Revised Modified RECIST Criteria in Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (Version 1.1): A Step Forward in a Long Race

Nivolumab and ipilimumab in the real-world setting in patients with mesothelioma

OBJECTIVES

Nivolumab (anti-PD-1) plus ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4) is a new first-line treatment combination for patients with pleural mesothelioma. Nivolumab-ipilimumab improved the survival, however, 30.3% of the patients suffered from grade 3-4 treatment related adverse events (TRAE's) and TRAE's led to discontinuation in 23.0% of all patients. Here, we present the first real-world data of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with malignant mesothelioma treated in two mesothelioma expert centers.

METHODS

Clinical data of patients with mesothelioma treated with nivolumab and ipilimumab were prospectively collected. Clinical parameters were obtained every visit, CT scans were evaluated every 12 weeks and adverse events were assessed continuously during the treatment. Data on grade 2-5 TRAE's and activity (overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), disease control rate (DCR), median progression-free survival (mPFS) and median overall survival (mOS) were reported.

RESULTS

Between January 2021 and August 2022, 184 patients were treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab. The median follow-up was 12.1 months (95 %CI 11.1 - 13.1). Grade 3-4 TRAEs were seen in 27.7 % of the patients and 25.0 % discontinued immunotherapy treatment early because of TRAE's. ORR was 21.7 % (95 % CI 15.7-27.7), median DOR was 5.7 months (IQR 3.2-8.7) and DCR at 12 weeks 56.0 % (95 % CI 48.8-63.2). The mPFS was 5.5 months (95 %CI 4.1-6.9), mOS was 14.1 months (95 % CI 11.1-18.2).

CONCLUSIONS

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab had an equal efficacy in a real-world comparable population but also a high risk of TRAE's, leading to discontinuation of treatment in 25% of the patients.

Radiographic response to neoadjuvant therapy in pleural mesothelioma should serve as a guide for patient selection for cytoreductive operations

Background

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is associated with poor prognosis despite advances in multimodal therapeutic strategies. While patients with resectable disease may benefit from added survival with oncologic resection, patient selection for mesothelioma operations often relies on both objective and subjective evaluation metrics. We sought to evaluate factors associated with improved overall survival (OS) in patients with mesothelioma who underwent macroscopic complete resection (MCR).

Methods

Patients with MPM who received neoadjuvant therapy and underwent MCR were identified in a prospectively maintained departmental database. Clinicopathologic, blood-based, and radiographic variables were collected and included in a Cox regression analysis (CRA). Response to neoadjuvant therapy was characterized by a change in tumor thickness from pretherapy to preoperative scans using the modified RECIST criteria.

Results

In this study, 99 patients met the inclusion criteria. The median age of the included patients was 64.7 years, who were predominantly men, had smoking and asbestos exposure, and who received neoadjuvant therapy. The median change in tumor thickness following neoadjuvant therapy was -16.5% (interquartile range of -49.7% to +14.2%). CRA demonstrated reduced OS associated with non-epithelioid histology [hazard ratio (HR): 3.06, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.62-5.78, p < 0.001] and a response to neoadjuvant therapy inferior to the median (HR: 2.70, CI: 1.55-4.72, p < 0.001). Patients who responded poorly (below median) to neoadjuvant therapy had lower median survival (15.8 months compared to 38.2 months, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Poor response to neoadjuvant therapy in patients with MPM is associated with poor outcomes even following maximum surgical cytoreduction and should warrant a patient-centered discussion regarding goals of care and may therefore help guide further therapeutic decisions.

Longitudinal monitoring of response to chemotherapy in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma by biomarkers

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to longitudinally investigate the serum levels of mesothelin, sestrin1, hyaluronan synthase 2 (HAS2), midkine, and high mobility group box 1 (HMGB1) before and after chemotherapy and at the time of relapse in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) patients treated with chemotherapy and to compare the changes in biomarker levels with radiological treatment outcome.

METHODS

A total of 64 MPM patients treated with chemotherapy were enrolled in the study and longitudinally followed for changes in biomarker levels in response to treatment. Biomarkers levels were measured in serum using a human ELISA kit. Relative and absolute changes in biomarker levels were compared with the best radiological overall response at each time point.

