Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma Nodal Status: Where Are We at?

Due to the lack of both prospective trial and high-volume retrospective studies, the management of clinical N+ malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) patients remains highly debated. Node positive patients show poor survival compared with node-negative ones; thus, lymph node staging appears crucial in determining treatment strategy. Notwithstanding the improvement in pre-treatment staging and the update on lymph node classification in the 8th edition of TNM, several open controversies remain on N parameter. How should we stage suspected N+ patients? How should we treat node positive patients? Which is the definition of a “resectable patient”? Is the site or the number the main prognostic factor for node positive patients? The aim of our narrative review is to analyse the existing relevant literature on lymph node status in MPM.

ERS/ESTS/EACTS/ESTRO guidelines for the management of malignant pleural mesothelioma

The European Respiratory Society (ERS)/European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS)/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) task force brought together experts to update previous 2009 ERS/ESTS guidelines on management of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), a rare cancer with globally poor outcome, after a systematic review of the 2009-2018 literature. The evidence was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. The evidence syntheses were discussed and recommendations formulated by this multidisciplinary group of experts. Diagnosis: pleural biopsies remain the gold standard to confirm the diagnosis, usually obtained by thoracoscopy but occasionally via image-guided percutaneous needle biopsy in cases of pleural symphysis or poor performance status. Pathology: standard staining procedures are insufficient in ∼10% of cases, justifying the use of specific markers, including BAP-1 and CDKN2A (p16) for the separation of atypical mesothelial proliferation from MPM. Staging: in the absence of a uniform, robust and validated staging system, we advise using the most recent 2016 8th TNM (tumour, node, metastasis) classification, with an algorithm for pretherapeutic assessment. Monitoring: patient's performance status, histological subtype and tumour volume are the main prognostic factors of clinical importance in routine MPM management. Other potential parameters should be recorded at baseline and reported in clinical trials. Treatment: (chemo)therapy has limited efficacy in MPM patients and only selected patients are candidates for radical surgery. New promising targeted therapies, immunotherapies and strategies have been reviewed. Because of limited data on the best combination treatment, we emphasize that patients who are considered candidates for a multimodal approach, including radical surgery, should be treated as part of clinical trials in MPM-dedicated centres.

Epidemiology, diagnosis and treatment of the malignant pleural mesothelioma, a narrative review of literature

The malignant pleural mesothelioma is a very aggressive tumor which is arising from mesothelial cells and is associated with asbestos exposure. It is a heterogeneous cancer that shows a complex pattern of molecular changes, including genetic, chromosomic, and epigenetic abnormalities. The malignant pleural mesothelioma is characterized by a silent and slow clinical progression with an average period of 20–40 years from the asbestos exposure phase to the start of the symptoms. Unfortunately, to date, the therapeutic options are very limited, especially if the tumor is detected late. This narrative review provides an extended overview of the present evidence in the literature regarding the epidemiology, diagnostic pathways and treatment approaches of the malignant pleural mesothelioma. The treatment of mesothelioma has evolved slowly over the last 20 years not only from a surgical point of view but also radiotherapy, chemotherapy and immunotherapy play nowadays a key role. Several surgical strategies are available ranging from extrapleural pneumonectomy to cytoreductive surgery but a multidisciplinary approach seems to be mandatory because a single approach has not proved to date to be resolutive. New non-surgical treatment options appear to be promising but the results have to be taken in account with caution because clear evidence with high-quality studies is still lacking

The 2019 ERS/ESTS/EACTS/ESTRO Guidelines on the Management of Patients With Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma is a rare aggressive cancer, with insidious growth, and is associated with poor outcomes that have not improved over the years. A task force made up of members of the European Respiratory Society (ERS)/European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS)/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) societies, who are experts in the field of malignant mesothelioma, reviewed the literature from 2009 to 2018 to update the 2009 guidelines concerning epidemiology, diagnosis, staging, and treatment, including surgical, radiotherapy, and medical management, as well as palliative care to provide the best evidence-based recommendations for this patient population.

