Novel and Promising Systemic Treatment Approaches in Mesothelioma

OPINION STATEMENT

There was limited progress in the development of novel systemic approaches in the treatment of advanced malignant mesothelioma for years following the publication of the pivotal phase III trial of Vogelzang et al. that established the cisplatin/pemetrexed regimen as a standard 1st-line systemic therapy. Since then, over the last several years, a significant step forward has been made, with incorporation of immune checkpoint inhibitors and anti-angiogenic agents. In addition, better appreciation of mesothelioma biology has allowed detection of novelmolecular therapeutic targets. All the above-mentioned strategies, along with the additional promising approaches represented by adoptive T cell therapy, dendritic cell therapy, cancer vaccines, oncoviral therapy, and agents targeting mesothelin are discussed in this review. The clinical research to identify effective biologic targets and treatment combinations in malignant mesothelioma is ongoing.

Antiangiogeneic Strategies in Mesothelioma

There is a strong rationale for inhibiting angiogenesis in mesothelioma. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is an autocrine growth factor in mesothelioma and a potent mitogen for mesothelial cells. Further, the abnormal tumor vasculature promotes raised interstitial pressure and hypoxia, which may be detrimental to both penetration and efficacy of anticancer agents. Antiangiogenic agents have been trialed in mesothelioma for close to two decades, with early phase clinical trials testing vascular targeting agents, the VEGF-A targeting monoclonal antibody bevacizumab, and numerous tyrosine kinase inhibitors, many with multiple targets. None of these have shown efficacy which has warranted further development as single agents in any line of therapy. Whilst a randomized phase II trial combining the multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor nintedanib with platinum/pemetrexed chemotherapy was positive, these results were not confirmed in a subsequent phase III study. The combination of cisplatin and pemetrexed with bevacizumab, in appropriately selected patients, remains the only anti-angiogenic combination showing efficacy in mesothelioma. Extensive efforts to identify biomarkers of response have not yet been successful.

Multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized phase II trial of gemcitabine/cisplatin plus bevacizumab or placebo in patients with malignant mesothelioma

PURPOSE

Gemcitabine plus cisplatin is active in malignant mesothelioma (MM), although single-arm phase II trials have reported variable outcomes. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors have activity against MM in preclinical models. We added the anti-VEGF antibody bevacizumab to gemcitabine/cisplatin in a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized phase II trial in patients with previously untreated, unresectable MM.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 to 1 and no thrombosis, bleeding, or major blood vessel invasion. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Patients were stratified by ECOG performance status (0 v 1) and histologic subtype (epithelial v other). Patients received gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 every 21 days, cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) every 21 days, and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg or placebo every 21 days for six cycles, and then bevacizumab or placebo every 21 days until progression.

RESULTS

One hundred fifteen patients were enrolled at 11 sites; 108 patients were evaluable. Median PFS time was 6.9 months for the bevacizumab arm and 6.0 months for the placebo arm (P = .88). Median overall survival (OS) times were 15.6 and 14.7 months in the bevacizumab and placebo arms, respectively (P = .91). Partial response rates were similar (24.5% for bevacizumab v 21.8% for placebo; P = .74). A higher pretreatment plasma VEGF concentration (n = 56) was associated with shorter PFS (P = .02) and OS (P = .0066), independent of treatment arm. There were no statistically significant differences in toxicity of grade 3 or greater.

CONCLUSION

The addition of bevacizumab to gemcitabine/cisplatin in this trial did not significantly improve PFS or OS in patients with advanced MM.

