Kinetics of soluble mesothelin in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma during treatment

Diagnosis of Pleural Mesothelioma: Is Everything Solved at the Present Time?

Ranked high in worldwide growing health issues, pleural diseases affect approximately one million people globally per year and are often correlated with a poor prognosis. Among these pleural diseases, malignant pleural mesothelioma (PM), a neoplastic disease mainly due to asbestos exposure, still remains a diagnostic challenge. Timely diagnosis is imperative to define the most suitable therapeutic approach for the patient, but the choice of diagnostic modalities depends on operator experience and local facilities while bearing in mind the yield of each diagnostic procedure. Since the analysis of pleural fluid cytology is not sufficient in differentiating historical features in PM, histopathological and morphological features obtained via tissue biopsies are fundamental. The quality of biopsy samples is crucial and often requires highly qualified expertise. Since adequate tissue biopsy is essential, medical or video-assisted thoracoscopy (MT or VATS) is proposed as the most suitable approach, with the former being a physician-led procedure. Indeed, MT is the diagnostic gold standard for malignant pleural pathologies. Moreover, this medical or surgical approach can allow diagnostic and therapeutic procedures: it provides the possibility of video-assisted biopsies, the drainage of high volumes of pleural fluid and the administration of sterile calibrated talcum powder under visual control in order to achieve pleurodesis, placement of indwelling pleural catheters if required and in a near future potential intrapleural therapy. In this context, dedicated diagnostic pathways remain a crucial need, especially to quickly and properly diagnose PM. Lastly, the interdisciplinary approach and multidisciplinary collaboration should always be implemented in order to direct the patient to the best customised diagnostic and therapeutic pathway. At the present time, the diagnosis of PM remains an unsolved problem despite MDT (multidisciplinary team) meetings, mainly because of the lack of standardised diagnostic work-up. This review aims to provide an overview of diagnostic procedures in order to propose a clear strategy.

Targeted Therapy in Mesotheliomas: Uphill All the Way

Mesothelioma (MM) is an aggressive and lethal disease with few therapeutic opportunities. Platinum-pemetrexed chemotherapy is the backbone of first-line treatment for MM. The introduction of immunotherapy (IO) has been the only novelty of the last decades, allowing an increase in survival compared to standard chemotherapy (CT). However, IO is not approved for epithelioid histology in many countries. Therefore, therapy for relapsed MM remains an unmet clinical need, and the prognosis of MM remains poor, with an average survival of only 18 months. Increasing evidence reveals MM complexity and heterogeneity, of which histological classification fails to explain. Thus, scientific focus on possibly new molecular markers or cellular targets is increasing, together with the search for target therapies directed towards them. The molecular landscape of MM is characterized by inactivating tumor suppressor alterations, the most common of which is found in CDKN2A, BAP1, MTAP, and NF2. In addition, cellular targets such as mesothelin or metabolic enzymes such as ASS1 could be potentially amenable to specific therapies. This review examines the major targets and relative attempts of therapeutic approaches to provide an overview of the potential prospects for treating this rare neoplasm.

Pleural Mesothelioma: Advances in Blood and Pleural Biomarkers

Pleural mesothelioma (PM) is a type of cancer that is highly related to exposure to asbestos fibers. It shows aggressive behavior, and the current therapeutic approaches are usually insufficient to change the poor prognosis. Moreover, apart from staging and histological classification, there are no validated predictors of its response to treatment or its long-term outcomes. Numerous studies have investigated minimally invasive biomarkers in pleural fluid or blood to aid in earlier diagnosis and prognostic assessment of PM. The most studied marker in pleural effusion is mesothelin, which exhibits good specificity but low sensitivity, especially for non-epithelioid PM. Other biomarkers found in pleural fluid include fibulin-3, hyaluronan, microRNAs, and CYFRA-21.1, which have lower diagnostic capabilities but provide prognostic information and have potential roles as therapeutic targets. Serum is the most investigated matrix for biomarkers of PM. Several serum biomarkers in PM have been studied, with mesothelin, osteopontin, and fibulin-3 being the most often tested. A soluble mesothelin-related peptide (SMRP) is the only FDA-approved biomarker in patients with suspected mesothelioma. With different serum and pleural fluid cut-offs, it provides useful information on the diagnosis, prognosis, follow-up, and response to therapy in epithelioid PM. Panels combining different markers and proteomics technologies show promise in terms of improving clinical performance in the diagnosis and monitoring of mesothelioma patients. However, there is still no evidence that early detection can improve the treatment outcomes of PM patients.

Longitudinal monitoring of response to chemotherapy in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma by biomarkers

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to longitudinally investigate the serum levels of mesothelin, sestrin1, hyaluronan synthase 2 (HAS2), midkine, and high mobility group box 1 (HMGB1) before and after chemotherapy and at the time of relapse in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) patients treated with chemotherapy and to compare the changes in biomarker levels with radiological treatment outcome.

METHODS

A total of 64 MPM patients treated with chemotherapy were enrolled in the study and longitudinally followed for changes in biomarker levels in response to treatment. Biomarkers levels were measured in serum using a human ELISA kit. Relative and absolute changes in biomarker levels were compared with the best radiological overall response at each time point.

RESULTS

Median survival was 20.0 ± 2.4 (15.3-24.7) months in patients with partial and complete response, 17.0 ± 1.0 (15.0-19.0) months in patients with stable disease, and 9.0 ± 1.0 (7.0-11.0) months in patients with progressive disease. A significant decrease in serum levels of mesothelin, midkine, and HMGB1 was observed in patients with radiologically partial and complete responses to chemotherapy (p< 0.001, p= 0.016, and p= 0.039, respectively). In these patients, mesothelin levels decreased by 15%, midkine levels by 7%, and HMGB1 levels by 15%. In addition, HMGB1 serum levels were found to significantly increase by 15% in patients with radiologically progressive responses to chemotherapy compared to pretreatment serum levels (p= 0.035). In patients with partial and complete response to chemotherapy, mesothelin levels increased by 15%, midkine by 12%, and sestrin1 by 8% when the disease recurred (p= 0.004, p= 0.004 and p= 0.044, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Biomarkers may be useful in the longitudinal monitoring of response to treatment in MPM. However, the results of our study should be validated in larger groups with sufficient case numbers from multicenter institutions.

