Metabolic response assessment with 18F-FDG-PET/CT is superior to modified RECIST for the evaluation of response to platinum-based doublet chemotherapy in malignant pleural mesothelioma

Considerations for Imaging of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: A Consensus Statement from the International Mesothelioma Interest Group

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive primary malignancy of the pleura that presents unique radiologic challenges with regard to accurate and reproducible assessment of disease extent at staging and follow-up imaging. By optimizing and harmonizing technical approaches to imaging MPM, the best quality imaging can be achieved for individual patient care, clinical trials, and imaging research. This consensus statement represents agreement on harmonized, standard practices for routine multimodality imaging of MPM, including radiography, computed tomography, ¹⁸F-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging, by an international panel of experts in the field of pleural imaging assembled by the International Mesothelioma Interest Group. In addition, modality-specific technical considerations and future directions are discussed. A bulleted summary of all technical recommendations is provided.

Prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in malignant pleural mesothelioma: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several FDG PET/CT parameters have been utilized to evaluate the prognosis in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). However, there are still controversial results due to the low incidence of MPM.

PURPOSE

To assess the prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in MPM.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Medline, and The Cochrane Library to identify eligible studies from inception to 12 February 2020. The pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of several variables, such as maximum standardized uptake value (SUV_max), the reduction of SUV_max after treatment (ΔSUV_max), metabolic tumor volume (MTV), total lesion glycolysis (TLG), and the reduction of TLG after treatment (ΔTLG), were calculated. Meta-regression with subsequent subgroup analyses were conducted to determine the heterogeneity of cutoff values, treatment regimen, study design, uptake time, and scanners across various studies.

RESULTS

In total, 19 eligible studies including 1819 patients were enrolled in the meta-analysis. The univariate analysis showed that the pooled HRs (95% CI) of SUV_max, ΔSUV_max, MTV, TLG, and ΔTLG were 1.29 (1.16-1.42), 1.12 (1.05-1.19), 1.15 (1.00-1.33), 1.47 (1.23-1.76), and 1.27 (1.12-1.45), respectively. The multivariate analysis showed that the pooled HRs (95% CI) of SUV_max, ΔSUV_max, MTV, and TLG for overall survival (OS) were 1.20 (1.08-1.33), 1.10 (1.02-1.19), 0.95 (0.81-1.11), and 1.13 (1.08-1.18), respectively.

CONCLUSION

SUV_max, ΔSUV_max, TLG, and ΔTLG are significant prognostic indicators for OS, while more clinical studies are needed to confirm the prognostic value of MTV in MPM.

The efficacy of 18F-FDG PET/CT in monitoring disease progression in malignant pleural mesothelioma

OBJECTIVE

In the event of suspicion of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) progression, imaging plays an important role. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT in monitoring disease progression by comparing it with CT, and estimate median overall survival (OS) according to progression status with CT and ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was an observational, retrospective, single-institution study with MPM patients who had both ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT and CT for monitoring disease progression from March 2009 to February 2020. Clinical features, radiological findings, and progression status according to CT [radiologic progression negative (RPN), radiologic progression positive (RPP)] and ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT [metabolic progression negative (MPN), metabolic progression positive (MPP)] were recorded. The discrepancies and concordance between two methods were evaluated. The OS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

A total of 56 patients were included. There were thirty-one (55.3%) RPN and 25 (44.7%) RPP, while there were 26 (46.5%) MPN and 30 (53.5%) MPP. All RPP patients were also found to be MPP, however, among RPN, 5 patients (8.9% of all patients) were evaluated as MPP. The concordance between two methods in monitoring disease progression was very good (K = 0.423; p < 0.01). The OS was 26 ± 2.6 months in all patients. Kaplan-Meier curves between RPN and RPP, and between MPN and MPP did not show statistically significant differences (p = 0.56 and p = 0.25, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Both methods are equally acceptable in monitoring disease progression in MPM, even though ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT detected more progression than CT did.

Does size matter? -a population-based analysis of malignant pleural mesothelioma

Background

The 8^th edition staging system for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) has been proposed. The size of tumor is not taken into consideration. We intend to elucidate the prognostic value of the size of MPM and evaluate the current staging system via the data of SEER database.

