A prospective trial evaluating the role of mesothelin in undiagnosed pleural effusions

Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis and Bioinformatic Analysis of Biomarkers for Prognosis of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

In previous studies, non-invasive diagnostic biomarkers showed great benefit in the early-stage diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). However, the accuracy of different biomarkers was controversial. In this study, meta-analysis and bioinformatics analysis were conducted to compare the accuracy of the following three biomarkers and explore the relationship between the gene expression levels and MPM. A systematic search of meta-analysis was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library to identify relevant studies from the inception to March 2021. QUADAS-2 for Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies was used to evaluate the quality of eligible studies. The meta-analysis was performed utilizing Stata 15.0 and Review Manager 5.4 software. The meta-analysis results showed that 31 studies that involved 8750 participants were included. The pooled sensitivity and specificity (SPE) were 0.90 (95% CI: 0.74, 0.97) and 0.91 (95% CI: 0.84, 0.95) for Fibulin-3, 0.66 (95% CI, 0.51–0.78) and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.82–0.96) for mesothelin (MSLN), 0.68 (95% CI: 0.63,0.73) and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.82,0.90) for soluble mesothelin-related peptides (SMRP), and 0.74 (95% CI, 0.66-0.80) and 0.89 (95% CI, 0.85–0.91) for MSLN + SMRP + Fibulin-3. Compared with the other two biomarkers, Fibulin-3 may be more appropriate to be one of the indicators for combined diagnosis. Bioinformatics analysis showed that the low expression level of the MSLN gene was significantly related to longer survival time and better prognosis of MPM patients. However, considering the limitation in the quality and sample size of the included research, further studies are required.

Diagnosing pleural effusions using mass spectrometry-based multiplexed targeted proteomics quantitating mid- to high-abundance markers of cancer, infection/inflammation and tuberculosis

Pleural effusion (PE) is excess fluid in the pleural cavity that stems from lung cancer, other diseases like extra-pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) and pneumonia, or from a variety of benign conditions. Diagnosing its cause is often a clinical challenge and we have applied targeted proteomic methods with the aim of aiding the determination of PE etiology. We developed a mass spectrometry (MS)-based multiple reaction monitoring (MRM)-protein-panel assay to precisely quantitate 53 established cancer-markers, TB-markers, and infection/inflammation-markers currently assessed individually in the clinic, as well as potential biomarkers suggested in the literature for PE classification. Since MS-based proteomic assays are on the cusp of entering clinical use, we assessed the merits of such an approach and this marker panel based on a single-center 209 patient cohort with established etiology. We observed groups of infection/inflammation markers (ADA2, WARS, CXCL10, S100A9, VIM, APCS, LGALS1, CRP, MMP9, and LDHA) that specifically discriminate TB-PEs and other-infectious-PEs, and a number of cancer markers (CDH1, MUC1/CA-15-3, THBS4, MSLN, HPX, SVEP1, SPINT1, CK-18, and CK-8) that discriminate cancerous-PEs. Some previously suggested potential biomarkers did not show any significant difference. Using a Decision Tree/Multiclass classification method, we show a very good discrimination ability for classifying PEs into one of four types: cancerous-PEs (AUC: 0.863), tuberculous-PEs (AUC of 0.859), other-infectious-PEs (AUC of 0.863), and benign-PEs (AUC: 0.842). This type of approach and the indicated markers have the potential to assist in clinical diagnosis in the future, and help with the difficult decision on therapy guidance.

Clinical utility of diagnostic biomarkers in malignant pleural mesothelioma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is characterised by late-stage diagnosis and poor prognosis. Currently, no screening tool is advocated and diagnosis is based on invasive techniques, which are not well tolerated. Non-invasive diagnostic biomarkers have shown potential and could have a huge clinical benefit. However, despite extensive research, there is no consensus yet on their clinical use, with many articles reporting contradicting results, limiting their clinical implementation. The aim of this systematic review is therefore to explore the different semi- and non-invasive diagnostic markers in several human matrices and identify those that might clinically be relevant. A total of 100 articles were selected through Web of Science and PubMed, with 56 articles included in the quantitative analysis. Although many studies have reported on the diagnostic accuracy of MPM biomarkers such as serum mesothelin and high-mobility group box protein 1 and plasma fibulin-3, none have resulted in a validated test for early detection. Future research should focus on external validation, combinations into biomarker panels, the inclusion of early stage MPM patients and a combination of different biomarker matrices, as well as new markers.

