Phase II study of gemcitabine plus docetaxel as second-line treatment in malignant pleural mesothelioma: a single institution study

Advances in Immunotherapy for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: From Emerging Strategies to Translational Insights

MPM stands as a rare malignancy necessitating improved therapeutic strategies due to its limited treatment choices and unfavorable prognosis. The advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors has heralded a paradigm shift in the therapeutic landscape of MPM, offering promising avenues across diverse clinical scenarios. In the context of advanced stages of the disease, Immune check-point inhibitors targeting programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-as-sociated protein 4 (CTLA-4), have exhibited encouraging potential in clinical trials, particularly manifesting efficacy among patients exhibiting disease progression following chemotherapy regimens. Innovative combination regimens, exemplified by the concurrent administration of nivolumab and ipilimumab, have demonstrated marked improvement in survival and patient's benefits. A deeper comprehension of the intricate genetic underpinnings of MPM, encompassing key mutations such as cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A (CDKN2A), neurofibromin 2 (NF2), and BRCA1-associated protein 1 (BAP1) mutations, has elucidated novel avenues for targeted therapeutic interventions. This review accentuates the transformative capacity of immunotherapy in revolutionizing the therapeutic outlook for MPM, thereby potentially translating into augmented survival rates and offering glimpses of new approaches on the horizon. Despite the persisting challenges, the synergistic crossroads of interdisciplinary research and collaborative clinical endeavors portend a hopeful landscape for MPM treatment.

Pleural mesothelioma (PM) - The status of systemic therapy

Pleural mesothelioma (PM) remains a malignancy with poor prognosis. Despite initial disappointing response rates to single-agent chemotherapy, upfront platinum and anti-folate-based combination chemotherapy has remained the backbone of treatment for PM for the last three decades. The role of maintenance chemotherapy remains unclear; switch-maintenance gemcitabine has shown improvements in progression-free but not overall survival. The addition of antiangiogenic agents to chemotherapy yielded modest improvements in survival, both upfront in combination with platinum-pemetrexed, and in the relapsed setting. Immunotherapy, particularly PD-(L)1 inhibitors, has shown important but variable effectiveness in relapsed PM when used as monotherapy, and is an important salvage treatment after first-line chemotherapy. Furthermore, the randomized phase 3 trial of ipilimumab-nivolumab versus platinum-pemetrexed chemotherapy demonstrated improved overall survival favouring ipilimumab-nivolumab (HR 0.74, 96.6% CI 0.60-0.91; p = 0.0020), establishing this regimen as the new standard first-line treatment for PM, particularly in those with non-epithelioid histology. Increased interest in PM genomics has led to development of novel personalized therapeutics, such as those targeting DNA repair and EZH2 pathways, however with variable outcomes in trials. Targeting the membrane glycoprotein mesothelin and arginine deprivation are other important strategies under ongoing investigation. The field of PM is changing and new treatments bring hope to a largely lethal and poor prognostic malignancy. Despite these developments, current challenges include understanding the role of combination and multimodality treatments, drivers of resistance to treatment, and establishing predictive biomarkers to improve patient selection and treatment sequencing.

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.

Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma Interactome with 364 Novel Protein-Protein Interactions

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive cancer affecting the outer lining of the lung, with a median survival of less than one year. We constructed an 'MPM interactome' with over 300 computationally predicted protein-protein interactions (PPIs) and over 2400 known PPIs of 62 literature-curated genes whose activity affects MPM. Known PPIs of the 62 MPM associated genes were derived from Biological General Repository for Interaction Datasets (BioGRID) and Human Protein Reference Database (HPRD). Novel PPIs were predicted by applying the HiPPIP algorithm, which computes features of protein pairs such as cellular localization, molecular function, biological process membership, genomic location of the gene, and gene expression in microarray experiments, and classifies the pairwise features as interacting or non-interacting based on a random forest model. We validated five novel predicted PPIs experimentally. The interactome is significantly enriched with genes differentially ex-pressed in MPM tumors compared with normal pleura and with other thoracic tumors, genes whose high expression has been correlated with unfavorable prognosis in lung cancer, genes differentially expressed on crocidolite exposure, and exosome-derived proteins identified from malignant mesothelioma cell lines. 28 of the interactors of MPM proteins are targets of 147 U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drugs. By comparing disease-associated versus drug-induced differential expression profiles, we identified five potentially repurposable drugs, namely cabazitaxel, primaquine, pyrimethamine, trimethoprim and gliclazide. Preclinical studies may be con-ducted in vitro to validate these computational results. Interactome analysis of disease-associated genes is a powerful approach with high translational impact. It shows how MPM-associated genes identified by various high throughput studies are functionally linked, leading to clinically translatable results such as repurposed drugs. The PPIs are made available on a webserver with interactive user interface, visualization and advanced search capabilities.

