Multiple myeloma (MM) is a hematological malignancy resulting from the uncontrolled proliferation of antibody-producing plasma cells in the bone marrow. At diagnosis, independent plasma cell tumors are found throughout the skeleton. The recirculation of mutant plasma cells from the initial lesion and their recolonization of distant marrow sites are thought to occur by a process similar to solid tumor metastasis. However, the efficiency of this bone marrow homing process and the proportion of disseminated cells that actively divide and contribute to new tumor growth in MM are both unknown. We used the C57BL/KaLwRij mouse model of myeloma, lentiviral-mediated DNA barcoding of 5TGM1 myeloma cells, and next-generation sequencing to investigate the relative efficiency of plasma cell migration to, and growth within, the bone marrow. This approach revealed three major findings: firstly, establishment of metastasis within the bone marrow was extremely inefficient, with approximately 0.01% of circulating myeloma cells becoming resident long term in the bone marrow of each long bone; secondly, the individual cells of each metastasis exhibited marked differences in their proliferative fates, with the majority of final tumor burden within a bone being attributable to the progeny of between 1 and 8 cells; and, thirdly, the proliferative fate of individual clonal plasma cells differed at each bone marrow site in which the cells “landed.” These findings suggest that individual myeloma plasma cells are subjected to vastly different selection pressures within the bone marrow microenvironment, highlighting the importance of niche-driven factors, which determine the disease course and outcome.

Multiple myeloma, a plasma cell malignancy, is a genetically heterogeneous disease and the genetic factors that contribute to its development and progression remain to be fully elucidated. The tumour suppressor gene GLIPR1 has previously been shown to be deleted in approximately 10% of myeloma patients, to inhibit the development of plasma cell tumours in ageing mice and to have reduced expression levels in the plasma cells of patients with light-chain amyloidosis, a myeloma-related malignancy. Therefore, we hypothesised that GLIPR1 may have tumour suppressor activity in multiple myeloma. In this study, we demonstrate that plasma cell expression of GLIPR1 is reduced in the majority of myeloma patients and Glipr1 expression is lost in the 5TGM1 murine myeloma cell line. However, overexpression of GLIPR1 in a human myeloma cell line did not affect cell proliferation in vitro. Similarly, re-expression of Glipr1 in 5TGM1 cells did not significantly reduce their in vitro proliferation or in vivo growth in C57BL/KaLwRij mice. In addition, using CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing, we generated C57BL/Glipr1-/mice and showed that loss of Glipr1 in vivo did not affect normal haematopoiesis or the development of monoclonal plasma cell expansions in these mice up to one year of age. Taken together, our results suggest that GLIPR1 is unlikely to be a potent tumour suppressor in multiple myeloma. However, it remains possible that the down-regulation of GLIPR1 may cooperate with other genetic lesions to promote the development of myeloma.

The protein SAMSN1 was recently identified as a putative tumor suppressor in multiple myeloma, with re‐expression of Samsn1 in the 5TGM1/KaLwRij murine model of myeloma leading to a near complete abrogation of intramedullary tumor growth. Here, we sought to clarify the mechanism underlying this finding. Intratibial administration of 5TGM1 myeloma cells into KaLwRij mice revealed that Samsn1 had no effect on primary tumor growth, but that its expression significantly inhibited the metastasis of these primary tumors. Notably, neither in vitro nor in vivo migration was affected by Samsn1 expression. Both knocking‐out SAMSN1 in the RPMI‐8226 and JJN3 human myeloma cell lines, and retrovirally expressing SAMSN1 in the LP‐1 and OPM2 human myeloma cell lines had no effect on either cell proliferation or migration in vitro. Altering SAMSN1 expression in these human myeloma cells did not affect the capacity of the cells to establish either primary or metastatic intramedullary tumors when administered intratibially into immune deficient NSG mice. Unexpectedly, the tumor suppressive and anti‐metastatic activity of Samsn1 in 5TGM1 cells were not evidenced following cell administration either intratibially or intravenously to NSG mice. Crucially, the growth of Samsn1‐expressing 5TGM1 cells was limited in C57BL/6/Samsn1−/− mice but not in C57BL/6 Samsn1+/+ mice. We conclude that the reported potent in vivo tumor suppressor activity of Samsn1 can be attributed, in large part, to graft‐rejection from Samsn1−/− recipient mice. This has broad implications for the design and interpretation of experiments that utilize cancer cells and knockout mice that are mismatched for expression of specific proteins.