Pemetrexed Maintenance Therapy in Patients with Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma:

Malignant pleural mesothelioma: treatment patterns and humanistic burden of disease in Europe

Background

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive and rare tumour with poor prognosis. Most patients are diagnosed with advanced disease and there is a paucity of data on the humanistic burden of MPM in terms of impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and activity. This study examined real-world treatment patterns and humanistic disease burden of MPM in Europe.

Methods

Physicians abstracted demographic/clinical characteristics and treatment data from MPM-patient medical records; MPM patients self-completed a questionnaire including symptoms, 3-level-EQ-5D questionnaire and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Lung Cancer Symptom Scale for Mesothelioma (LCSS-Meso), and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire.

Results

Physicians (n = 171) abstracted data of 1390 patients; 767/1390 patients self-completed questionnaires. Patients were elderly with advanced, unresectable MPM. Treatment patterns followed guidelines with most (81%) patients receiving platinum+antifolate chemotherapy at first line (1 L). Maintenance treatment use was high (51.1%) despite no recommended maintenance therapies. Symptom burden was high and health states and HRQoL were poor at 1; declining further with progression. Overall mean (SD): LCSS-Average Symptom Burden Index score was 48.8 (19.3; n = 758); EQ-5D Utility Index score was 0.510 (0.349; n = 763); EQ-5D VAS score was 54.2 (20.3;n = 766); LCSS-3-Item Global Index score was 143.2 (64.5; n = 762); LCSS-normal activities score was 51.9 (24.6;n = 765); WPAI-activity impairment was 56.0% (23.2%; n = 737).

Conclusion

The humanistic burden of MPM is high, despite treatments being prescribed as per available guidance. Treatments that delay progression and provide palliation of symptoms are most likely to improve/maintain HRQoL.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09750-7.

A Real-World Analysis of the use of Systemic Therapy in Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma and the Differential Impacts on Overall Survival by Practice Pattern

Introduction

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive malignancy that affects older adults with frequent comorbidities, making real-world treatment decisions challenging. This study compares the overall survival (OS) of patients with MPM by physician’s choice of first-line (1L) platinum chemotherapy (PC), second-line (2L) immunotherapy versus chemotherapy, and by receipt of maintenance therapy (MT).

Methods

The study included patients diagnosed with advanced MPM in the Flatiron Health electronic health record–derived database who initiated PC with pemetrexed in the 1L setting between 2011 and 2019. Patients in the 2L therapy analysis received single-agent chemotherapy versus immunotherapy after the progression of disease from our 1L cohort. Patients in the MT cohort were identified on the basis of continued receipt of pemetrexed with or without bevacizumab after dropping PC at prespecified intervals. The OS of patients by choice of 1L PC, 2L immunotherapy versus chemotherapy, and receipt of MT was summarized by means of Kaplan-Meier survival estimates and compared in the context of propensity score matching weighted analyses.

Results

In propensity score matching weighting analysis from 2065 patients with MPM, there was no evidence of an OS difference by choice of 1L PC (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.89–1.31, p = 0.43), suggestive evidence of an OS difference by choice of 2L immunotherapy versus chemotherapy (HR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.42–1.08; p = 0.10), and no evidence of an OS difference by receipt of MT (HR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.72–1.16, p = 0.46).

Conclusions

Using real-world, propensity score–matched weighted analysis of MPM, we found there was no difference in OS by choice of 1L PC, 2L immunotherapy or chemotherapy, or by receipt of MT.

Randomized Study of Maintenance Pemetrexed Versus Observation for Treatment of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: CALGB 30901

BACKGROUND

The role of maintenance therapy for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is unknown. We performed a randomized phase II trial to determine if continuation of pemetrexed after first-line pemetrexed and platinum would improve progression-free survival (PFS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients with unresectable MPM, without disease progression following 4 to 6 cycles of pemetrexed and platinum were randomized 1:1 to observation or continuation of pemetrexed until progression, stratified by number of cycles (< 6 or 6), cis- or carboplatin containing regimen, and histology. Study size was calculated based on the assumption that observation would produce a median PFS of 3 months and pemetrexed would yield median PFS of 6 months.