Pilot Study to Evaluate Serum Soluble Mesothelin-Related Peptide (SMRP) as Marker for Clinical Monitoring of Pleural Mesothelioma (PM): Correlation with Modified RECIST Score

A soluble mesothelin-related peptide (SMRP) is the only FDA-approved biomarker for diagnosis of pleural mesothelioma (PM) and the most used for monitoring treatment. Radiological assessment of PM, based on modified RECIST (mRECIST) criteria, is challenging. This pilot study was designed to evaluate whether SMRP levels correlated over time with mRECIST score. Serial serum samples from PM patients were collected and SMRP levels were measured and compared with the mRECIST score obtained through centralized CT scans by blinded review. The within-patient SMRP-mRECIST relationship over time was estimated through a normal random-effects regression approach applied to the log-transformed mRECIST score. Overall, 58 PM patients were included (46 males and 12 females) with a median age at diagnosis of 67 years (min–max = 48–79), 44 (76%) with epithelioid and 14 (24%) with non-epithelioid histology. The total number of SMRP measurements and CT scans considered for analysis was 183. There was a statistically significant correlation between SMRP and mRECIST score in the 2 cohorts considered both separately and jointly. These results, although exploratory, suggest that SMRP measurement might be considered as an adjunct to monitor PM patients in order to delay CT scans time interval, thus warranting further investigation.

Hitting the Bull's-Eye: Mesothelin's Role as a Biomarker and Therapeutic Target for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive cancer with limited treatment options and poor prognosis. MPM originates from the mesothelial lining of the pleura. Mesothelin (MSLN) is a glycoprotein expressed at low levels in normal tissues and at high levels in MPM. Many other solid cancers overexpress MSLN, and this is associated with worse survival rates. However, this association has not been found in MPM, and the exact biological role of MSLN in MPM requires further exploration. Here, we discuss the current research on the diagnostic and prognostic value of MSLN in MPM patients. Furthermore, MSLN has become an attractive immunotherapy target in MPM, where better treatment strategies are urgently needed. Several MSLN-targeted monoclonal antibodies, antibody-drug conjugates, immunotoxins, cancer vaccines, and cellular therapies have been tested in the clinical setting. The biological rationale underpinning MSLN-targeted immunotherapies and their potential to improve MPM patient outcomes are reviewed.

Follow-up of Soluble Mesothelin-Related Protein Levels in Participants With Asbestos-Related Disorders

Background

Asbestos exposure is associated with the development of the cancer malignant mesothelioma (MM). Measurement of soluble mesothelin-related protein (SMRP) has been suggested as a method for detection of MM in its early stages. We prospectively examined SMRP levels in participants with asbestos exposure who are a group at a high risk of development of MM.

Methods

This study was a follow-up of our cohort of 322 asbestos-exposed participants. No further participants developed MM or malignancy over the study period. Mean follow-up time was 22.9 months.

Results

Mean (standard deviation) SMRP levels at baseline and follow-up were 0.94 (0.79) and 0.91 (0.86) nmol/L (p = 0.1033), respectively. Mean SMRP levels of the healthy individuals exposed to asbestos at baseline was significantly lower than those of participants with asbestosis and pleural plaques alone; similar patterns were found on follow-up measurements. There was a statistically significant effect of age on serial SMRP measurements. Our study confirms higher levels in participants with nonmalignant asbestos-related disorders. Levels decreased in asbestos-related disorders other than asbestosis, where a small increase was observed. We did not detect any further cases of malignancy.

Conclusion

Monitoring programs for early detection of MM need to take into account increased SMRP levels found in benign asbestos-related diseases.

Potential role of serum mesothelin in predicting survival of patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive tumor with poor survival rates. Therefore, it is essential to have effective biological markers predicting the course of the disease and prognosis. The aim of the present study was to highlight the prognostic significance of serum soluble mesothelin-related protein (Se-SMRP) in patients with MPM at diagnosis. Se-SMRP was determined in 60 patients using an ELISA commercial kit. Se-SMRP levels were subdivided into three tertile-based categories and in each category overall survival (OS) indexes were determined using the Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. The association between Se-SMRP levels and OS was also assessed by restricted cubic spline (RCS) analysis. No notable differences in the Kaplan-Meier probabilities were identified across the Se-SMRP categories (<0.66 nM, 0.66-1.46 nM, >1.46 nM) although an upward trend in death rate ratios (RR) was pointed out by comparing the higher (RR=1.95) and intermediate (RR=1.86) categories with the lower category (RR=1.00). In addition, such an increasing tendency, particularly when the biomarker exceeded 1.0 nM, was confirmed by an RCS function of Se-SMPR levels fitted to survival data using the Cox regression equation. The present study provided evidence in favor of a prognostic value of Se-SMRP in patients with MPM.

Evaluation of soluble mesothelin-related peptides and MSLN genetic variability in asbestos-related diseases

Background

Asbestos exposure is associated with increased risk of several diseases, including malignant mesothelioma (MM). Cell surface glycoprotein mesothelin is overexpressed in MM and serum soluble mesothelin-related peptides (SMRP) were already proposed as a diagnostic or prognostic biomarker in MM. However, interindividual variability in serum SMRP levels limits the clinical usefulness. Our primary objective was to investigate the influence of MSLN rs1057147 on serum SMRP levels in asbestos-exposed subjects and patients with asbestos-related diseases as well as on survival in MM.

Subjects and methods

Among 782 asbestos-exposed subjects and patients with asbestos-related diseases, 154 had MM. Serum SMRP levels were determined using sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. All subjects were genotyped for MSLN rs1057147 polymorphism using competitive allele-specific polymerase chain reaction. Nonparametric tests, logistic and Cox regression were used in statistical analysis to compare different subject groups.

