Gemcitabine and vinorelbine in pemetrexed-pretreated patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma

The Current Treatment Landscape of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma and Future Directions

The incidence of malignant pleural mesothelioma is expected to increase globally. New treatment options for this malignancy are eagerly awaited to improve the survival and quality of life of patients. The present article highlights the results of recent advances in this field, analyzing data from several relevant trials. The heterogeneous tumor microenvironment and biology, together with the low mutational burden, pose a challenge for treating such tumors. So far, no single biomarker has been soundly correlated with targeted therapy development; thus, combination strategies are often required to improve outcomes. Locally applied vaccines, the expansion of genetically engineered immune cell populations such as T cells, the blockage of immune checkpoints that inhibit anti-tumorigenic responses and chemoimmunotherapy are among the most promising options expected to change the mesothelioma treatment landscape.

Improvements in Systemic Therapies for Advanced Malignant Mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare and aggressive malignancy associated with poor prognosis and a 5-year survival rate of 12%. Many drugs have been tested over the years with conflicting results. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of current therapies in MPM and how to best interpret the data available on these drugs. Furthermore, we focused on promising treatments under investigation, such as immunotherapy with targets different from anti-PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors, vaccines, target therapies, and metabolism-based strategies.

Immunotherapy vs. Chemotherapy in Subsequent Treatment of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: Which Is Better?

(1) Background: Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare but aggressive tumor arising from the pleural surface. For relapsed MPM, there is no accepted standard of- are for subsequent treatment. Thus, we aimed to compare the efficacy of chemotherapy, targeting drugs, and immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) as subsequent therapy for relapsed MPM. (2) Methods: The study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). We searched several acknowledged databases. Primary outcomes were defined as overall median progressive survival (mPFS) and median overall survival (mOS) in different treatment groups. Secondary outcomes were defined as objective response rate (ORR), the proportion of stable disease (SD), and progressive disease (PD). (3) Results: Ultimately, 43 articles were selected for the meta-analysis. According to the results of a pooled analysis of single-arm studies, ICIs showed a slight advantage in mOS, while chemotherapy showed a slight advantage in mPFS (mOS: 11.2 m vs. 10.39 m and mPFS: 4.42 m vs. 5.08 m for ICIs group and chemotherapy group, respectively). We identified only a few studies that directly compared the efficacy of ICIs with that of chemotherapy, and ICIs did not show significant benefits over chemotherapy based on mOS. (4) Conclusions: Based on current evidence, we considered that immunotherapy might not be superior to chemotherapy as a subsequent therapy for relapsed MPM. Although several studies investigated the efficacy of ICIs, targeting drugs, and chemotherapy in relapsed MPM, there was still no standard of care. Further randomized control trials with consistent criteria and outcomes are recommended to guide subsequent therapy in relapsed MPM and identify patients with certain characteristics that might benefit from such subsequent therapy.

Anetumab ravtansine versus vinorelbine in patients with relapsed, mesothelin-positive malignant pleural mesothelioma (ARCS-M): a randomised, open-label phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Few treatment options exist for second-line treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma. We aimed to assess the antibody-drug conjugate anetumab ravtansine versus vinorelbine in patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic disease overexpressing mesothelin who had progressed on first-line platinum-pemetrexed chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab.

METHODS

In this phase 2, randomised, open-label study, done at 76 hospitals in 14 countries, we enrolled adults (aged ≥18 years) with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic malignant pleural mesothelioma, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and who had progressed on first-line platinum-pemetrexed chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab. Participants were prospectively screened for mesothelin overexpression (defined as 2+ or 3+ mesothelin membrane staining intensity on at least 30% of viable tumour cells by immunohistochemistry) and were randomly assigned (2:1), using an interactive voice and web response system provided by the sponsor, to receive intravenous anetumab ravtansine (6·5 mg/kg on day 1 of each 21-day cycle) or intravenous vinorelbine (30 mg/m2 once every week) until progression, toxicity, or death. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival according to blinded central radiology review, assessed in the intention-to-treat population, with safety assessed in all participants who received any study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02610140, and is now completed.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 3, 2015, and May 31, 2017, 589 patients were enrolled and 248 mesothelin-overexpressing patients were randomly allocated to the two treatment groups (166 patients were randomly assigned to receive anetumab ravtansine and 82 patients were randomly assigned to receive vinorelbine). 105 (63%) of 166 patients treated with anetumab ravtansine (median follow-up 4·0 months [IQR 1·4-5·5]) versus 43 (52%) of 82 patients treated with vinorelbine (3·9 months [1·4-5·4]) had disease progression or died (median progression-free survival 4·3 months [95% CI 4·1-5·2] vs 4·5 months [4·1-5·8]; hazard ratio 1·22 [0·85-1·74]; log-rank p=0·86). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (one [1%] of 163 patients for anetumab ravtansine vs 28 [39%] of 72 patients for vinorelbine), pneumonia (seven [4%] vs five [7%]), neutrophil count decrease (two [1%] vs 12 [17%]), and dyspnoea (nine [6%] vs three [4%]). Serious drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 12 (7%) patients treated with anetumab ravtansine and 11 (15%) patients treated with vinorelbine. Ten (6%) treatment-emergent deaths occurred with anetumab ravtansine: pneumonia (three [2%]), dyspnoea (two [1%]), sepsis (two [1%]), atrial fibrillation (one [1%]), physical deterioration (one [1%]), hepatic failure (one [1%]), mesothelioma (one [1%]), and renal failure (one [1%]; one patient had 3 events). One (1%) treatment-emergent death occurred in the vinorelbine group (pneumonia).

INTERPRETATION

Anetumab ravtansine showed a manageable safety profile and was not superior to vinorelbine. Further studies are needed to define active treatments in relapsed mesothelin-expressing malignant pleural mesothelioma.