RESULTS

A total of 72 patients were registered from December 2010 to June 2016. The study closed early after 53 patients were randomized; 49 eligible (22 on the observation arm and 27 on the pemetrexed arm) were included in the analysis. The median PFS was 3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.6-11.9 months) on observation and 3.4 months (95% CI, 2.8-9.8 months) on pemetrexed (hazard ratio [HR], 0.99; 95% CI, 0.51-1.90; P = .9733). The median overall survival (OS) was 11.8 months (95% CI, 9.3-28.7 months) for observation, and 16.3 months (95% CI, 10.5-26.0 months) for pemetrexed (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.44-1.71; P = .6737). Grade 3 or 4 toxicities on the pemetrexed arm included anemia (8%), lymphopenia (8%), neutropenia (4%), and fatigue (4%). A higher baseline level of soluble mesothelin-related peptide was associated with worse PFS (HR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.00-3.46; P = .049).

CONCLUSION

Maintenance pemetrexed following initial pemetrexed and platinum chemotherapy does not improve PFS in patients with MPM.

Nephrotoxic Chemotherapy Agents: Old and New

In the last several decades, advancements in chemotherapy have improved the overall survival of cancer patients. These agents, however, are associated with adverse effects, including various kidney lesions. This review summarizes the nephrotoxic potential of chemotherapy agents, old and new, as well as the different factors that contribute to kidney injury. Provided for each class of chemotherapy agent is the associated kidney lesion and a brief discussion of clinical manifestation, mechanism of action, and possible treatment when available. Understanding the nephrotoxic potential of these agents have on the kidneys is imperative for both the oncologist and the nephrologist to properly care for cancer patients and ensure their best outcomes.

Establishment and characterization of a new malignant peritoneal mesothelioma cell line, KOG-1, from the ascitic fluid of a patient with pemetrexed chemotherapy resistance

Malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (MPeM) is a rare and aggressive form of malignant mesothelioma. Sufficient biological tools for studying the functional characteristics of this cancer have not been developed. Therefore, in this study, a novel human cancer cell line, KOG-1, was established from ascites fluids isolated from a 39-year-old Japanese woman with pemetrexed-resistant MPeM. Cells were dendritic or linear immediately after thawing, showed a jigsaw puzzle-like and spindle arrangement during growth, and formed monolayers without contact inhibition in two-dimensional (2D) culture. The population doubling time was 13.7 h. Karyotypic and molecular genetic analyses showed that chromosome numbers ranged from 62 to 142, with a peak of 73 with complicated copy number alterations. No germline BAP1 pathogenic variant was detected. Cells expressed various tumor markers of mesothelioma, such as calretinin, podoplanin, and Wilms tumor 1 (WT-1). Drug sensitivity and resistance testing with a set of 36 drugs using 2D and three-dimensional (3D) culture models demonstrated that KOG-1 cells showed high and low sensitivity to pemetrexed under 2D and 3D culture conditions, respectively, whereas control ovarian cancer cell lines showed low sensitivity to pemetrexed under both culture conditions. This newly established cell line will be a valuable biological resource to expand the feasibility of functional studies as well as drug testing for potential therapeutic purposes in MPeM.

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 .

Malignant pleural mesothelioma: an update on investigation, diagnosis and treatment

Malignant pleural mesothelioma is an aggressive malignancy of the pleural surface, predominantly caused by prior asbestos exposure. There is a global epidemic of malignant pleural mesothelioma underway, and incidence rates are predicted to peak in the next few years.

This article summarises the epidemiology and pathogenesis of malignant pleural mesothelioma, before describing some key factors in the patient experience and outlining common symptoms. Diagnostic approaches are reviewed, including imaging techniques and the role of various biomarkers. Treatment options are summarised, including the importance of palliative care and methods of controlling pleural effusions. The evidence for chemotherapy, radiotherapy and surgery is reviewed, both in the palliative setting and in the context of trimodality treatment. An algorithm for managing malignant pleural effusion in malignant pleural mesothelioma patients is presented. Finally new treatment developments and novel therapeutic approaches are summarised.

