Management of Malignant Pleural Effusions

Management of malignant pleural effusion and trapped lung: a survey of respiratory physicians and thoracic surgeons in Australasia

BACKGROUND

Malignant pleural effusions (MPEs) are common, and a third of them have underlying trapped lung (TL). Management of MPE and TL is suspected to be heterogeneous. Understanding current practices in Australasia is important in guiding policies and future research.

AIMS

Electronic survey of Australia-New Zealand respiratory physicians, thoracic surgeons and their respective trainees to determine practice of MPE and TL management.

RESULTS

Of the 132 respondents, 56% were respiratory physicians, 23% were surgeons and 20% were trainees. Many respondents defined TL as >25% or any level of incomplete lung expansion; 75% would use large-volume thoracentesis to determine whether TL was present. For patients with TL, indwelling pleural catheters (IPCs) were the preferred treatment irrespective of prognosis. In those without TL, surgical pleurodesis was the most common choice if prognosis was >6 months, whereas IPC was the preferred option if survival was <3 months. Only 5% of respondents considered decortication having a definite role in TL, but 55% would consider it in select cases. Forty-nine per cent of surgeons would not perform decortication when the lung does not fully expand intra-operatively. Perceived advantages of IPCs were minimisation of hospital time, effusion re-intervention and usefulness irrespective of TL status. Perceived disadvantages of IPCs were lack of suitable drainage care, potentially indefinite duration of catheter-in-situ and catheter complications.

CONCLUSION

This survey highlights the lack of definition of TL and heterogeneity of MPE management in Australasia, especially for patients with expandable lungs. This survey also identified the main hurdles of IPC use that should be targeted.

The evidence framework of traditional Chinese medicine injection (Aidi injection) in controlling malignant pleural effusion: A clustered systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Aidi injection (Aidi), a traditional Chinese medicine injection, is often practiced to control malignant pleural effusion (MPE).

OBJECTIVES

We performed a registered systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD42022337611) to clarify the clinical role of Aidi in MPE, reveal optimal combinations of Aidi and chemical agents, their indications, therapeutic route and usage, and demonstrate their clinical effectiveness and safety.

METHODOLOGY

All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about Aidi in controlling MPE were collected from Chinese and English databases (up to October 2022). We clustered them into multiple homogenous regimens, evaluated the risk-of-bias at outcome level using a RoB 2, extracted and pooled the data using meta-analysis or descriptive analysis, and finally summarized their evidence quality.

RESULTS

All 56 studies were clustered into intrapleural administration with Aidi alone or plus chemical agents, and intravenous administration with Aidi for MPE. Intrapleural administration with Aidi alone displayed similar clinical responses on Cisplatin (DDP) alone. Only administration with Aidi plus DDP significantly improved complete response and quality of life, and displayed a low pleurodesis failure, disease progression, hematotoxicity, gastrointestinal and hepatorenal toxicity. For patients with moderate to massive effusion, Karnofsky Performance Status score ≥ 50 or anticipated survival time ≥3 months, Aidi (50 ml to 80 ml each time, one time each week and three to eight times) plus DDP (20 to 30 mg, 40 to 50 mg, or 60 to 80 mg each time) significantly improved clinical responses. Most results had moderate to low quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidences indicate that Aidi, a pleurodesis agent, plays an interesting clinical role in controlling MPE. Aidi plus DDP perfusion is a most commonly used regimen, which shows a significant improvement in clinical responses. These findings also provide an indication and possible optimal usage for rational drug use.

