem cells and build a bone matrix by secreting collagen. Furthermore, interleukin-6 (IL-6) produced by immature OBs upregulates osteoclasts, while osteoprotegerin (OPG) produced by mature OBs inhibits the activation of OCs. Osteoclastogenesis and osteoblastogenesis contribute to the control of bone remodeling in new bone formation.
Myeloma cells also secrete cytokines to stimulate osteoclastogenesis by interacting with bone marrow stromal cells and the microenvironment. These cytokines include interleukin (IL)-1b, IL-3, IL-6, IL-11, and IL-17, as well as tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), C-C motif ligand 3 (CCL3), annexin2, and stromal cell-derived factor-1 alpha (SDF-1α), which also suppress OBs to inhibit bone formation. The uncoupling of osteoclastogenesis and osteoblastogenesis disrupts the bone remodeling process.
Osteolytic bone disease is pathognomonic of MM-related SREs. Bone destruction is mediated by increased OC activity and OB inhibition [ 5 ]. The microenvironment in myeloma bone disease includes cellular interactions between myeloma cells and bone marrow cells, including bone marrow stromal cells (BMSCs), OBs, and OCs. These interactions promote osteocyte apoptosis, resulting in increased myeloma growth and osteolytic bone destruction ( Figure 1 ) [ 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 ].
2.1. Increasing OC Activity
As a result of the assessments of the mechanisms involved in MBDs, the RANKL/RANK pathway has been identified to play a major role in the development of osteolytic bone disease. RANK and its ligand (RANKL) activate the downstream factor, NF-κB, which simultaneously activates OC differentiation and decreases OC apoptosis. RANKL is mainly expressed by osteoblasts, but it is also expressed by activated lymphocytes, BMSCs, and endothelial cells [ 6 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ]. RANKL facilitates OC activation by binding to RANK on the OC membrane. Another influential pathway is the Notch signaling pathway, which promotes OC activity. The interaction of the Notch family in the membranes of MM cells that bind to the Jagged ligands expressed in the membranes of BMSCs results in increased RANKL expression by MM cells [ 21 ]. Other factors favoring osteoclastogenesis and OC-mediated bone destruction include chemokines, such as the chemokine C-C motif ligand 3 (CCL3), or macrophage inflammatory protein 1-alpha (MIP1α), SDF-1α, IL-1b, IL-3, IL-6, IL-11, IL-17, annexin 2, and TNF-α [ 3 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 ]. The CCL3 chemokine or MIP1α, secreted by myeloma cells, triggers osteoclastogenesis by binding to chemokine receptor type 1 (CCR1) and CCR5 on OOCs. Simultaneously, they facilitate the adhesion between myeloma cells and BMSCs, stimulating increased production of IL-6 and RANKL. Finally, myeloma cells construct a feedback loop to ensure their own growth by producing CCL3 (MIP-1α), and increase OC activity in combination with RANKL and MIP-1α in synergy with IL-6 to promote their survival.
2.2. Enhancing OB Inhibition
MBD is complicated by OB inhibition, resulting in bone loss without repair. The Wingless-type (Wnt) pathway is a central regulator of OB differentiation and normal bone homeostasis [ 24 , 37 ]. OCs play a key role in the modulation of remodeling by negatively regulating Wnt signaling through the expression of Wnt inhibitors. Dickkopf-1/2 (DKK-1/2) prevents further bone formation [ 24 , 25 , 37 , 38 ]. OCs and myeloma cells produce Wnt signaling inhibitors such as sclerostin (Scl), DKK-1, and the secreted, frizzled-related protein 2 (SFRP-2) to suppress OB activity, resulting in decreased osteoblastogenesis, which contributes to MM-related bone resorption and disease progression. DKK-1 inhibits immature OBs and enables the maximum amount of IL-6 to be secreted, and it also suppresses OB differentiation and activity [ 25 , 39 ]. SFRP-2 is a Wnt antagonist and a soluble factor produced by myeloma cells. Scl inhibits OB development, weakens bone mineralization [ 33 ], and impedes Scl production with monoclonal antibodies in preclinical MM models that restore deregulated bone metabolism and decrease bone fragility [ 15 , 33 , 40 ].
The transcription factor, runt-related transcription factor 2 (Runx2)/core-binding factor runt domain alpha subunit 1 (CBFA1), is an important driver of OB differentiation and bone formation. Myeloma cells inhibit osteoprogenitor cells to downregulate the differentiation of OBs by inhibiting Runx2/CBF1A, which results in osteolytic lesions. Furthermore, Runx2/CBFA1 mediates the secretion of OPG. Inhibition of Runx2/CBFA1 decreases OPG and increases osteoclastogenesis. OPG is produced by OBs, BMSCs, and osteocytes. OPG inhibits the interaction between RANKL and RANK. Myeloma cells degrade OPG through the membrane syndecan-1 system to inhibit OB activity [ 41 , 42 , 43 ].
2.3. Bidirectional Signaling in the Uncoupling of Osteoclastogenesis and Osteoblastogenesis
The development of osteolytic lesions is the result of the uncoupling of osteoclastogenesis and osteoblastogenesis. However, several other factors are involved in their development. The interaction between Ephrin type-B receptor 4 (EphB4) in the membranes of OBs and EphinB2 expressed in the membranes of OCs results in enhanced OB inhibition and increased OC activity [ 44 ]. The apoptosis of OBs also enriches the expression of Notch and promotes Scl secretion and RANKL expression, which enhances OB inhibition and increases OC activity.
Transforming growth factor beta (TGF-β) and ILs, such as IL-3 and IL-7, are also involved in OB suppression. OCs and myeloma cells further inhibit OBs through semaphorin-4D [ 36 , 45 , 46 ]. TGF-β is produced by the bone matrix during bone resorption and inhibits osteoblast differentiation. IL-3 and IL-7 play a bidirectional role in inhibiting OBs by inducing activin A and suppressing Runx2, and this inhibits osteoblastogenesis. TNF-α also has a bidirectional activity in osteoclastogenesis and can suppress OB differentiation. TNF-α inhibits OB differentiation by decreasing Runx2, a key regulator of osteoblastogenesis. Furthermore, TNF-α can induce the apoptosis of mature OBs.