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.

Characteristics and long-term outcomes of advanced pleural mesothelioma in Latin America (MeSO-CLICaP)

Background

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive tumor, associated with poor prognosis. There is a lack of information about the clinical and pathological features related with survival in the Latin American population.

Methods

The MeSO‐CLICaP registry identified 302 patients with advanced MPM diagnosed and treated between January 2008 and March 2016. The Cox model was applied to determine the variables associated with survival. A random forest tree model was built to predict the response to first‐line chemotherapy among Latin American patients.

Results

The median age was 61.1 years (SD 10.6 years), 191 (63.2%) were men, 65.9% were ever smokers, and 38.7% had previous exposure to asbestos. A total of 237 (78.5%) had epithelioid tumors, and 188 (62.3%) and 114 (37.7%) cases had stage III or IV MPM, respectively. A total of 49 patients (16.2%) underwent pleurectomy, 57 (18.9%) received radiotherapy, and 279 patients received first‐line platinum‐based chemotherapy. The overall response rate to first‐line chemotherapy was 40.4%, progression‐free survival to first‐line treatment was 5.7 months (95% CI 4.9–6.5), and 63 (20.8%) patients had pemetrexed maintenance. The median overall survival was 16.8 months (95% CI 13.0–20.5), and multivariate analysis found that stage (P = 0.013), and pleurodesis (P = 0.048), were independent prognostic factors for first‐line overall survival. The model to predict response to first‐line chemotherapy obtained a 0.98 area under the curve, a sensitivity of 93%, and a specificity of 95% for detecting responders and non‐responders.

Conclusion

This study identifies factors associated with clinical benefit from chemotherapy among advanced MPM Latin American patients, emphasizing the impact of histology and the clinical benefit of chemotherapy on outcomes.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of second-line therapies for treatment of mesothelioma

INTRODUCTION

Advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is generally treated with platinum/pemetrexed-based first-line therapy. Once the disease progresses, evidence for the efficacy of palliative treatments is lacking, and platinum re-challenge or single-agent chemotherapy are commonly used. To assess the effects of cytostatic or targeted therapy for treating MPM, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were searched to identify published articles on second-line treatments for recurrent or advanced mesothelioma. Inclusion criteria were publication in the English language, describing clinical trials with 20 or more patients, and evaluability for efficacy and for receiving second-line systemic therapies. Data were pooled using number of events/number of evaluable patients, median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), according to a fixed or random effect model. Pooled median OS was the primary endpoint.

RESULTS

A total of 49 eligible studies (n = 3938 patients; range, 12-400) were identified. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.4 months (95%CI 2.87-3.93). Median pooled OS was 7.86 (95%CI 7.01-8.72). The pooled overall response rate (ORR) was 8.63% (95%CI 6-11.26), and the pooled disease control rate (DCR) was 54.8% (95%CI 48.9-60.6). Median pooled OS with platinum- and pemetrexed-based chemotherapy were 7.93 and 7.78 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

There remains uncertainty about the ideal second-line agent for MPM. Based on this meta-analysis, palliative chemotherapy or other experimental agents can be considered for patients with MPM who desire further treatment after their disease has progressed, during or after first-line therapy.

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 .

Medical treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma relapses

There are not established treatments for patients with advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma that progressed after first-line chemotherapy with cisplatin and pemetrexed. Retrospective analyses suggest a possible role for rechallenge with pemetrexed for selected patients. Phase II trials demonstrate a modest efficacy of vinorelbine monotherapy with a response rate ranging between 0% and 18% and a tolerable toxicity profile. Combination schedules, despite an increased toxicity, fail to demonstrate an improved efficacy. To date, genome wide analyses did not show molecular targets suitable for therapy and biological drugs did not exert a significant efficacy in clinical trials. Immunotherapy has given a hint of efficacy in early clinical trials but definitive evaluations are still ongoing.

The role of interleukin-6 in malignant mesothelioma

Malignant mesothelioma (MM) still remains a dismal disease with a median overall survival between 9-12 months. During the past decade since the introduction of the multi-folate antagonist, pemetrexed, there have been no significant advances in its systemic treatment, particularly with novel therapeutics that have exhibited varying degrees of success in other solid tumours. In recent years, the pleiotropic proinflammatory cytokine, interleukin-6 (IL-6) has emerged as a mediator of pivotal processes such as cell proliferation and chemoresistance within the mesothelioma tumour microenvironment in addition to clinical symptoms commonly witnessed in this disease. This manuscript provides a brief summary on the pathophysiology and clinical management of MM, followed by the role of IL-6 in its tumourigenesis and the rationale for utilising anti-IL-6 therapeutics alongside standard chemotherapy and targeted agents in an attempt to prolong survival.

