Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma Patients Research Articles

EIF4G1 and RAN as Possible Drivers for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma.

For malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) novel therapeutic strategies are urgently needed. In a previous study, we identified 51 putative cancer genes over-expressed in MPM tissues and cell lines. Here, we deepened the study on nine of them (ASS1, EIF4G1, GALNT7, GLUT1, IGF2BP3 (IMP3), ITGA4, RAN, SOD1, and THBS2) to ascertain whether they are truly mesothelial cancer driver genes (CDGs) or genes overexpressed in an adaptive response to the tumoral progression (“passenger genes”). Through a fast siRNA-based screening, we evaluated the consequences of gene depletion on migration, proliferation, colony formation capabilities, and caspase activities of four MPM (Mero-14, Mero-25, IST-Mes2, and NCI-H28) and one SV40-immortalized mesothelial cell line (MeT-5A) as a non-malignant model. The depletion of EIF4G1 and RAN significantly reduced cell proliferation and colony formation and increased caspase activity. In particular, the findings for RAN resemble those observed for other types of cancer. Thus, we evaluated the in vitro effects of importazole (IPZ), a small molecule inhibitor of the interaction between RAN and importin-β. We showed that IPZ could have effects similar to those observed following RAN gene silencing. We also found that primary cell lines from one out of three MPM patients were sensitive to IPZ. As EIF4G1 and RAN deserve further investigation with additional in vitro and in vivo studies, they emerged as promising CDGs, suggesting that their upregulation could play a role in mesothelial tumorigenesis and aggressiveness. Furthermore, present data propose the molecular pathways dependent on RAN as a putative pharmacological target for MPM patients in the view of a future personalized medicine.

Should Lung-Sparing Surgery Be the Standard Procedure for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma?

Background: Surgical procedures for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) include extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP), extended pleurectomy/decortication (P/D) and P/D. EPP has been applied to MPM for a long time, but the postoperative status is extremely poor due to the loss of one whole lung. We compared the mortality, morbidity and median survival time (MST) of lung-sparing surgery (extended P/D or P/D) and lung-sacrificing surgery (EPP) for MPM by performing a systematic review. Methods: We extracted the number of events and patients from the literature identified in electronic databases. Ultimately, 15 reports were selected, and 2674 MPM patients, including 1434 patients undergoing EPP and 1240 patients undergoing extended P/D or P/D, were analyzed. Results: Our systematic review showed that lung-sparing surgery was significantly superior to lung-sacrificing surgery in both the surgical-related mortality (extended P/D vs. EPP: 3.19% vs. 7.65%, p < 0.01; P/D vs. EPP: 1.85% vs. 7.34%, p < 0.01) and morbidity (extended P/D vs. EPP: 35.7% vs. 60.0%, p < 0.01; P/D vs. EPP: 9.52% vs. 20.89%, p < 0.01). Lung-sparing surgery was not inferior to EPP in terms of MST. Conclusion: Although no prospective randomized controlled trial has been conducted, it may be time to change the standard surgical method for MPM from lung-sacrificing surgery to lung-sparing surgery.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma: Treatment patterns and outcomes from the Spanish Lung Cancer Group

BackgroundMalignant mesothelioma is a rare but aggressive tumor arising from the pleura, typically associated with exposure to asbestos. The purpose of this investigation was to describe mesothelioma patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and outcomes in Spain. Material and methodsPatients diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma of the pleura were recorded in an anonymous online database (BEMME, Epidemiologic Spanish Malignant Mesothelioma Database) from June 2008 through May 2013. Patient and tumor characteristics at time of diagnosis, as well as subsequent treatments (surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy), were collected. Among patients treated with chemotherapy, we explored type of chemotherapy regimen and outcomes by treatments. ResultsA total of 560 malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) patients were recorded. The median age at diagnosis was 68 years, mainly with epithelioid histology (62 %), and any asbestos exposure was noted in 45 % of patients. Nearly two-thirds of patients (71 %) received chemotherapy, mainly platinum-pemetrexed combination, as part of their treatment. Surgery and radiotherapy were given in 36 % and 17 % of patients, respectively. The median overall survival (OS) in the whole cohort was 13.0 months (95 % confidence interval (CI), 11.1–14.8 months) with 1-year OS of 53.2 % (95 % CI, 48.7–57.7 %). In patients receiving first-line chemotherapy (N = 315), the median OS was 13.4 months (95 % CI, 10.8–16.0 months), reaching 20.2 months (95 % CI, 17.2–23.2 months) for those 68 patients receiving maintenance chemotherapy. Results of multivariate analyses showed significant association of ECOG-performance status, histology and treatment response with improved OS in MPM patients treated with palliative chemotherapy. ConclusionsDespite multimodal therapeutic intervention, survival of patients with mesothelioma in Spain remains poor. Although it did not reach significance in the multivariate analysis, a meaningful additional survival benefit was observed among those patients receiving maintenance chemotherapy.