Methods

All cases of primary MPM were identified and extracted from the SEER database during the period of 2004–2016. The endpoints were overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) which were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method. Log-rank test and Cox regression were utilized to identify the prognostic factors.

Results

A total of 2,138 patients were included in the primary cohort. The 1-, 3- and 5-year survival rates of MPM were 39.4%, 11.8% and 3.8%. Older, male and advanced stage patients accounted for larger proportion of the cohort. Besides tumor extension, lymph node involvement and metastatic status, tumor size, pathological type and differentiation grade were significant prognostic factors. In the stratified analysis of tumor extension, size is a significant prognostic factor in T2 patients and indicates inferior survival outcomes. Surgery, chemotherapy and radiation can increase both OS and CSS in MPM patients. Triple combination treatments showed a superiority to other treatments.

Conclusions

Tumor size matters in the prognosis of MPM especially in the early stage of MPM patients. The adjusted TNM staging system incorporating tumor size has better accuracy than the 8^th edition IMIG system. However, some stages had not been fully identified. More cases of early stages are warranted for essential revision.

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.

Comparison of modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer criteria, and PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors for evaluation of tumor response to chemotherapy and prognosis prediction in patients with unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma

OBJECTIVE

To compare modified RECIST (mRECIST), EORTC criteria, and PERCIST for response evaluation and prognosis prediction in advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) patients treated with chemotherapy.

METHODS

Patients with MPM and not curative surgery candidates (n = 75) underwent standard chemotherapy with cisplatin and pemetrexed. CT and [F]fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT scans were performed at baseline and after three chemotherapy cycles. Chemotherapeutic response was evaluated according to mRECIST, EORTC, and PERCIST, then concordance among those was assessed using Cohen's κ coefficient. PFS and OS were examined using log-rank and Cox methods.

RESULTS

With EORTC, 27 patients had PMD, 23 SMD, 17 PMR, and eight CMR, while with PERCIST those were 28, 22, 11, and 14, respectively. Using mRECIST, 28 had PD, 29 SD, 18 PR, and 0 CR. Although there was high concordance between EORTC and PERCIST (82.7% of patients; κ = 0.83), that between mRECIST and EORTC (38.7%; κ = 0.27) and mRECIST and PERCIST (36.0%; κ = 0.26) was low. According to both EORTC and PERCIST, patients with no progression (CMR/PMR/SMD) showed significantly longer PFS and OS than PMD patients (EORTC: P = 0.0024 and P = 0.039, respectively, PERCIST: P = 0.0012 and P = 0.024, respectively), while according to mRECIST, those who achieved no progression (PR/SD) showed significantly longer PFS than PD patients (P = 0.011), but not significantly longer OS (P = 0.11).

CONCLUSION

EORTC and PERCIST are more accurate than mRECIST for evaluation of tumor response to chemotherapy and predicting prognosis in unresectable MPM patients.

Effects of Reduction in Tumor Burden on Survival in Epithelioid Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

OBJECTIVE

To understand the relationship between response and survival in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The original clinical trial was conducted from April 1999 through March 2001. Patients with epithelioid MPM (n=305) were categorized using modified pleural Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors by whether they responded to treatment. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated and hazard ratios for responders and nonresponders were estimated and compared using the log-rank test. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to adjust for baseline prognostic factors.

RESULTS

Patients who responded to frontline therapy had a significantly longer OS (hazard ratio, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.24-0.49; median, 20.6 months; 95% CI, 15.3 months to not reached) than did those who did not respond (median, 9.4 months; 95% CI, 8.1-11.0 months) (P<.001). Similarly, responders had a significantly longer PFS (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.39-0.64; median, 7.8 months; 95% CI, 6.5-8.5 months) than did nonresponders (median, 3.7 months; 95% CI, 2.9-4.3 months) (P<.001). These results were confirmed when adjusting for baseline prognostic factors. We also observed a survival benefit associated with disease stabilization in MPM.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that reduction in tumor burden or disease stabilization determined using modified pleural Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors is strongly associated with OS and PFS in epithelioid MPM.