Second-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy regimens improve overall 3-year survival rate in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma: a multicenter retrospective study

In the present study, we aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of second-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy regimens on overall survival (OS) in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) patients receiving first-line pemetrexed-based regimens. A total of 73 patients with MPM from Akdeniz University, Acibadem Kayseri Hospital, Kayseri Training and Research Hospital, and Erciyes University were analyzed and evaluated retrospectively as two groups: second-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy and no second-line chemotherapy. The median OS of patients who received second-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy was 11.3 (5.1-17.5) months, while it was 9.9 (2.1-17.7) months in the patients who did not receive chemotherapy in the second-line setting (p = 0.056). When we evaluated the survival rate at the 6th, 12th, 18th, 24th, and 36th month, the OS rate of the 36th month was significantly higher in patients who received gemcitabine-based second-line chemotherapy (p = 0.041). When evaluating the OS from diagnosis to death, the median OS values were 20.8 (17.5-24.1) months for first-line pemetrexed-based regimens then second-line gemcitabine alone and 13.1 (9.0-17.1) months supportive care after first-line pemetrexed-based regimens (p = 0.005). According to our results, we may consider gemcitabine-based regimens as second-line chemotherapy after treatment with pemetrexed plus platinum in patients with MPM.

Second-line treatment in malignant pleural mesothelioma: translating the evidence into clinical practice

SUMMARY 

Nearly all patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) progress during or after standard first-line treatment with pemetrexed plus a platinum compound. Second-line therapies are being increasingly used in clinical practice, but their role is still unproven, and the optimal regimens remain to be defined. Published studies have frequently severe limitations, due to the small number and to the heterogeneity of patients included. New treatment options are eagerly awaited. In selected cases with a prolonged disease control after first-line chemotherapy, re-treatment with pemetrexed seems to be the best option. In the other cases, patients should be enrolled whenever possible in clinical trials. Single-agent chemotherapy remains a reasonable option for palliation.

[Malignant pleural mesothelioma: diagnosis and treatment]

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare and aggressive tumor issued from the mesothelial surface of the pleural space. A previous exposure to asbestos is the main risk factor of mesothelioma. Clinical signs are most of the time late and unspecific. Chest CT-scan, a key imaging procedure, usually shows a (unilateral) pleurisy associated with pleural nodular thickening. PET-scan associated with CT-scan may help to differenciate MPM from pleural benign tumors but it is not recommended for the diagnosis of MPM, as well as chest resonance magnetic imaging and blood or pleural fluid biomarkers, including soluble mesothelin still under investigation. The diagnosis of MPM is based on histology using essentially immunohistochemistry on pleural biopsies best obtained by thoracoscopy. The treatment of MPM relies mostly on chemotherapy. Surgery, pleurectomy/decortication or extrapleural pneumonectomy, is not recommended outside a clinical trial, as well as adjuvant chest radiotherapy. Prophylactic irradiation of chest scars and drains, validated by the French guidelines in 2005, is however highly discussed at the international level. Finally, numerous research studies presently assess the value of targeted therapies and biomarkers in MPM, opening new perspectives in the management of this cancer.

[Second-line therapy in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. A French retrospective study (2005-2006)]

BACKGROUND

The role of second-line chemotherapy (SLC) has still not been established in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) but SLC is increasingly used because many patients are still fit at the time of the progression of the disease.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, the authors reviewed their experience with SLC in pemetrexed-pretreated patients with MPM at two French thoracic oncology units (institut Gustave-Roussy, Villejuif, and hôpital d'Instruction des Armées Percy, Clamart).

RESULTS

Between January 2005 and December 2006, 84 consecutive patients with progressing MPM after pemetrexed chemotherapy were enrolled. Forty-four patients received an SLC. There were 30 men and 14 women. The median age was 58 years (range: 34 to 76 years). Most patients had a performance status (PS) less than or equal to 1 (82%) and an epithelial histological subtype (91 %). The median time to progression (TTP) after first-line chemotherapy was 6.1 months. The SLC was a pemetrexed therapy in 21 patients and a new regime in 20 patients (gemcitabine alone or with oxaliplatin). The other three patients were enrolled in a phase I study. According to the Recist criteria, a partial response was observed in four patients and the disease was stabilised in six patients after SLC. The median TTP after SLC was 3.8 months. The median survival was 12.2 months (range: 2 to 72 months). Four of these 44 patients then received third-line (4.8 %) and two received fourth-line therapy (2.4 %).

CONCLUSIONS

This experience indicates the feasibility of administering SLC in patients with MPM who are healthy at the time of the progression of the disease. The optimal treatment has not been defined to date and prospective trials are needed.