Diagnostic biomarkers for malignant pleural mesothelioma seem promising; however, further research is necessary to prove their clinical value. This review provides a thorough overview of the different markers and compares them in several matrices.https://bit.ly/35ni6UO

Ancillary Diagnostic Investigations in Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

For a number of patients presenting with an undiagnosed pleural effusion, frailty, medical co-morbidity or personal choice may preclude the use of pleural biopsy, the gold standard investigation for diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). In this review article, we outline the most recent evidence on ancillary diagnostic tests which may be used to support a diagnosis of MPM where histological samples cannot be obtained or where results are non-diagnostic. Immunocytochemical markers, molecular techniques, diagnostic biomarkers and imaging techniques are discussed. No adjunctive test has a sensitivity and specificity profile to support use in isolation; however, correlation of pleural fluid cytology with relevant radiology and supplementary biomarkers can enable an MDT-consensus clinico-radiological-cytological diagnosis to be made where further invasive tests are not possible or not appropriate. Diagnostic challenges surrounding non-epithelioid MPM are recognised, and there is a critical need for reliable and non-invasive investigative tools in this population.

Experimental Study on Early Diagnosis of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma with Computed Tomography Combined Serum Soluble Mesothelin-Related Proteins

Objective: To investigate the value on early diagnosis of experimental rat according to computed tomography (CT) combined with the serum level of Serum Soluble Mesothelin-related Proteins (SMRP). Methods: Thirty-two SD rat were divided into three groups, including group A (experimental group) of 20 rats with pleural cavity injection of crocidolite suspension, group B (negative control group) of 6 rats with pleural cavity injection of saline, group C (blank control group) of 6 rats without any processing. Chest and abdominal CT scan and enhancement were performed in the three months and six months after induction and the pleural thickening was analyzed. The serum level of SMRP was measured at the different time period including pre-injection, the postinjection first month, the second month, the third month and the sixth month. The correlation between pleural thickening and serum level of SMRP was analyzed. Results: In group A: 20 cases were performed on CT scan in post-injection third month and we found 13 cases without pleural lesions and 7 cases with pleural lesions including of 4 cases with mild pleural thickening, 1 moderate thickening and 2 severe thickening (2 cases died). Moreover, 18 cases were done by CT in post-injection third month and we found 3 cases without pleural lesions and 15 cases with pleural lesions including of 6 cases with mild pleural thickening, 5 moderate thickening and 4 severe thickening (3 cases died). No pleural lesions were found in group B and group C. SMRP expression level differences in the three groups was statistically significant. However, there was no difference in pre-injection in the three groups and there were no difference in group B and C at the different time period. In group A, there was no difference between post-injection first month and second month, whereas, there had statistically difference in post-injection third and sixth month. In group A, SMRP level gradually increased over time. The high correlation between pleural thickening and serum level of SMRP was seen at the post-injection third and sixth month, which the expression of SMRP gradually increased as the pleural thickening. Conclusion: Serum SMRP expression level has a certain value for early diagnosis and staging of MPM, which can be used as an important biomarker for early screening of high-risk groups exposed to asbestos.

Exhaled Breath Analysis in Diagnosis of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: Systematic Review

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is mainly related to previous asbestos exposure. There is still dearth of information on non-invasive biomarkers to detect MPM at early stages. Human studies on exhaled breath biomarkers of cancer and asbestos-related diseases show encouraging results. The aim of this systematic review was to provide an overview on the current knowledge about exhaled breath analysis in MPM diagnosis. A systematic review was conducted on MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE and Web of Science databases to identify relevant studies. Quality assessment was done by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Six studies were identified, all of which showed fair quality and explored volatile organic compounds (VOC) based breath profile using Gas Chromatography Coupled to Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS), Ion Mobility Spectrometry Coupled to Multi-capillary Columns (IMS-MCC) or pattern-recognition technologies. Sample sizes varied between 39 and 330. Some compounds (i.e, cyclohexane, P3, P5, P50, P71, diethyl ether, limonene, nonanal, VOC IK 1287) that can be indicative of MPM development in asbestos exposed population were identified with high diagnostic accuracy rates. E-nose studies reported breathprints being able to distinguish MPM from asbestos exposed individuals with high sensitivity and a negative predictive value. Small sample sizes and methodological diversities among studies limit the translation of results into clinical practice. More prospective studies with standardized methodologies should be conducted on larger populations.