Current status of and progress in the treatment of malignant pleural effusion of lung cancer

Malignant pleural effusion (MPE) is a common complication in the late stage of malignant tumors. The appearance of MPE indicates that the primary tumor has spread to the pleura or progressed to an advanced stage. The survival time of the patients will be significantly shortened, with a median survival of only a few months. There are a variety of traditional treatments, and their advantages and disadvantages are relatively clear. There are still many problems that cannot be solved by traditional methods in clinical work. The most common one is intrapleural perfusion therapy with chemotherapy drugs, but it has a large side effect of chemotherapy. At present, with the development of medical technology, there are a variety of treatment methods, and many innovative, significant and valuable treatment methods have emerged, which also bring hope for the treatment of refractory and recurrent MPE patients. Several clinical trials had confirmed that drug-carrying microparticles has less adverse reactions and obvious curative effect. However, there is still a long way to go to completely control and cure MPE, and the organic combination of clinical work and scientific research results is needed to bring dawn to refractory MPE patients.

Intrapleural Perfusion With Staphylococcal Enterotoxin C for Malignant Pleural Effusion: A Clustered Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction

The staphylococcal enterotoxin C (SEC), a commercially available bio-product from Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus), has been widely used to control MPE.

Objectives

We designed and performed a new systematic review (SR) and meta-analysis to clarify the perfusion protocols with SEC, determine their clinical effectiveness and safety, and reveal the indication and optimum usage for achieving the desired responses.

Methodology

All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about SEC for MPE were collected from electronic databases (from inception until July 2021), and clustered into multiple logical topics. After evaluating their methodological quality, we pooled the data from each topic using the meta-analysis or descriptive analysis, and summarized the evidence quality using the grading of recommendation assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach.

Results

All 114 studies were clustered into SEC perfusion alone or plus chemical agents. The SEC alone showed a better complete response (CR), a lower pleurodesis failure, and adverse drug reactions (ADRs), and a higher fever than cisplatin (DDP) alone. The SEC and chemical agents developed 10 perfusion protocols. Among them, only SEC and DDP perfusion showed a better CR, a lower failure, disease progression and ADRs, and a higher fever than DDP alone. The SEC (100–200 ng per time, one time a week for one to four times) with DDP (30–40 mg, or 50–60 mg each time) significantly improved clinical responses for patients with moderate to large volume, Karnofsky performance status (KPS) scores ≥40, ≥50, or ≥60, and anticipated survival time (AST) ≥2 or 3 months. Most results were moderate to low quality.

Conclusion

Current pieces of evidence indicate that super-antigen SEC is a pleurodesis agent, which provides an attractive alternative to existing palliative modalities for patients with MPE. Among 10 protocols, the SEC and DDP perfusion is a most commonly used, which shows a significant improvement in clinical responses with low ADRs. These findings also provide a possible indication and optimal usage for SEC and DDP perfusion.

Diagnostic Value of Six Tumor Markers for Malignant Pleural Effusion in 1,230 Patients: A Single-Center Retrospective Study

Background: The diagnostic value of tumor markers in pleural effusion (PE) and serum for malignant pleural effusion (MPE) is still in debate. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of six tumor markers in PE, serum, and the corresponding PE/serum (PE/S) ratio in distinguishing MPE from benign pleural effusion (BPE).

Methods: A total of 1,230 patients with PE (452 MPEs and 778 BPEs) were retrospectively included in the study. PE and serum levels of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), carbohydrate antigen 15-3 (CA15-3), carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA125), carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9), cytokeratin 19 fragment (CYFRA 21-1), and neuron-specific enolase (NSE) were measured. The area under the curve (AUC) was used to assess the single and combined diagnostic values of the six tumor markers for MPE.

Results: The levels of the six tumor markers in PE, serum, and PE/S were significantly higher in MPE than that in BPE, except for serum CA125. PE CEA showed the highest AUC [0.890 (0.871–0.907)] at a cut-off value of 3.7 ng/ml compared to any single tumor marker using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. The specificity, sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) of PE CEA were 74.1%, 95.5%, 90.5%, 86.4%, 16.47, and 0.27, respectively. The combination of PE CEA and serum CYFRA21-1 showed the best diagnostic performance with an AUC of 0.934 (sensitivity, 79.9%; specificity, 95.7%, PPV, 90.5; PLR, 17.35) among all two or three combinations. Besides, serum CYFRA21-1 was the best diagnostic tumor marker in distinguishing cytology-negative MPE from BPE at a cut-off value of 3.0 ng/ml.