Results

MM patients had significantly higher SMRP levels than all other subjects (p < 0.001). Compared to wild-type MSLN rs1057147 genotype, both heterozygotes and carriers of two polymorphic alleles had significantly higher SMRP levels among subjects without MM (p < 0.001), but not in MM patients (p = 0.424). If genotype information was included, specificity of SMRP increased from 88.5% to 92.7% for the optimal cutoff value. Overall survival was significantly shorter in MM patients carrying at least one polymorphic rs1057147 allele (HR = 1.72, 95% CI = 1.15-2.55, p = 0.008).

Conclusions

MSLN genetic variability affects serum SMRP levels and was associated with shorter survival of MM patients. Combination of genetic and serum factors could therefore serve as a better diagnostic or prognostic biomarker in MM patients.

Comparative biodistribution analysis across four different 89Zr-monoclonal antibody tracers-The first step towards an imaging warehouse

Rationale: Knowledge on monoclonal antibody biodistribution in healthy tissues in humans can support clinical drug development. Molecular imaging with positron emission tomography (PET) can yield information in this setting. However, recent imaging studies have analyzed the behavior of single antibodies only, neglecting comparison across different antibodies. Methods: We compared the distribution of four ⁸⁹Zr-labeled antibodies in healthy tissue in a retrospective analysis based on the recently published harmonization protocol for ⁸⁹Zr-tracers and our delineation protocol. Results: The biodistribution patterns of ⁸⁹Zr-lumretuzumab, ⁸⁹Zr-MMOT0530A, ⁸⁹Zr-bevacizumab and ⁸⁹Zr-trastuzumab on day 4 after tracer injection were largely similar. The highest tracer concentration was seen in healthy liver, spleen, kidney and intestines. About one-third of the injected tracer dose was found in the circulation, up to 15% in the liver and only 4% in the spleen and kidney. Lower tracer concentration was seen in bone marrow, lung, compact bone, muscle, fat and the brain. Despite low tracer accumulation per gram of tissue, large-volume tissues, especially fat, can influence overall distribution: On average, 5-7% of the injected tracer dose accumulated in fat, with a peak of 19% in a patient with morbid obesity. Conclusion: The similar biodistribution of the four antibodies is probably based on their similar molecular structure, binding characteristics and similar metabolic pathways. These data provide a basis for a prospectively growing, online accessible warehouse of molecular imaging data, which enables researchers to increase and exchange knowledge on whole body drug distribution and potentially supports drug development decisions.

Prognostic significance of soluble mesothelin in malignant pleural mesothelioma: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Soluble mesothelin is beneficial to detect the progression and the treatment response of malignant pleural mesothelioma. However, the prognostic value of soluble mesothelin in malignant pleural mesothelioma remains unclear.

METHODS

Hazard ratio with 95% CI was used to evaluate the prognostic value of soluble mesothelin and the effect of clinicopathological characteristics on the survival of malignant pleural mesothelioma.

RESULTS

Eight eligible studies involving 579 patients were selected for this meta-analysis. The results showed that soluble mesothelin level was significantly correlated with the survival of malignant pleural mesothelioma (pooled HR: 1.958, 95%CI: 1.531-2.504, p = 0.000; heterogeneity test: I2 = 1.1%, p = 0.421). In addition, the survival of malignant pleural mesothelioma was significantly correlated with some clinicopathological characteristics such as tumor histology (HR = 3.214, 95% CI = 2.071-4.988, p = 0.000; heterogeneity test: I2 = 0.0%, p = 0.623) and tumor stage (HR = 2.007; 95% CI = 1.477-2.727; p = 0.000; heterogeneity test: I2 = 0.0%, p = 0.966).

CONCLUSIONS

The survival of malignant pleural mesothelioma is significantly correlated with tumor histology and tumor stage. Furthermore, high soluble mesothelin level may lead to a poor prognosis for malignant pleural mesothelioma patients.

A prospective study to investigate the role of serial serum mesothelin in monitoring mesothelioma

Background

Radiological monitoring of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) using modified RECIST criteria is limited by low sensitivity and inter-observer variability. Serial serum mesothelin measurement has shown utility in the assessment of treatment response during chemotherapy but has never been assessed in the longer term follow up of patients.

Methods

This is a single centre study of consecutive patients diagnosed with MPM who received chemotherapy or best supportive care (BSC). Serum mesothelin measurements with paired 6 monthly CT scans were performed following the completion of chemotherapy, or from baseline in the BSC group. Changes in mesothelin were correlated with radiological progression and overall survival.

Results

Forty-one patients with MPM were recruited and followed up for a minimum of 12 months (range 12–21 months). The majority of patients (n = 23) received chemotherapy with pemetrexed and cisplatin. Across the cohort a 10% rise in serum mesothelin could predict radiological progression with a sensitivity of 96% (IQR; 79–100) and specificity of 74% (IQR; 50–91). Sensitivity fell to 80% in sarcomatoid only disease. Patients with a rising mesothelin at 6 months had significantly worse overall survival (175 days) compared to stable/falling levels (448 days) (p = 0.003).

Conclusions

This is the first study to assess serum mesothelin’s ability to detect progression of MPM following chemotherapy or during BSC. A 10% rise in serum mesothelin level showed excellent sensitivity at predicting progressive disease. Mesothelin measurement has several advantages over serial CT imaging including reducing hospital visits and cost.

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 .

Biomarkers in mesothelioma

Mesothelioma is an aggressive cancer of pleural and peritoneal cells that is difficult to diagnose and monitor. Numerous studies have attempted to identify a blood- or pleural fluid-based biomarker that could be used in the diagnostic pathway. More recently, there has been interest in the ability of serum/plasma biomarkers to monitor mesothelioma, given the development of newer treatments and limitations of radiological assessment. The majority of research has focused on soluble mesothelin, a soluble glycoprotein expressed by mesothelial cells. Although soluble mesothelin lacks the sensitivity to be used as a standalone diagnostic marker, serial measurements may be informative, with rising concentrations indicating disease progression and poor survival. High concentrations of other soluble glycoproteins, such as osteopontin, fibulin-3 and vascular endothelial growth factor are independently associated with poor prognosis at baseline, although further research is required to ascertain any role outside of clinical trials. More recent literature has focused on the development of novel biomarkers from discovery cohorts. Although many DNA and mRNA biomarkers show promise in the diagnosis or screening of mesothelioma, none have been prospectively evaluated for use in clinical practice. In this review article, we highlight the potential utility of biomarkers and evaluate the existing literature.