FUNDING

Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals.

Establishment and characterization of NCC‑DMM1‑C1, a novel patient‑derived cell line of desmoplastic malignant pleural mesothelioma

Desmoplastic malignant pleural mesothelioma (DMM) is a rare histological variant of malignant pleural mesothelioma, which is a highly aggressive neoplasm of the mesothelium. DMM is associated with distant metastases and short survival. Effective treatments for DMM are not established and the development of histotype-tailored treatments is difficult due to the rarity of the disease. Although patient-derived cancer models are crucial tools for the development of novel therapeutics, they are difficult to obtain for DMM; no DMM cell lines or xenografts are available from public biobanks and only two cell lines have been reported. Thus, the present study aimed to establish a novel cell line of DMM as a resource for drug screening. A cell line of DMM was established, designated as NCC-DMM1-C1, using surgically resected tumor tissues from a 73-year-old male patient with DMM. Characteristics of NCC-DMM1-C1 cells were examined, such as growth, spheroid formation and invasion capability. Drug targets and anti-cancer drugs with anti-proliferative efficacy were examined using a comprehensive kinase activity assay and drug screening of 213 anti-cancer agents, respectively. NCC-DMM1-C1 exhibited fast growth, spheroid formation and invasion capability, suggesting that the NCC-DMM1-C1 cells retained the aggressive features of DMM. NCC-DMM1-C1 cells and the tumor tissue shared common activity profiles of kinases, which included FES, Wee1, platelet-derived growth factor receptor-β and Src. The drug screening revealed that bortezomib, fostamatinib, gemcitabine, homoharringtonine and vinorelbine had anti-proliferative effects, which have not been previously reported for DMM. It was concluded that NCC-DMM1-C1 cells may be a useful tool for the study of DMM.

The minimum standard of care for managing malignant pleural mesothelioma in developing nations within the Asia-Pacific Region

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an incurable malignancy associated with high symptom burden and poor prognosis. The relationship between asbestos exposure and MPM incidence is well-established. The incidence rate of MPM in Australia and New Zealand is among the highest globally. Matching the experience of other nations with legal restrictions on asbestos, incidence is expected to fall. In contrast, the incidence of MPM is rising in the developing nations of the Asia-Pacific as consumption and mining (albeit to a lesser extent) of asbestos continues. The incidence of MPM in these nations is currently low or unknown, reflecting insufficient latency periods since industrial use of asbestos, deficient resources for accurate diagnosis, and lack of occupational disease or cancer registries. The landscape of treatment for MPM is rapidly changing with combination immunotherapy now demonstrating improved survival in the first-line setting. Considering vast global inequity in access to anticancer treatments, establishing minimum standard of care for MPM in developing nations is of greater significance. Here, we review the evidence that form the basis of our minimum-standard recommendations for diagnosis, systemic treatment, management of recurrent pleural effusions, and symptom management. We also briefly review evidence-based treatment that may be considered for those with access.

Oncological Frontiers in the Treatment of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare malignancy characterized by very poor prognosis and lack of treatment options. Immunotherapy has rapidly emerged as an effective tool for MPM, particularly for tumors of non-epithelioid histology. At the same time, comprehensive genomic sequencing may open the way to new-generation targeted-drugs able to hit specific MPM molecular vulnerabilities. These innovations will possibly enrich, but also dramatically complicate, the elucidation of treatment algorithms. Multidisciplinary integration is urgently needed.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors for unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma

Unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive disease with a 5-year survival rate of approximately 10%. Recent data suggest that MPM is an immunologically active tumor, in which checkpoint inhibition through the blockade of the anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (-CTLA-4) or anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) could play a major therapeutic role. Initially, clinical trials evaluated immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in the salvage setting after platinum-based chemotherapy with mixed results in terms of efficacy. More recently, the combination of the anti-CTLA-4 agent ipilimumab plus the anti-PD-1 agent nivolumab was tested in the front-line setting, and reported a superior survival as compared to platinum/pemetrexed. While other clinical trials ore ongoing in order to investigate ICIs for MPM, it seems now evident that we have entered a new "era" for the treatment of MPM. In the future, a few issues need to be solved with regard to the use of ICIs for MPM. Among them, there is the identification of biomarkers of sensitivity to immunotherapy that may help enrich the patient population who could benefit the most from treatment, while avoiding for some other patients the potential occurrence of immune-related side effects from therapies that are anticipated to be ineffective.

Volumetric PET Response Assessment Outperforms Conventional Criteria in Patients Receiving High-Dose Pembrolizumab for Malignant Mesothelioma

Fixed-dose pembrolizumab (200 mg absolute, day 1, every 3 wk) for the treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma did not result in survival benefit in the phase 3 PROMISE-meso trial compared with second-line chemotherapy. Because of lack of validated imaging response criteria, responder subgroups with potential survival benefit have not yet been identified. Here, we administered high-dose pembrolizumab (10 mg/kg, day 1, every 2 wk) considering the KEYNOTE-028 trial and assessed the prognostic value of PET metabolic response in patients with chemotherapy-resistant malignant mesothelioma of the pleura or peritoneum. Methods: Data from 27 patients with baseline and follow-up ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT imaging were retrospectively analyzed. RECIST, version 1.1; modified RECIST; and PERCIST using both tumor lesion metabolic activity in a 1 cm³ spheric region of interest of up to 5 target lesions (PERCIST_SULpeak) and metabolic tumor volume PERCIST (PERCIST_MTV) were applied separately to categorize responders in CT and PET imaging studies. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between responders and nonresponders using Kaplan-Meier and log-rank analyses. Programmed cell death protein 1 ligand expression status was assessed, and its association with outcome was investigated. Results: Twenty-seven patients had ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT imaging at baseline and after at least 4 cycles pembrolizumab. Median PFS and OS were 3.4 and 15.1 mo, respectively. Response rates were 7%, 7%, 30%, and 30% based on RECIST, modified RECIST, PERCIST_SULpeak, and PERCIST_MTV response criteria, respectively. Response according to PERCIST_MTV predicted prolonged OS or PFS (P < 0.01), whereas all other imaging criteria and programmed cell death protein 1 ligand expression did not. Conclusion: ¹⁸F-FDG PET metabolic volume response predicts survival in patients with malignant mesothelioma receiving high-dose pembrolizumab. These results should prompt inclusion of PET response assessment in future phase 3 clinical trials.