Questioning the prognostic role of BAP-1 immunohistochemistry in malignant pleural mesothelioma: A single center experience with systematic review and meta-analysis

IntroductionThe prognostic role of BRCA1 associated protein-1 (BAP1) expression in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a matter of debate. We aimed to clarify whether MPM patients with loss of BAP1 expression have better overall survival (OS) compared to BAP1 positive patients. MethodsBAP1 immunohistochemical staining of tumor samples from 60 MPM patients treated at our institution with first-line chemotherapy was evaluated. A systematic literature search was also performed. Only cohort studies that investigated BAP1 by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and reported hazard ratio (HR) values for OS obtained through multivariate analysis (or adjusted for histotype) were considered. A dataset comprising 638 MPM patients was added to our cohort and included in the meta-analysis. ResultsIn our cohort, 23 samples (38 %) were BAP1 positive/retained (≥1 %) and 37 samples (62 %) were BAP1 negative/loss. BAP1 loss was associated with epithelioid histotype (p 0.01). Median OS times were 14.8 months (95 % CI: 10.7–29.3) and 18.1 months (95 % CI: 11.2–25.8) for negative and positive BAP1 expression, respectively (p 0.2). At multivariate analysis, again no differences were observed among the two groups (p 0.81). Similarly, the meta-analysis consisting of 698 patients showed no difference in terms of OS according to BAP1 status (HR 1.11; 95 % CI, 0·76-1·61; p 0.60). ConclusionsBAP1 expression is not an independent prognostic factor for MPM patients and it should not be considered without taking into account tumor histotype. Future studies should investigate its predictive role in patients treated with new emerging therapies such as immunotherapy.

Adenosine Deaminase in Pleural Effusion and Its Relationship with Clinical Parameters in Patients with Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

Pleural effusion adenosine deaminase (ADA) levels are elevated in various diseases. We investigated whether pleural effusion ADA levels differ among patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), lung cancer (LC), and benign diseases, including tuberculous pleurisy. We examined 329 patients from February 2002 to July 2013. There were 131 MPM cases with ADA levels of 32.29 IU/L; 117 LC cases with ADA levels of 21.12 IU/L; 54 benign disease cases with ADA levels of 20.98 IU/L. A significant difference existed in pleural effusion ADA levels between MPM and benign disease patients. Pleural effusion ADA levels were significantly higher in MPM patients.

Delayed-Phase Enhancement for Evaluation of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma on Computed Tomography: A Prospective Cohort Study

BackgroundRadiologic assessment of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) on computed tomography (CT) imaging can be limited by similar attenuations of MPM and adjacent tissues. This can result in inaccuracies in defining the presence and extent of pleural tumor burden. We hypothesized that increasing the time delay for pleural enhancement will optimize discrimination between MPM and noncancerous tissues on CT. Here we conduct a prospective observational study to determine the optimal time delay for imaging MPM on CT. Patients and MethodsAdult MPM patients (n = 15) were enrolled in this prospective exploratory imaging trial. Patients with < 1 cm MPM thickness, prior pleurectomy, pleurodesis, pleural radiotherapy, or antiangiogenic therapy were excluded. All patients underwent a dynamically-enhanced CT with multiple time delays (0 - 10 minutes) after intravenous contrast administration. Tumor tissue attenuation was measured at each phase of enhancement. A qualitative assessment of tumor enhancement kinetics was also performed. The optimal phase of enhancement based on qualitative lesion conspicuity and quantitative tumor enhancement was then compared. ResultsMPM tumor enhancement was quantitatively and qualitatively increased at time delays beyond the conventional time delay for thoracic CT imaging (40-60 seconds). Patient tumor enhancement kinetics, displayed as the fraction of maximal tumor tissue attenuation as a function of time, revealed an optimal time delay of 230 to 300 seconds after intravenous contrast administration. There was an association between degree of tumor enhancement and subjective lesion conspicuity. ConclusionOptimal MPM contrast enhancement occurs at a later phase than typically acquired with conventional thoracic CT imaging.