Interestingly, proteasome inhibitors promote OB differentiation independently of Wnt signaling. Thus, they have an anabolic effect on myelomatous bone [ 47 ]. MBD development has a direct correlation with the stimulation of OCs and inhibition of OBs.
2.4. MM and the Bone Microenvironment
Myeloma cells mainly survive and proliferate in the bone marrow niche, which interacts with the surrounding bone marrow microenvironment. The bone marrow microenvironment includes two compartments that interact with myeloma cells. A non-cellular compartment consists of soluble factors, such as cytokines, chemokines, growth factors, and extracellular matrix proteins such as collagen, fibronectin, and laminin. In contrast, the cellular compartment consists of hematopoietic and non-hematopoietic cells, fibroblasts, OCs, OBs, and BMSCs [ 42 ].
There is constant crosstalk among different cell subtypes in the bone marrow microenvironment. The homing of MM cells is favored by their adhesion to BMSCs through Notch bidirectional signaling, which facilitates the interactions among MM cells, BMSCs, and OCs. This results in significant changes in the bone marrow microenvironment that promote MM proliferation and bone destruction [ 43 , 48 , 49 ]. The dysregulation of the EphrinB2/EphB4 pathway in MM also weakens the normal interaction between OCs and OBs, leading to increased bone loss [ 21 , 36 ]. Positive feedback cycles in the interactions between MM cells and the bone microenvironment have been assumed to lead to increased bone resorption and MM cell proliferation through the IL-6 and BMSC adhesion-related pathways [ 50 ]. Myeloma cells induce high levels of TNF-α in the marrow microenvironment. TNF-α increases the BMSC production of OC-activating factors, such as RANKL and IL-6, by increasing the transcription factor spliced X-box binding protein 1, thereby increasing osteoclastogenesis.
OCs may participate in the immunosuppressive microenvironment by promoting the expansion of T helper (Th) 17 lymphocytes and myeloid-derived suppressor cells; however, they inhibit the activity of cytotoxic T and natural killer cells against myeloma cells. Interestingly, the interplay between MM cells and mature OBs may provide a unique niche for MM cells to be maintained in a quiescent state, whereas OB dysfunction or OC remodeling of the endosteal niche allows for their reactivation.
3. Predictors or Biomarkers
MBD is evaluated using plain radiographs, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), positron emission tomography (PET) scans, technetium-99m-sestamibi (Mibi) scanning, and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scanning, all of which provide comprehensive information. Biochemical markers of bone resorption are also under investigation, despite the limited availability of the above assays. Further, due to the lack of extensive testing in patients, the routine use of these assays is difficult to analyze [ 51 , 52 , 53 ].
An investigation of the molecular basis of MBD to develop predictive markers or to identify patients at high risk of developing SREs during therapy with bisphosphonates (BPs) was carried out with 261 myeloma samples, which were analyzed by global gene expression profiling. Genetic analysis, including the Wnt signaling antagonist DKK1 genes involved in growth factor signaling and apoptosis, and the overexpression of the interferon (IFN)-induced family or factors involved in cell signaling and mitosis, revealed molecules that are significantly associated with SREs. Higher serum calcium levels and the presence of bone disease and hyperdiploidy at presentation were also identified to be associated with a high risk of SRE development. The simple expression-based SRE predictor can effectively identify individuals at high risk of developing bone disease during treatment with BPs. Such predictors could assist in the development of future trials of novel therapies that aim to treat or manage MBD [ 54 ].
4. Treatment Overview for MBD
When MM and MBD are diagnosed, several treatments are available. However, a multidisciplinary approach is needed to guarantee that a patient’s quality of life is retained, by using analgesics for pain, surgery, or radiotherapy for MBD. MBD is fatal in the absence of adequate anti-MM treatment. Thus, MM-management plans need to consider treating the underlying MM as well as MBD. Preventive therapies are also needed to delay disease progression in MBD. The mainstay treatment involves the use of antiresorptive agents. However, MBD is often treated with radiation therapy, vertebroplasty, surgery, BPs, and anti-RANKL moAb ( Table 1 ).
Recently developed novel anabolic agents that target sclerostin and DKK1, which promote osteoblastogenesis and bone formation and have the potential to repair existing lesions, may lead to a substantial improvement in MBD. The rest of this review is focused on current treatments for MBD and further developments in the treatment of MBD based on its pathogenesis.
4.1. BPs
BPs are pyrophosphate analogs that bind to exposed bone areas of hydroxyapatite crystals. BPs inhibit OC activity and function, providing effective therapy for the SREs of MM [ 61 ]. BPs are well-established and are the current standard of care for MBD [ 38 , 61 , 62 ]. There are two types of BPs: non-nitrogen-containing BPs, such as clodronate, which induce OC apoptosis by causing the accumulation of non-hydrolyzable ATP analogs; and nitrogen-containing BPs, such as pamidronate and ZA, that bind to hydroxyapatite and cause OC apoptosis by inhibiting the farnesyl diphosphate synthase enzyme of the mevalonate pathway.
Zoledronic acid (ZA) was demonstrated to be superior in decreasing SREs relative to clodronate in the MRC Myeloma IX trial. Pamidronate and ZA have greater potency in inhibiting the transformation of monocytes to OCs and might facilitate the apoptosis of OCs [ 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 63 ]. In large-scale, randomized clinical studies, improved progression-free survival and overall survival by novel BPs in the treatment of MBD has been shown in subanalyses of the overall population. BPs may thus be well-tolerated by patients with MM. The adverse events associated with BPs are mild and easily managed. However, renal function must be continuously monitored. Favorable results of long-term treatment with BPs (Bonefos, Ibandronate) in combination with antitumor therapy were observed in 364 patients. During a 15-year observation period, a median survival of 94 months with a 35% probability of 10-year survival was achieved with a significant decrease in bone complications in 58% of patients in the treatment groups compared to 14% in the placebo group [ 64 ].
