[Guidelines of the European Respiratory Society and the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons for the management of malignant pleural mesothelioma]

A Case of Pulmonary Embolism with Sarcomatoid Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma with Long-Term Pleural Effusion

Background

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a highly aggressive tumor that originates from pleural mesothelial cells. In recent years, with the development of asbestos-related industries and the increase in air pollution, its incidence has been increased. The incidence of pulmonary embolism combined with sarcomatoid MPM is very low and the prognosis is extremely poor. We here report a case of a patient with long term of pleural effusion and finally diagnosed as pulmonary embolism with sarcomatoid MPM.

Case

A 75-year-old male with a 30-year history of asbestos exposure was admitted to our hospital due to chest pain and difficulty in breathing after exercise. Radiologic examination revealed pleural effusion, computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) suggests pulmonary embolism, and we consider pleural effusion caused by pulmonary embolism. After anticoagulant therapy for pulmonary embolism and pleural puncture to reduce pleural effusion, the patient's symptoms improved. However, after that, the patient was still admitted to the hospital several times because of recurrent chest pain and dyspnea symptoms, and radiologic examination always showed unexplained pleural effusion. Finally, pathological and immunohistochemical examinations of the pleural biopsy specimens were performed, and the diagnosis was confirmed as sarcomatoid MPM.

Conclusion

In summary, sarcomatoid MPM with pulmonary embolism is relatively rare, and the prognosis is poor. Clinicians need to be alert to its occurrence. When the first diagnosis is confirmed and the effect of targeted treatment is still not good, the possibility of other diseases should be considered. In clinical practice, pleural biopsy guided by PET-CT is a good choice for patients with sarcomatoid MPM who cannot tolerate open pleural biopsies or thoracoscopy. And patients should undergo pleural morphology and immunohistochemistry as soon as possible, which are helpful for timely diagnosis.

A multicenter, randomized, phase II/III study of dendritic cells loaded with allogeneic tumor cell lysate (MesoPher) in subjects with mesothelioma as maintenance therapy after chemotherapy: DENdritic cell Immunotherapy for Mesothelioma (DENIM) trial

Background

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive, treatment resistant neoplasm. The current treatment, consisting of antifolate and platinum-based chemotherapy, improves the median overall survival with only 3 months. Adjuvant bevacizumab generates an additional 2 months survival benefit. Checkpoint inhibitors (CI) have shown promising clinical effects in only a minority of patients. A possible reason is that MPM patients have low numbers of tumor-infiltrating CD8⁺ T-cells. Dendritic cell (DC) therapy can induce an immune response and activate tumor-specific CD8⁺ T-cells. Allogeneic mesothelioma tumor-lysate loaded DC therapy has proven effective in mice and safe and feasible in humans. We have designed a randomized, phase II/III, multicenter, open-label trial to examine the efficacy of DC therapy in humans with histologically proven MPM.

Methods

In this open-label, multicenter, randomized phase II/III trial patients will be randomized to receive either DC therapy plus best supportive care (BSC) or BSC alone according to the discretion of the local investigator after first line chemotherapy treatment. The primary end point will be overall survival. The secondary endpoints will be safety and tolerability, progression-free survival, overall response rate and quality of life.

Discussion

This phase II/III trial will determine whether DC therapy in patients with MPM is safe and effective as a maintenance treatment and subsequently might be a new treatment option for MPM.

Extrapleural pneumonectomy: still indicated?

The optimal treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) has not yet been established and is still under investigation. Surgery is one of the pillars in the multimodality approach with the purpose of removing as much as visible tumor as possible and to relieve symptoms. To date, two major surgical procedures are available for removal or debulking of MPM that is considered to be resectable: [extended (e)] pleurectomy/decortication (P/D) and extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP). Historically, EPP was regarded as the only way to achieve a macroscopic complete resection. However, in the last years, there is a shift in literature towards (e)P/D as the preferred surgical procedure whenever possible as several retrospective studies and meta-analyses showed a similar or lower long-term survival and higher perioperative mortality and postoperative morbidity in patients who been treated with EPP. On the other hand, no randomized-controlled trials regarding surgical treatment with (e)P/D or EPP exist and therefore level A evidence favoring one surgical procedure is lacking. In this review we provide a nuanced and well-considered answer to the question whether EPP is still indicated in the surgical treatment of MPM.

Management and Survival of Pleural Mesothelioma: A Record Linkage Study

BACKGROUND

Pleural mesothelioma (PM) is a rare, highly lethal tumor. A definite consensus on its management has yet to be established.

OBJECTIVES

To assess management, overall survival (OS), and their predictors in a cohort of patients from Lombardy, the largest Italian region (about 10 million inhabitants).

METHODS

Through a record linkage between Lombardy health care administrative databases, we identified patients diagnosed with PM in 2006-2011 without history of cancer, evaluating their management. OS from PM diagnosis was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Predictors of OS and of treatment were assessed using Cox regression models with time-dependent covariates when appropriate.