This article on mesothelioma describes pathogenesis, symptoms, diagnostic approaches and treatment optionshttp://ow.ly/cjkb305aQGz

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 drug toxicities in the onco-nephrology world

New anticancer medications are rapidly entering the clinical arena offering patients with previously resistant cancers the promise of more effective therapies capable of extending their lives. However, adverse renal consequences develop in treated patients with underlying risk factors, requiring the nephrology community to be familiar with the nephrotoxic effects. The most common clinical nephrotoxic manifestations of these drugs include acute kidney injury, varying levels of proteinuria, hypertension, electrolyte disturbances, and at times chronic kidney disease. Thus, to practice competently in the 'onco-nephrology' arena, nephrologists will garner benefit from an update on older drugs with newly recognized nephrotoxic potential as well as newer agents, which may be associated with kidney injury. With that in mind, this brief update is meant to provide clinicians with the currently available evidence on the nephrotoxicity of a group of anticancer medications.

[Pemetrexed nephrotoxicity]

Pemetrexed belongs to a new generation of multitargeted antifolate cytotoxic agents. It is increasingly used as first-line treatment in combination with cisplatin, and as second-line treatment or maintenance monotherapy mainly in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer and in malignant mesothelioma. It is increasingly used as first-line treatment in combination with cisplatin in lung adenocarcinoma, and as second-line treatment or maintenance monotherapy in patients mainly controlled by the first-line to progression or poor tolerance. In mesothelioma, pemetrexed is indicated only in first-line with a platinum salt. The main side effect of pemetrexed is myelosuppression, which may be prevented by folinic acid supplementation. This review focuses on the progressive and cumulative emerging renal toxicity of pemetrexed, affecting five to ten percent of "long-term" pemetrexed-treated patients.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma: new hope in the horizon with novel therapeutic strategies

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare but aggressive malignancy of the pleura, with a strong causal link to asbestos exposure. MPM incidence has been increasing in recent years and it is not expected to fall off in the next two decades. Prognosis of MPM patients is modest since the vast majority of patients are diagnosed at advanced stage and because platinum-based chemotherapy remains the cornerstone of treatment, with no standard second line treatment. Most current efforts to improve outcomes are based on a better understanding of the stromal compartment and deregulated pathways leading ultimately to the design of clinical trials based on novel therapeutic approaches such as immunotherapy or molecular-directed compounds. This review seeks to update the last clinical trials investigating novel agents in unresectable MPM.

Long progression-free survival by pemetrexed continuation maintenance therapy following cisplatin-based chemotherapy in malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is associated with a poor prognosis. The combination of cisplatin and pemetrexed has been established as a standard chemotherapy that confers a survival benefit. Because the regimen is sometimes hampered by the renal toxicity of cisplatin and no second-line chemotherapy has yet been established, the strategy of administering a higher total dose of pemetrexed to optimize the regimen could be promising. We herein describe the case of a 69-year-old man with MPM who underwent five cycles of cisplatin plus pemetrexed and exhibited a partial response. Because his serum creatinine increased, pemetrexed maintenance therapy (PMT) was adopted, and 18 cycles were successfully delivered and the patient achieved a complete response. This case suggests that PMT could thus be useful for treating MPM.

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.

Chemotherapy for malignant pleural mesothelioma

OPINION STATEMENT

All MPM patients with a good performance status should be considered for enrollment on clinical trials. With that said, the standard frontline therapy for fit MPM patients remains an antifolate/platinum doublet, based on large, well powered randomized clinical trials that showed not only a survival benefit for antifolate/platinum regimens but also improvements in quality of life and/or symptoms. For less fit patients, single agents can be used as frontline therapy. In the second line setting, there is benefit from retreatment with single agent pemetrexed after prior exposure to that agent, as well as after exposure to other chemotherapeutic agents. Other single chemotherapy agents and combinations are viable options for fit patients who have had relatively long time to progression after their frontline therapy. Additionally, several prognostic scales designed for MPM (CALGB and EORTC) provide additional means to better select patients for frontline and second line chemotherapy.

Malignant mesothelioma

INTRODUCTION

Mesothelioma is a malignant tumour of the pleura or peritoneum caused by asbestos. It is increasing in frequency and the prognosis remains grim, with average survival around 1 year.

SOURCES OF DATA

Medical literature and personal experience.

AREAS OF AGREEMENT

Amphibole fibres are far more potent than chrysotile in causing mesothelioma.