A recent large-scale investigation examined ZA effectiveness in 111,679 patients with bone metastases from breast cancer or prostate cancer, or MM patients using real-world databases. The findings revealed a decreased risk of SREs in patients with a history of SREs. However, no preventive effects of ZA were observed in patients without this history [ 65 ].
Although BPs are the initial, first-line treatment for MBD, their long-term adverse effects limit their use. These adverse effects include renal toxicity (which requires dose reduction in patients with renal impairment), flu-like symptoms, gastrointestinal upset during administration, atrial fibrillation, atypical femoral fracture, and osteonecrosis of the jaw (which can occur in 3.5% of patients). Although the efficacy of clodronate was reportedly inferior to that of ZA, a lower rate of osteonecrosis of the jaw was evident relative to ZA treatment (1 vs. 4%, respectively). Furthermore, pamidronate can be administered to patients with significant renal impairment [ 57 ]. Based on the updated results of the Myeloma IX trial, ZA should be administered until patients’ disease progression fails to achieve beneficial partial response. BPs are recommended to be administered for up to 2 years if they are well-tolerated at the time of relapse.
4.2. Denosumab
The denosumab anti-RANKL moAb strongly binds to RANKL. The resulting inhibition resembles the effect of endogenous OPG and decreases bone resorption. In 2018, both the United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) granted the supplemental approval of denosumab for the prevention of SREs in MM patients based on the phase 3 results of the 20090482, randomized, double-blind trial comparing the safety and efficacy of monthly denosumab to monthly ZA in patients with MM. The trial was undertaken to demonstrate non-inferiority and possibly superiority regarding progression-free survival [ 20 , 60 , 66 ].
No apparent difference between denosumab and ZA has been found regarding overall survival or skeletal events. Further, their safety profiles are very similar. ZA may result in slightly more renal toxicity. However, this is balanced by the higher rates of hypocalcemia with denosumab [ 66 , 67 ]. In MM, there are no data on denosumab cessation, and the drug has been licensed for continuous use. Based on the results of the 10-year follow-up of the Future Revascularization Evaluation in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus: Optimal Management of Multivessel Disease (FREEDOM) and open-label extension studies, the continuous administration of denosumab has a manageable toxicity profile and shows continuous improvement in BMD, with decreased fracture risk among postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, especially among patients at high risk for SREs.
Denosumab is recommended when BPs cannot be prescribed, for example, due to renal toxicity. There is also a recommendation to use denosumab if hypercalcemia of malignancy occurs and is refractory to BPs. Denosumab is not nephrotoxic and can be administered as a subcutaneous injection, which allows easier access for patients to this treatment and provides a potential alternative to those that cannot tolerate BPs.
4.3. ASCT
RANKL and OPG may be crucial in the pathogenesis of bone destruction. BPs may clinically improve skeletal prognosis and survival in patients with myeloma. High-dose chemotherapy with autografting may normalize abnormal bone resorption; however, the effect may take several weeks to emerge and may be paralleled by increased OB activity [ 68 ]. ASCT could normalize abnormal bone remodeling by decreasing the ratio of soluble RANKL (sRANKL) and OPG in patients with MM [ 69 ].
4.4. Bortezomib-Based Regimens
Bortezomib is a proteasome inhibitor used to treat MM and is generally used in combination with other medications [ 2 , 70 ]. Bortezomib-based regimens are indicated for MM in patients who have and have not previously received treatment.
At baseline in one study [ 71 ], patients with relapsed MM displayed increased serum concentrations of DKK-1, sRANKL, sRANKL/OPG ratio, C-telopeptide of type I collagen (CTX), and tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase isoform-5b (TRACP-5b), and reduced bone alkaline phosphatase and osteocalcin. Serum DKK-1 levels were correlated with CTX and severe bone disease. Bortezomib administration decreased serum DKK-1, sRANKL, CTX, and TRACP-5b levels after four cycles of therapy, and increased bone alkaline phosphatase and osteocalcin, irrespective of treatment response. Accordingly, bone remodeling was observed to be normalized in relapsed myeloma [ 71 ].
5. Novel Agents
The high prevalence of osteolytic bone disease in MM highlights the need for novel therapies targeting the bone microenvironment [ 16 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 ]. Several novel agents are under investigation for their positive effects on bone remodeling mediated by OC inhibition. The downregulation of OB differentiation has prompted the use of anabolic agents. In addition to restoring bone remodeling, these novel agents may impede tumor growth in vivo.
MBD is dependent on the uncoupling of bone remodeling that is provoked by increased bone resorption mediated by OCs. Typically, bone formation is reduced because of the downregulation of the number of functional OBs [ 77 ]. Functionally, MM cells interfere with physiological bone remodeling by releasing OC-promoting cytokines, such as RANKL, IL-1, IL-6, CCL3, and CCL20. Moreover, MM cells are also responsible for the inhibition of osteogenesis, as they upregulate OB inhibitors, including DKK1 and Scl [ 21 , 35 , 36 ].
Therapeutic strategies targeting pathophysiologic interactions between MM cells, OCs, and OBs in the bone marrow microenvironment are key to deferring the onset of SREs, avoiding bone lesions, and achieving tumor regression. BPs and denosumab are bone-modifying agents with anticatabolic properties that are recommended for the treatment of MBD. Other potential therapeutic targets include DKK1 and Scl antagonists [ 25 , 28 , 33 ]. Standard anti-MM agents, such as proteasome inhibitors, are also known to influence osteolytic lesions [ 78 ]. The novel agents under investigation are summarized in Table 2 .