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

OBJECTIVES

Second-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 METHODS

GEM (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).

RESULTS

In 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.

CONCLUSIONS

The 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.

Efficacy and Safety of Avelumab Treatment in Patients With Advanced Unresectable Mesothelioma: Phase 1b Results From the JAVELIN Solid Tumor Trial

Importance

Patients with malignant mesothelioma whose disease has progressed after platinum and pemetrexed treatment have limited options. Anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) antibodies have antitumor activity in this disease, but little is known about the activity of anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibodies in patients with mesothelioma.

Objective

To assess the efficacy and safety of avelumab in a cohort of patients with previously treated mesothelioma.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Phase 1b open-label study (JAVELIN Solid Tumor) in patients with unresectable mesothelioma that progressed after platinum and pemetrexed treatment, enrolled at 25 sites in 3 countries between September 9, 2014, and July 22, 2015.

Interventions

Participants received avelumab, 10 mg/kg, every 2 weeks until disease progression, unacceptable toxic effects, or withdrawal from the study.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Prespecified end points included confirmed best overall response based on Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors, version 1.1; duration of response; progression-free survival (PFS); overall survival (OS); PD-L1 expression-based analyses; and safety.

Results

Of 53 patients treated with avelumab, the median age was 67 (range, 32-84) years; 32 (60%) were male. As of December 31, 2016, median follow-up was 24.8 (range, 16.8-27.8) months. Twenty patients (38%) had 3 or more previous lines of therapy (median, 2; range, 1-8). The confirmed objective response rate (ORR) was 9% (5 patients; 95% CI, 3.1%-20.7%), with complete response in 1 patient and partial response in 4 patients. Responses were durable (median, 15.2 months; 95% CI, 11.1 to not estimable months) and occurred in patients with PD-L1-positive tumors (3 of 16; ORR, 19%; 95% CI, 4.0%-45.6%) and PD-L1-negative tumors (2 of 27; ORR, 7%; 95% CI, 0.9%-24.3%) based on a 5% or greater PD-L1 cutoff. Disease control rate was 58% (31 patients). Median PFS was 4.1 (95% CI, 1.4-6.2) months, and the 12-month PFS rate was 17.4% (95% CI, 7.7%-30.4%). Median OS was 10.7 (95% CI, 6.4-20.2) months, and the median 12-month OS rate was 43.8% (95% CI, 29.8%-57.0%). Five patients (9%) had a grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse event, and 3 (6%) had a grade 3 or 4 immune-related, treatment-related adverse event. There were no treatment-related deaths.

Conclusions and Relevance

Avelumab showed durable antitumor activity and disease control with an acceptable safety profile in a heavily pretreated cohort of patients with mesothelioma.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01772004.

Approved and emerging treatments of malignant pleural mesothelioma in elderly patients

Introduction: Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare neoplasm with asbestos exposure as the dominant etiologic agent. Owing to the long latent period following exposure, MPM is often diagnosed late in life. Despite this, elderly patients are under-represented in clinical trials. To date, data regarding the tolerability and efficacy of anticancer treatments for elderly patients affected by MPM are still lacking.Areas covered: The current state-of-the-art of approved treatments employed in the treatment of MPM elderly patients is reviewed and discussed, with a look to emerging therapies. A structured search of bibliographic databases for peer-reviewed research literature and of main meeting abstracts using a focused review question was undertaken.Expert opinion: Even though the median age of MPM patients enrolled in the most recent experimental trials is increasing, no specific analysis has been reported so far in the elderly. Moreover, no data are available for the 'oldest of the elderly' (>75 years). Treatment of elderly patients with MPM is one of the major challenges to the clinician. There is a clear need of large, well-conducted retrospective studies and above all of prospective investigations in this patient population, both in the first-and in the second-line setting.

Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: Is Tailoring the Second-Line Therapy Really "Raising the Bar?"

OPINION STATEMENT

Unresectable or relapsed malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) has dismal prognosis. First-line combination therapy with pemetrexed and a platinum analog allows a modest survival benefit, while no clear therapeutic options exist for the second-line therapy. In this setting, pemetrexed seems to be the most active drug; however, the inclusion in front-line treatment limits its use in further lines. Nevertheless, rechallenge with one or both drugs used in first-line remains a feasible strategy for responder patients. Alternatively, only few cytotoxic drugs have demonstrated a mild activity in refractory MPM. Among other options, targeted therapy has unfortunately produced disappointing results as salvage treatment probably due to the lack of a clear understanding of the tumor biology. In contrast, recent data suggest moderate efficacy and mild toxicity of immunotherapy also for the treatment of MPM. The combination of checkpoint inhibitors with chemotherapy or other immunological agents seems promising and could really "raise the bar" in this setting.

