We selected 5 documented MGF for which recombinant MGF and inhibitors are commercially available to define a hierarchy of their biological action on HMCLs. We have found that IGF-1 is the major MGF in agreement with several studies
9,41, IL-6 an important one, and that HGF, EGF family and BAFF/APRIL act on a subset of HMCLs only. In serum-free cultures, only the 3 CD45
− HMCLs could survive within 4–6 days of culture through an autocrine IGF-1/IGF-1R loop. These cells coexpressed
IGF-1R and
IGF-1 genes and IGF-1R and IGF-1 proteins and the NVP-AEW541 IGF-1R inhibitor, unlike other MGF inhibitors, abrogated their survival. Regarding CD45
+ HMCLs, although an autocrine IGF-1/IGF-1R loop was present in 4/5 HMCLs, it was not sufficient to promote survival. But this autocrine IGF-1/IGF-1R loop was necessary for the growth activity of IL-6, HB-EGF or HGF when MMC expressed IGF-1R. Adding a high concentration of IL-6 (up to 30 ng/mL) could not rescue from apoptosis due to IGF-1 pathway inhibition (data not shown). The specificity of NVP-AEW541 for IGF-1R targeting was previously reported
35 and is emphasized here by its lack of effect on the IGF-1R
− XG-12 HMCL and its lack of inhibition of IL-6 or HGF-induced transduction signals. IL-6 increases proliferation of 7/8 HMCLs tested, but interestingly its effect is dependent on the presence of an autocrine IGF-1/IGF-1R loop when MMC expressed IGF-1R. IGF-1 is detected by western blot in myeloma cells but could not be detected in HMCL culture supernatant. This does not preclude a bioactive role of autocrine IGF-1 since the bioactive concentration of rIGF-1 on HMCLs (27 pg/mL) is below the detection limit of commercially available IGF-1 ELISA (≥ 45 pg/mL). In addition, the survival of the CD45
− HMCLs and the IL-6-induced stimulation of CD45
+ HMCLs in serum-free medium are also blocked by recombinant IGF-binding protein 3 (IGFBP-3), another IGF-1 inhibitor (results not shown). To study the cooperation between IL-6 and IGF-1, different techniques have been used focussing on different aspects that may yield to challenging conclusions
10,25,26. Our current data did not confirm a previous study showing that the IL-6-induced growth of CD45
+ HMCLs was not inhibited by an IGF-1R inhibitor
26. An explanation may be the use of foetal calf serum containing medium, which comprises IGF-1 but also insulin that stimulates MMC growth
42. We used here a serum-free culture medium, devoid of insulin, making it possible to unravel this major role of autocrine IGF-1. This matter is of great importance in view of anti-IGF-1 therapy. Indeed, the report by Descamps
et al. suggest that an anti-IGF-1R MoAb therapy will be unable to target CD45
+ MMC, that include the proliferating MMC
26. On the contrary, our data suggest that an IGF-1R inhibitor therapy could be useful in patients with
IGF-1Rpresent MMC, independently of CD45 expression. Only 2/8 HMCLs were stimulated by HGF although
c-Met is expressed by 7/8 HMCLs. Another HMCL is stimulated by HB-EGF, whereas 8/8 HMCLs expressed at least one of the 4 ErbB receptors
43. These effects were abrogated by the specific inhibitor of HGF or HB-EGF and also by the IGF-1R inhibitor, but not the anti-IL-6 MoAb, BCMA-FC and pan-ErbB kinase inhibitor (for HGF effect) or anti-HGF MoAb (for HB-EGF effect). Thus targeting IGF-1R could also help to block their activity. Only APRIL-activity is not affected by IGF-1R inhibition. Out of the 3 BAFF/APRIL receptors -
BAFF-R, TACI, BCMA - MMC expressed always
BCMA,
TACI in one third of HMCLs, and rarely
BAFF-R 44.
These in vitro data fit well with the prognostic value of receptor expression of these 5 MGF on MMC since only
IGF-1R and IL-6R expression have prognostic value using 2 independent patient series.
IGF-1R gene is not expressed by normal B and plasma cells, including plasmablastic cells. Thus
IGF-1R is aberrantly expressed by 31%–50% of MMC of previously-untreated patients. Of note, 90% of HMCLs expressed
IGF-1R. HMCLs are mainly obtained from patients with extramedullary proliferation
31,45 and this increased frequency of
IGF-1Rpresence in HMCLs compared to that in primary MMC may reflect an increase frequency of
IGF-1Rpresent MMC in patients with extramedullary proliferation. Alternatively, it might be due to the way of obtaining HMCLs using culture medium and serum that contain large amount of circulating IGF-1, thus favoring the growth of
IGF-1Rpresent MMC.