Conclusion: PE CEA was the best diagnostic tumor marker in distinguishing MPE from BPE. Serum CYFRA21-1 was the best diagnostic tumor marker in distinguishing cytology-negative MPE from BPE. The combination of PE CEA and serum CYFRA21-1 could increase the diagnostic performance in distinguishing MPE from BPE and cytology-negative MPE from BPE.

Intrapleural Injection of Anti-PD1 Antibody: A Novel Management of Malignant Pleural Effusion

Background

Malignant tumors accompanied with malignant pleural effusion (MPE) often indicate poor prognosis. The therapeutic effect and mechanism of intrapleural injection of anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD1) on MPE need to be explored.

Methods

A preclinical MPE mouse model and a small clinical study were used to evaluate the effect of intrapleural injection of anti-PD1 antibody. The role of immune cells was observed via flow cytometry, RNA-sequencing, quantitative PCR, western blot, immunohistochemistry, and other experimental methods.

Results

Intrathoracic injection of anti-PD1 monoclonal antibody (mAb) has significantly prolonged the survival time of mice (P = 0.0098) and reduced the amount of effusion (P = 0.003) and the number of cancer nodules (P = 0.0043). Local CD8+ T cells participated in intrapleural administration of anti-PD1 mAb. The proportion of CD69+, IFN-γ+, and granzyme B+ CD8+ T cells in the pleural cavity was increased, and the expression of TNF-α and IL-1β in MPE also developed significantly after injection. Local injection promoted activation of the CCL20/CCR6 pathway in the tumor microenvironment and further elevated the expression of several molecules related to lymphocyte activation. Clinically, the control rate of intrathoracic injection of sintilimab (a human anti-PD1 mAb) for 10 weeks in NSCLC patients with MPE was 66.7%. Local injection improved the activity and function of patients' local cytotoxic T cells (CTLs).

Conclusions

Intrapleural injection of anti-PD1 mAb could control malignant pleural effusion and the growth of cancer, which may be achieved by enhancing local CTL activity and cytotoxicity.

Intrapleural Administration With Rh-Endostatin and Chemical Irritants in the Control of Malignant Pleural Effusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

A modified and recombinant human endostatin (Rh-endostatin) is often used in the control of malignant pleural effusion (MPE) through intrapleural infusion.

OBJECTIVES

To demonstrate the clinical response, survival, and safety of Rh-endostatin plus chemical irritants, their optimal combinations, treatment threshold, and optimal usage, we performed a new systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODOLOGY

All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were collected from Chinese and English electronic databases (from inception until August 2020). We pooled the data using a series of meta-analyses and summarized the evidence quality following the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

RESULTS

We included 75 RCTs recruiting 4,678 patients, which reported six combinations for Rh-endostatin plus chemical irritants. Among the six combinations, only Rh-endostatin plus cisplatin (DDP) with enough trials might improve the complete response [2.29 (1.93, 2.71)] and quality of life [3.01 (2.49, 3.63)] and reduce treatment failure [0.29 (0.25, 0.33)] and progressive disease [0.27 (0.22, 0.34)]. It might not increase the risk of adverse drug reactions. For patients with lung cancer, moderate to massive effusion, initial treatment, Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) score ≥60, or anticipated survival time ≥3 months, Rh-endostatin (30-45 mg each time, once or twice a week 3-4 times) plus DDP (30-60 mg/m2) obtained a significant improvement in clinical response and a reduction of failure and progressive disease. Most results had good robustness and moderate quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests that Rh-endostatin with DDP may be an optimal combination, which may improve clinical response and reduce failure and progressive disease with good safety. Rh-endostatin (30-40 mg each time, once or twice a week 3-4 times) with DDP (30-40 mg/m2) may be an optimal usage for achieving an ideal response.