6. Conclusions
MBD is one of the main causes of death in patients with MM, even in patients in remission. This bone disease is caused by an imbalance in bone remodeling, with increased OC and decreased OB activity and formation, culminating in lytic bone destruction. The survival outcomes and quality of life of MM patients are improved with the administration of new agents. BP and RANKL inhibitors are the current standard of care. However, their limited efficacy, inability to promote new bone formation, and concerns over their safety profile demonstrate the strong potential utility of bone anabolic agents. Although patients’ survival increases with treatment with these inhibitors, it is necessary to introduce more effective agents for the treatment of MBD. As the molecular mechanisms guiding MBD are increasingly well-understood, new therapeutic targets are being broadly investigated in the preclinical setting, and clinical trials with novel agents are yielding promising results. Mounting evidence of the benefits of bone anabolic agents, such as anti-DKK-1, anti-RANKL, antisclerostin, and anti-TGF-β, will herald improvements in the treatment of MBD. With many agents in clinical trials and many target factors identified, combination treatment demonstrates the greatest potential for the management of MBD. The reduction in bone resorption combined with new bone formation is necessary to reduce the burden of disease. Combining antiresorptive agents and antimyeloma therapies may also serve as a future treatment strategy for MBD. Further research is, however, necessary to validate these outcomes in patients and ultimately determine patients’ quality of life and survival.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Author Contributions
Writing—original draft preparation, J.-S.D.; writing—review and editing, H.-H.H. and C.-M.H.; supervision, C.-H.Y.; project administration, H.-H.H. and J.-S.D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research was supported by a grant from the Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital (KMUH108-8M15 and KMUH109-9R19).
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Abbreviations
References
1. Panaroni C. Yee A.J. Raje N.S. Myeloma and Bone Disease Curr. Osteoporos. Rep. 2017 15 483 498 10.1007/s11914-017-0397-5 28861842
2. Palumbo A. Anderson K. Multiple myeloma N. Engl. J. Med. 2011 364 1046 1060 10.1056/NEJMra1011442 21410373
3. Callander N.S. Roodman G.D. Myeloma bone disease Semin. Hematol. 2001 38 276 285 10.1016/S0037-1963(01)90020-4 11486316
4. Raje N. Roodman G.D. Advances in the Biology and Treatment of Bone Disease in Multiple Myeloma Clin. Cancer Res. 2011 17 1278 1286 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-1804 21411443
5. Webb S.L. Edwards C.M. Novel therapeutic targets in myeloma bone disease Br. J. Pharmacol. 2014 171 3765 3776 10.1111/bph.12742 24750110 PMC4128042
6. Corso A. Arcaini L. Mangiacavalli S. Astori C. Orlandi E. Lorenzi A. Passamonti F. Klersy C. Pascutto C. Canevari-Sciorati A. Biochemical markers of bone disease in asymptomatic early stage multiple myeloma. A study on their role in identifying high risk patients Haematology 2001 86 394 398 11325645
7. Terpos E. Politou M. Rahemtulla A. New insights into the pathophysiology and management of bone disease in multiple myeloma Br. J. Haematol. 2003 123 758 769 10.1046/j.1365-2141.2003.04712.x 14632767
8. Araki K. Sangai T. Miyamoto S. Maeda H. Zhang S.-C. Nakamura M. Ishii G. Hasebe T. Kusaka H. Akiyama T. Inhibition of bone-derived insulin-like growth factors by a ligand-specific antibody suppresses the growth of human multiple myeloma in the human adult bone explanted in NOD/SCID mouse Int. J. Cancer 2006 118 2602 2608 10.1002/ijc.21653 16353147
9. Giuliani N. Morandi F. Tagliaferri S. Rizzoli V. Targeting pathways mediating bone disease Curr. Pharm. Biotechnol. 2006 7 423 429 10.2174/138920106779116955 17168658
10. Heider U. Fleissner C. Zavrski I. Kaiser M. Hecht M. Jakob C. Sezer O. Bone markers in multiple myeloma Eur. J. Cancer 2006 42 1544 1553 10.1016/j.ejca.2005.11.034 16765040
11. Terpos E. Biochemical markers of bone metabolism in multiple myeloma Cancer Treat. Rev. 2006 32 15 19 10.1016/S0305-7372(06)80004-6 16680833
12. Roodman G.D. Targeting the bone microenvironment in multiple myeloma J. Bone Miner. Metab. 2010 28 244 250 10.1007/s00774-009-0154-7 20127498
13. Roodman G. Erratum to? Pathogenesis of myeloma bone disease? Blood Cells Mol. Dis. 2004 109 283 291 10.1016/s1079-9796(04)00096-8 15003820
14. Labropoulou V. Theocharis A. Symeonidis A. Skandalis S. Karamanos N. Kalofonos H. Pathophysiology and Pharmacological Targeting of Tumor-Induced Bone Disease: Current Status and Emerging Therapeutic Interventions Curr. Med. Chem. 2011 18 1584 1598 10.2174/092986711795471275 21428887