Biomarkers for malignant pleural mesothelioma: a meta-analysis

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare but aggressive cancer, and early detection is associated with better survival. Mesothelin, fibulin-3 and osteopontin have been suggested as screening biomarkers. The study conducted a meta-analysis of the mean differences of mesothelin, osteopontin and fibulin-3 in blood and pleural samples. PubMed searches were conducted for studies that measured levels of mesothelin, osteopontin and fibulin-3 in participants with MPM compared with malignancy, benign lung disease or healthy participants. Thirty-two studies with mesothelin levels, 12 studies with osteopontin levels and 9 studies with fibulin-3 levels were included in the meta-analysis. Statistically significant mean differences were seen between MPM patients and all other comparison groups for mesothelin blood and pleural levels. Statistically significant differences in blood osteopontin levels were seen between participants with benign lung disease and healthy participants compared with participants with MPM, but not when comparing participants with cancer with MPM participants. There were not enough studies that reported osteopontin levels in pleural fluid to complete a meta-analysis. Statistically significant differences were seen in both blood and pleural levels of fibulin-3 in MPM patients compared with all other groups. On the basis of these results, mesothelin and fibulin-3 levels appear to be significantly lower in all control groups compared with those with MPM, making them good candidates for screening biomarkers. Osteopontin may be a useful biomarker for screening healthy individuals or those with benign lung disease but would not be useful for screening patients with malignancies.

Diagnostic value of soluble mesothelin-related peptides in pleural effusion for malignant pleural mesothelioma: An updated meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Soluble mesothelin-related peptide (SMRP) is a widely studied tumor marker for diagnosing malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). This study discussed the diagnostic value of SMRPs in pleural effusion (PE) for MPM.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane library system were systematically searched on the data of SMRPs in PE for MPM diagnosis. Pooled diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and symmetric receiver operating characteristic curve were calculated.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and a total of 3359 cases including 759 MPM cases, 1061 non-MM (malignant mesothelioma) malignant PE, and 1539 benign PE were brought into this meta-analysis. The pooled results of SMRPs in PE for diagnosing MPM were as follows: sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio were 0.68 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.64-0.72), 0.91 (95% CI: 0.86-0.94), 7.8 (95% CI: 5.0-12.0), 0.35 (95% CI: 0.31-0.40), and 22 (95% CI: 14-35), respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.72-0.80). Subgroup analyzes revealed that the AUC of cohort group using histological diagnosis could be improved to 0.86 (95% CI: 0.83, 0.89). The Deek's funnel plot asymmetry test showed no publication bias.

CONCLUSION

Although the sensitivity of SMRPs was low, PE-SMRPs can be a good indicator of the existence of MPM.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma and mesothelial hyperplasia: A new molecular tool for the differential diagnosis

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare asbestos related cancer, aggressive and unresponsive to therapies. Histological examination of pleural lesions is the gold standard of MPM diagnosis, although it is sometimes hard to discriminate the epithelioid type of MPM from benign mesothelial hyperplasia (MH).This work aims to define a new molecular tool for the differential diagnosis of MPM, using the expression profile of 117 genes deregulated in this tumour.The gene expression analysis was performed by nanoString System on tumour tissues from 36 epithelioid MPM and 17 MH patients, and on 14 mesothelial pleural samples analysed in a blind way. Data analysis included raw nanoString data normalization, unsupervised cluster analysis by Pearson correlation, non-parametric Mann Whitney U-test and molecular classification by the Uncorrelated Shrunken Centroid (USC) Algorithm.The Mann-Whitney U-test found 35 genes upregulated and 31 downregulated in MPM. The unsupervised cluster analysis revealed two clusters, one composed only of MPM and one only of MH samples, thus revealing class-specific gene profiles. The Uncorrelated Shrunken Centroid algorithm identified two classifiers, one including 22 genes and the other 40 genes, able to properly classify all the samples as benign or malignant using gene expression data; both classifiers were also able to correctly determine, in a blind analysis, the diagnostic categories of all the 14 unknown samples.In conclusion we delineated a diagnostic tool combining molecular data (gene expression) and computational analysis (USC algorithm), which can be applied in the clinical practice for the differential diagnosis of MPM.