Racial Disparities in Treatment Patterns and Survival Among Surgically Treated Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma Patients.

Surgery may improve survival in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) patients. We examined treatment and survival in black and white surgical MPM patients using the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Among patients with pleurectomy/decortication (PD) or extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP), multivariable logistic regressions were used to evaluate racial differences in surgical extent, additional treatment, and 30-/90-day mortality. Multivariable and propensity matched models were used to assess differences in survival. We identified 2550 patients; 2462 white (96.5%), 88 black (3.5%). Black patients were significantly less likely to receive EPP (ORadj 0.36, 95% CI 0.17-0.78) and trended towards worse 30-/90-day mortality (ORadj 1.54, 95% CI 0.59-4.03; ORadj 1.59, 95% CI 0.80-3.17, respectively). There was no difference in survival (HRadj 0.94, 95% CI 0.71-1.25). Surgery conferred a survival benefit (HRadj 0.77, 95% CI 0.73-0.82), but it varied by race (HRadj[white] 0.76, 95% CI 0.72-0.81; HRadj[black] 0.93, 95% CI 0.67-1.29). With the limitation of a small proportion of surgically resected black MPM patients in this population-based analysis, black patients were noted to undergo less extensive surgery. Although there was an overall survival benefit noted with surgery, this was not consistent across races, despite trends towards worse short-term mortality in black patients.

TGFα Promotes Chemoresistance of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma.

Background: There is no standard chemotherapy for refractory or relapsing malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Our previous reports nevertheless indicated that a combination of an anthracycline (doxorubicin) and a lysine deacetylase inhibitor (valproic acid, VPA) synergize to induce the apoptosis of MPM cells and reduce tumor growth in mouse models. A Phase I/II clinical trial indicated that this regimen is a promising therapeutic option for a proportion of MPM patients. Methods: The transcriptomes of mesothelioma cells were compared after Illumina HiSeq 4000 sequencing. The expression of differentially expressed genes was inhibited by RNA interference. Apoptosis was determined by cell cycle analysis and Annexin V/7-AAD labeling. Protein expression was assessed by immunoblotting. Preclinical efficacy was evaluated in BALB/c and NOD-SCID mice. Results: To understand the mechanisms involved in chemoresistance, the transcriptomes of two MPM cell lines displaying different responses to VPA-doxorubicin were compared. Among the differentially expressed genes, transforming growth factor alpha (TGFα) was associated with resistance to this regimen. The silencing of TGFα by RNA interference correlated with a significant increase in apoptosis, whereas the overexpression of TGFα desensitized MPM cells to the apoptosis induced by VPA and doxorubicin. The multi-targeted inhibition of histone deacetylase (HDAC), HER2 and TGFα receptor (epidermal growth factor receptor/EGFR) improved treatment efficacy in vitro and reduced tumor growth in two MPM mouse models. Finally, TGFα expression but not EGFR correlated with patient survival. Conclusions: Our data show that TGFα but not its receptor EGFR is a key factor in resistance to MPM chemotherapy. This observation may contribute to casting light on the promising but still controversial role of EGFR signaling in MPM therapy.

ERS/ESTS/EACTS/ESTRO guidelines for the management of malignant pleural mesothelioma.

The European Respiratory Society (ERS)/European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS)/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) task force brought together experts to update previous 2009 ERS/ESTS guidelines on management of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), a rare cancer with globally poor outcome, after a systematic review of the 2009-2018 literature. The evidence was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. The evidence syntheses were discussed and recommendations formulated by this multidisciplinary group of experts. Diagnosis: pleural biopsies remain the gold standard to confirm the diagnosis, usually obtained by thoracoscopy but occasionally via image-guided percutaneous needle biopsy in cases of pleural symphysis or poor performance status. Pathology: standard staining procedures are insufficient in ∼10% of cases, justifying the use of specific markers, including BAP-1 and CDKN2A (p16) for the separation of atypical mesothelial proliferation from MPM. Staging: in the absence of a uniform, robust and validated staging system, we advise using the most recent 2016 8th TNM (tumour, node, metastasis) classification, with an algorithm for pre-therapeutic assessment. Monitoring: patient's performance status, histological subtype and tumour volume are the main prognostic factors of clinical importance in routine MPM management. Other potential parameters should be recorded at baseline and reported in clinical trials. Treatment: (chemo)therapy has limited efficacy in MPM patients and only selected patients are candidates for radical surgery. New promising targeted therapies, immunotherapies and strategies have been reviewed. Because of limited data on the best combination treatment, we emphasise that patients who are considered candidates for a multimodal approach, including radical surgery, should be treated as part of clinical trials in MPM-dedicated centres.

