Treatment of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Summary

Ki67 Tumor Expression Predicts Treatment Benefit Achieved by Macroscopic Radical Lung-Preserving Surgery in Pleural Mesothelioma-A Retrospective Multicenter Analysis

Pleural mesothelioma (PM), linked to asbestos-induced inflammation, carries a poor prognosis. Therapy ranges from therapy limitation to aggressive multimodality treatment. Given the uncertainty about treatment benefits for patients, this study aimed to assess the role of Ki67 as a prognostic and predictive parameter in PM. Ki67 was measured in the specimens of 70 PM patients (17 female, 53 male) from two centers and correlated to overall survival (OS) and therapy outcome. The median OS was 16.1 months. The level of Ki67 expression was divided into low (≤15%) and high (>15%). A low value of Ki67 expression was associated with a longer OS (Ki67 ≤ 15%: 31.2 (95% CI 6.5-55.8) months vs. Ki67 > 15%: 11.1 (95% CI 7.7-14.6) months, p = 0.012). The 5-year survival represents 22% in the low Ki67 expression group, in contrast to 5% in the high Ki67 expression group. We found a significant interaction term of Ki67 with multimodality treatment (p = 0.031) translating to an OS of 48.1 months in the low expression Ki67 group compared to 24.3 months in the high Ki67 expression group when receiving surgery within multimodality therapy. Therefore, Ki67 stands out as a validated prognostic and, most importantly, novel predictive biomarker for treatment benefits, particularly regarding surgery within multimodality therapy.

Reliability of assessing morphologic features with prognostic significance in cytology specimens of epithelioid diffuse pleural mesothelioma and implications for cytopathology reporting

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization incorporates morphologic features with prognostic significance in the 2021 classification of epithelioid diffuse pleural mesothelioma (E-DPM). Although cytology specimens are often the first and occasionally the only specimen available for patients with DPM, these features have not yet been investigated in cytology.

METHODS

Nuclear atypia, pleomorphic features, necrosis, and architectural patterns were retrospectively assessed in 35 paired cytology and concurrent/consecutive surgical pathology specimens of E-DPM. Agreement between pairs was determined via unweighted κ scores. Discordant cases were re-reviewed to determine the reasons for disagreement.

RESULTS

Interpretation of nuclear atypia in cytology was concordant with histology in all cases (κ = 1.000; p < .001). The presence of pleomorphic features and necrosis was concordant in 97.1% (κ = 0.842; p < .001) and 85.7% (κ = 0.481; p = .001) of paired cases, respectively. Assessment of architectural patterns in cytology showed only slight agreement with histology (κ = 0.127; p = .037). In cytology cases (n = 23) with cell block material available, assessment of nuclear atypia and the presence of pleomorphic features showed perfect agreement (κ = 1.000; p < .001, each), the presence of necrosis showed moderate agreement (κ = 0.465; p = .008), and assessment of architectural patterns showed slight agreement (κ = 0.162; p = .15) in paired specimens. Most disagreements were due to sampling differences between cytology and histology specimens.

CONCLUSIONS

Although complete nuclear grading of E-DPM is not possible given the unreliability of mitotic counts in cytology, assessment of nuclear atypia in cytology specimens is shown to be reliable. Identification of pleomorphic features and necrosis is also reliable despite occasional sampling issues. Assessment of architectural patterns is more limited in cytology.

Training and validation of a knowledge-based dose-volume histogram predictive model in the optimisation of intensity-modulated proton and volumetric modulated arc photon plans for pleural mesothelioma patients

BACKGROUND

To investigate the performance of a narrow-scope knowledge-based RapidPlan (RP) model for optimisation of intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans applied to patients with pleural mesothelioma. Second, estimate the potential benefit of IMPT versus VMAT for this class of patients.

METHODS

A cohort of 82 patients was retrospectively selected; 60 were used to "train" a dose-volume histogram predictive model; the remaining 22 provided independent validation. The performance of the RP models was benchmarked, comparing predicted versus achieved mean and near-to-maximum dose for all organs at risk (OARs) in the training set and by quantitative assessment of some dose-volume metrics in the comparison of the validation RP-based data versus the manually optimised training datasets. Treatment plans were designed for a prescription dose of 44 Gy in 22 fractions (proton doses account for a fixed relative biological effectiveness RBE = 1.1).