Pleural effusion biomarkers and computed tomography findings in diagnosing malignant pleural mesothelioma: A retrospective study in a single center

In this study, we aimed to examine the clinical value of the pleural effusion (PE) biomarkers, soluble mesothelin-related peptide (SMRP), cytokeratin 19 fragment (CYFRA 21–1) and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), and the utility of combining chest computed tomography (CT) findings with these biomarkers, in diagnosing malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). We conducted a retrospective cohort study in a single center. Consecutive patients with undiagnosed pleural effusions who underwent PE analysis between September 2014 and August 2016 were reviewed. This study included 240 patients (32 with MPM and 208 non-MPM). SMRP and the CYFRA 21-1/CEA ratio had a sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing MPM of 56.3% and 86.5%, and 87.5% and 74.0%, respectively. Using receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis of the ability of these markers to distinguish MPM from all other PE causes, the area under the ROC curve (AUC) for SMRP and the CYFRA 21-1/CEA ratio was 0.804 and 0.874, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of SMRP combined with the CYFRA 21-1/CEA ratio were 93.8% and 64.9%, respectively. The sensitivity of the combination of SMRP, the CYFRA 21-1/CEA ratio, and the presence of Leung’s criteria (a chest CT finding that is suggestive of malignant pleural disease) was 93.8%. In conclusion, the combined PE biomarkers had a high sensitivity for diagnosing MPM, although the addition of chest CT findings did not improve the sensitivity of SMRP combined with the CYFRA 21-1/CEA ratio. Combination of these biomarkers helped to rule out MPM effectively among patients at high risk of suffering MPM and would be valuable especially for old frail patients who have difficulty in undergoing invasive procedures such as thoracoscopy.

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.

Comparison of mesothelin and fibulin-3 in pleural fluid and serum as markers in malignant mesothelioma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Malignant mesothelioma is an asbestos-induced, aggressive tumour, which frequently presents with pleural effusion. There are over 60 reported causes that can result in the development of a pleural effusion. Currently, there are no tumour biomarkers in widespread clinical use for the differential diagnosis of mesothelioma from other diseases. With the incidence of mesothelioma expected to continue to increase, it is timely to review the current status of effusion-based biomarkers for mesothelioma diagnosis.

RECENT FINDINGS

The majority of recent studies have evaluated soluble mesothelin in effusions in a diagnostic setting for mesothelioma. However, at high specificity, the sensitivity of the assay is limited to approximately 60% at the time of diagnosis. There is considerable research effort directed toward the identification of new markers for mesothelioma through a variety of genomic, proteomic and immunomic based platforms. One of the few new biomarkers to be identified through a biomarker discovery pipeline and evaluated in pleural effusions is fibulin-3. Preliminary results on the diagnostic accuracy of fibulin-3 have been inconsistent.

SUMMARY

To date, soluble mesothelin remains the best available biomarker for mesothelioma and a positive result is clinically useful in patients with pleural effusions in whom the diagnosis is uncertain.

Brain metastases in malignant pleural mesothelioma

The brain is a rare site of metastasis in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), and its clinical features and prognosis remain unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence, prognosis, and risk factors for brain metastases (BM) in MPM patients. Between July 1993 and October 2014, 150 patients with histologically proven MPM were included in this retrospective study. The cumulative incidence of BM was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method, and differences between groups were analyzed by the log-rank test. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was applied to assess risk factors for BM. The median follow-up time was 11 months (range 0-154.0 months). A total of eight patients (5.3 %) developed BM during the course of their illness. Multivariate analysis identified age <65 years (odds ratio [OR] = 5.83, p = 0.038) and International Mesothelioma Interest Group stage IV (OR = 1.69, p = 0.040) as independent factors related to increased risk of developing BM. The 1-and 2-year cumulative rates of BM were 4.0 % (95 % confidence intervals [CI] 1.4-8.5 %) and 5.3 % (95 % CI 2.3-10.2 %), respectively. Our study showed that the overall survival (OS) of patients with BM was worse than that of patients without BM (median OS 6.5 vs. 11.0 months, p = 0.037). The prognosis for BM in MPM patients is poor. Clinicians should perform careful screening for BM, especially in patients with risk factors.

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.