ERS/ESTS/EACTS/ESTRO guidelines for the management of malignant pleural mesothelioma.

The European Respiratory Society (ERS)/European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS)/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) task force brought together experts to update previous 2009 ERS/ESTS guidelines on management of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), a rare cancer with globally poor outcome, after a systematic review of the 2009-2018 literature. The evidence was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. The evidence syntheses were discussed and recommendations formulated by this multidisciplinary group of experts. Diagnosis: pleural biopsies remain the gold standard to confirm the diagnosis, usually obtained by thoracoscopy but occasionally via image-guided percutaneous needle biopsy in cases of pleural symphysis or poor performance status. Pathology: standard staining procedures are insufficient in ∼10% of cases, justifying the use of specific markers, including BAP-1 and CDKN2A (p16) for the separation of atypical mesothelial proliferation from MPM. Staging: in the absence of a uniform, robust and validated staging system, we advise using the most recent 2016 8th TNM (tumour, node, metastasis) classification, with an algorithm for pretherapeutic assessment. Monitoring: patient's performance status, histological subtype and tumour volume are the main prognostic factors of clinical importance in routine MPM management. Other potential parameters should be recorded at baseline and reported in clinical trials. Treatment: (chemo)therapy has limited efficacy in MPM patients and only selected patients are candidates for radical surgery. New promising targeted therapies, immunotherapies and strategies have been reviewed. Because of limited data on the best combination treatment, we emphasize that patients who are considered candidates for a multimodal approach, including radical surgery, should be treated as part of clinical trials in MPM-dedicated centres.

Randomized phase II study on gemcitabine with or without ramucirumab as second-line treatment for advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM): Results of Italian Rames Study.

9004 Background. The RAMES Study (EudraCT Number 2016-001132-36) is a multicenter, double-blind, randomized phase II trial exploring the efficacy and the safety of the addition of ramucirumab to gemcitabine as the second-line treatment in MPM patients (pts) after platinum/pemetrexed regimens. Methods. The pts were assigned (1:1) to receive Gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 i v on days 1 and 8 every 21 days with Placebo (Arm A) or Ramucirumab 10 mg/kg i v on day 1, of a 21-day cycle (Arm B), until tolerability or progressive disease. Pts was stratified by ECOG/PS (0-1 vs 2), age (≤ 70 vs &gt; 70 yrs), histology (epithelioid vs non-epithelioid) and time to progression (TTP) after first-line therapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Assuming a proportion of OS equal to 40% at 1 year in arm A, a 12% absolute improvement in OS at 1 yrs was expected in Arm B (hazard ratio = 0.70).114 events (156 subjects) are required for a one-sided log-rank test with α = 0.15 to have 80% power. Results. From December 2016 to July 2018, 164 pts were randomized, 81 pts in Arm A and 80 Arm B; 3 pts were randomized but not treated. Characteristics of pts were: median age 69 yrs (44-81), males 119 (73.9%), females 42 (26.1%); ECOG/PS0 96 (59.6%) ECOG/PS1-2 65 (40.4%); histotype epithelioid 132 (81.9%), non-epithelioid 29 (18.1%); stage III 98 (60.7%), stage IV 60 (37.3%), 3 (2.0%) missing; asbestos exposure assessed 80 (49.7%). Median of courses was 3.50 in Arm A and 7.50 in Arm B. OS was significantly longer in Arm B with median 13.8 mths (70% CI 12.7-14.4) vs Arm A with 7.5 mths (70% CI 6.9-8.9), HR 0.71 (70% CI 0.59-0.85, p = 0.057). OS at 6 and 12 mths was in Arm A 63.9% and 33.9%, and in Arm B 74.7% and 56.5%, respectively. In Arm B OS was not correlated to TTP at first-line therapy (13.6 mths in TTP ≤6 mths and 13.9 mths in TTP &gt; 6 mths) and histotypes (13.8 months in the epithelioid and 13.0 months in non-epithelioid). No significant differences in thromboembolism G3-4 events were observed in Arm A vs Arm B (p= 0.64). None hypertension G3-4 was reported in Arm A vs 5 pts (6.3%) in Arm B (p= 0.022). No significant differences in G3-4 haematological toxicities between the two arms were reported. Conclusion: In the RAMES Study the addition of Ramucirumab to Gemcitabine significantly improved OS regardless of age of pts, tumor histotype and TTP at the first-line treatment. Gemcitabine plus Ramucirumab can be considered a manageable regimen in second-line treatment of advanced MPM pts. Clinical trial information: NTC03560973.