Midkine is a potential novel marker for malignant mesothelioma with different prognostic and diagnostic values from mesothelin

Background

We evaluated possible diagnostic and prognostic values of serum midkine in malignant pleural mesothelioma in comparison with those of serum mesothelin, a well-established diagnostic biomarker.

Methods

Serum mesothelin and midkine levels were determined with an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. We examined specimens from 95 Turkish cases with malignant pleural mesothelioma, 56 metastatic cancers to pleura, 27 other types of benign pleural diseases and 20 benign asbestos pleurisy. The cut-off values were 1.5 nmol/L for mesothelin and 421 pg/mL for midkine.

Results

Sensitivity and specificity of mesothelin were 51.6 and 71.4%, 51.6 and 85.2%, and 51.6 and 85% for differentiating mesothelioma from metastatic cancers to pleura, other benign pleural diseases and benign asbestos pleurisy, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity of midkine were 61.1 and 41.1%, 61.1 and 48.1%, and 61.1 and 75% to distinguish mesothelioma from metastatic cancers to pleura, other benign pleural diseases and benign asbestos pleurisy, respectively. Combination of both biomarkers did not improve the differential diagnostic efficacy. Mesothelin levels were elevated in the epitheloid type and in the advanced cases, but were not related to the prognosis. In contrast, elevated baseline levels of midkine were independently associated with a poor prognosis of mesothelioma patients after adjusting for the stage, the histological subtypes and treatment schedules (HR = 1.84; 95% CI: 1.09-3.09) (p = 0.022).

Conclusions

Serum mesothelin showed moderate sensitivity and high specificity to differentiate malignant pleural mesothelioma from metastatic malignancy to pleura and from benign pleural diseases. In contrast, midkine was a useful marker for predicting prognosis of mesothelioma patients.

Serum mesothelin, osteopontin and vimentin: useful markers for clinical monitoring of malignant pleural mesothelioma

INTRODUCTION

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a relatively rare tumor, with the epithelioid type occurring more frequently. Several biomarkers have been suggested for screening and early diagnosis of MPM. Currently, high levels of soluble mesothelin-related peptides (SMRP), plasma osteopontin (pOPN) and vimentin have been reported in patients with MPM as promising markers for diagnosis, but their clinical use in monitoring is still discussed. The aim of our study was to evaluate the usefulness of these substances as markers of the clinical response to treatment in patients suffering from epithelioid mesothelioma.

METHODS

219 serum samples from 56 patients were collected during follow-up and the clinical response to therapy was recorded. Percentage differences between 2 consecutive measurements of SMRP, osteopontin and vimentin (Δ markers) by means of commercially available kits were correlated with changes in the clinical course.

RESULTS

Δ SMRP, Δ pOPN and Δ vimentin showed statistically significant differences between the disease categories stable disease, partial response and disease progression (p = 0.0001, p = 0.035 and p = 0.0025 for SMRP, pOPN and vimentin, respectively). Moreover, contingency table analysis showed statistically significant differences between clinical response and Δ of each marker clustered into 3 groups (<-20%, between -20% and +20%, >+20%).

CONCLUSIONS

The time course of Δ SMRP and Δ vimentin was strongly associated with disease status, and so was the time course of pOPN, albeit to a lesser extent. These markers appear to be particularly effective in cases of partial response and disease progression, while their possible use in stable disease should be better investigated.

Prognostication and monitoring of mesothelioma using biomarkers: a systematic review

Background:

Radiological markers of treatment response and prognostication in malignant pleural mesothelioma have limitations due to the morphology of the disease. Serum or pleural fluid biomarkers that could act as an adjunct to radiological assessment would be of significant value. The aim of this review was to collate and summarise the literature relating to this topic.

Methods:

A systematic review was performed on the databases Pubmed and EMBASE to identify relevant studies. Two independent researchers read the abstracts and used the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool to assess the quality of the evidence.

Results:

Forty-five studies were identified from the current literature. Twenty studies investigated the role of serum soluble mesothelin with majority suggesting that it has variable utility as a baseline test but when measured serially correlates with treatment response and prognosis. Several studies demonstrated that serum osteopontin correlated with survival at baseline. Other biomarkers have shown prognostic utility in individual studies but are yet to be reproduced in large cohort studies.

Conclusions:

From the available literature no serum or pleural fluid biomarker was identified that could be recommended currently for routine clinical practice. However, a falling serum soluble mesothelin might correlate with treatment response and improved survival.

Malignant Mesothelioma Biomarkers: From Discovery to Use in Clinical Practice for Diagnosis, Monitoring, Screening, and Treatment

Malignant pleural mesothelioma is a highly aggressive tumor associated with asbestos exposure. There are few effective treatment options for mesothelioma, and patients have a very poor prognosis with a median survival of < 12 months from diagnosis. Biomarkers have been proposed as a cost-effective means of cancer management, and the search for a mesothelioma biomarker has been ongoing for the last 30 years. Many traditional soluble (glyco)protein biomarkers have been evaluated over this time, and an ever-increasing list of new biomarkers, including messenger RNA, DNA, microRNA, and antibodies, is being reported from biomarker discovery projects. To date, soluble mesothelin is the only tumor biomarker to receive US Food and Drug Administration approval for clinical use in mesothelioma. Mesothelin is a glycoprotein normally expressed on the surface of mesothelial cells, and in the cancerous state it can be present in circulation. Mesothelin has a limited expression on normal, nonmalignant tissue and is thus an attractive therapeutic target for mesothelin-positive tumors. In this review we will focus on the discovery and clinical usages of mesothelin and provide an update on other mesothelioma biomarkers and show how such biomarker studies might impact on the management of this deadly tumor in the future.

The South West Area Mesothelioma and Pemetrexed trial: a multicentre prospective observational study evaluating novel markers of chemotherapy response and prognostication

Background:

Robust markers that predict prognosis and detect early treatment response in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) would enhance patient care.