15. Gavriatopoulou M. Dimopoulos M.A. Kastritis E. Terpos E. Emerging treatment approaches for myeloma-related bone disease Expert Rev. Hematol. 2017 10 217 228 10.1080/17474086.2017.1283213 28092987
16. Calimeri T. Battista E. Conforti F. Neri P. di Martino M.T. Rossi M. Foresta U. Piro E. Ferrara F. Amorosi A. A unique three-dimensional SCID-polymeric scaffold (SCID-synth-hu) model for in vivo expansion of human primary multiple myeloma cells Leukemia 2011 25 707 711 10.1038/leu.2010.300 21233838 PMC3089835
17. Gooding S. Edwards C.M. New approaches to targeting the bone marrow microenvironment in multiple myeloma Curr. Opin. Pharmacol. 2016 28 43 49 10.1016/j.coph.2016.02.013 27018230
18. Xi H. An R. Li L. Wang G. Tao Y. Gao L. Myeloma bone disease: Progress in pathogenesis Prog. Biophys. Mol. Biol. 2016 122 149 155 10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2016.08.003 27496181
19. O’Donnell E.K. Raje N.S. Myeloma bone disease: Pathogenesis and treatment Clin. Adv. Hematol. Oncol. H&O 2017 15 285 295 28591104
20. Yee A.J. Raje N.S. Denosumab for the treatment of bone disease in solid tumors and multiple myeloma Future Oncol. 2018 14 195 203 10.2217/fon-2017-0403 29052442
21. Terpos E. Ntanasis-Stathopoulos I. Dimopoulos M.A. Myeloma bone disease: From biology findings to treatment ap-proaches Blood 2019 133 1534 1539 10.1182/blood-2018-11-852459 30760454
22. Berenson J.R. Myeloma bone disease Best Pract. Res. Clin. Haematol. 2005 18 653 672 10.1016/j.beha.2005.03.001 16026743
23. Huston A. Roodman G.D. Role of the microenvironment in multiple myeloma bone disease Future Oncol. 2006 2 371 378 10.2217/14796694.2.3.371 16787117
24. Edwards C.M. Edwards J.R. Lwin S.T. Esparza J. Oyajobi B.O. McCluskey B. Munoz S. Grubbs B. Mundy G.R. Increasing Wnt signaling in the bone marrow microenvironment inhibits the development of myeloma bone disease and reduces tumor burden in bone in vivo Blood 2008 111 2833 2842 10.1182/blood-2007-03-077685 18094333 PMC2254537
25. Kaiser M. Mieth M. Liebisch P. Oberländer R. Rademacher J. Jakob C. Kleeberg L. Fleissner C. Braendle E. Peters M. Serum concentrations of DKK-1 correlate with the extent of bone disease in patients with multiple myeloma Eur. J. Haematol. 2008 80 490 494 10.1111/j.1600-0609.2008.01065.x 18331598
26. Terpos E. Efstathiou E. Christoulas D. Roussou M. Katodritou E. Dimopoulos M.-A. RANKL inhibition: Clinical implications for the management of patients with multiple myeloma and solid tumors with bone metastases Expert Opin. Biol. Ther. 2009 9 465 479 10.1517/14712590902845610 19344283
27. Johnson S.K. Stewart J.P. Bam R. Qu P. Barlogie B. van Rhee F. Shaughnessy J.D. Epstein J. Yaccoby S. CYR61/CCN1 overexpression in the myeloma microenvironment is associated with superior survival and reduced bone disease Blood 2014 124 2051 2060 10.1182/blood-2014-02-555813 25061178 PMC4186535
28. Feng X. Deng S. An G. Qin X. Sui W. Zou D. Qiu L. Xu Y. Detection of serum DKK1 in multiple myeloma and myeloma bone disease Zhonghua Xue Ye Xue Za Zhi 2015 36 682 685 26462639 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-2727.2015.08.011 PMC7348258
29. Gan Z.Y. Fitter S. van Dyke K. To L.B. Zannettino A.C. Martin S.K. The effect of the dual PI3K and mTOR inhibitor BEZ235 on tumour growth and osteolytic bone disease in multiple myeloma Eur. J. Haematol. 2014 94 343 354 10.1111/ejh.12436 25179233
30. Abe M. Mechanisms of myeloma-induced bone disease Clin. Calcium 2016 26 699 706 27117615
31. Loredana S. Santo L. Wein M.N. Hu D.Z. Cirstea D.D. Nemani N. Tai Y.-T. Raines S.E. Kuhstoss S.A. Munshi N.C. Regulation of Sclerostin Expression in Multiple Myeloma by Dkk-1: A Potential Therapeutic Strategy for Myeloma Bone Disease J. Bone Miner. Res. 2016 31 1225 1234 10.1002/jbmr.2789 26763740 PMC5002355
32. Liu H. Peng F. Liu Z. Jiang F. Li L. Gao S. Wang G. Song J. Ruan E. Shao Z. CYR61/CCN1 stimulates proliferation and differentiation of osteoblasts in vitro and contributes to bone remodelling in vivo in myeloma bone disease Int. J. Oncol. 2016 50 631 639 10.3892/ijo.2016.3815 28035364
33. McDonald M.M. Delgado-Calle J. Sclerostin: An Emerging Target for the Treatment of Cancer-Induced Bone Disease Curr. Osteoporos. Rep. 2017 15 532 541 10.1007/s11914-017-0403-y 28956252
34. Heusschen R. Muller J. Duray E. Withofs N. Bolomsky A. Baron F. Beguin Y. Menu E. Ludwig H. Caers J. Molecular mechanisms, current management and next generation therapy in myeloma bone disease Leuk. Lymphoma 2018 59 14 28 10.1080/10428194.2017.1323272 28573897
35. Terpos E. Christoulas D. Gavriatopoulou M. Biology and treatment of myeloma related bone disease Metabolism 2018 80 80 90 10.1016/j.metabol.2017.11.012 29175022
36. Terpos E. Ntanasis-Stathopoulos I. Gavriatopoulou M. Dimopoulos M.A. Pathogenesis of bone disease in multiple myeloma: From bench to bedside Blood Cancer J. 2018 8 1 12 10.1038/s41408-017-0037-4 29330358 PMC5802524