Statin treatment improves response to anti-PD1 agents in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma and non-small cell lung cancer.

3074 Background: After progression to standard chemotherapy, only a small proportion of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients (pts) benefit from anti-programmed cell death (PD-1) treatment. Combination strategies might improve response. In pre-clinical models, statins showed vaccine adjuvant activities and synergized with anti-PD1 agents. In this multi-center study, we evaluated the impact of baseline statin treatment in MPM and NSCLC pts. Methods: We separately examined MPM and NSCLC pts treated with anti-PD1 monotherapy after progression to standard chemotherapy at two European academic institutions. As control cohort, MPM pts treated with first-line chemotherapy were also examined. Pts receiving statins at start of treatment were compared with those who did not. Objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed. Results: A total of 287 patients were examined. Twenty-seven out of 80 (34%) MPM and 36 out of 130 (20%) NSCLC pts received statins at start of anti-PD1 treatment. The most common statins were simvastatin, atorvastatin and rosuvastatin. In MPM pts, statin use was associated with improved ORR (22% versus 5%, P = 0.05), longer PFS (median 6.7 versus 2.4 months, hazard ratio (HR) 0.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23–0.77, P &lt; 0.01), and longer OS (median not reached versus 6.0 months, HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.21–0.85, P = 0.01). In NSCLC pts, statin use was associated with improved ORR (40% versus 22%, P = 0.04), longer PFS (median 7.8 versus 3.6 months, HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37–0.97.2, P = 0.03) but similar OS (median 13.1 versus 10.1 months, HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.49–1.28, P = 0.30). At multivariate analyses, after adjusting for ECOG performance status (PS) and histological subtype, the impact of statins remained significant for ORR, PFS and OS in MPM and for PFS in NSCLC. Conversely, no association between statin use and outcomes was found in 77 MPM pts treated with first-line chemotherapy. Conclusions: This study shows that statin use at start of anti-PD1 treatment improves response to anti-PD1 agents in MPM and NSCLC pts who progressed to standard chemotherapy in routine clinical practice. This association could not be found in MPM pts treated with first-line chemotherapy, thus suggesting a synergy between statins and anti-PD1 agents. Prospective studies are needed to confirm whether the combination of statin and anti-PD1 therapy could improve outcome in pts with poorly immunogenic thoracic malignancies.

Breath Analysis for Early Detection of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) Determination and Possible Biochemical Pathways.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare neoplasm, mainly caused by asbestos exposure, with a high mortality rate. The management of patients with MPM is controversial due to a long latency period between exposure and diagnosis and because of non-specific symptoms generally appearing at advanced stage of the disease. Breath analysis, aimed at the identification of diagnostic Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) pattern in exhaled breath, is believed to improve early detection of MPM. Therefore, in this study, breath samples from 14 MPM patients and 20 healthy controls (HC) were collected and analyzed by Thermal Desorption-Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (TD-GC/MS). Nonparametric test allowed to identify the most weighting variables to discriminate between MPM and HC breath samples and multivariate statistics were applied. Considering that MPM is an aggressive neoplasm leading to a late diagnosis and thus the recruitment of patients is very difficult, a promising data mining approach was developed and validated in order to discriminate between MPM patients and healthy controls, even if no large population data are available. Three different machine learning algorithms were applied to perform the classification task with a leave-one-out cross-validation approach, leading to remarkable results (Area Under Curve AUC = 93%). Ten VOCs, such as ketones, alkanes and methylate derivates, as well as hydrocarbons, were able to discriminate between MPM patients and healthy controls and for each compound which resulted diagnostic for MPM, the metabolic pathway was studied in order to identify the link between VOC and the neoplasm. Moreover, five breath samples from asymptomatic asbestos-exposed persons (AEx) were exploratively analyzed, processed and tested by the validated statistical method as blinded samples in order to evaluate the performance for the early recognition of patients affected by MPM among asbestos-exposed persons. Good agreement was found between the information obtained by gold-standard diagnostic methods such as computed tomography CT and model output.