Methods:

Consecutive patients with MPM who were considered fit for first-line chemotherapy were prospectively recruited. Patients of similar performance status opting for best supportive care were included as a comparator group. Baseline and interval CT, PET-CT and serum markers (mesothelin, fibulin-3 and neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio (NLR)) were obtained, and patients followed up for a minimum 12 months.

Findings:

Seventy-three patients were recruited (58 chemotherapy/15 comparator arm). Baseline TGV (total glycolytic volume on PET-CT) was an independent predictor of worse overall survival (OS) (P=0.001). Change in interval TGV(baseline/after two cycles of chemotherapy) did not predict OS or chemotherapy response on CT. Baseline NLR<4 was an independent predictor of better OS (median survival 453 (IQR 272–576) days vs NLR⩾4, 257 (IQR 147–490), P=0.002). Although baseline serum mesothelin did not predict OS, a falling level at 8 weeks significantly predicted longer time to progression (TTP) (P<0.001).

Interpretation:

Neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio and baseline TGV predict prognosis in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), but PET-CT is unhelpful in monitoring chemotherapy response. Serum mesothelin is a useful early treatment response marker when measured serially during chemotherapy and may have a role in evaluating patients' treatment response.

A serum mesothelin level is a prognostic indicator for patients with malignant mesothelioma in routine clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Malignant mesothelioma (MM) carries a poor prognosis and response rates to palliative chemotherapy remain low. Identifying patients with MM that are unlikely to respond to chemotherapy could prevent futile treatments and improve patient quality of life. Studies have suggested that soluble mesothelin is a potential biomarker for early diagnosis and prognosis of MM. We set out to explore the utility of serum mesothelin in routine clinical practice.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective exploratory study of serum mesothelin levels in 53 consecutive patients with MM at our institution between April 2009 and February 2011. Survival was assessed and analysed by mesothelin level as both continuous and categorical variables using Cox regression models. Differences in response rate between treatment groups were assessed by the Kruskal-Wallis Test.

RESULTS

All 53 patients, who had been given study information agreed to participate. The patients' median age was 69 (range 24-90). Median mesothelin level was 2.7 nM and this value was used to dichotomize categories: ≤2.7 nM (low) and >2.7 nM (high). The progression free survival (PFS) for low vs high mesothelin was 8.0 vs 5.1 months (HR 1.8, p-0.058). When mesothelin was accessed as a continuous variable for PFS the HR was 1.03 (95% CI: 1.01-1.06; p=0.013). The overall survival (OS) for low vs high mesothelin was 17.2 vs 11.3 months (HR 1.9, p=0.088). When mesothelin was assessed as a continuous variable for OS the HR was 1.02 (95% CI: 0.99 - 1.04; p=0.073). Thirty patients received chemotherapy of which 18 had a pre-chemotherapy serum mesothelin level. In these 18 patients, the pre-chemotherapy mesothelin level did not correlate with response.

CONCLUSIONS

A single random sample provides information about patient prognosis but does not predict treatment response. We suggest further prospective validation of mesothelin testing as a prognostic biomarker.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma: current and future perspectives

Mesothelioma still remains an occupational related cancer with severe outcome. It is usually diagnosed at advanced stage since it does not demonstrate early symptoms. Several efforts have been made towards removing all materials inducing mesothelioma in the work setting and new work protection measures have been applied. Although we have new targeted treatments and radical surgery as arrows in the quiver, the type of mesothelioma and early diagnosis still remain the best treatment approach. Novel treatment modalities have been explored and several others are already on the way. In the current review we will present current data for mesothelioma and future perspectives.

Significance of serum mesothelin in an asbestos-exposed population in the Czech Republic

AIMS

Pleural mesothelioma is a highly aggressive and difficult-to-treat form of cancer induced by asbestos in 80-90% of cases. The population group most at risk of the condition are asbestos-exposed workers. Mesothelin or soluble mesothelin-related protein (SMRP) is studied as a potential marker of mesothelioma in the at-risk population.

METHODS

The study comprised 239 subjects with a mean duration of occupational exposure to asbestos of 19.9 years. In all of them, a complete medical history was taken, focused on exposure duration and a physical examination, a chest X-ray or other imaging investigations and a lung function test were performed. Their serum SMRP levels were measured and biopsy samples were taken to diagnose pleural disease. Based on the above examinations, the subjects were classified into subgroups and serum SMRP concentrations were statistically analyzed with respect to individual parameters.

RESULTS

In asbestos-exposed individuals, mesothelin levels were significantly higher in those with pathological X-ray findings than in those with normal X-ray results (0.78 ± 0.63 vs. 0.50 ± 0.35, P<0.0001). The group of patients with benign disease had statistically significantly higher mesothelin levels than those with normal X-ray findings (0.755 ± 0.543 vs. 0.50 ± 0.35, P<0.001). In the group with present malignant processes, mesothelin levels were higher than in individuals with benign disease (1.19 ± 0.89 vs. 0.76 ± 0.54, P=0.015). Only a weak correlation was found between mesothelin levels and asbestos exposure duration. There were relatively high sensitivity and high specificity (75% and 90.6%, respectively) of serum mesothelin for pleural mesothelioma. However, given the small number of mesothelioma cases in the group, the results cannot be considered as statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

In persons followed up for asbestos exposure, increased mesothelin levels signalize pathological processes in the chest and correlate with severity of the disease. The study suggests that mesothelin cannot be considered a reliable marker for the early stage of malignant degeneration of pleural disease but only an additional criterion for examination of the followed-up individuals.

Diagnostic values of soluble mesothelin-related peptides for malignant pleural mesothelioma: updated meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Although the values of soluble mesothelin-related peptides (SMRPs), including mesothelin and megakaryocyte potentiating factor, in serum and/or pleural fluid for diagnosing malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) have been extensively studied, the exact diagnostic accuracy of these SMRPs remains controversial. The purpose of the present meta-analysis is to update the overall diagnostic accuracy of SMRPs in serum and, furthermore, to establish diagnostic accuracy of SMRPs in pleural fluid for MPM.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

A total of 30 articles of diagnostic studies were included in the current meta-analysis. Sensitivity, specificity and other measures of accuracy of SMRPs in serum and pleural fluid for the diagnosis of MPM were pooled using random effects models. Summary receiver operating characteristic curves were used to summarise overall test performance.