RESULTS

Training and validation RP-based plans resulted dosimetrically similar for both VMAT and IMPT groups, and the clinical planning aims were met for all structures. The IMPT plans outperformed the VMAT ones for all OARs for the contra-lateral and the mean and low dose regions for the ipsilateral OARs. Concerning the prediction performance of the RP models, the linear regression for the near-to-maximum dose resulted in D_achieved = 1.03D_predicted + 0.58 and D_achieved = 1.02D_predicted + 1.46 for VMAT and IMPT, respectively. For the mean dose it resulted: D_achieved = 0.99D_predicted + 0.34 and D_achieved = 1.05D_predicted + 0.27 respectively. In both cases, the linear correlation between prediction and achievement is granted with an angular coefficient deviating from unity for less than 5%. Concerning the dosimetric comparison between manual plans in the training cohort and RP-based plans in the validation cohort, no clinical differences were observed for the target volumes in both the VMAT and IMPT groups. Similar consistency was observed for the dose-volume metrics analysed for the OAR. This proves the possibility of achieving the same quality of plans with manual procedures (the training set) or with automated RP-based methods (the validation set).

CONCLUSION

Two models were trained and validated for VMAT and IMPT plans for pleural mesothelioma. The RP model performance resulted satisfactory as measured by the agreement between predicted and achieved (after full optimisation) dose-volume metrics. The IMPT plans outperformed the VMAT plans for all the OARs (with different intensities for contra- or ipsilateral structures). RP-based planning enabled the automation of part of the optimisation and the harmonisation of the dose-volume results between training and validation. The IMPT data showed a systematic significant dosimetric advantage over VMAT. In general, using an RP-based approach can simplify the optimisation workflow in these complex treatment indications without impacting the quality of plans.

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.

BAP1-Altered Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: Outcomes With Chemotherapy, Immune Check-Point Inhibitors and Poly(ADP-Ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors

Objectives

Little is known regarding the outcomes of systemic treatments in BAP1-altered malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM).

Materials and Methods

Forty five patients with MPM [group A: eight MPM patients with BAP1 inactivating mutation/copy number loss (FoundationOne^® CDx/TEMPUSxT), selected from the electronic databases of four Israeli cancer centers (ICC); group B: 37 consecutive (years 2016–2018) MPM patients selected from the electronic databases of two ICC—of those six patients without a BAP1 alteration (group B1) and 31 patients not tested for BAP1 (group B2)] were analyzed for ORR, PFS (mRECIST), and OS with 1^st-line platinum/pemetrexed+/−antiangiogenic drug (CT, n-28), immune check-point inhibitors (ICPi, n-16) and poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi, n-4). OS since diagnosis (OSDx) was assessed.

Results

There were no differences in ORR or mPFS with CT between the groups: ORR-50% vs. 47% vs. 50% vs. 47% (p>0.9), mPFS-9.1mo (95% CI, 1.2–16.1) vs. 9.2mo (95% CI, 2.9–13.3) vs. 7.2mo (95% CI, 2.3-NR) vs. 10.9mo (95% CI, 2.9–20.3) (p>0.8) in groups A, B, B1, and B2, respectively. There were no differences in ORR or mPFS with ICPi between the groups: ORR-0% vs. 27% vs. 33% vs. 25% (p>0.2), mPFS-2.5mo (95% CI, 1.4–3.7) vs. 3.0mo (95% CI, 1.3–10.5) vs. 2.0mo (95% CI, 1.9-NR) vs. 4.5mo (95% CI, 0.3–10.5) (p>0.3) in groups A, B, B1, and B2, respectively. In group A, no responses were seen with PARPi; mPFS with PARPi was 1.8mo (95% CI, 1.8-NR). OSDx was 98.3mo (95% CI, 9.7–98.3) vs. 19.4mo (95% CI, 9.7–47.3) vs. 18.8mo (95% CI, 8.5-NR) vs. 19.5mo (95% CI, 8.3–82.2) in groups A, B, B1, and B2, respectively (p>0.3).

Conclusions

BAP1-altered MPM, as compared to non-selected MPM, is characterized by similar efficacy of CT and ICPi. Numerically longer OS in BAP1-altered MPM may reflect favorable tumor biology. No responses were observed with PARPi.