AREAS OF CONTROVERSY

A minority view suggests that mesotheliomas in those exposed to chrysotile are caused only by tremolite (an amphibole) which contaminates chrysotile. There is a hypothesis, for which evidence is weakening, that Simian virus 40 may cause mesothelioma.

GROWING POINTS

There is emerging evidence of genetic variation in susceptibility to fibre carcinogenesis. There are developments in treatment, particularly chemotherapy with pemetrexed and cisplatin which prolongs survival and helps symptoms.

AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH

Targeted agents for treatment are under investigation and may improve the outlook. The role of radical and palliative surgery requires clarification.

Current options for systemic therapy in mesothelioma

Systemic therapy options for patients with mesothelioma remain limited. Although many conventional chemotherapeutic agents have shown modest activity in this disease, only the combination of cisplatin plus pemetrexed has demonstrated an improvement in clinical outcomes in a phase III trial when compared with single modality therapies. Clinical investigations of the use of targeted therapies in mesothelioma are ongoing, as investigators attempt to inhibit critical pathways in this disease. This article surveys the current clinical landscape of systemic therapies in mesothelioma and explores the impact of both conventional and targeted agents.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a deadly disease that occurs in 2,000 to 3,000 people each year in the United States. Although MPM is an extremely difficult disease to treat, with the median overall survival ranging between 9 and 17 months regardless of stage, there has been significant progress over the last few years that has reshaped the clinical landscape. This article will provide a comprehensive discussion of the latest developments in the treatment of MPM. We will provide an update of the major clinical trials that impact mesothelioma treatment in the resectable and unresectable settings, discuss the impact of novel therapeutics, and provide perspective on where the clinical research in mesothelioma is moving. In addition, there are controversial issues, such as the role of extrapleural pneumonectomy, adjuvant radiotherapy, and use of intensity-modulated radiotherapy versus hemithoracic therapy that will also be addressed in this manuscript.

Systemic treatments for mesothelioma: standard and novel

Systemic therapy is the only treatment option for the majority of mesothelioma patients, for whom age, co-morbid medical illnesses, non-epithelial histology, and locally advanced disease often preclude surgery. For many years, chemotherapy had a minimal impact on the natural history of this cancer, engendering considerable nihilism. Countless drugs were evaluated, most of which achieved response rates below 20% and median survival of <1 year. Several factors have hampered the evaluation of systemic regimens in patients with mesothelioma. The disease is uncommon, affecting only about 2500 Americans annually. Thus, most clinical trials are small, and randomized studies are challenging to accrue. There is significant heterogeneity within the patient populations of these small trials, for several reasons. Since all of the staging systems for mesothelioma are surgically based, it is almost impossible to accurately determine the stage of a patient who has not been resected. Patients with very early stage disease may be lumped together with far more advanced patients in the same study. The disease itself is heterogenous, with many different prognostic factors, most notably three pathologic subtypes—epithelial, sarcomatoid, and biphasic—that have different natural histories, and varying responses to treatment. Finally, response assessment is problematic, since pleural-based lesions are difficult to measure accurately and reproducibly. Assessment criteria often vary between trials, making some cross-trial comparisons difficult to interpret. Despite these limitations, in recent years, there has been a surge of optimism regarding systemic treatment of this disease. Several cytotoxic agents have been shown to generate reproducible responses, improve quality of life, or prolong survival in mesothelioma. Drugs with single-agent activity include pemetrexed, raltitrexed, vinorelbine, and vinflunine. The addition of pemetrexed or raltitrexed to cisplatin prolongs survival. The addition of cisplatin to pemetrexed, raltitrexed, gemcitabine, irinotecan, or vinorelbine improves response rate. The combination of pemetrexed plus cisplatin is considered the benchmark front-line regimen for this disease, based on a phase III trial in 456 patients that yielded a response rate of 41% and a median survival of 12.1 months. Vitamin supplementation with folic acid is essential to decrease toxicity, though recent data suggests that there may be an optimum dose of folic acid that should be administered; higher doses may diminish the effectiveness of pemetrexed. There are also several unresolved questions about the duration and timing of treatment with pemetrexed that are the subject of planned clinical trials. It is essential to recognize that the improvements observed with the pemetrexed/cisplatin combination, though real, are still modest. Other active drugs or drug combinations may be more appropriate for specific individuals, and further research is still needed to improve upon these results. Since the majority of mesotheliomas in the United States occur in the elderly, non-cisplatin-containing pemetrexed combinations may be more appropriate for some patients. Now that effective agents have been developed for initial treatment, several classical cytotoxic drugs and many novel agents are being evaluated in the second-line setting. These include drugs targeted against the epidermal growth factor, platelet-derived growth factor, vascular endothelial growth factor, src kinase, histone deacetylase, the proteasome, and mesothelin. Given the progress made in recent years, there is reason to believe that more effective treatments will continue to be developed.