RESULTS

Median survival was 20.0 ± 2.4 (15.3-24.7) months in patients with partial and complete response, 17.0 ± 1.0 (15.0-19.0) months in patients with stable disease, and 9.0 ± 1.0 (7.0-11.0) months in patients with progressive disease. A significant decrease in serum levels of mesothelin, midkine, and HMGB1 was observed in patients with radiologically partial and complete responses to chemotherapy (p< 0.001, p= 0.016, and p= 0.039, respectively). In these patients, mesothelin levels decreased by 15%, midkine levels by 7%, and HMGB1 levels by 15%. In addition, HMGB1 serum levels were found to significantly increase by 15% in patients with radiologically progressive responses to chemotherapy compared to pretreatment serum levels (p= 0.035). In patients with partial and complete response to chemotherapy, mesothelin levels increased by 15%, midkine by 12%, and sestrin1 by 8% when the disease recurred (p= 0.004, p= 0.004 and p= 0.044, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Biomarkers may be useful in the longitudinal monitoring of response to treatment in MPM. However, the results of our study should be validated in larger groups with sufficient case numbers from multicenter institutions.

Serum Expression Levels of Certain miRNAs in Predicting Diagnosis, Prognosis, and Response to Chemotherapy in Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

Background:

miRNAs are involved in tumor pathogenesis and can therefore be determined in the primary tumor, plasma and serum, and body fluids. As in various cancers, their role in the diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) may be important.

Aims:

To analyze the predictive value of miR-16-5p, miR-29c-3p, miR-31-5p, miR-125a-5p, miR-320a, miR-484 and miR-532-5p expressions for diagnosis, prognosis and response to treatment in patients with MPM.

Study Design:

Prospective case-control study.

Methods:

In the first phase of the study, blood samples were collected from 101 MPM patients before chemotherapy and from 24 healthy donors (HDs). In the second phase, the blood samples were collected from 74 MPM patients who had received chemotherapy when the best overall response and disease recurrence were determined. A quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction was undertaken to detect the miRNA expression levels. The miRNA expression profiles of MPM patients were compared with those of HDs. The associations between the expression levels of miRNAs and prognosis and response to treatment were then evaluated.

Results:

All miRNAs, except miR-31-5p, were expressed differently in MPM relative to that in HDs. The expression level of miR-16-5p decreased when compared with that of HDs, and the expression levels of miR-29c-3p, miR-125a-5p, miR-320a, miR-484, and miR-532-5p increased when compared with that of HDs. The sensitivity and specificity values of miR-29c-3p, miR-125a-5p, miR-320a, miR-484, and miR-532-5p for discriminating MPM from HDs were 85.9% and 59.1%, 95.1% and 62.5%, 87.1% and 79.2%, 82.2% and 58.3%, and 69.3% and 82.6%, respectively. After adjusting for the histological subtype, stage, and treatment, the miR-29c-3p, miR-125a-5p, and miR-484 were associated with longer survival. The miRNA expression levels did not change longitudinally for the determination of chemotherapy response and recurrence.

Conclusion:

miRNAs may be useful in diagnosing patients with MPM and provides helpful information in determining the prognosis of patients.

Imaging response assessment for oncology: An algorithmic approach

Treatment response assessment by imaging plays a vital role in evaluating changes in solid tumors during oncology therapeutic clinical trials. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 is the reference standard imaging response criteria and provides details regarding image acquisition, image interpretation and categorical response classification. While RECIST 1.1 is applied for the majority of clinical trials in solid tumors, other criteria and modifications have been introduced when RECIST 1.1 outcomes may be incomplete. Available criteria beyond RECIST 1.1 can be explored in an algorithmic fashion dependent on imaging modality, tumor type and method of treatment. Positron Emission Tomography Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (PERCIST) is available for use with PET/CT. Modifications to RECIST 1.1 can be tumor specific, including mRECIST for hepatocellular carcinoma and mesothelioma. Choi criteria for gastrointestinal stromal tumors incorporate tumor density with alterations to categorical response thresholds. Prostate Cancer Working Group 3 (PCWG3) imaging criteria combine RECIST 1.1 findings with those of bone scans. In addition, multiple response criteria have been created to address atypical imaging responses in immunotherapy.

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.

Radiologic Considerations and Standardization of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma Imaging Within Clinical Trials: Consensus Statement from the NCI Thoracic Malignancy Steering Committee - International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer - Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation Clinical Trials Planning Meeting

Detailed guidelines pertaining to radiological assessment of malignant pleural mesothelioma are currently lacking due to the rarity of the disease, complex morphology, propensity to invade multiple planes simultaneously, and lack of specific recommendations within the radiology community about assessment, reporting, and follow-up. In March 2017, a multidisciplinary meeting of mesothelioma experts was co-sponsored by the National Cancer Institute Thoracic Malignancy Steering Committee, International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, and the Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation. One of the outcomes of this conference was the foundation of detailed, multidisciplinary consensus imaging and management guidelines. Here, we present the recommendations for radiologic assessment of malignant pleural mesothelioma in the setting of clinical trial enrollment. We discuss optimization of imaging parameters across modalities, standardized reporting, and response assessment within clinical trials.