BAP1 Status Determines the Sensitivity of Malignant Mesothelioma Cells to Gemcitabine Treatment

Malignant mesothelioma (MMe) is a cancer with poor prognosis and resistance to standard treatments. Recent reports have highlighted the role of the BRCA1 associated protein 1 gene (BAP1) in the development of MMe. In this study, the chemosensitivity of human mesothelioma cell lines carrying BAP1 wild-type (WT), mutant and silenced was analysed. The BAP1 mutant cells were significantly less sensitive than BAP1 WT cell lines to the clinically relevant drug gemcitabine. Silencing of BAP1 significantly increased resistance of MMe cells to gemcitabine. Cell cycle analysis suggested that gemcitabine induced Sub-G1 phase accumulation of the BAP1 WT cells and increased in the S-phase in both BAP1 WT and mutant cells. Analysis of the role of BAP1 in apoptosis suggested that gemcitabine induced early apoptosis in both BAP1 WT and BAP1 mutant cells but with a much higher degree in the WT cells. Effects on the population of cells in late apoptosis, which can mark necrosis and necroptosis, could not be seen in the mutant cells, highlighting the possibility that BAP1 plays a role in several types of cell death. Significantly decreased DNA damage in the form of double-strand breaks was observed in gemcitabine-treated BAP1 mutant cells, compared to BAP1 WT cells under the same conditions. After BAP1 silencing, a significant decrease in DNA damage in the form of double-strand breaks was observed compared to cells transfected with scramble siRNA. Taken together, the results presented in this manuscript shed light on the role of BAP1 in the response of MMe cells to gemcitabine treatment and in particular in the control of the DNA damage response, therefore providing a potential route for more efficient MMe therapy.

Product review: avelumab, an anti-PD-L1 antibody

Although immunotherapies have been employed for many decades, immune checkpoint inhibitors have only recently entered the oncologic landscape. Avelumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody that blocks the interaction between PD-L1 on tumor cells and PD-1 on T cells, thereby inhibiting immunosuppression in the tumor microenvironment and reducing tumor growth. Most early clinical trials of avelumab as monotherapy and in combination regimens were part of the international JAVELIN clinical trial program, which included more than 7000 patients in more than 30 trials with at least 15 tumor types. Avelumab has been approved by the U.S. FDA for the treatment of metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma and metastatic urothelial carcinoma that has progressed during or following treatment with a platinum-based regimen. Its acceptable safety profile and ability to induce durable responses in otherwise deadly tumors provide the rationale for its use in other tumor types and in combination with other therapies.

Nivolumab Immunotherapy in Malignant Mesothelioma: A Case Report Highlighting a New Opportunity for Exceptional Outcomes

BACKGROUND Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a highly lethal cancer with a median survival of ~12 months even with aggressive intervention. Frontline therapy relies on systemic cisplatin and pemetrexed chemotherapy and has a response rate of ~35-41%; currently, there are no US Food and Drug Administration approved second-line therapies for MPM. Herein, we present a patient with MPM who experienced rapid disease progression after standard therapy but who had an exceptional and sustained response to immune checkpoint inhibition with single agent nivolumab. CASE REPORT A 68-year-old male with a history of work-related asbestos exposure was diagnosed with MPM. He was treated with primary resection followed by systemic chemotherapy with cisplatin and pemetrexed. When chemotherapy failed, he was switched to immunotherapy with nivolumab and achieved an exceptional response. CONCLUSIONS We report the first case of a patient with MPM who experienced rapid disease progression after standard therapy but had an exceptional and sustained response to immune checkpoint inhibition with single agent nivolumab. As outcomes with traditional chemotherapy regimens remain disappointing, there is a substantial need for new approaches to MPM; our case highlights a new therapeutic opportunity even in the face of aggressive disease. Indeed, a new era of investigation utilizing immunotherapy for mesothelioma is beginning, with much anticipation.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of second-line therapies for treatment of mesothelioma

INTRODUCTION

Advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is generally treated with platinum/pemetrexed-based first-line therapy. Once the disease progresses, evidence for the efficacy of palliative treatments is lacking, and platinum re-challenge or single-agent chemotherapy are commonly used. To assess the effects of cytostatic or targeted therapy for treating MPM, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were searched to identify published articles on second-line treatments for recurrent or advanced mesothelioma. Inclusion criteria were publication in the English language, describing clinical trials with 20 or more patients, and evaluability for efficacy and for receiving second-line systemic therapies. Data were pooled using number of events/number of evaluable patients, median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), according to a fixed or random effect model. Pooled median OS was the primary endpoint.

RESULTS

A total of 49 eligible studies (n = 3938 patients; range, 12-400) were identified. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.4 months (95%CI 2.87-3.93). Median pooled OS was 7.86 (95%CI 7.01-8.72). The pooled overall response rate (ORR) was 8.63% (95%CI 6-11.26), and the pooled disease control rate (DCR) was 54.8% (95%CI 48.9-60.6). Median pooled OS with platinum- and pemetrexed-based chemotherapy were 7.93 and 7.78 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

There remains uncertainty about the ideal second-line agent for MPM. Based on this meta-analysis, palliative chemotherapy or other experimental agents can be considered for patients with MPM who desire further treatment after their disease has progressed, during or after first-line therapy.

A prospective study to investigate the role of serial serum mesothelin in monitoring mesothelioma

Background

Radiological monitoring of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) using modified RECIST criteria is limited by low sensitivity and inter-observer variability. Serial serum mesothelin measurement has shown utility in the assessment of treatment response during chemotherapy but has never been assessed in the longer term follow up of patients.

Methods

This is a single centre study of consecutive patients diagnosed with MPM who received chemotherapy or best supportive care (BSC). Serum mesothelin measurements with paired 6 monthly CT scans were performed following the completion of chemotherapy, or from baseline in the BSC group. Changes in mesothelin were correlated with radiological progression and overall survival.