37. Qiang Y.-W. Shaughnessy J.D. Yaccoby S. Wnt3a signaling within bone inhibits multiple myeloma bone disease and tumor growth Blood 2008 112 374 382 10.1182/blood-2007-10-120253 18344425 PMC2442747
38. Terpos E. Berenson J. Raje N. Roodman G.D. Management of bone disease in multiple myeloma Expert Rev. Hematol. 2014 7 113 125 10.1586/17474086.2013.874943 24433088
39. Gavriatopoulou M. Dimopoulos M.-A. Christoulas D. Migkou M. Iakovaki M. Gkotzamanidou M. Terpos E. Dickkopf-1: A suitable target for the management of myeloma bone disease Expert Opin. Ther. Targets 2009 13 839 848 10.1517/14728220903025770 19530987
40. Delgado-Calle J. Anderson J. Cregor M.D. Condon K.W. Kuhstoss S.A. Plotkin L.I. Bellido T. Roodman G.D. Genetic deletion of Sost or pharmacological inhibition of sclerostin prevent multiple myeloma-induced bone disease without affecting tumor growth Leukemia 2017 31 2686 2694 10.1038/leu.2017.152 28529307 PMC5699973
41. Pitari M.R. Rossi M. Amodio N. Botta C. Morelli E. Federico C. Gullà A. Caracciolo D. di Martino M.T. Arbitrio M. Inhibition of miR-21 restores RANKL/OPG ratio in multiple myeloma-derived bone marrow stromal cells and impairs the resorbing activity of mature osteoclasts Oncotarget 2015 6 27343 27358 10.18632/oncotarget.4398 26160841 PMC4694994
42. Yen C.-H. Hsiao H.-H. NRF2 Is One of the Players Involved in Bone Marrow Mediated Drug Resistance in Multiple Myeloma Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2018 19 3503 10.3390/ijms19113503 30405034 PMC6274683
43. Yen C.-H. Hsu C.-M. Hsiao S.Y. Hsiao H.-H. Pathogenic Mechanisms of Myeloma Bone Disease and Possible Roles for NRF2 Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020 21 6723 10.3390/ijms21186723 PMC7555756 32937821
44. Pennisi A. Ling W. Li X. Khan S. Shaughnessy J.D. Jr. Barlogie B. Yaccoby S. The ephrinB2/EphB4 axis is dysreg-ulated in osteoprogenitors from myeloma patients and its activation affects myeloma bone disease and tumor growth Blood 2009 114 1803 1812 10.1182/blood-2009-01-201954 19597185 PMC2738568
45. Takeuchi K. Abe M. Hiasa M. Oda A. Amou H. Kido S. Harada T. Tanaka O. Miki H. Nakamura S. Tgf-Beta inhibition restores terminal osteoblast differentiation to suppress myeloma growth PLoS ONE 2010 5 e9870 10.1371/journal.pone.0009870 20360846 PMC2845613
46. Negishi-Koga T. Shinohara M. Komatsu N. Bito H. Kodama T. Friedel R.H. Takayanagi H. Suppression of bone formation by osteoclastic expression of semaphorin 4D Nat. Med. 2011 17 1473 1480 10.1038/nm.2489 22019888
47. Garcia-Gomez A. Quwaider D. Canavese M. Ocio E.M. Tian Z. Blanco J.F. Berger A.J. Ortiz-De-Solorzano C. Hernández-Iglesias T. Martens A.C. Preclinical Activity of the Oral Proteasome Inhibitor MLN9708 in Myeloma Bone Disease Clin. Cancer Res. 2014 20 1542 1554 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-1657 24486586
48. Schwarzer R. Nickel N. Godau J. Willie B.M. Duda G.N. Cirovic B. Leutz A. A Manz R. Bogen B. Dorken B. Notch pathway inhibition controls myeloma bone disease in the murine MOPC315.BM model Blood Cancer J. 2014 4 e217 10.1038/bcj.2014.37 24927406 PMC4080208
49. Hideshima T. Chauhan D. Schlossman R. Richardson P. Anderson K.C. The role of tumor necrosis factor α in the pathophysiology of human multiple myeloma: Therapeutic applications Oncogene 2001 20 4519 4527 10.1038/sj.onc.1204623 11494147
50. Wang Y. Pivonka P. Buenzli P.R. Smith D.W. Dunstan C.R. Computational modeling of interactions between mul-tiple myeloma and the bone microenvironment PLoS ONE 2011 6 e27494 22110661 10.1371/journal.pone.0027494 PMC3210790
51. Weng W.-W. Dong M.-J. Zhang J. Yang J. Xu Q. Zhu Y.-J. Liu N.-H. A systematic review of MRI, scintigraphy, FDG-PET and PET/CT for diagnosis of multiple myeloma related bone disease-which is best? Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev. 2014 15 9879 9884 10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.22.9879 25520122
52. Tang W. Da Y. Lin Q. Li H. Gao X. Zhou D. Zhuang J. The value of chest computerized tomography in evaluation of bone disease and clinical prognosis of multiple myeloma Zhonghua Nei ke za Zhi 2015 54 711 715 26674628
53. Wang Y. Yee A.J. Sirard C. Landau S. Raje N. Mahmood U. Sodium fluoride PET imaging as a quantitative phar-macodynamic biomarker for bone homeostasis during anti-DKK1 therapy for multiple myeloma Blood Cancer J. 2017 7 e615 10.1038/bcj.2017.95 28984867 PMC5678221
54. Wu P. Walker B.A. Brewer D. Gregory W.M. Ashcroft J. Ross F.M. Jackson G.H. Child A.J. Davies F.E. Morgan G.J. A Gene Expression–Based Predictor for Myeloma Patients at High Risk of Developing Bone Disease on Bisphosphonate Treatment Clin. Cancer Res. 2011 17 6347 6355 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-0994 21856767 PMC3866998
55. Berenson J.R. Lichtenstein A. Porter L. Dimopoulos M.A. Bordoni R. George S. Lipton A. Keller A. Ballester O. Kovacs M.J. Efficacy of Pamidronate in Reducing Skeletal Events in Patients with Advanced Multiple Myeloma N. Engl. J. Med. 1996 334 488 493 10.1056/NEJM199602223340802 8559201