RESULTS

The summary estimates of sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio and diagnostic OR were 0.61, 0.87, 5.71, 0.43 and 14.43, respectively, for serum and 0.79, 0.85, 4.78, 0.30 and 19.50, respectively, for pleural fluid. It was also found that megakaryocyte potentiating factor in serum had a superior diagnostic accuracy compared with mesothelin for MPM.

CONCLUSIONS

SMRPs in both serum and pleural fluid are helpful markers for diagnosing MPM with similar diagnostic accuracy. The negative results of SMRP determinations are not sufficient to exclude non-MPM, and the positive test results indicate that further invasive diagnostic steps might be necessary for the diagnosis of MPM.

Current and future options for the diagnosis of malignant pleural effusion

INTRODUCTION

Malignant pleural effusion (MPE) is a frequent problem faced by clinicians, but tumor pleural involvement can be seen without effusion.

AREAS COVERED

Imaging, pleural fluid analysis, biomarkers for MPE, needle pleural biopsy and thoracoscopy. To prepare this review, we performed a search using keywords: 'diagnosis' + 'malignant' + 'pleural' + 'effusion' (all fields) in PubMed, and found 4106 articles overall (until 16 January 2013, 881 in the last 5 years).

EXPERT OPINION

Ultrasound techniques will stay as valuable tools for pleural effusions. Biomarkers in pleural fluid do not currently provide an acceptable yield for MPE. In subjects with past history of asbestos exposure, some serum or plasma markers (soluble mesothelin, fibulin) might help in selecting cases for close follow-up, to detect mesothelioma early. Needle pleural biopsy is justified only if used with image-techniques (ultrasound or CT) guidance, and thoracoscopy is better for both diagnosis and immediate palliative treatment (pleurodesis). Animal models of MPE and 'spheroids' are promising for research involving both pathophysiology and therapy. Considering the possibility of direct pleural delivery of nanotechnology-developed compounds-fit to both diagnosis and therapy purposes ('theranostics')-MPE and mesothelioma in particular are likely to benefit sooner than later from this exciting perspective.

[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.

Mesothelioma - Update on Diagnostic Strategies

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) can be a challenging diagnosis for clinicians to make as it is often difficult to distinguish from benign asbestos pleural effusions and metastatic carcinomas. In this review, we present a case of MPM and discuss clinical manifestations, traditional diagnostic techniques, and the role of cytopathologic immunostains and serum biomarkers in the diagnosis of MPM.

Malignant pleural effusion: tumor-host interactions unleashed

Malignant pleural effusion (MPE) poses a significant clinical problem. Current nonetiologic management is suboptimal in terms of efficacy and safety. In light of recent research progress, we propose herein a new view of MPE development, which may rapidly translate into meaningful changes in therapeutics. In addition to tumor-induced impairment of pleural fluid drainage, pertinent findings point toward another pathway to MPE formation: a vicious loop of interactions between pleural-based tumor cells and the host vasculature and immune system that results in increased net fluid production via enhanced plasma extravasation into the pleural space. The ability of tumor cells to trigger this cascade likely rests on a specific and distinct transcriptional repertoire, which results in important vasoactive events in the pleural space. Although the characterization of tumor-derived factors responsible for MPE development is in the making, an additional, indirect path to MPE was recently demonstrated: tumor cells recruit and co-opt host cells and mediators, which, in turn, amplify tumor cell-primed fluid leakage and impact tumor cell functions. Importantly, recent evidence suggests that the biologic events that culminate in clinical MPE are likely amenable to therapeutic inhibition and even prevention. In this perspective, the scientific basis for an update of current concepts of MPE formation is highlighted. Key questions for future research are posed. Finally, a vision for novel, effective, safe, and convenient treatment modalities that can be offered to outpatients with MPE is set forth.

Serum mesothelin for diagnosing malignant pleural mesothelioma: an individual patient data meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Mesothelin is currently considered the best available serum biomarker of malignant pleural mesothelioma. To examine the diagnostic accuracy and use of serum mesothelin in early diagnosis, we performed an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis.

METHODS

The literature search identified 16 diagnostic studies of serum mesothelin, measured with the Mesomark enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. IPD of 4,491 individuals were collected, including several control groups and 1,026 patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. Mesothelin levels were standardized for between-study differences and age, after which the diagnostic accuracy and the factors affecting it were examined with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) regression analysis.

RESULTS

At a common diagnostic threshold of 2.00 nmol/L, the sensitivities and specificities of mesothelin in the different studies ranged widely from 19% to 68% and 88% to 100%, respectively. This heterogeneity can be explained by differences in study population, because type of control group, mesothelioma stage, and histologic subtype significantly affected the diagnostic accuracy. The use of mesothelin in early diagnosis was evaluated by differentiating 217 patients with stage I or II epithelioid and biphasic mesothelioma from 1,612 symptomatic or high-risk controls. The resulting area under the ROC curve was 0.77 (95% CI, 0.73 to 0.81). At 95% specificity, mesothelin displayed a sensitivity of 32% (95% CI, 26% to 40%).

CONCLUSION

In patients suspected of having mesothelioma, a positive blood test for mesothelin at a high-specificity threshold is a strong incentive to urge further diagnostic steps. However, the poor sensitivity of mesothelin clearly limits its added value to early diagnosis and emphasizes the need for further biomarker research.

Soluble mesothelin, megakaryocyte potentiating factor, and osteopontin as markers of patient response and outcome in mesothelioma

INTRODUCTION

Soluble mesothelin (SM), megakaryocyte potentiating factor (MPF), and osteopontin (OPN) are blood biomarkers of mesothelioma. This study evaluates their use as markers of response to therapy and outcome.