Results

Forty-one patients with MPM were recruited and followed up for a minimum of 12 months (range 12–21 months). The majority of patients (n = 23) received chemotherapy with pemetrexed and cisplatin. Across the cohort a 10% rise in serum mesothelin could predict radiological progression with a sensitivity of 96% (IQR; 79–100) and specificity of 74% (IQR; 50–91). Sensitivity fell to 80% in sarcomatoid only disease. Patients with a rising mesothelin at 6 months had significantly worse overall survival (175 days) compared to stable/falling levels (448 days) (p = 0.003).

Conclusions

This is the first study to assess serum mesothelin’s ability to detect progression of MPM following chemotherapy or during BSC. A 10% rise in serum mesothelin level showed excellent sensitivity at predicting progressive disease. Mesothelin measurement has several advantages over serial CT imaging including reducing hospital visits and cost.

Treatment of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline

Purpose To provide evidence-based recommendations to practicing physicians and others on the management of malignant pleural mesothelioma. Methods ASCO convened an Expert Panel of medical oncology, thoracic surgery, radiation oncology, pulmonary, pathology, imaging, and advocacy experts to conduct a literature search, which included systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and prospective and retrospective comparative observational studies published from 1990 through 2017. Outcomes of interest included survival, disease-free or recurrence-free survival, and quality of life. Expert Panel members used available evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations. Results The literature search identified 222 relevant studies to inform the evidence base for this guideline. Recommendations Evidence-based recommendations were developed for diagnosis, staging, chemotherapy, surgical cytoreduction, radiation therapy, and multimodality therapy in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/thoracic-cancer-guidelines and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki .

Medical treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma relapses

There are not established treatments for patients with advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma that progressed after first-line chemotherapy with cisplatin and pemetrexed. Retrospective analyses suggest a possible role for rechallenge with pemetrexed for selected patients. Phase II trials demonstrate a modest efficacy of vinorelbine monotherapy with a response rate ranging between 0% and 18% and a tolerable toxicity profile. Combination schedules, despite an increased toxicity, fail to demonstrate an improved efficacy. To date, genome wide analyses did not show molecular targets suitable for therapy and biological drugs did not exert a significant efficacy in clinical trials. Immunotherapy has given a hint of efficacy in early clinical trials but definitive evaluations are still ongoing.

A specific inhibitor of lactate dehydrogenase overcame the resistance toward gemcitabine in hypoxic mesothelioma cells, and modulated the expression of the human equilibrative transporter-1

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a very hypoxic malignancy, and hypoxia has been associated with resistance towards gemcitabine. The muscle-isoform of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH-A) constitutes a major checkpoint for the switch to anaerobic glycolysis. Therefore we investigated the combination of a new LDH-A inhibitor (NHI-1) with gemcitabine in MPM cell lines. Under hypoxia (O₂ tension of 1%) the cell growth inhibitory effects of gemcitabine, were reduced, as demonstrated by a 5- to 10-fold increase in IC₅₀s. However, the simultaneous addition of NHI-1 was synergistic (combination index < 1). Flow cytometry demonstrated that hypoxia caused a G1 arrest, whereas the combination of NHI-1 significantly increased gemcitabine-induced cell death. Finally, the mRNA expression levels of the human equilibrative transporter-1 (hENT1) were significantly down-regulated under hypoxia, but treatment with NHI-1 was associated with a recovery of hENT1 expression. In conclusion, our data show that hypoxia increased MPM resistance to gemcitabine. However, cell death induction and modulation of the key transporter in gemcitabine uptake may contribute to the synergistic interaction of gemcitabine with the LDH-A inhibitor NHI-1 and support further studies for the rational development of this combination.

MDM2 and HIF1alpha expression levels in different histologic subtypes of malignant pleural mesothelioma: correlation with pathological and clinical data

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive tumor with poor prognosis and limited treatment options. Sarcomatoid/biphasic mesotheliomas are characterized by more aggressive behaviour and a poorer prognosis compared with the epithelioid subtype. To date prognostic and tailored therapeutic biomarkers are lacking. The present study analyzed the expression levels of MDM2 and HIF1alpha in different histologic subtypes from chemonaive MPM patients. Diagnostic biopsies of MPM patients from four Italian cancer centers were centrally collected and analyzed. MDM2 and HIF1alpha expression levels were investigated through immunohistochemistry and RT-qPCR. Pathological assessment of necrosis, inflammation and proliferation index was also performed. Molecular markers, pathological features and clinical characteristics were correlated to overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS). Sixty MPM patients were included in the study (32 epithelioid and 28 non-epithelioid). Higher levels of MDM2 (p < 0.001), HIF1alpha (p = 0.013), necrosis (p = 0.013) and proliferation index (p < 0.001) were seen mainly in sarcomatoid/biphasic subtypes. Higher levels of inflammation were significantly associated with epithelioid subtype (p = 0.044). MDM2 expression levels were correlated with HIF1alpha levels (p = 0.0001), necrosis (p = 0.008) and proliferation index (p = 0.009). Univariate analysis showed a significant correlation of non-epithelioid histology (p = 0.04), high levels of necrosis (p = 0.037) and proliferation index (p = 0.0002) with shorter PFS. Sarcomatoid/biphasic and epithelioid mesotheliomas showed different MDM2 and HIF1alpha expression levels and were characterized by different levels of necrosis, proliferation and inflammation. Further studies are warranted to confirm a prognostic and predictive role of such markers and features.

Pemetrexed Maintenance Therapy Following Bevacizumab-Containing First-Line Chemotherapy in Advanced Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: A Case Report and Literatures Review

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a lethal disease with poor prognosis. The combination of cisplatin and pemetrexed has been confirmed as the standard of care for nonoperable MPM. Data have shown that the adoption of pemetrexed maintenance therapy (PMT) following first-line treatment appears extremely promising.We describe a 57-year-old man diagnosed as advanced MPM. We treated this patient with PMT after first-line cisplatin-based bevacizumab-containing chemotherapy and residual tumor disappeared after 6 course of PMT. A perfect response and a long progression-free survival (PFS) were reached with tumor mass disappearing and 14 months duration of PFS.This case suggests that adding bevacizumab to standard first-line chemotherapy is feasible and that PMT could be promising and useful for treating advanced MPM. We further entail a review of the literature on the first-line treatment, continuation maintenance therapy, switch maintenance therapy, and second-line treatment of patients with advanced MPM.