Single-agent pemetrexed for chemonaïve and pretreated patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma: results of an International Expanded Access Program

INTRODUCTION

Pemetrexed has established efficacy, and is the backbone for chemotherapy in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). An International Expanded Access Program provided >3000 mesothelioma patients with access to single-agent pemetrexed or pemetrexed plus platinum analogs (cisplatin or carboplatin) in 13 countries. In this article, we report the safety and efficacy data of MPM patients who were treated with single-agent pemetrexed (n = 812).

METHODS

Patients with histologically confirmed MPM, not amenable to curative surgery, received pemetrexed (500 mg/m) once (day 1) every 21 days with standard premedication and vitamin supplementation. Investigator-determined response and survival data were recorded at the end of study participation. Myelosuppression data were also collected.

RESULTS

All 812 MPM patients (319 chemonaïve; 493 pretreated) received single-agent pemetrexed (>or=1 dose) and were evaluated for safety. A total of 643 patients (247 chemonaïve, 396 pretreated) were evaluated for efficacy. Of the chemonaïve patients evaluated for efficacy (n = 247), the overall response rate was 10.5%, median time to progressive disease (TTPD) was 6.0 months, and median survival was 14.1 month. Of the pretreated patients evaluated for efficacy (n = 396), the overall response rate was 12.1%, median TTPD was 4.9 months, and the median survival was not estimable due to high censoring. Common terminology criteria grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity was mild in both groups, with neutropenia (<18%) as the main toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

In the present expanded access program, single-agent pemetrexed demonstrated promising activity in MPM in both chemonaïve and pretreated patients, with TTPD of 6.0 and 4.9 months, respectively, 1-year survival >or=54.7%, and mild hematologic toxicity.

Multidisciplinary treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma

The incidence of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is increasing worldwide, and is predicted to peak in the next 10-20 years. Difficulties in MPM diagnosis and staging, especially of early disease, have thwarted the development of a universally accepted therapeutic approach. Single modality therapies (surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy) have generally failed to significantly prolong patient survival. As a result, multimodality treatment regimens have been developed. Radical surgery with extrapleural pneumonectomy and adjuvant treatments has become the preferred option in early disease, but the benefits of such an aggressive approach have been questioned because of significant treatment-related morbidity and mortality. In the past few years, there have been several major advances in the management of patients with MPM, including more accurate staging and patient selection, improvements in surgical techniques and postoperative care, novel chemotherapy regimens with definite activity such as antifolate (pemetrexed or raltitrexed)-platinum combinations, and new radiotherapy techniques such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy. Induction chemotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy has shown promising results. A number of molecular alterations occurring in MPM have been reported, providing broader insights into its biology and leading to the identification of new targets for therapy. However, currently available treatments still appear to have modest results. Further studies are needed to provide evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of early and advanced stages of this disease.

[Malignant pleural mesothelioma: interrogations and hopes concerning the expected epidemic]

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare incurable tumor. Interest in MPM has increased in recent years due to a steadily increasing incidence subsequent to the intensive use of asbestosis, the main causal agent, but also due to better awareness in the political and scientific communities faced with a serious public health issue. Our knowledge of MPM has improved regularly in terms of pathologic diagnosis and the mechanisms underlying the mesothelial carcinogenesis. MPM is also the subject of many technological innovations as illustrated by the recent identification of new biological markers, access to metabolic imaging, and clinical research on targeted treatments. Proper management implies the participation of the general population since the implementation of administrative procedures for social indemnities. In 2007, a more aggressive therapeutic approach is becoming common practice with the use of radiotherapy and the emergence of the concept of multimodal care centered on wide pleuropneumonectomy. These advances create real hope for improvement, but also many interrogations since no standard treatment protocol has been clearly identified.