ERS/ESTS/EACTS/ESTRO guidelines for the management of malignant pleural mesothelioma

The European Respiratory Society (ERS)/European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS)/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)/European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) task force brought together experts to update previous 2009 ERS/ESTS guidelines on management of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), a rare cancer with globally poor outcome, after a systematic review of the 2009-2018 literature. The evidence was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. The evidence syntheses were discussed and recommendations formulated by this multidisciplinary group of experts. Diagnosis: pleural biopsies remain the gold standard to confirm the diagnosis, usually obtained by thoracoscopy but occasionally via image-guided percutaneous needle biopsy in cases of pleural symphysis or poor performance status. Pathology: standard staining procedures are insufficient in ∼10% of cases, justifying the use of specific markers, including BAP-1 and CDKN2A (p16) for the separation of atypical mesothelial proliferation from MPM. Staging: in the absence of a uniform, robust and validated staging system, we advise using the most recent 2016 8th TNM (tumour, node, metastasis) classification, with an algorithm for pre-therapeutic assessment. Monitoring: patient's performance status, histological subtype and tumour volume are the main prognostic factors of clinical importance in routine MPM management. Other potential parameters should be recorded at baseline and reported in clinical trials. Treatment: (chemo)therapy has limited efficacy in MPM patients and only selected patients are candidates for radical surgery. New promising targeted therapies, immunotherapies and strategies have been reviewed. Because of limited data on the best combination treatment, we emphasise that patients who are considered candidates for a multimodal approach, including radical surgery, should be treated as part of clinical trials in MPM-dedicated centres.

Systematic review of quality of life following pleurectomy decortication and extrapleural pneumonectomy for malignant pleural mesothelioma

BACKGROUND

Few studies have focused on quality of life (QoL) after treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). There are still questions as to which surgical procedure, extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP) or pleurectomy decortication (P/D) is most effective and results in better survival outcomes, involves fewer complications, and results in better QoL. Here we performed a literature review on MPM patients to assess and compare QoL changes after P/D and EPP.

METHODS

Research articles concerning QoL after mesothelioma surgery were identified through May 2018 in Medline. For inclusion, studies were 1) cohort or randomized controlled trials (RCT) design, 2) included standardized QoL instruments, 3) reported QoL measurement after surgery, 4) described the type of surgery performed (EPP or P/D), 5) were written in English. Measures of lung function (FEV1, FVC) and measures from the EORTC-C30 were compared 6 months following surgery with preoperative values.

RESULTS

QoL data was extracted from 17 articles (14 datasets), encompassing 659 patients (102 EPP, 432 P/D); the available evidence was of low quality. While two studies directly compared QoL between the two surgical procedures, additional data was available from one arm of two RCTs, as the RCTs were not comparing EPP and P/D. The remaining data was reported from observational studies. While QoL was still compromised 6 months following surgery, from the limited and low quality data available it would appear that P/D patients had better QoL than EPP patients across all measures. Physical function, social function and global health were better at follow-up for P/D than for EPP, while other indicators such as pain and cough were similar. Forced Expiratory Volume (FEV1) and Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) were reported in one study only, and were higher at follow-up for P/D compared to EPP.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the existing evidence is limited and of low quality, it suggests that P/D patients have better QoL than EPP patients following surgery. QoL outcomes should be factored into the choice of surgical procedure for MPM patients, and the possible effects on lung function and QoL should be discussed with patients when presenting surgical treatment options.

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 .

Mesothelioma in Australia: a review

The incidence of malignant mesothelioma in Australia is among the highest in the world as a result of widespread use of asbestos by industry and in construction throughout the 20th century. The risk of developing malignant mesothelioma after asbestos exposure is dose-related; a transient, low dose exposure confers a correspondingly very low risk of disease. Malignant mesothelioma is a heterogeneous disease, partly explaining the limited role of biomarkers in screening and diagnosis. The prognosis remains poor, and early advice on medico-legal compensation and a collaborative team approach to managing malignant mesothelioma are both essential. Chemotherapy can have a modest treatment effect in some people. New therapies, such as immunotherapy, do not yet have a defined role in the treatment of malignant mesothelioma. As treatment options for malignant mesothelioma are limited and no cure is available, there is no established role for early detection or screening of at risk populations. A multidisciplinary approach to caring for patients with malignant mesothelioma and their carers is vital.

New Concepts in the Treatment of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a highly aggressive and generally incurable cancer. Current anti-MPM chemotherapy-based treatments are only marginally effective, and long-term survival remains an unmet goal. Nonetheless, in selected cases, personalized surgery-based multimodality treatments (MMT) have been shown to significantly extend survival. The design of MMT and selection of patients are challenging, and optimal results require accurate presurgical diagnosis, staging, and risk stratification. Further, meticulous surgical techniques and advanced radiation protocols must be applied. We review key principles and evolving concepts in the care of MPM patients with a focus on the expanding role of MMT in MPM.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma: predictors and staging

Malignant pleural mesothelioma remains a rapidly fatal cancer with few effective therapies. Unusual anatomic features complicate determination of stage and prognosis for individual patients. Validation of staging criteria has been difficult given the rarity of the disease and the fact that only a minority of patients undergo surgical resection with pathological examination of their tumors. Thus, additional heuristic factors and algorithms have been taken into account by clinicians to estimate prognosis and inform discussion of appropriate management strategies or clinical research protocols with patients.