New directions in mesothelioma treatment

For most patients with mesothelioma, symptom control and palliative chemotherapy are mainstays of care. First-line cisplatin/pemetrexed chemotherapy has demonstrated survival and quality-of-life benefits. A randomized controlled trial adding bevacizumab to cisplatin and pemetrexed recently reported improved survival and time to progression, and may constitute a new standard of care where economically viable. Immunotherapy is under active investigation and positive results have been reported from single-arm studies of the anti-CTLA4 antibody tremelimumab; the anti-PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab; and mesothelin-targeting strategies. Symptom control remains critical for patient well-being, and includes management of pleural effusion, analgesia, treatment of symptomatic masses and management of systemic symptoms. There is increasing evidence that tunneled pleural catheters are preferred over talc pleurodesis for recurrent pleural effusion.

The role of interleukin-6 in malignant mesothelioma

Malignant mesothelioma (MM) still remains a dismal disease with a median overall survival between 9-12 months. During the past decade since the introduction of the multi-folate antagonist, pemetrexed, there have been no significant advances in its systemic treatment, particularly with novel therapeutics that have exhibited varying degrees of success in other solid tumours. In recent years, the pleiotropic proinflammatory cytokine, interleukin-6 (IL-6) has emerged as a mediator of pivotal processes such as cell proliferation and chemoresistance within the mesothelioma tumour microenvironment in addition to clinical symptoms commonly witnessed in this disease. This manuscript provides a brief summary on the pathophysiology and clinical management of MM, followed by the role of IL-6 in its tumourigenesis and the rationale for utilising anti-IL-6 therapeutics alongside standard chemotherapy and targeted agents in an attempt to prolong survival.

Current issues in malignant pleural mesothelioma evaluation and management

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an uncommon disease most often associated with occupational asbestos exposure and is steadily increasing in worldwide incidence. Patients typically present at an older age, with advanced clinical stage and other medical comorbidities, making management quite challenging. Despite great efforts, the prognosis of MPM remains poor, especially at progression after initial treatment. Macroscopic complete resection of MPM can be achieved through extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP) or extended (ie, radical) pleurectomy (e-P/D) in selected patients and can result in prolonged survival when incorporated into a multimodality approach. Given the morbidity associated with surgical resection of MPM, optimizing identification of appropriate patients is essential. Unfortunately, most patients are not candidates for EPP or e-P/D due to advanced stage, age, and/or medical comorbidity. Pemetrexed and platinum combination chemotherapy has become the cornerstone of therapy for patients with unresectable disease because the combination is associated with improved survival and quality of life in treated patients. However, MPM eventually becomes resistant to initial therapy, and benefit to further lines of therapy has not been substantiated in randomized clinical trials. Translational research has provided exciting insights into tumorigenesis, biomarkers, and immune response in MPM, leading to the development of multiple novel therapeutic agents that are currently in clinical trials. These advances hold the promise of a new era in the treatment of MPM and suggest that this disease will not be left behind in the war on cancer.

Second-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy regimens improve overall 3-year survival rate in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma: a multicenter retrospective study

In the present study, we aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of second-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy regimens on overall survival (OS) in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) patients receiving first-line pemetrexed-based regimens. A total of 73 patients with MPM from Akdeniz University, Acibadem Kayseri Hospital, Kayseri Training and Research Hospital, and Erciyes University were analyzed and evaluated retrospectively as two groups: second-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy and no second-line chemotherapy. The median OS of patients who received second-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy was 11.3 (5.1-17.5) months, while it was 9.9 (2.1-17.7) months in the patients who did not receive chemotherapy in the second-line setting (p = 0.056). When we evaluated the survival rate at the 6th, 12th, 18th, 24th, and 36th month, the OS rate of the 36th month was significantly higher in patients who received gemcitabine-based second-line chemotherapy (p = 0.041). When evaluating the OS from diagnosis to death, the median OS values were 20.8 (17.5-24.1) months for first-line pemetrexed-based regimens then second-line gemcitabine alone and 13.1 (9.0-17.1) months supportive care after first-line pemetrexed-based regimens (p = 0.005). According to our results, we may consider gemcitabine-based regimens as second-line chemotherapy after treatment with pemetrexed plus platinum in patients with MPM.

Second-line treatment in malignant pleural mesothelioma: translating the evidence into clinical practice

SUMMARY 

Nearly all patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) progress during or after standard first-line treatment with pemetrexed plus a platinum compound. Second-line therapies are being increasingly used in clinical practice, but their role is still unproven, and the optimal regimens remain to be defined. Published studies have frequently severe limitations, due to the small number and to the heterogeneity of patients included. New treatment options are eagerly awaited. In selected cases with a prolonged disease control after first-line chemotherapy, re-treatment with pemetrexed seems to be the best option. In the other cases, patients should be enrolled whenever possible in clinical trials. Single-agent chemotherapy remains a reasonable option for palliation.

Vinorelbine and gemcitabine as second- or third-line therapy for malignant pleural mesothelioma

OBJECTIVES

Pemetrexed-cisplatin is the only FDA-approved regimen for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), and the impact on survival is modest. No drugs have been shown to improve survival as second-line therapy, yet vinorelbine and gemcitabine are prescribed based on the results of small phase II trials. To augment the existing limited data, we examined our institutional experience with vinorelbine and gemcitabine in patients with previously treated MPM.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We reviewed charts of patients with MPM treated with vinorelbine and/or gemcitabine as second- or third-line therapy between 2003 and 2010. Toxicity was graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 4.0. CT scans were reviewed with a reference radiologist according to modified RECIST criteria.