56. Rosen L.S. Gordon D. Kaminski M. Howell A. Belch A. Mackey J. Apffelstaedt J. Hussein M. E Coleman R. Reitsma D.J. Zoledronic acid versus pamidronate in the treatment of skeletal metastases in patients with breast cancer or osteolytic lesions of multiple myeloma: A phase III, double-blind, comparative trial Cancer J. 2001 7 377 387 11693896
57. Gimsing P. Carlson K. Turesson I. Fayers P. Waage A. Vangsted A. Mylin A. Gluud C. Juliusson G. Gregersen H. Effect of pamidronate 30 mg versus 90 mg on physical function in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (Nordic Myeloma Study Group): A double-blind, randomised controlled trial Lancet Oncol. 2010 11 973 982 10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70198-4 20863761
58. Morgan G.J. E Davies F. Gregory W.M. Cocks K. E Bell S. Szubert A.J. Navarro-Coy N. Drayson M.T. Owen R.G. Feyler S. First-line treatment with zoledronic acid as compared with clodronic acid in multiple myeloma (MRC Myeloma IX): A randomised controlled trial Lancet 2010 376 1989 1999 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)62051-X 21131037 PMC3639680
59. Himelstein A.L. Foster J.C. Khatcheressian J.L. Roberts J.D. Seisler D.K. Novotny P.J. Qin R. Go R.S. Grubbs S.S. O’Connor T. Effect of Longer-Interval vs Standard Dosing of Zoledronic Acid on Skeletal Events in Patients with Bone Metastases: A Randomized Clinical Trial Jama 2017 317 48 58 10.1001/jama.2016.19425 28030702 PMC5321662
60. Raje N. Terpos E. Willenbacher W. Shimizu K. García-Sanz R. Durie B. Legieć W. Krejčí M. Laribi K. Zhu L. Denosumab versus zoledronic acid in bone disease treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: An international, double-blind, double-dummy, randomised, controlled, phase 3 study Lancet Oncol. 2018 19 370 381 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30072-X 29429912
61. Locke F.L. Morgan G.J. What is the evidence for the use of bisphosphonate therapy in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients lacking bone disease? Hematology 2012 2012 350 353 10.1182/asheducation.V2012.1.350.3806855 23233603
62. Terpos E. Bisphosphonate anticancer activity in multiple myeloma Anti-Cancer Agents Med. Chem. 2012 12 123 128 10.2174/187152012799014986 21864228
63. Søe K. Plesner T. Jakobsen E.H. Hansen C.T. Jørgensen H.B. Delaisse J.-M. Is retention of zoledronic acid onto bone different in multiple myeloma and breast cancer patients with bone metastasis? J. Bone Miner. Res. 2013 28 1738 1750 10.1002/jbmr.1897 23427025
64. Izumi T. Management of bone disease in multiple myeloma Gan kagaku ryoho. Cancer Chemother. 2012 39 1187 1190 22902442
65. Jeon H.-L. Oh I.-S. Baek Y.-H. Yang H. Park J. Hong S. Shin J.-Y. Zoledronic acid and skeletal-related events in patients with bone metastatic cancer or multiple myeloma J. Bone Miner. Metab. 2020 38 254 263 10.1007/s00774-019-01052-6 31673791
66. Goldstein D.A. Denosumab for bone lesions in multiple myeloma—What is its value? Haematology 2018 103 753 754 10.3324/haematol.2017.185264 PMC5927995 29712820
67. Alegre A. Gironella M. Bailén A. Giraldo P. Zoledronic acid in the management of bone disease as a consequence of multiple myeloma: A review Eur. J. Haematol. 2014 92 181 188 10.1111/ejh.12239 24330023
68. Clark R.E. Fraser W.D. Bone Turnover Following Autologous Transplantation in Multiple Myeloma Leuk. Lymphoma 2002 43 511 516 10.1080/10428190290011985 12002753
69. Terpos E. Politou M. Szydlo R. Nadal E. Avery S. Olavarria E. Kanfer E. Goldman J.M. Apperley J.F. Rahemtulla A. Autologous stem cell transplantation normalizes abnormal bone remodeling and sRANKL/osteoprotegerin ratio in pa-tients with multiple myeloma Leukemia 2004 18 1420 1426 10.1038/sj.leu.2403423 15215875
70. Neri P. Ren L. Gratton K. Stebner E. Johnson J. Klimowicz A. Duggan P. Tassone P. Mansoor A. Stewart U.A. Bortezomib-induced “BRCAness” sensitizes multiple myeloma cells to PARP inhibitors Blood 2011 118 6368 6379 10.1182/blood-2011-06-363911 21917757 PMC4348156
71. Terpos E. Heath D.J. Rahemtulla A. Zervas K. Chantry A. Anagnostopoulos A. Pouli A. Katodritou E. Verrou E. Vervessou E.C. Bortezomib reduces serum dickkopf-1 and receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappaB ligand con-centrations and normalises indices of bone remodelling in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma Br. J. Haematol. 2006 135 688 692 10.1111/j.1365-2141.2006.06356.x 17107351
72. Hamasaki M. Hideshima T. Tassone P. Neri P. Ishitsuka K. Yasui H. Shiraishi N. Raje N. Kumar S. Picker D.H. Azaspirane (N-N-diethyl-8,8-dipropyl-2-azaspiro [4.5] decane-2-propanamine) inhibits human multiple myeloma cell growth in the bone marrow milieu in vitro and in vivo Blood 2005 105 4470 4476 10.1182/blood-2004-09-3794 15705788 PMC1895034