Mutational Profiling of Driver Tumor Suppressor and Oncogenic Genes in Brazilian Malignant Pleural Mesotheliomas

Background: Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a highly lethal disease comprising a heterogeneous group of tumors with challenging to predict biological behavior. The diagnosis is complex, and the histologic classification includes 2 major subtypes of MPM: epithelioid (∼60% of cases) and sarcomatous (∼20%). Its identification depends upon pathological investigation supported by clinical and radiological evidence and more recently ancillary molecular testing. Treatment options are currently limited, with no known targeted therapies available. Objectives: To elucidate the mutation profile of driver tumor suppressor and oncogenic genes in a cohort of Brazilian patients. Methods: We sequenced 16 driver genes in a series of 43 Brazilian malignant mesothelioma (MM) patients from 3 distinct Brazilian centers. Genomic DNA was extracted from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor tissue blocks, and the TERT promoter region was amplified by PCR followed by direct capillary sequencing. The Illumina TruSight Tumor 15 was used to evaluate 250 amplicons from 15 genes associated with solid tumors (AKT1, GNA11, NRAS, BRAF, GNAQ, PDGFRA, EGFR, KIT, PIK3CA, ERBB2, KRAS, RET, FOXL2, MET,and TP53). Library preparation with the TruSight Tumor 15 was performed before sequencing at the MiSeq platform. Data analysis was performed using Sophia DDM software. Results: Out of 43 MPM patients, 38 (88.4%) were epithelioid subtype and 5 (11.6%) were sarcomatoid histotype. Asbestos exposure was present in 15 (39.5%) patients with epithelioid MPM and 3 (60%) patients with sarcomatoid MPM. We found a TERT promoter mutation in 11.6% of MM, and the c.-146C>T mutation was the most common event. The next-generation sequencing was successful in 33 cases. A total of 18 samples showed at least 1 pathogenic, with a median of 1.8 variants, ranging from 1 to 6. The most mutated genes were TP53 and ERBB2 with 7 variants each, followed by NRAS BRAF, PI3KCA, EGFR and PDGFRA with 2 variants each. KIT, AKT1, and FOXL2 genes exhibited 1 variant each. Interestingly, 2 variants observed in the PDGFRA gene are classic imatinib-sensitive therapy. Conclusions: We concluded that Brazilian MPM harbor mutation in classic tumor suppressor and oncogenic genes, which might help in the guidance of personalized treatment of MPM.

Prognostic Impact of Pleural Effusion in Patients with Malignancy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Pleural effusion is a common complication of tumors, but the exact role of pleural effusion in the prognosis of tumor still remain unclear. We aimed to systematically review the prognostic value of pleural effusion in cancer patients. Methods: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis with a systematic literature search on five databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Medline (accessed via OVID), Embase and Web of Science covering the time from the database creation to April 2, 2020. We included all cohort studies and case control studies with available overall survival and progression-free survival results for cancer patients with or without pleural effusion. The studies with patients below the age of 18 and study population less than 30 were excluded. We applied the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to assess the study quality. Mantel-Haenszel method was used to calculate the pooled HR and 95% CI. Heterogeneity and publication bias were examined. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were performed. Findings: A total of 12189 studies were identified by the search and 47 studies with 146117 patients were included in the analysis. For overall survival, the pooled data demonstrated that pleural effusion is a poor prognostic factor for tumor patients (HR 1·58, 95% CI 1·43-1·75; I2 94·8%). For subgroup analysis, pleural effusion is a poor prognostic factor for lung cancer patients (HR 1·44, 95% CI 1·35-1·54; I2 60·8%), hematological tumor patient (HR 2·79, 95% CI 1·63-4·77; I2 29·4%) and other kinds of tumor patients (HR 2·08, 95% CI 1·43-3·01; I2 55·1%). Only in malignant pleural mesothelioma patients, pleural effusion is not a prognostic factor (HR 1·72, 95% CI 0·79-3·71; I2 91·9%). Whether or not malignant effusion is clearly diagnosed, the results cannot be affected. For progression-free survival, pleural effusion is a poor prognostic factor for cancer patients (HR 1·61, 95% CI 1·28-2·03; I2 42·9%). We also observed that massive pleural effusion is a poor prognostic factor (HR 1·32, 95% CI 1·13-1·55; I2 58·0%) compared to minimal pleural effusion, but metachronous pleural effusion is not a poor prognostic factor (HR 1·29, 95% CI 0·60-2·76; I2 93·3%) compared to synchronous pleural effusion. Interpretation: Whether or not malignant effusion is clearly diagnosed, pleural effusion has a poor prognostic value in tumor patients except malignant pleural mesothelioma. It is a prognostic risk factor both in OS and PFS. Massive pleural effusion patients have a worse prognosis than minimal pleural effusion patients. The time of discovery of pleural effusion is not a prognostic factor for tumor patients. However, future evidence of other pleural effusion characteristics such as bilateral pleural effusion or unilateral pleural effusion, bloody pleural effusion or no-bloody pleural effusion is still needed. Funding Statement: This work was supported by grants from Beijing Municipal Administration of Hospitals’ Mission Plan (No. SML20150301), Beijing Nova program (Z171100001117015), Beijing Talents Foundation (2017000021223ZK38) and “1351 Talents Program” of Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital (WXZXZ-2017-01 and CYXX-2017-35). Declaration of Interests: We declare no competing interests.