Preoperative Identification of Benefit from Surgery for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

In the absence of standardized treatment algorithms for patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma, one of the main difficulties remains patient allocation to therapies with potential benefit. This article discusses clinical, radiologic, pathologic, and molecular prognostic factors as well as genetic background leading to preoperative identification of benefit from surgery, which have been investigated over the past years to simplify and at the same time specify patient selection for surgical treatment.

Biomarker-guided targeted and immunotherapies in malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a lethal thoracic malignancy whose incidence is still increasing worldwide. MPM is characterized by frequent inactivation of tumor-suppressor genes (TSGs), e.g., the homozygous deletion of CDKN2A/2B and various genetic alterations that inactivate BAP1, NF2, LATS1/2, and TP53. The leading cause for the poor prognosis of patients with MPM is the lack of effective treatment options, with conventional chemotherapy being the standard of care in the clinic, which has remained unchanged for almost 20 years. Precision oncology, a burgeoning effort to provide precise cancer treatment tailored to unique molecular changes in individual patients, has made tremendous progress in the last decade in several cancers, but not in MPM. Recent studies indicate a high degree of tumor heterogeneity in MPM and the importance to optimize histological and molecular classifications for improved treatment. In this review, we provide an up-to-date overview of recent advances in MPM by focusing on new stratifications of tumor subgroups, specific vulnerabilities associated with functional loss of TSGs and other biomarkers, and potential clinical implications. The molecularly based subdivisions not only deepen our understanding of MPM pathobiology, but more importantly, they may raise unprecedented new hopes for personalized treatment of MPM patients with biomarker-guided targeted and immunotherapies.

Retrospective Evaluation of the Use of Pembrolizumab in Malignant Mesothelioma in a Real-World Australian Population

INTRODUCTION

We investigated the efficacy and toxicity of pembrolizumab in patients with mesothelioma from a real-world Australian population. We aimed to determine clinical factors and predictive biomarkers that could help select patients who are likely to benefit from pembrolizumab.

METHOD

Patients with mesothelioma who were treated with pembrolizumab as part of the Insurance and Care New South Wales compensation scheme were included. Clinical information was collected retrospectively. Tumor biomarkers such as programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), BAP1, and CD3-positive (CD3+) tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) were examined using archival formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor samples.

RESULTS

A total of 98 patients were included with a median age of 70 years (range, 46-91 y); 92% were men; 76% had epithelioid subtype; 21% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0. Pembrolizumab was used as second-line or subsequent-line treatment in 94 patients and as first-line treatment in four patients. The overall response rate was 18%, and the disease control rate was 56%. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.8 months (95% confidence interval: 3.6-6.2), and the median overall survival (OS) was 9.5 months (95% confidence interval: 6.6-13.7). Immune-related adverse events occurred in 27% of patients, of which nine (9%) were of grade 3 or higher. In the multivariable analysis, factors independently associated with longer PFS included baseline ECOG status of 0 (median PFS: 12 mo versus 4 mo, p < 0.01) and PD-L1 tumor proportion score of greater than or equal to 1% (median PFS: 6 mo versus 4 mo, p < 0.01). Baseline platelet count of less than or equal to 400 × 109/liter was independently associated with longer PFS and OS (median PFS: 6 mo versus 2 mo, p = 0.05; median OS: 10 mo versus 4 mo, p = 0.01), whereas lack of pretreatment dexamethasone was independently associated with OS but not PFS (median OS: 10 mo versus 3 mo, p = 0.01). The odds of response were higher for patients with baseline ECOG status of 0 (p = 0.02) and with greater than or equal to 5% CD3+ TILs in the tumor (p < 0.01). PD-L1 expression, BAP1 loss, and CD3+ TILs in the stroma were not significantly associated with the overall response rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Immunotherapy is a reasonable treatment option for patients with mesothelioma. Our results are comparable to other clinical trials investigating pembrolizumab in mesothelioma in terms of response. Good performance status assessment remains the most robust predictor for patient outcomes. CD3+ TILs in the tumor may help select patients that are likely to respond to pembrolizumab, whereas factors such as PD-L1 expression, baseline platelet count, and lack of pretreatment dexamethasone may help predict survival outcomes from pembrolizumab treatment.

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.

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.