[Anti-angiogenic factors in thoracic oncology: successes, failures and prospects]

Many growth factors involved in tumor angiogenesis are potential targets in thoracic oncology. This work is a review of the literature on the effectiveness of anti-angiogenic treatments in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), small cell lung cancer (SCLC) and malignant pleural mesothelioma (MM). Thirty-four articles and 15 abstracts were identified. Currently, bevacizumab is the only drug that has demonstrated an impact on overall survival in first line treatment for stage IV non-squamous NSCLC, but VEGFR-TKI such as cediranib, aflibercept, vandetanib, pazopanib have shown encouraging results in phase II or III clinical trials. In extensive-disease SCLC and inoperable MM, bevacizumab is the most studied molecule, but again, clinical trials are still ongoing. Current data on potential predictors for efficacy are disappointing, but some biomarkers or radiological techniques might be useful for guiding the use of anti-angiogenic therapies in the future. In conclusion, bevacizumab is the most studied anti-angiogenic agent in thoracic oncology. It is the only approved drug with an indication in first-line and maintenance treatment for stage IV non-squamous NSCLC. The indications for the use of VEGFR-TKI in clinical practice remain to be defined.

Novel targeted therapies and vaccination strategies for mesothelioma

Novel targeted therapies have found a niche in the treatment of many cancers, although the most responsive populations, best biomarkers of response, and appropriate treatment settings are still under investigation. With few exceptions, cancer vaccination strategies have not entered into routine management. In malignant mesothelioma, combination first-line chemotherapy with a platinum and pemetrexed remains the standard of care when systemic therapy is considered. Second-line chemotherapy is used but benefits are uncertain in the absence of appropriately controlled randomized trials. Currently, there are no novel targeted therapies or vaccinations that should be used in this disease outside the context of a clinical trial.

Chemotherapy and targeted therapies for unresectable malignant mesothelioma

The global burden of mesothelioma is expected to increase in the coming decades. As a result the development of more effective therapies with an emphasis on personalized treatments based on validated prognostic and predictive biomarkers is an essential requirement. Progress has been made in the last decade with the development of newer generation anti-folates leading to the current standard of care of pemetrexed and cisplatin in patients with unresectable disease. However, the median overall survival of patients with this combination treatment is only 12 months. There is no consensus regarding second line therapy for patients who have progressed or not responded to pemetrexed based therapies although gemcitabine in combination with a platinum compound or single agent vinorelbine is a reasonable option. The development of effective targeted agents that are active in mesothelioma has to date been disappointing. Strategies involving the addition of bevacizumab to pemetrexed and cisplatin in the frontline setting, the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat as second line therapy and studies evaluating the utility of maintenance therapy in mesothelioma are all ongoing and appear promising. In addition clinical trials investigating immunotherapy and gene therapy in combination with chemotherapy could potentially improve the prognosis of patients with mesothelioma.

Review on clinical trials of targeted treatments in malignant mesothelioma

PURPOSE

Malignant mesothelioma (MM) is an aggressive tumor of the serosal surfaces with a poor prognosis. Advances in the understanding of tumor biology have led to the development of several targeted treatments, which have been evaluated in clinical trials. This article is a comprehensive review of all clinical trials evaluating the effect of targeted treatments in MM.

METHODS

An extensive literature search was performed in January 2011 using pubmed and medline. No constraints on publication date were applied.

RESULTS

Thirty-two trials exploring 17 different targeted agents in MM were found. Treatment in first- and second-line targeted agents induced response rates ranging from 0-14% and 0-16%, respectively. The tyrosine kinase inhibitor sunitinib induced partial response in 10% and stable disease in 66% of MPM patients as second-line treatment. A preliminary analysis of a phase II/III trial suggests that addition of bevacizumab to pemetrexed and cisplatin first-line treatment significantly improves disease control (CR + PR + SD) in the bevacizumab arm (73.5%) compared with treatment with pemetrexed and cisplatin without bevacizumab (43.2%) (P = 0.010). Another phase II trial did not observe any significant clinical benefit of adding of bevacizumab to gemcitabine and cisplatin.

CONCLUSIONS

Disease stabilization is reported in some patients with several targeted treatments and might be beneficial in subgroups of patients or in combination with classic chemotherapy. None of the hitherto explored targeted treatments can currently be recommended as standard treatment in MM.