The impact of surgical approach on quality of life for pleural malignant mesothelioma

BACKGROUND

A comprehensive review of quality of life (QoL) after surgery for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) was conducted to assess differences between pleurectomy decortication (P/D) and extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP).

METHODS

Original research studies on quality of life after mesothelioma surgery were identified through June 2016; 15 articles and 12 distinct datasets, for a total of 523 patients, were retrieved.

RESULTS

QoL data was available for 102 patients treated with EPP and 296 with P/D. Two studies directly compared QoL outcomes between the two techniques. Symptoms, lung function parameters, and physical and social functioning were still compromised 6 months following surgery. However, P/D patients fared better than EPP patients across QoL measures.

CONCLUSIONS

Quality of life is generally better for patients undergoing P/D compared to EPP, for an extended period following surgery. Given the need for multimodality therapy and the aggressive nature of MPM, QoL outcomes should be strongly considered when recommending type of surgery for patients with this disease.

Comparison of outcomes following a cytological or histological diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma

Background:

Survival with the epithelioid subtype of malignant mesothelioma (MM) is longer than the biphasic or sarcomatoid subtypes. There is concern that cytology-diagnosed epithelioid MM may underdiagnose the biphasic subtype. This study examines survival differences between patients with epithelioid MM diagnosed by cytology only and other subtypes diagnosed by histology.

Methods:

Demographics, diagnosis method, MM subtype and survival were extracted from the Western Australia (WA) Mesothelioma Registry, which records details of all MM cases occurring in WA.

Results:

A total of 2024 MM cases were identified over 42 years. One thousand seven hundred forty-four (86.2%) were male, median (IQR) age was 68.6 (60.4–77.0) years. A total of 1212 (59.9%) cases were identified as epithelioid subtype of which 499 (41.2%) were diagnosed using fluid cytology only. Those with a cytology-only diagnosis were older than the histology group (median 70.2 vs 67.6 years, P<0.001), but median survival was similar (cytology 10.6 (5.5–19.2) vs histology 11.1 (4.8–19.8) months, P=0.727) and Cox regression modelling adjusting for age, sex, site and time since first exposure showed no difference in survival between the different diagnostic approaches.

Conclusions:

Survival of cytologically and histologically diagnosed epithelioid MM cases does not differ. A diagnostic tap should be considered adequate to diagnose epithelioid MM without need for further invasive testing.

Role of thoracoscopy, mediastinoscopy and laparoscopy in the diagnosis and staging of malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive malignancy with dismal prognosis. Unfortunately, chemotherapy only marginally extends patient survival and palliative care often remains the sole therapeutic option. Nonetheless, for a selected group of patients that present with an early disease stage and an epithelioid histology, a personally tailored multimodality therapeutic (MMT) protocol comprising of cyto-reductive surgery and chemotherapy with or without radiation therapy may significantly prolong survival. Accurately selecting patients for this aggressive therapeutic approach is challenging and is based in part on optimal pre-surgical staging. Here we discuss the role of thoracoscopy, mediastinoscopy and laparoscopy in the diagnosis and staging of MPM patients prior to definite surgical resection.

Postmortem findings of malignant pleural mesothelioma: a two-center study of 318 patients

BACKGROUND

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an incurable cancer with a rising incidence. MPM is often perceived as a locally invasive cancer, and the exact cause of death is poorly understood.This two-center study describes the anatomic features of patients with MPM at postmortem.

METHODS

The Western Australia Mesothelioma Registry (Australia) and Coroner’s Office reports from the Avon region (England) were interrogated for the postmortem records of confirmed mesothelioma cases.

RESULTS

Postmortem records of 318 patients with pleural mesothelioma (169 from Western Australia and 149 from Avon) were identified. Most patients (91.5%) were men (mean age, 68.4 ± 11.5 years), and MPM was right-sided in 55.3%. Extrapleural dissemination of tumor was found in 87.7% of cases and lymph node involvement in 53.3%. Tumor dissemination in extra thoracicsites was common (55.4% of patients), and almost all organs were involved, including liver(31.9%), spleen (10.8%), thyroid (6.9%), and the brain (3.0%). Pulmonary emboli were found in 6% of cases and considered as directly contributing to death in 13 patients (4.1%). The precise cause of death could only be determined in 63 (19.8%) cases even after postmortem. The BMI was significantly lower in cases that had no identifiable anatomic cause of death at postmortem(18.8 ± 4.3 vs 21.0 ± 4.7, P = .034).