RESULTS

Sixty patients were identified: 33 treated with vinorelbine, 15 gemcitabine, and 12 both agents. Eighty-three percent initially received pemetrexed-platinum. Toxicity was substantial: 46% experienced at least one episode of grade 3-4 toxicity. Of 56 patients evaluable radiologically, there was 1 partial response (gemcitabine) giving a response rate of 2% (95% CI: 0-10%). Forty-six percent had stable disease. Median progression free survival was 1.7 months for vinorelbine and 1.6 months for gemcitabine. Median overall survival was 5.4 and 4.9 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Response to second- or third-line vinorelbine or gemcitabine is rare. The high rate of stable disease warrants the continued use of these agents in this setting, though the impact on survival is questionable. These data justify the choice of placebo control arms in randomized trials of novel agents in previously treated patients.

Vinorelbine in pemetrexed-pretreated patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma

BACKGROUND

Pemetrexed-platinum chemotherapy is the standard first-line treatment of unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). At progression, patients are generally selected to experimental trials, when available, or, in every-day clinical practice, they are offered second-line chemotherapy. The optimal treatment has not yet been defined. The aim of this retrospective, single-center study was to evaluate the activity and toxicity of vinorelbine administered to a consecutive series of pemetrexed-pretreated MPM patients.

METHODS

Vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) was administered intravenously as a single agent on days 1, 8 every three weeks, either as second-line (2L) or further-line (>2L) therapy. Treatment was repeated for a maximum of 6 cycles, until progression, or unacceptable toxicity.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine patients were included in this analysis. Vinorelbine was given to 34 patients as 2L, and to 25 as > 2L treatment. The median age was 69 years (range 45-80). Forty-two patients (71.2%) had a good EORTC prognostic score. Partial response was observed in 9 (15.2%) cases, stable disease in 20 (33.9%). The overall disease control rate (DCR) was 49.1%. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 2.3 and 6.2 months, respectively. ECOG performance status (PS) (HR(0 vs. 1-2) 0.50; 95%CI: 0.3-0.8; p = 0.014) and PFS ≥ 6 months following first-line (FL) chemotherapy (HR(FL-PFS>6 ms vs. <6 ms) 0.50; 95%CI: 0.3-0.9; p = 0.031) were significantly associated to OS in multivariate analysis. No difference was observed in terms of DCR, PFS, and OS in relation to age, histology, sex, line of vinorelbine therapy, or response to FL treatment. Hematological toxicity was acceptable, with grade 3/4 neutropenia occurring in 5 (8.4%) patients, and there were no cases of febrile neutropenia. The main non-hematological toxicities were grade 2 fatigue in 17 (28.8%) and constipation in 7 (11.8%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Vinorelbine was moderately active in pemetrexed-pretreated MPM patients, with an acceptable toxicity profile, particularly in patients with ECOG-PS0 and FL-PFS ≥ 6 months.

Gemcitabine and vinorelbine as second-line or beyond treatment in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma pretreated with platinum plus pemetrexed chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive neoplasm that responds poorly to chemotherapy. Although treatment with pemetrexed in combination with cisplatin serves as first-line chemotherapy for MPM, the optimal second-line and beyond therapy has not yet been fully examined.

METHODS

Between March 2008 and October 2011, 17 consecutive Japanese patients pretreated with at least one regimen of platinum plus pemetrexed chemotherapy received gemcitabine and vinorelbine. Responses, survival time, and toxicity were retrospectively evaluated.

RESULTS

Response [partial response (PR) + complete response (CR)] and disease control [stable disease (SD) + PR + CR] rates were 18 and 82 %, respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) after combination chemotherapy was 6.0 months, whereas the median overall survival (OS) was 11.2 months. Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia and anemia were observed in 41 and 29 % of patients, respectively, and one patient experienced febrile neutropenia. Grade 3 or 4 nonhematologic toxicities included constipation (6 %) and phlebitis (6 %).

CONCLUSION

Combination chemotherapy using gemcitabine with vinorelbine was shown to have moderate activity in Japanese MPM patients pretreated with platinum plus pemetrexed chemotherapy. A further multicenter phase II trial is warranted to confirm the efficacy and safety of this combination treatment.

[Malignant pleural mesothelioma: diagnosis and treatment]

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare and aggressive tumor issued from the mesothelial surface of the pleural space. A previous exposure to asbestos is the main risk factor of mesothelioma. Clinical signs are most of the time late and unspecific. Chest CT-scan, a key imaging procedure, usually shows a (unilateral) pleurisy associated with pleural nodular thickening. PET-scan associated with CT-scan may help to differenciate MPM from pleural benign tumors but it is not recommended for the diagnosis of MPM, as well as chest resonance magnetic imaging and blood or pleural fluid biomarkers, including soluble mesothelin still under investigation. The diagnosis of MPM is based on histology using essentially immunohistochemistry on pleural biopsies best obtained by thoracoscopy. The treatment of MPM relies mostly on chemotherapy. Surgery, pleurectomy/decortication or extrapleural pneumonectomy, is not recommended outside a clinical trial, as well as adjuvant chest radiotherapy. Prophylactic irradiation of chest scars and drains, validated by the French guidelines in 2005, is however highly discussed at the international level. Finally, numerous research studies presently assess the value of targeted therapies and biomarkers in MPM, opening new perspectives in the management of this cancer.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma: update on treatment options with a focus on novel therapies

There is evidence that improved treatments of malignant pleural mesothelioma are increasing the quality and quantity of life for patients with mesothelioma. Multimodality treatment programs that combine maximal surgical cytoreduction with novel forms of radiation therapy and more effective chemotherapy combinations may offer significant increases in survival for certain subgroups of patients with mesothelioma. Lung-sparing surgery may allow improvements in pulmonary function after surgery-based multimodality therapy, and potential longer overall survival than that seen with extrapleural pneumonectomy. Experimental treatments provide hope for all patients with mesothelioma, and in the future may be combined with standard therapy in multimodality protocols.