Translational therapies for malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma is a highly invasive tumor arising from the mesothelial cells of serosal surfaces. Several chemotherapeutic agents have been tested for the treatment of this disease and doublet cisplatin with antifolates has been demonstrated to have significant efficacy in Phase III studies. However, the benefit of these treatments remains poor and the median survival time of patients is low, ranging between 9 and 17 months. Targeted therapies are being developed in oncology and emerging evidence suggests that they offer disease control in several tumors. This article reviews the knowledge on the malignant pleural mesothelioma molecular pathway and focuses on results of clinical trials conducted on this devastating disease.

Improving the outcome in malignant pleural mesothelioma: nonaggressive or aggressive approach?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma continues to be a clinical challenge. The question, however, is no longer whether to provide active treatment or not, but how aggressive the treatment should be in view of the limited life expectancy of patients with this disease.

RECENT FINDINGS

With platin and pemetrexed-based combination chemotherapy having become the preferred systemic therapy, the major questions now evolve around the identification of a suitable second line therapy and the quest for innovative new approaches. Surgical interventions from pleurectomy and decortication to extrapleural pneumonectomy have increasingly come of use in specialized centres. With neoadjuvant chemotherapy and extrapleural pneumonectomy median survival times of almost 2 years have been reported. Studies on high-dose hemithoracic radiotherapy after extrapleural pneumonectomy suggested a beneficial effect on local recurrence. However, both extrapleural pneumonectomy and high-dose hemithoracic radiotherapy are associated with potential treatment-related mortality and morbidity and cannot yet be recommended outside specialized centres.

SUMMARY

More than ever, the diagnosis and treatment of patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma mandate a multidisciplinary approach.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma continues to be a challenge. The diagnosis and treatment of patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma requires a multidisciplinary approach. The diagnosis is best made by thoracoscopic biopsy and the aid of immunohistochemistry. Molecular studies identified inactivation of the neurofibromatosis-2 gene and INK4alpha/ARF to be key events in tumorigenesis. Based on the results of a Phase III trial, the combination of cisplatin with pemetrexed has become the preferred choice for chemotherapy, although there is suggestive evidence for the activity of other platin combinations based on Phase II studies. The optimal second-line chemotherapy remains to be defined. Surgical interventions ranging from pleurectomy/decortication to extrapleural pneumonectomy are increasingly offered in specialized centers, and the results of multimodality approaches with neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy and extrapleural pneumonectomy are encouraging. Ongoing investigations are defining the role of postoperative radiotherapy and the clinical activity of tyrosine kinase inhibitors targeting VEGFR2, histone deacetylase inhibitors and proteosome inhibitors.

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.

Erlotinib plus bevacizumab in previously treated patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma

BACKGROUND

We conducted a phase 2, multicenter, open-label study of erlotinib plus bevacizumab in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma who had previously received 1 prior chemotherapy regimen. These agents have activity in non-small cell lung cancer, but their role in mesothelioma is unclear. The primary endpoint is response rate. Secondary endpoints include time to progression, survival, and toxicity.

METHODS

Eligible patients with mesothelioma who had previously received 1 chemotherapy regimen were treated with erlotinib 150 mg per os daily and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg administered intravenously on Day 1 of a 21-day cycle. Treatment continued until disease progression or development of significant toxicity. Tumor response was assessed after every 2 cycles using previously established mesothelioma response criteria from Byrne and Nowak.

RESULTS

Twenty-four eligible patients initiated therapy with erlotinib and bevacizumab between February 2004 and October 2006. There were no complete or partial responses, although 12 patients achieved stable disease for at least 2 cycles of treatment. The median time to progression was 2.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4 months-5.9 months). The median survival was 5.8 months (95% CI, 2.8 months-10.1 months). The most common toxicities were rash and diarrhea. There were no treatment-related deaths, intracranial bleeding, or hemoptysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of erlotinib and bevacizumab was tolerated reasonably well, but there was no evidence of radiographic response. This study demonstrates the feasibility of conducting trials in mesothelioma patients who have failed first-line therapy. More therapeutic studies with effective agents are needed for these patients.

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.