METHODS

Sixty-two patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma were included in an observational multicenter study. Blood samples and matched computed tomography scans were collected at diagnosis and, when possible, during and after therapy. For each patient, the best overall radiological response was compared with the changes in serum SM, MPF, and plasma OPN levels across corresponding time points.

RESULTS

In five patients, blood sampling was done shortly before and after extrapleural pneumonectomy. SM and MPF levels markedly decreased after surgery, whereas OPN levels showed a median increase. Fifty-seven patients were surveilled during (and after) chemotherapy, of whom 27 (47%) had stable disease, 14 (25%) partial response, and 16 (28%) progressive disease. In patients with stable disease, SM and MPF levels did not change significantly across the corresponding time points, whereas OPN levels significantly decreased. In those with partial response, SM and MPF levels significantly decreased, whereas OPN levels showed no significant change. In patients with progressive disease, all three biomarker levels significantly increased. Patient responses correlated with a 15% change in all three biomarkers, although SM and MPF appeared more accurate than OPN. Low baseline OPN levels were independently associated with favorable progression-free survival and overall survival. Neither SM nor MPF showed prognostic value.

CONCLUSIONS

SM and MPF levels were more closely associated with disease course than OPN and might prove useful in monitoring patient response in mesothelioma. Baseline OPN levels were an independent negative predictor of survival. These promising results require further validation.

Soluble markers for diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a highly aggressive and invasive tumor, whose incidence is expected to peak, in many countries, at the end of the present decade, 20–40 years after the peak of asbestos use (asbestos being the most important etiological factor). MPM has a poor prognosis, in part, owing to a difficult and often late diagnosis hindered by a lack of available tests able to diagnose or predict this cancer in its early stages. Recently, there has been increased interest in noninvasive, economic and well-accepted diagnostic tests for screening of asbestos-exposed subjects, as well as for monitoring response of MPM patients to treatment. Several markers have been studied in biofluids, such as serum, plasma and pleural effusions, especially using ELISA, and some of them are still under investigation. However, only mesothelin and ostepontin have proven levels of sensitivity and specificity that are worth testing in the clinical setting.

Association of MiR-126 with soluble mesothelin-related peptides, a marker for malignant mesothelioma

Background

Improved detection methods for diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) are essential for early and reliable detection as well as treatment. Since recent data point to abnormal levels of microRNAs (miRNAs) in tumors, we hypothesized that a profile of deregulated miRNAs may be a marker of MPM and that the levels of specific miRNAs may be used for monitoring its progress.

Methods and Results

miRNAs isolated from fresh-frozen biopsies of MPM patients were tested for the expression of 88 types of miRNA involved in cancerogenesis. Most of the tested miRNAs were downregulated in the malignant tissues compared with the normal tissues. Of eight significantly downregulated, three miRNAs were assayed in cancerous tissue and adjacent non-cancerous tissue sample pairs collected from 27 formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded MPM tissues by quantitative RT-PCR. Among the miRNAs tested, only miR-126 significantly remained downregulated in the malignant tissues. Furthermore, the performance of the selected miR-126 as biomarker was evaluated in serum samples of asbestos-exposed subjects and MPM patients and compared with controls. MiR-126 was not affected by asbestos exposure, whereas it was found strongly associated with VEGF serum levels. Levels of miR-126 in serum, and its levels in patients' serum in association with a specific marker of MPM, SMRPs, correlate with subjects at high risk to develop MPM.

Conclusions and Significance

We propose miR-126, in association with SMRPs, as a marker for early detection of MPM. The identification of tumor biomarkers used alone or, in particular, in combination could greatly facilitate the surveillance procedure for cohorts of subjects exposed to asbestos.

Serum soluble mesothelin concentrations in malignant pleural mesothelioma: relationship to tumor volume, clinical stage and changes in tumor burden

PURPOSE

To examine the clinical utility of soluble mesothelin in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

A total of 97 patients (female: 11; male: 86) were prospectively enrolled, longitudinal serum samples collected, and mesothelin concentrations determined. Baseline mesothelin levels were analyzed relative to tumor stage, presence of metastatic disease, the positron emission tomography (PET) parameters maximum standardized uptake value, tumor volume, total glycolytic volume, and survival. Changes in mesothelin level were correlated to objective response to chemotherapy, as assessed radiologically and by PET imaging, and with patient survival.

RESULTS

Baseline mesothelin levels greater than 5 nmol/L were a significant negative prognostic indicator (HR = 2.25; 95% CI, 1.20-4.21) and correlated with tumor stage and volume. In 55 patients who received chemotherapy, change in mesothelin correlated with radiological response (χ(2) = 11.32; P = 0.023) and change in metabolically active tumor volume (r = 0.58; P < 0.01). Median survival for patients with a reduction in mesothelin following chemotherapy (19 months) was significantly longer than for patients with increased mesothelin (5 months; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

These findings show the potential value of changes in mesothelin levels for prognostication and monitoring of treatment response in mesothelioma.

Phase I clinical trial of the chimeric anti-mesothelin monoclonal antibody MORAb-009 in patients with mesothelin-expressing cancers

PURPOSE

MORAb-009 is a chimeric monoclonal antibody that targets mesothelin, a tumor differentiation antigen overexpressed in pancreatic cancer, ovarian cancer, mesothelioma, and other malignancies. We conducted a phase I clinical trial of MORAb-009 in patients with advanced mesothelin-expressing cancers to determine its safety, dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), and maximum tolerated dose (MTD).

METHODS

Cohorts consisting of 3 to 6 subjects each received MORAb-009 intravenously on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 at progressively increasing doses ranging from 12.5 to 400 mg/m(2). Disease evaluation with computed tomography occurred on day 35. Subjects with responding or stable disease could receive additional cycles of MORAb-009.

RESULTS

A total of 24 subjects were treated including 13 mesothelioma, 7 pancreatic cancer, and 4 ovarian cancer patients. The median number of MORAb-009 infusions was 4 (range 1-24 infusions). At the 400 mg/m(2) dose level, 2 subjects experienced DLT (grade 4 transaminitis and a grade 3 serum sickness). Thus, although there were other contributing causes of these adverse events, 200 mg/m(2) was considered the MTD. Other adverse events at least possibly related to MORAb-009 included 7 drug hypersensitivity events (all grade 1 or 2) and a thromboembolic event (grade 4). Eleven subjects had stable disease. There was a dose-dependent increase in serum MORAb-009 concentration.