Detection of Circulating Tumor Cells (CTCs) in Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (MPM) with the "Universal" CTC-Chip and An Anti-Podoplanin Antibody NZ-1.2.

Circulating tumor cell (CTC) is a potentially useful surrogate of micro-metastasis, but detection of rare tumor cells contaminated in a vast majority of normal hematologic cells remains technical challenges. To achieve effective detection of a variety of CTCs, we have developed a novel microfluidic system (CTC-chip) in which any antibody to capture CTCs is easily conjugated. In previous studies, we employed an antibody (clone E-1) against podoplanin that was strongly expressed on mesothelioma cells. The CTC-chip coated by the E-1 antibody (E1-chip) provided a modest sensitivity in detection of CTCs in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Here, to achieve a higher sensitivity, we employed a novel anti-podoplanin antibody (clone NZ-1.2). In an experimental model, MPM cells with high podoplanin expression were effectively captured with the CTC-chip coated by the NZ-1.2 antibody (NZ1.2-chip). Next, we evaluated CTCs in the peripheral blood sampled from 22 MPM patients using the NZ1.2-chip and the E1-chip. One or more CTCs were detected in 15 patients (68.2%) with the NZ1.2-chip, whereas only in 10 patients (45.5%) with the E1-chip. Of noted, in most (92.3%, 12/13) patients with epithelioid MPM subtype, CTCs were positive with the NZ1.2-chip. The CTC-count detected with the NZ1.2-chip was significantly higher than that with the E1-chip (p = 0.034). The clinical implications of CTCs detected with the NZ1.2-chip will be examined in a future study.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma: current perspectives

The objectives of this study are to review epidemiology, novel methods of detection, novel diagnostics, and novel therapeutic options of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) in the literature that were published between 1977 and 2019. Malignant pleural mesothelioma, associated with prolonged respirable-asbestos-fiber exposure is a rare cancer with constantly increasing incidence and poor prognosis due to lacking the effective treatment options. The median survival ranges from 8 to 14 months. Sarcomatoid histological subtype has the worst prognosis. Video-assisted thoracoscopy plus mediastinoscopy is the current gold standard for staging malignant pleural mesothelioma and is superior to computerized tomography of the chest for assessing the tumor size and suspected nodal metastases. Several circulating biomarkers are detected in MPM patients, such as mesothelin, osteopontin, fibulin-3, high mobility group B1, vascular endothelial growth factor, reactive oxygen species, reactive nitrogen species, micro-ribonucleic acids, tumor deoxyribonucleic acid, etc.Surgery is controversial and restricted to patients with early stage disease and good functional status. There is still no curative treatment whereas chemotherapy is the only treatment modality that improve patients’ survival. Radiotherapy is beneficial as a palliative treatment and an adjuvant to chemotherapy and surgery in the context of trimodality treatment. In conclusion, there is potential for the development of biomarkers and radiological imaging in the years to come. Several novel therapeutic options are under studied and it is likely to involve highly personalized treatment. Its incidenceis expected to decrease in the next decade.

Immunotherapy in Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma.