RESULTS

Out of 1,326 patients, 754 (56.9%) received treatment for PM: 205 (15.5%) underwent surgery, and 696 (52.5%) used chemotherapy. Surgery was spread across several hospitals, and most patients diagnosed in nonspecialized centers (70%) underwent surgery in the same centers. Age at diagnosis was a strong inverse determinant of surgery. Determinants of receiving chemotherapy were younger age, a more recent first diagnosis, and first diagnosis in a specialized center. OS was 45.4% at 1 year, 24.8% at 2 years, and 9.6% at 5 years (median 11 months). OS decreased with age, and was higher for those who underwent surgery, but not for those treated with chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Management of PM varied widely in clinical practice, and significant predictors of treatment were younger age and recent diagnosis, though a high proportion of patients were not treated. Patients were treated in various hospitals, indicating the importance of concentrating serious rare neoplasms in Comprehensive Cancer Centers (as recognized by the Italian Health Ministry).

Surgery for malignant pleural mesothelioma: an international guidelines review

Currently there is no universally accepted surgical therapy for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). The goal of surgery in this dismal disease is a macroscopic complete resection (MCR) and there are two types of intervention with a curative intent. At one side, there is the extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP) which consists in an en-bloc resection of the lung, pleura, pericardium and diaphragm and at the other side, there is pleurectomy/decortication (P/D) a lung-sparing surgery. Initially, EPP was considered the only surgical option with a curative aim, but during the decades P/D have acquired a role of increasing importance in MPM therapy. Several randomized prospective trials are required to establish the best strategy in the treatment of pleural mesothelioma. Although which is the best surgical option remains unclear, the International Mesothelioma Interest Group (IMIG), recently have stated that the type of surgery depends on clinical factors and on individual surgical judgment and expertise. Moreover, according to the current evidence, the surgery should be performed in high-volume centres within multimodality protocols. The aim of this study is to examine the currently available international guidelines in the surgical diagnosis and treatment of MPM.

The Synthetic Lignan Secoisolariciresinol Diglucoside Prevents Asbestos-Induced NLRP3 Inflammasome Activation in Murine Macrophages

BACKGROUND

The interaction of asbestos with macrophages drives two key processes that are linked to malignancy: (1) the generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS)/reactive nitrogen species (RNS) and (2) the activation of an inflammation cascade that drives acute and chronic inflammation, with the NLRP3 inflammasome playing a key role. Synthetic secoisolariciresinol diglucoside (SDG), LGM2605, is a nontoxic lignan with anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties and was evaluated for protection from asbestos in murine peritoneal macrophages (MF).

METHODS

MFs were exposed to crocidolite asbestos ± LGM2605 given 4 hours prior to exposure and evaluated at various times for NLRP3 expression, secretion of inflammasome-activated cytokines (IL-1β and IL-18), proinflammatory cytokines (IL-6, TNFα, and HMGB1), NF-κB activation, and levels of total nitrates/nitrites.

RESULTS

Asbestos induces a significant (p < 0.0001) increase in the NLRP3 subunit, release of proinflammatory cytokines, NLRP3-activated cytokines, NF-κB, and levels of nitrates/nitrites. LGM2605 significantly reduced NLRP3 ranging from 40 to 81%, IL-1β by 89-96%, and TNFα by 67-78%, as well as activated NF-κB by 48-49% while decreasing levels of nitrates/nitrites by 85-93%.

CONCLUSIONS

LGM2605 reduced asbestos-induced NLRP3 expression, proinflammatory cytokine release, NF-κB activation, and nitrosative stress in MFs supporting its possible use in preventing the asbestos-induced inflammatory cascade leading to malignancy.

Protocol for PIT: a phase III trial of prophylactic irradiation of tracts in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma following invasive chest wall intervention

INTRODUCTION

Histological diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma requires an invasive procedure such as CT-guided needle biopsy, thoracoscopy, video-assisted thorascopic surgery (VATs) or thoracotomy. These invasive procedures encourage tumour cell seeding at the intervention site and patients can develop tumour nodules within the chest wall. In an effort to prevent nodules developing, it has been widespread practice across Europe to irradiate intervention sites postprocedure--a practice known as prophylactic irradiation of tracts (PIT). To date there has not been a suitably powered randomised trial to determine whether PIT is effective at reducing the risk of chest wall nodule development.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In this multicentre phase III randomised controlled superiority trial, 374 patients who can receive radiotherapy within 42 days of a chest wall intervention will be randomised to receive PIT or no PIT. Patients will be randomised on a 1:1 basis. Radiotherapy in the PIT arm will be 21 Gy in three fractions. Subsequent chemotherapy is given at the clinicians' discretion. A reduction in the incidence of chest wall nodules from 15% to 5% in favour of radiotherapy 6 months after randomisation would be clinically significant. All patients will be followed up for up to 2 years with monthly telephone contact and at least four outpatient visits in the first year.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

PIT was approved by NRES Committee North West-Greater Manchester West (REC reference 12/NW/0249) and recruitment is currently on-going, the last patient is expected to be randomised by the end of 2015. The analysis of the primary end point, incidence of chest wall nodules 6 months after randomisation, is expected to be published in 2016 in a peer reviewed journal and results will also be presented at scientific meetings and summary results published online. A follow-up analysis is expected to be published in 2018.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN04240319; NCT01604005; Pre-results.