CONCLUSION

MORAb-009 is well tolerated and the MTD when administered weekly is conservatively set at 200 mg/m(2). In this group of previously treated patients, 11 subjects had stable disease. Phase II studies of MORAb-009 in different mesothelin-expressing cancers are ongoing.

Biomarkers for early detection of malignant mesothelioma: diagnostic and therapeutic application

Malignant mesothelioma (MM) is a rare and aggressive tumour of the serosal cavities linked to asbestos exposure. Improved detection methods for diagnosing this type of neoplastic disease are essential for an early and reliable diagnosis and treatment. Thus, focus has been placed on finding tumour markers for the non-invasive detection of MM. Recently, some blood biomarkers have been described as potential indicators of early and advanced MM cancers. The identification of tumour biomarkers alone or in combination could greatly facilitate the surveillance procedure for cohorts of subjects exposed to asbestos, a common phenomenon in several areas of western countries.

Current status of screening for malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant mesothelioma is characterized by its association with asbestos, its long latency period, and the propensity for the diagnosis to be obtained in the later stages of the disease. Because the high-risk cohorts for mesothelioma are fairly well defined by the association with asbestos, and the exposure is usually in the workplace, it is hypothesized that early detection of the disease could (1) find patients at an earlier, more treatable stage and (2) result in prolonged survival over the present median 12 months from the start of therapy. Many studies have used standard chest X-ray to characterize changes associated with asbestos-exposed individuals, but the insensitivity of X-ray in screening patients with mesothelioma has never supported the wide-scale adaptation of such an effort. With the advent of computerized tomography, prospective trials, many of which are chiefly prevalence detection studies, have been performed and stress the importance for proper detailing by carefully qualifying suspicious changes, as well as defining the correct cohort to screen. Most recently, serum biomarkers with the potential to discriminate asbestos-exposed, non-cancer-bearing individuals from those with mesothelioma have been investigated both at single institutions and with multi-institutional-blinded trials. These markers, including soluble mesothelin-related protein, osteopontin, and megakaryocyte potentiating factor, may, in the future, be incorporated into a screening algorithm for high-risk asbestos-exposed individuals to help monitor these cohorts in a noninvasive fashion and guide the use of computerized tomography.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma: an update on biomarkers and treatment

Although the insulating properties of asbestos have been known for millennia, the link between asbestos exposure and mesothelioma was not recognized until 1960, when it was first described in South African asbestos miners. The incidence of mesothelioma parallels asbestos usage with a latency of 20 to 40+ years; thus, patient numbers are declining in the United States but rising in the developing world. Radiation, genetics, and possibly simian virus 40 are less common causes. Diagnosis can be challenging, since the results of pleural fluid cytology testing are often negative despite repeated sampling. No staging system adequately predicts prognosis in the unresected patient. Newly described biomarkers, including soluble mesothelin-related peptide, megakaryocyte potentiation factor, and osteopontin, may predict which asbestos-exposed individuals will develop mesothelioma, and may prove useful in assessing response to treatment. Since surgery cannot eradicate all residual microscopic disease, a multimodality approach is encouraged. Metaanalysis suggests that pleurectomy/decortication may achieve outcomes similar to those of extrapleural penumonectomy. The standard first-line chemotherapy for unresectable disease is pemetrexed plus cisplatin. This combination improves response, survival, time to progression, pulmonary function, and disease-related symptoms. Carboplatin is often substituted, with similar results. Other active agents include raltitrexed, gemcitabine, and vinorelbine. Novel agents in clinical trials include inhibitors of the epidermal growth factor receptor, vascular endothelial growth factor, mesothelin, and histone deacetylases. Although disappointing results of early trials did not confirm promising preclinical data, recent studies have suggested that some novel agents may be effective. As we learn more about mesothelioma biology, molecularly targeted agents may become treatment options.

Clinical impact and reliability of pleural fluid mesothelin in undiagnosed pleural effusions

RATIONALE

Serum mesothelin is a new biomarker for the diagnosis of mesothelioma. Patients with mesothelioma commonly present with pleural effusions. To define the clinical utility of mesothelin quantification in pleural fluid, we assessed its additional value over pleural fluid cytology and its short-term reproducibility and reliability after pleural inflammatory processes, including pleurodesis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the diagnostic role of pleural fluid mesothelin and the effect of common clinical factors that may influence measurement accuracy.

METHODS

Mesothelin was quantified in 424 pleural fluid and 64 serum samples by ELISA. Fluid was collected prospectively from 167 patients who presented with pleural effusions for investigation. Serial pleural fluid samples were obtained from patients (n = 33) requiring repeated drainage. Mesothelin levels were also measured in patients (n = 32) prepleurodesis and postpleurodesis.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Pleural fluid mesothelin concentrations were significantly higher in patients with mesothelioma (n = 24) relative to those with metastatic carcinomas (n = 67) and benign effusions (n = 75): median (interquartile range, 25th-75th percentile) = 40.3 (18.3-68.1) versus 6.1 (1.5-13.2) versus 3.7 (0.0-12.4) nM, respectively, P < 0.0001. Mesothelin measurement was superior to cytological examination in the diagnosis and exclusion of mesothelioma (sensitivity, 71 vs. 35%; specificity, 89 vs. 100%; negative predictive value, 95 vs. 82%, respectively). In patients with "suspicious" cytology, pleural fluid mesothelin was 100% specific for mesothelioma, and in cytology-negative effusions (n = 105) offered a negative predictive value of 94%. Intraindividual reproducibility of pleural fluid mesothelin was excellent: mean (+/-SD) variation, -0.15 (+/-8.41) nM in samples collected within 7 days from patients with mesothelioma. Measurements remained reliable after pleurodesis and were not affected by the presence of bacteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Pleural fluid mesothelin provides additional diagnostic value relative to cytological examination. Mesothelin measurements are reproducible and not affected by inflammatory pleural processes.