73. Yasui H. Hideshima T. Hamasaki M. Roccaro A.M. Shiraishi N. Kumar S. Tassone P. Ishitsuka K. Raje N. Tai Y.-T. SDX-101, the R-enantiomer of etodolac, induces cytotoxicity, overcomes drug resistance, and enhances the activity of dexamethasone in multiple myeloma Blood 2005 106 706 712 10.1182/blood-2005-02-0838 15802527 PMC1895170
74. Burger R. le Gouill S. Tai Y.-T. Shringarpure R. Tassone P. Neri P. Podar K. Catley L. Hideshima T. Chauhan D. Janus kinase inhibitor INCB20 has antiproliferative and apoptotic effects on human myeloma cells in vitro and in vivo Mol. Cancer Ther. 2009 8 26 35 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-08-0149 19139110 PMC3418602
75. Holien T. Sundan A. Oncogene addiction to c-MYC in myeloma cells Oncotarget 2012 3 739 740 10.18632/oncotarget.631 22964579 PMC3478451
76. Maes K. de Smedt E. Lemaire M. de Raeve H. Menu E. van Valckenborgh E. McClue S. Vanderkerken K. de Bruyne E. The role of DNA damage and repair in decitabine-mediated apoptosis in multiple myeloma Oncotarget 2014 5 3115 3129 10.18632/oncotarget.1821 24833108 PMC4102796
77. Roodman G.D. Mechanisms of Bone Metastasis N. Engl. J. Med. 2004 350 1655 1664 10.1056/NEJMra030831 15084698
78. Deleu S. Lemaire M. Arts J. Menu E. van Valckenborgh E. Broek I.V. de Raeve H. Coulton L. van Camp B. Croucher P. Bortezomib Alone or in Combination with the Histone Deacetylase Inhibitor JNJ-26481585: Effect on Myeloma Bone Disease in the 5T2MM Murine Model of Myeloma Cancer Res. 2009 69 5307 5311 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-4472 19531653
79. Vallet S. Raje N. Ishitsuka K. Hideshima T. Podar K. Chhetri S. Pozzi S. Breitkreutz I. Kiziltepe T. Yasui H. MLN3897, a novel CCR1 inhibitor, impairs osteoclastogenesis and inhibits the interaction of multiple myeloma cells and osteoclasts Blood 2007 110 3744 3752 10.1182/blood-2007-05-093294 17715391 PMC2077320
80. Fu R. Liu H. Zhao S. Wang Y. Li L. Gao S. Ruan E. Wang G. Wang H. Song J. Osteoblast inhibition by chemokine cytokine ligand3 in myeloma-induced bone disease Cancer Cell Int. 2014 14 132 10.1186/s12935-014-0132-6 25520585 PMC4268854
81. Scullen T. Santo L. Vallet S. Fulciniti M. Eda H. Cirstea D. Patel K. Nemani N. Yee A. Mahindra A. Le-nalidomide in combination with an activin A-neutralizing antibody: Preclinical rationale for a novel anti-myeloma strategy Leukemia 2013 27 1715 1721 10.1038/leu.2013.50 23417027
82. Abdulkadyrov K.M. Salogub G.N. Khuazheva N.K. Sherman M.L. Laadem A. Barger R. Knight R. Srinivasan S. Terpos E. Sotatercept in patients with osteolytic lesions of multiple myeloma Br. J. Haematol. 2014 165 814 823 10.1111/bjh.12835 24650009 PMC4312883
83. Fulciniti M. Hideshima T. Vermot-Desroches C. Pozzi S. Nanjappa P. Shen Z. Patel N. Smith E.S. Wang W. Prabhala R. A High-Affinity Fully Human Anti-IL-6 mAb, 1339, for the Treatment of Multiple Myeloma Clin. Cancer Res. 2009 15 7144 7152 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-09-1483 19934301 PMC2787636
84. Noonan K. Marchionni L. Anderson J. Pardoll D. Roodman G.D. Borrello I. A novel role of IL-17-producing lym-phocytes in mediating lytic bone disease in multiple myeloma Blood 2010 116 3554 3563 10.1182/blood-2010-05-283895 20664052 PMC4017298
85. Prabhala R.H. Fulciniti M. Pelluru D. Rashid N.U. Nigroiu A. Nanjappa P. Pai C. Lee S. Prabhala N.S. Bandi R.L. Targeting IL-17A in multiple myeloma: A potential novel therapeutic approach in myeloma Leukemia 2016 30 379 389 10.1038/leu.2015.228 26293646 PMC4740263
86. Kobune M. Chiba H. Kato J. Kato K. Nakamura K. Kawano Y. Takada K. Takimoto R. Takayama T. Hamada H. Wnt3/RhoA/ROCK signaling pathway is involved in adhesion-mediated drug resistance of multiple myeloma in an autocrine mechanism Mol. Cancer Ther. 2007 6 1774 1784 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-06-0684 17575106
87. Kleber M. Ntanasis-Stathopoulos I. Dimopoulos M.A. Terpos E. Monoclonal antibodies against RANKL and sclerostin for myeloma-related bone disease: Can they change the standard of care? Expert Rev. Hematol. 2019 12 651 663 10.1080/17474086.2019.1640115 31268745
88. Kaveh S. Hosseinifard H. Ghadimi N. Vojdanian M. Aryankhesal A. Efficacy and safety of Romosozumab in treat-ment for low bone mineral density: A systematic review and meta-analysis Clin. Rheumatol. 2020 39 3261 3276 10.1007/s10067-020-04948-1 32385757
89. Tian E. Zhan F. Walker R. Rasmussen E. Ma Y. Barlogie B. Shaughnessy J.D. Jr. The Role of the Wnt-Signaling Antagonist DKK1 in the Development of Osteolytic Lesions in Multiple Myeloma N. Engl. J. Med. 2003 349 2483 2494 10.1056/NEJMoa030847 14695408
90. Vallet S. Filzmoser J.-M. Pecherstorfer M. Podar K. Myeloma Bone Disease: Update on Pathogenesis and Novel Treatment Strategies Pharmaceutics 2018 10 202 10.3390/pharmaceutics10040202 PMC6321035 30355994
91. Fowler J.A. Edwards C.M. Croucher P.I. Tumor–host cell interactions in the bone disease of myeloma Bone 2011 48 121 128 10.1016/j.bone.2010.06.029 20615487 PMC3005983