Diagnostic and prognostic value of soluble syndecan-1 in pleural malignancies

Background. The distinction between malignant and benign pleural effusions is a diagnostic challenge today and measuring soluble biomarkers could add to the diagnostic accuracy. Syndecan-1 is a proteoglycan involved in various cellular functions and is cleaved from the cell surface in a regulated manner. The shed fragment, which can be recovered in effusion supernatant and in serum, retains its binding capacities, but often with different functions and signalling properties than the cell-bound form. Aim. This study aimed to investigate the diagnostic and prognostic value of soluble syndecan-1 in pleural effusions and sera from patients with pleural malignancies. Study Design. Using two cohorts of patients, we assessed the diagnostic and prognostic value of soluble syndecan-1 in pleural effusions and sera, using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. Results. In pleural effusions, syndecan-1 distinguished malignant and benign diseases, with an odds ratio of 8.59 (95% CI 3.67 to 20.09). Furthermore, syndecan-1 in pleural effusions predicted a survival difference for patients with pleural metastatic disease and malignant mesothelioma of 11.2 and 9.2 months, respectively. However, no such effects were seen when syndecan-1 was measured in serum. Conclusion. Soluble syndecan-1 is a promising candidate biomarker for the cytopathological diagnosis and prognostication of malignant pleural effusions.

Diagnosis and treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma

There are three major challenges in the diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma: mesothelioma must be distinguished from benign mesothelial hyperplasia; malignant mesothelioma (and its subtypes) must be distinguished from metastatic carcinoma; and invasion of structures adjacent to the pleura must be demonstrated. The basis for clarifying the first two aspects is determination of a panel of monoclonal antibodies with appropriate immunohistochemical evaluation performed by highly qualified experts. Clarification of the third aspect requires sufficiently abundant, deep biopsy material, for which thoracoscopy is the technique of choice. Video-assisted needle biopsy with real-time imaging can be of great assistance when there is diffuse nodal thickening and scant or absent effusion. Given the difficulties of reaching an early diagnosis, cure is not generally achieved with radical surgery (pleuropneumonectomy), so liberation of the tumor mass with pleurectomy/decortication combined with chemo- or radiation therapy (multimodal treatment) has been gaining followers in recent years. In cases in which surgery is not feasible, chemotherapy (a combination of pemetrexed and platinum-derived compounds, in most cases) with pleurodesis or a tunneled pleural drainage catheter, if control of pleural effusion is required, can be considered. Radiation therapy is reserved for treatment of pain associated with infiltration of the chest wall or any other neighboring structure. In any case, comprehensive support treatment for pain control in specialist units is essential: this acquires particular significance in this type of malignancy.

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.

Diagnostic value of mesothelin in pleural fluids: comparison with CYFRA 21-1 and CEA

CYFRA 21-1 and CEA have been applied for the differential diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). The soluble mesothelin-related peptide (SMRP) has been proposed as a specific marker for distinguishing MPM from benign diseases and other malignancies in pleural effusions (PEs). In this study, we evaluated the usefulness of SMRP in PEs in the detection of mesotheliomas by comparing it with that of CYFRA 21-1, CEA, and with cytological examination. One hundred and seventy-seven consecutive patients (57 MPM, 64 metastatic tumors, and 56 benign diseases) were evaluated using commercial tests. The performance of the markers was analyzed by standard ROC analysis methods, using the area under a ROC curve (AUC) as a measure of accuracy. CYFRA 21-1 better differentiated malignant from benign effusions. The corresponding area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.87, while it was 0.74 for SMRP and 0.64 for CEA (p < 0.001). Conversely, SMRP differentiated MPM from all other PEs better than both CYFRA 21-1 and CEA (AUC = 0.84, 0.76, and 0.32, respectively, p = 0.003). Low levels of CEA were associated with a MPM diagnosis. The AUC for differentiating MPM from metastases was 0.81 for SMRP, 0.61 for CYFRA 21-1, and 0.20 for CEA (p < 0.001). In cases with negative or suspicious cytology, SMRP and CYFRA 21-1 identified 36/71 and 46/66 malignant PEs (29 and 31 MPM, respectively). Only 1 MPM showed a high CEA concentration. No single marker showed the best performance in any comparison. Results suggest that SMRP could improve CYFRA 21-1 and CEA accuracy in the differential diagnosis of MPM.