Osteolytic bone lesions are one of the central features of multiple myeloma (MM) and lead to bone pain, fractures, decreased quality of life, and decreased survival. Dysfunction of the osteoclast (OC)/osteoblast (OB) axis plays a key role in the development of myeloma-associated osteolytic lesions. Many signaling pathways and factors are associated with myeloma bone diseases (MBDs), including the RANKL/OPG and NF-κB pathways. NRF2, a master regulator of inflammatory signaling, might play a role in the regulation of bone metabolism via anti-inflammatory signaling and decreased reactive oxygen species (ROS) levels. The loss of NRF2 expression in OCs reduced bone mass via the RANK/RANKL pathway and other downstream signaling pathways that affect osteoclastogenesis. The NRF2 level in OBs could interfere with interleukin (IL)-6 expression, which is associated with bone metabolism and myeloma cells. In addition to direct impact on OCs and OBs, the activity of NRF2 on myeloma cells and mesenchymal stromal cells influences the inflammatory stress/ROS level in these cells, which has an impact on OCs, OBs, and osteocytes. The interaction between these cells and OCs affects the osteoclastogenesis of myeloma bone lesions associated with NRF2. Therefore, we have reviewed the effects of NRF2 on OCs and OBs in MBDs.

Multiple myeloma is a hematologic malignancy of plasma cells that causes bone-destructive lesions and associated skeletal-related events (SREs). The pathogenesis of myeloma-related bone disease (MBD) is the imbalance of the bone-remodeling process, which results from osteoclast activation, osteoblast suppression, and the immunosuppressed bone marrow microenvironment. Many important signaling cascades, including the RANKL/RANK/OPG axis, Notch signaling, the Wnt/β-Catenin signaling pathways, and signaling molecules, such as DKK-1, sclerostin, osteopontin, activin A, chemokines, and interleukins are involved and play critical roles in MBD. Currently, bisphosphonate and denosumab are the gold standard for MBD prevention and treatment. As the molecular mechanisms of MBD become increasingly well understood, novel agents are being thoroughly explored in both preclinical and clinical settings. Herein, we will provide an updated overview of the pathogenesis of MBD, summarize the clinical management and guidelines, and discuss novel bone-modifying therapies for further management of MBD.

There is still a significant lack of knowledge regarding many aspects of the etiopathology and consequences of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) infection in humans. For example, the variety of molecular mechanisms mediating this infection, and the long‐term consequences of the disease remain poorly understood. It first seemed like the SARS‐CoV‐2 infection primarily caused a serious respiratory syndrome. However, over the last years, an increasing number of studies also pointed towards the damaging effects of this infection has on the central nervous system (CNS). In fact, evidence suggests a possible disruption of the blood–brain barrier and deleterious effects on the CNS, especially in patients who already suffer from other pathologies, such as neurodegenerative disorders. The molecular mechanisms behind these effects on the CNS could involve the dysregulation of mitochondrial physiology, a well‐known early marker of neurodegeneration and a hallmark of aging. Moreover, mitochondria are involved in the activation of the inflammatory response, which has also been broadly described in the CNS in COVID‐19. Here, we critically review the current bibliography regarding the presence of neurodegenerative symptoms in COVID‐19 patients, with a special emphasis on the mitochondrial mechanisms of these disorders.

Transmission of hepatitis C virus (HCV) to recipients of hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) occurs frequently from HCV viremic donors and causes complications. Here, we report the outcomes of 3 cases from our 265 allogeneic HSCTs, whose donors had HCV infections. Successful prevention of HCV transmission was noted in 1 recipient by pretreatment of the donor with peginterferon/ribavirin to undetectable levels of HCV viremia before stem cell harvest. This case stressed the important role of effective antiviral therapy and HCV RNA seronegativity before cell harvest for prevention of HCV transmission in HSCT.

Considering a steady increase in the number of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantations (allo-HSCT) worldwide and the significant proportion of the world’s population that has been exposed to hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, HBV reactivation following allo-HSCT remains an important issue for post-transplant morbidity and mortality. Antiviral prophylaxis can reduce HBV replication, severity of HBV-related hepatitis, and mortality; therefore, identification of patients at risk is crucial. It is recommended that all recipients and donors should be screened for active or prior HBV infection, including HBsAg, antiHBc, and antiHBs. Adoptive immunity transfer from the donor seems to have protective effects against HBV reactivation. Antiviral prophylaxis should be initiated in all HBsAg-positive patients. HBsAg-negative, antiHBc-positive patients remain at risk; therefore, antiviral prophylaxis should be considered if baseline serum HBV DNA is detectable. In HBsAg-negative, antiHBc-positive patients without detectable HBV DNA, close monitoring of viral load with an on-demand therapy is necessary. Entecavir or tenofovir rather than lamivudine are more appropriate for the emergence of lamivudine resistance. The treatment duration remains unclear, with 6- to 12-month therapy after cessation of immunosuppressive therapy commonly recommended. Here we review the updated evidence and recent recommendations regarding HBV reactivation in patients undergoing allo-HSCT for individualized therapy.

Background: Carfilzomib, the proteasome inhibitor, can increase the overall survival rate of multiple myeloma (MM) patients undergoing targeted therapy. However, relapse and toxicity present great challenges for such treatment, so an urgent need for effective combination therapy is necessary. Emodin is a natural chemical compound that inhibits the proliferation of various cancers and can effectively combine with other treatments. In this study, we evaluated the sensitizing effect of emodin combined with carfilzomib on MM cells. Methods: The cells were treated with emodin, carfilzomib, and a combination of drugs to determine their effects on cell proliferation and viability. The cell cycle distribution and reactive oxygen species (ROS) expression were measured by flow cytometry. The level of RNA and protein were analyzed through real-time qPCR and immunoblotting. Results: Emodin acted synergistically with carfilzomib to reduce the proliferation and viability of MM cell lines in vitro. Furthermore, the combination of emodin and carfilzomib increased ROS production, inducing apoptosis and autophagy pathways via caspase-3, PARP, p62, and LC3B. Conclusions: These results provide a molecular target for combination therapy in MM patients.

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treating transplant-ineligible myeloma patients with either a bortezomib plus thalidomide plus dexamethasone (VTD) or a bortezomib plus melphalan plus prednisolone (VMP) treatment in Taiwan. Methods: Newly diagnosed, transplant-ineligible myeloma patients with VTD or VMP therapy were enrolled from two medical centers in southern Taiwan. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were used as the measurement unit of the effectiveness evaluation, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was used for comparison between the two groups. A net monetary benefit approach and cost-effectiveness acceptability curve were also used for the cost-effectiveness assessment. A one-way sensitivity analysis was used to check the impact of different parameters. In total, 77 patients were enrolled in the study with 43 patients in the VTD group and 34 patients in the VMP group. Clinical presentations were similar without significant difference, except the VTD group had a higher survival rate (p = 0.029). Comparisons of the two groups over an eight-month time horizon revealed a significant lower mean of direct medical costs in the VTD group than in the VMP group (p < 0.001), and a significantly higher average QALY was gained (p < 0.001). Conclusions: The study demonstrated the greater clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of VTD compared to VMP therapy in transplant-ineligible, newly diagnosed myeloma patients.

No abstract