Presently, no conclusive data have been published regarding the prognostic value of IGF-1R on MMC
29,30. We have shown here that
IGF-1R expression is prognostically significant in two independent large sets of patients obtained in two centers, using different methods for the Affymetrix probe preparation (single or double in vitro transcription amplification) and two different Affymetrix platforms
3,46. The poor prognosis of patients with
IGF-1Rpresent MMC is not only explained by a strong association of
IGF-1Rpresent MMC and poor prognosis t(4;14) translocation and spiked MMSET expression
1. Indeed, patients with
IGF-1Rpresent MMC and unspiked
MMSET had also a significantly shorter survival than patients with
IGF-1Rabsent MMC. This might be explained by the increased proportion of patients with
IGF-1Rpresent MMC in the poor prognosis proliferation group (75.9% versus 49.9%)
3 and in patients with del17, another poor prognosis abnormality
1 that occurs independently of t(4;14). Noteworthy, we show here that IGF-1 is a major factor driving the proliferation of MMC, which could account for the proliferation signature. Patients with both
IGF-1Rpresent MMC and t(4;14) had the shortest survival. A possible explanation is that patients with t(4;14) need to acquire additional aberrations (e.g. aberrant expression of
IGF-1R) for the outbreak of overt MM.
MMC are “bathed” in high levels of IGF-1 in the tumor milieu in vivo. First, IGF-1 is directly produced in the bone marrow, by MMC and by osteoclasts. In addition, high levels of IGF-1 - bound to IGFBP-3 and ALS protein - circulate in patients with MM and healthy individuals
47 and serum levels of IGF-1 correlated with poor prognosis in patients with MM
28. These circulating IGF-1-IGFBP-3-ALS complexes can be captured by MMC that expressed highly syndecan-1, that bind IGFBP-3
47. IGFBP-3 binding to heparan sulfate chains weakens its affinity with IGF-1, which is thus able to bind membrane IGF-1R and exert its biological activity. In addition, MMC produce soluble syndecan-1, in particular though an heparanase controlled process
46,48,49, providing an extracellular matrix able to bind circulating IGF-1-IGFBP complexes and to release IGF-1 close to MMC.
IL-6R is variably expressed in MMC of all patients with MM. Dividing MM patients within two groups using
IL-6R median expression, we found that patients with
IL-6Rhigh MMC had a shorter survival. This might be explained by the increased proportion of patients of poor prognosis groups (proliferation, MAF and MMSET groups)
3 in
IL-6Rhigh group. Patients with both
IL-6Rhigh MMC and t(4;14) had a worst survival.
A message of this study is not that
IGF-1R expression can be useful to define new prognostic classification, as the adverse prognosis value of
IGF-1R expression is explained mainly by their expression in already identified poor prognosis groups,
i.e. t(4;14), del17 and proliferation groups. But a message is that the adverse prognosis value of
IGF-1R expression in MMC together with its major MGF activity emphasize that targeting IGF-1 could be promising for the treatment of patients with MM. A phase I study of anti-IGF-1R antibody therapy in patients with refractory MM was recently reported
50. This trial showed no toxicity and disease stabilization in about half of the patients. Since
IGF-1R is present on MMC of 30% to 50% of the newly-diagnosed patients,
IGF-1R expression on MMC should be evaluated in patients treated with anti-IGF-1 therapy. Anti-IL-6 MoAb treatment was also shown to block MMC proliferation with temporary disease stabilization
51. Thus, anti-IL-6 therapy could be a useful combination with an IGF-1 inhibitor.
In conclusion, this study makes it possible to define a hierarchy of the biological action of 5 well-documented MGF on HMCLs, IGF-1 being the major one, IL-6 an important one, and HGF, EGF family and BAFF/APRIL acting only on a subset of HMCLs. Of interest, this hierarchy of biological activity of these 5 MGF using HMCLs fully paralleled with the prognostic value of the expression of the genes of the receptors of these MGF in MMC since IGF-1R and IL-6R expressions in MMC had prognostic value. Thus, gene expression profiles of MMC and of the tumor environment is highly recommended for a better understanding and anticipation of the efficacy of growth factor targeted therapy in patients with MM.