The only registered systemic treatment for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is platinum based chemotherapy combined with pemetrexed, with or without bevacizumab. Immunotherapy did seem active in small phase II trials. In this review, we will highlight the most important immunotherapy-based research performed and put a focus on the future of MPM. PD-(L)1 inhibitors show response rates between 10 and 29% in phase II trials, with a wide range in progression free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). However, single agent pembrolizumab was not superior to chemotherapy (gemcitabine or vinorelbine) in the recent published PROMISE-Meso trial in pre-treated patients. In small studies with CTLA-4 inhibitors there is evidence for response in some patients, but it fails to show a better PFS and OS compared to best supportive care in a randomized study. A combination of PD-(L)1 inhibitor with CTLA-4 inhibitor seem to have a similar response as PD-(L)1 monotherapy. The first results of combining durvalumab (PD-L1 blocking) with cisplatin-pemetrexed in the first line are promising. Another immune treatment is Dendritic Cell (DC) immunotherapy, which is recently tested in mesothelioma, shows remarkable anti-tumor activity in three clinical studies. The value of single agent checkpoint inhibitors is limited in MPM. There is an urgent need for biomarkers to select the optimal candidates for immunotherapy among MPM patients in terms of efficacy and tolerance. Results of combination checkpoint inhibitors with chemotherapy are awaiting.

A phase II study of the combination of gemcitabine and imatinib mesylate in pemetrexed-pretreated patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma

ObjectivesSecond-line chemotherapy is not a standard of care in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) that progresses after first-line treatment with cisplatin and pemetrexed. In pre-clinical models, the combination of gemcitabine (GEM) and imatinib mesylate (IM), compared with GEM alone, led to a further tumor growth inhibition and improved survival. This phase II study evaluates the antitumor activity of a combination of IM and GEM in platinum-pemetrexed-pretreated MPM patients expressing PDGFR-β and/or cKIT by immunohistochemistry (IHC). Patients and methodsGEM (1000 mg/m2) was given on days 3 and 10; IM (400 mg) was taken orally on days 1–5 and 8–12 of a 21-day cycle. The primary endpoint was the 3-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate. The study follows the optimal two-stage design of Simon. A 3-month PFS target of 75 % was required. With a probability error α = 10 % and a power of 80 %, the calculated sample size was 22 patients. In particular, in the first step, six out of nine patients and globally 14/22 patients free from progressive disease at 3 months were required. Secondary endpoints included response rate, duration of response, toxicity and overall survival (OS). ResultsIn total, 23 patients were enrolled (ECOG PS 0–1/2: 9/13; one previous line/≥two previous lines: 10/13). Partial response was achieved in four patients (17.4 %) and stable disease in 11 (47.8 %) with a disease control rate of 65.3 %. After a median follow-up of 34.5 months, median PFS and OS were 2.8 and 5.7 months, respectively. The 3-month PFS rate was 39.1 % (9/23 patients). All-grade drug-related adverse events occurred in 17 (73.9 %) patients. Grade 3 treatment-related adverse events were observed in four (17 %) patients. ConclusionsThe combination of IM and GEM is well tolerated in platinum-pemetrexed-pretreated MPM patients expressing PDGFR-β and/or cKIT by IHC, but it does not show a significant PFS benefit.

The Role of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients With Resectable Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma-An Institutional and National Analysis.

There is no standard of care with respect to the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in resectable malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). We performed an intention-to-treat analysis with data from a single institution and the National Cancer Database (NCDB) to identify whether the use of NAC impacts survival in resectable MPM. Patients with MPM who had surgery with curative intent at Duke University from 1995 to 2017 were selected, and the 2004-2015 NCDB was used to identify MPM patients with clinical stage I-IIIB who underwent definitive surgery. For both cohorts, patients were stratified by receipt of NAC. Primary outcomes were overall survival and postresection survival (RS), which were estimated using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. A total of 257 patients met inclusion criteria in the Duke cohort. Compared with immediate resection (IR), NAC was associated with similar overall survival but an increased risk for postresection mortality in both unmatched (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.21 to 2.83) and propensity-matched (HR = 1.62, 95% CI = 1.03 to 2.55) cohorts. A total of 1949 NCDB patients were included: 1597 (81.9%) IR and 352 (18.1%) NAC. RS was worse for patients undergoing NAC in both unmatched (HR = 1.85, 95% CI = 1.21 to 2.83) and propensity-matched (HR = 1.29, 95% CI = 1.06 to 1.57) analyses compared with patients receiving IR. In this intention-to-treat study, NAC was associated with worse RS compared with IR in patients with MPM. The risks and benefits of induction therapy should be weighed before offering it to patients with resectable MPM.