CONCLUSIONS

In this largest, to our knowledge, postmortem series on MPM, extrathoracic dissemination of mesothelioma was common and often under recognized. No anatomic cause of death was identified in the majority of patients even at autopsy, raising the possibility of physiologic and metabolic causes of death.

Malignant mesothelioma

Malignant mesothelioma (MM) is an aggressive tumour that commonly affects the mesothelial surfaces of the pleural and peritoneal cavities, and occasionally, the tunica vaginalis and the pericardium. Formerly a rare tumour, MM is increasing in incidence in Australia due to the heavy nationwide use of asbestos from 1940 until the 1980s. The incidence is expected to peak in Australia in the next decade, mirroring the long latency period between asbestos exposure and development of MM. Diagnosis of MM can be difficult. Definitive pathological diagnosis is required and it often requires an experienced pathologist to differentiate MM from other benign or malignant processes. Treatment of MM requires a multidisciplinary approach, regardless of palliative or curative intent. Treatment options, such as surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy and active symptom control or a combination of these, may be used. Further research is needed to advance the therapeutic options for MM, and strategies to realize personalisation of therapy through discovery of predictive markers. In the Australian society where asbestos contamination of the built environment is very high, education and stringent public health measures are required to prevent a second wave of increased MM incidence.

[Pleural mesothelioma: where are we with radical surgery and multimodal treatment?]

Multimodal treatment of pleural mesothelioma, which is reserved for specialised centres for epithelial forms without node involvement, must include preliminary laparoscopy, thoracoscopy and mediastinoscopy. Following chemotherapy, in our opinion surgical removal via pleuropneumonectomy should be performed without resection of the diaphragm and the pericardium, because of the risks of seeding and postoperative complications. Our limited experience with 15 patients has confirmed the feasibility of this with no deaths. High-dose radiotherapy of the whole pneumonectomy cavity appears essential, but the optimal technique is debatable. Only five homogeneous series of more than 40 patients incorporating hemithoracic radiotherapy have been published.

Multimodality Imaging Review of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma Diagnosis and Staging

Early diagnosis and accurate disease staging in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) are essential in classifying such patients into prognostic subgroups to allow delivery of stage-specific therapies. This review addresses the current status of multimodality imaging in the diagnosis and staging of MPM. Clinical, research, and future directions in computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging, and PET/CT diagnosis and staging of MPM are discussed, including the use of novel PET probes. The article concludes with important take-home messages summarized as the pearls and pitfalls of each diagnostic modality in the diagnosis and staging of patients with MPM.

A systematic review of extrapleural pneumonectomy for malignant pleural mesothelioma

INTRODUCTION

The primary objective of the present systematic review was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP) for patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma.

METHODS

A systematic review of relevant studies identified through five online search databases was performed. Two reviewers independently appraised each study.

RESULTS

Thirty-four of 58 relevant studies from 26 institutions containing the most updated data were evaluated for survival and perioperative outcomes after EPP. The median overall survival varied from 9.4 to 27.5 months, and 1-, 2-, and 5-year survival rates ranged from 36 to 83%, 5 to 59%, and 0 to 24%, respectively. Overall perioperative mortality rates ranged from 0 to 11.8%, and the perioperative morbidity rates ranged from 22 to 82%. Quality of life assessments from three studies reported improvements in nearly all domains at 3 months postoperatively. Patients who underwent trimodality therapy involving EPP and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy had a median overall survival of 13 to 23.9 months.

DISCUSSIONS

The current evidence suggests that selected patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma may benefit from EPP, especially when combined with neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy and adjuvant radiotherapy.

Surgical therapy of mesothelioma

The treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma is controversial, particularly regarding the role of surgery. Though well accepted as a diagnostic modality, surgery is also frequently used to establish stage, provide palliation, and perhaps most controversially, to offer cytoreduction with the putative goal of delaying tumor progression and prolonging survival. Pleurectomy/decortication (PD) can achieve macroscopic complete resection; however, the ability to deliver effective postoperative radiation treatment is limited because of the risk of lung toxicity. Accordingly, it has been associated with higher rates of local recurrence compared to extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP). Extrapleural pneumonectomy generally offers a more complete cytoreduction compared to PD but at the cost of increased morbidity and mortality. Adjuvant hemithoracic radiation is feasible following EPP and in most series local recurrence rates are lower after EPP than PD. There are no convincing data, however, to show that one procedure is superior to the other in terms of survival. Furthermore, no randomized data currently exist that demonstrate a survival benefit to any form of surgical cytoreduction over systemic treatment and supportive care. If cytoreductive surgery does have a beneficial effect on long-term survival, it will most likely be realized in patients with epithelioid tumors without nodal metastases.