Advanced diffuse malignant peritoneal mesothelioma responding to palliative chemotherapy

A 64-year-old man diagnosed with advanced malignant peritoneal mesothelioma by laparoscopic biopsy was treated with systemic chemotherapy. The patient underwent first-line chemotherapy with pemetrexed plus cisplatin for 11 months, then second-line chemotherapy with gemcitabine plus vinorelbine for 6 months, and third-line chemotherapy with CPT-11 for 4 months. After third-line chemotherapy failed, he received palliative treatment. Although the tumor continued to grow, and he died 24 months after initiation of treatment, chemotherapy prolonged the survival time and improved his quality of life.

Preclinical studies identify novel targeted pharmacological strategies for treatment of human malignant pleural mesothelioma

The incidence of human malignant pleural mesothelioma (hMPM) is still increasing worldwide. hMPM prognosis is poor even if the median survival time has been slightly improved after the introduction of the up-to-date chemotherapy. Nevertheless, large phase II/III trials support the combination of platinum derivatives and pemetrexed or raltitrexed, as preferred first-line schedule. Better understanding of the molecular machinery of hMPM will lead to the design and synthesis of novel compounds targeted against pathways identified as crucial for hMPM cell proliferation and spreading. Among them, several receptors tyrosine kinase show altered activity in subsets of hMPM. This observation suggests that these kinases might represent novel therapeutic targets in this chemotherapy-resistant disease. Over these foundations, several promising studies are ongoing at preclinical level and novel molecules are currently under evaluation as well. Yet, established tumour cell lines, used for decades to investigate the efficacy of anticancer agents, although still the main source of drug efficacy studies, after long-term cultures tend to biologically diverge from the original tumour, limiting the predictive potential of in vivo efficacy. Cancer stem cells (CSCs), a subpopulation of malignant cells capable of self-renewal and multilineage differentiation, are believed to play an essential role in cancer initiation, growth, metastasization and relapse, being responsible of chemo- and radiotherapy refractoriness. According to the current carcinogenesis theory, CSCs represent the tumour-initiating cell (TIC) fraction, the only clonogenic subpopulation able to originate a tumour mass. Consequently, the recently described isolation of TICs from hMPM, the proposed main pharmacological target for novel antitumoural drugs, may contribute to better dissect the biology and multidrug resistance pathways controlling hMPM growth.

Synthesis and in vitro evaluation of novel lipophilic monophosphorylated gemcitabine derivatives and their nanoparticles

Gemcitabine hydrochloride (HCl) is approved for the treatment of a wide spectrum of solid tumors. However, the rapid development of resistance often makes gemcitabine less efficacious. In the present study, we synthesized several novel lipophilic monophosphorylated gemcitabine derivatives, incorporated them into solid lipid nanoparticles, and then evaluated their ability to overcome major known gemcitabine resistance mechanisms by evaluating their in vitro cytotoxicities in cancer cells that are deficient in deoxycytidine kinase (dCK), deficient in human equilibrative nucleoside transporter (hENT1), over-expressing ribonucleotide reductase M1 subunit (RRM1), or over-expressing RRM2. In dCK deficient cells, the monophosphorylated gemcitabine derivatives and their nanoparticles were up to 86-fold more cytotoxic than gemcitabine HCl. The majority of the gemcitabine derivatives and their nanoparticles were more cytotoxic than gemcitabine HCl in cells that over-expressing RRM1 or RRM2, and the gemcitabine derivatives in nanoparticles were also resistant to deamination by deoxycytidine deaminase. The gemcitabine derivatives (in nanoparticles) hold a great potential in overcoming gemcitabine resistance.

Systemic treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma is a rare malignancy with a dismal prognosis. The clinical management of most of the patients with this disease is quite challenging, and, overall, the therapeutic strategy has not yet benefited from the recent advances in molecular biology. Randomized evidence supports the use of cisplatin in combination with pemetrexed or raltitrexed as first-line treatments. In elderly patients with comorbidities cisplatin may be replaced by carboplatin because of a lesser burden of toxicities. The role of second-line chemotherapy is unproven, although pemetrexed can be regarded as the standard option in pemetrexed-naive patients and therapeutic rechallenge with pemetrexed may be considered in selected patients with prolonged disease control after first-line therapy. Targeted therapies failed to demonstrate any substantial activity; however, immunotherapies may complement other treatment strategies. In summary, there is an unmet clinical need and innovative approaches to select new potentially active drugs are highly warranted.

Medical treatment of mesothelioma: anything new?

In the present report, we review the current standard and investigational treatments of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Several studies have reported the use of gemcitabine and cisplatin as an induction chemotherapy in combination with extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP) and thoracic radiation in a combined-modality approach for resectable MPM. Since the combination of cisplatin with pemetrexed was applied as the standard first-line regimen for unresectable MPM, the combination as an induction chemotherapy regimen has been proven effective in phase 2 trials. In addition, intensity-modulated radiation therapy and proton therapy have been introduced as new radiation methods into the combined modality. Hyperthermic intraoperative chemotherapy following EPP appears effective with acceptable toxicity. In addition, clinical studies that include molecular targeting agents, immunotherapy, and gene therapy have all been conducted. Thus, although there are numerous hopeful treatments for MPM, the benefits of these regimens remain to be proven in a randomized clinical setting.