Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Jul 1;12(13):4440.
doi: 10.3390/jcm12134440.

Dynamics of Bone Disease Biomarkers Dickkopf-1 and Sclerostin in Patients with Multiple Myeloma

Affiliations

Dynamics of Bone Disease Biomarkers Dickkopf-1 and Sclerostin in Patients with Multiple Myeloma

Vladimir Gerov et al. J Clin Med. .

Abstract

Dickkopf-1 (DKK-1) and sclerostin are essential Wnt/β-catenin pathway inhibitors, playing an important role in multiple myeloma bone disease (MBD). We aimed to examine the serum DKK-1 and sclerostin variations in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients at diagnosis and in the course of therapy, including autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). This study included 41 NDMM-patients and 33 controls. MBD was assessed by whole-body low-dose computed tomography. DKK-1 and sclerostin were assayed by commercial ELISA kits. At diagnosis, NDMM-patients revealed significantly higher DKK-1 and sclerostin values (p < 0.0001), showing dependence on disease stage (lowest in ISS-I and highest in ISS-III: p < 0.0012 and p < 0.025, respectively, for both proteins). Bone lesions revealed significant positive correlation with both DKK-1 (p < 0.05) and sclerostin (p < 0.0001). In the course of therapy, significant reduction, more prominent after ASCT, was observed for both parameters in each treatment point compared to the baseline (p < 0.0001). Markedly lower sclerostin (p < 0.01) and DKK-1 (p < 0.05) values were observed in patients with complete and very good partial response compared to those with partial response, stable, or progressive disease. Sclerostin and DKK-1 in NDMM patients reflect the MBD severity and the effect of therapy. Both proteins could represent a novel tool for better disease monitoring and effectiveness of therapy.

Keywords: Dickkopf-1; multiple myeloma bone disease; sclerostin.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funder had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Serum levels of sclerostin and DKK-1 in controls and patients at baseline. Statistical significance was indicated at p < 0.05.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Comparison of serum levels of sclerostin and DKK-1 in NDMM patients, stratified according to the ISS staging system. Statistical significance was indicated at p < 0.05.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Correlations of DKK-1 and sclerostin with Hb, albumin, and B2MG. Hb–hemoglobin; Alb—albumin, Β2MG—ß2 microglobulin. Statistical significance was indicated at p < 0.05.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Serum levels of sclerostin and DKK-1 in NDMM patients stratified by the number of bone lesions. G1—patients with ≤3 osteolytic lesions, G2—patients >3 osteolytic lesions and/or presence of bone fractures. Statistical significance was indicated at p < 0.05.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Serum levels of sclerostin and DKK-1 in NDMM patients, stratified according to BMI by MPCs. BMI—bone marrow infiltration; MPCs—multiple myeloma plasma cells. Statistical significance was indicated at p < 0.05.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Sclerostin and Dickkopf-1 assessed at different time points. T0—at diagnosis; T1—after 4 cycles of chemotherapy; T2—after another 4 cycles (8 cycles) of chemotherapy; TA—after autologous stem cell transplantation. Statistical significance was indicated at p < 0.05.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Sclerostin and Dickkopf-1 according to the treatment response. CR—complete response, VGPR—very good partial response, PR—partial response, SD—stable disease, PD—progressive disease. Statistical significance was indicated at p < 0.05.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Siegel R., Ma J., Zou Z., Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J. Clin. 2014;64:9–29. doi: 10.3322/caac.21208. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cowan A.J., Allen C., Barac A., Basaleem H., Bensenor I., Curado M.P., Foreman K., Gupta R., Harvey J., Hosgood H.D., et al. Global Burden of Multiple Myeloma: A Systematic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4:1221–1227. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.2128. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. 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;8:7. doi: 10.1038/s41408-017-0037-4. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Panaroni C., Yee A.J., Raje N.S. Myeloma and Bone Disease. Curr. Osteoporos. Rep. 2017;15:483–498. doi: 10.1007/s11914-017-0397-5. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mukkamalla S.K.R., Malipeddi D. Myeloma Bone Disease: A Comprehensive Review. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021;22:6208. doi: 10.3390/ijms22126208. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources