Phase III trial of pemetrexed plus best supportive care compared with best supportive care in previously treated patients with advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma

Validity of the diagnostic criteria from the Asian Working Group for Cachexia in advanced cancer

BACKGROUND

Recently, the Asian Working Group for Cachexia (AWGC) published a consensus statement on diagnostic criteria for cachexia in Asians. We aimed to validate the criteria in adult patients in Japan with advanced cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a single-institution retrospective cohort study between April 2021 and October 2022. The AWGC criteria include chronic comorbidities and either a weight loss of >2% over 3-6 months or a body mass index (BMI) of <21 kg/m2 . In addition, any of the following items were required: anorexia as a subjective symptom, decreased grip strength as an objective measurement and an elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) level as a biomarker. We used the cut-off value of grip strength of 28/18 kg for male/female individuals and CRP level of 5 mg/L.

RESULTS

Of the 449 consecutive patients, 85 of those who could not be evaluated because of end-of-life or refractory symptoms (n = 41) or missing data (n = 44) were excluded from the primary analysis. The prevalence of the AWGC-defined cachexia was 76% (n = 277), and the median survival time (MST) for all patients was 215 (95% confidence interval [CI] 145-270) days. The prevalence of the following criteria was significantly higher in patients with cachexia than in those without cachexia: a BMI of <21 kg/m2 (65% vs. 15%, P < 0.001), a weight loss of >2% in 6 months (87% vs. 14%, P < 0.001), anorexia (75% vs. 47%, P < 0.001), a grip strength of <28 kg in male individuals (63% vs. 28%, P < 0.001) and CRP level of >5 mg/L (85% vs. 56%, P < 0.001). Overall survival was significantly shorter in patients with cachexia than in those without cachexia (MST 157 days, 95% CI 108-226 days vs. MST 423 days, 95% CI 245 days to not available, P = 0.0023). The Cox proportional hazards analysis showed that best supportive care (hazard ratio [HR] 2.91, P ≤ 0.001), lung cancer (HR 1.67, P = 0.0046), an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status score of ≥3 (HR 1.58, P = 0.016), AWGC-defined cachexia (HR 1.56, P = 0.015), an age of ≥70 years (HR 1.53, P = 0.0070), oedema (HR 1.31, P = 0.022) and head/neck cancer (HR 0.44, P = 0.023) were found to be the significant predictors for mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated that AWGC-defined cachexia has a significant prognostic value in advanced cancer.

Additivity predicts the efficacy of most approved combination therapies for advanced cancer

Most advanced cancers are treated with drug combinations. Rational design aims to identify synergistic combinations, but existing synergy metrics apply to preclinical, not clinical data. Here we propose a model of drug additivity for progression-free survival (PFS) to assess whether clinical efficacies of approved drug combinations are additive or synergistic. This model includes patient-to-patient variability in best single-drug response plus the weaker drug per patient. Among US Food and Drug Administration approvals of drug combinations for advanced cancers (1995-2020), 95% exhibited additive or less than additive effects on PFS times. Among positive or negative phase 3 trials published between 2014-2018, every combination that improved PFS was expected to succeed by additivity (100% sensitivity) and most failures were expected to fail (78% specificity). This study shows synergy is neither a necessary nor common property of clinically effective drug combinations. The predictable efficacy of approved combinations suggests that additivity can be a design principle for combination therapies.

Improvements in Systemic Therapies for Advanced Malignant Mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare and aggressive malignancy associated with poor prognosis and a 5-year survival rate of 12%. Many drugs have been tested over the years with conflicting results. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of current therapies in MPM and how to best interpret the data available on these drugs. Furthermore, we focused on promising treatments under investigation, such as immunotherapy with targets different from anti-PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors, vaccines, target therapies, and metabolism-based strategies.

Clinical efficacy and safety of pemetrexed with or without either Bevacizumab or Pembrolizumab in patients with metastatic nonsquamous non-small cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Pemetrexed was approved by United States Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) in combination with platinum for the treatment of advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) and malignant mesothelioma. Bevacizumab and pembrolizumab can be added to chemotherapy for patients with nonsquamous NSCLC with benefits but there has not been any dedicated head-to-head comparison between pembrolizumab-pemetrexed-platinum (PAC) and bevacizumab-pemetrexed-platinum (BAC) on their efficacy and safety.

METHODS

This was a retrospective single-center cohort study conducted in Queen Mary Hospital in Hong Kong. The study included 451 patients with advanced stage nonsquamous NSCLC that received first-line pemetrexed and platinum with or without bevacizumab or pembrolizumab. Patients who received pemetrexed-platinum (AC) were compared with those who received PAC and BAC. The primary endpoint was the progression-free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

The median PFS for patients that received PAC was significantly longer than those who received BAC and AC (9 months vs. 6.8 months vs. 4.8 months, p < 0.05 among all three groups), with OR of 0.578 (95% CI, 0.343-0.976; p = 0.040) and 0.430 (95% CI, 0.273-0.675; p < 0.001) when compared to BAC and AC, respectively. Patients who received PAC also had a higher disease control rate and higher likelihood to receive continuation maintenance therapy than those on AC. There is no statistically significant difference in the grade 3 to 4 toxicity among the three treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Although both regimens are superior to pemetrexed-platinum alone, data from this retrospective single center study suggested a better PFS in  advanced stage nonsquamous NSCLC patient treated with first-line pembrolizumab-pemetrexed-platinum than bevacizumab-pemetrexed-platinum without an obvious increase in significant toxicity.

What's Current and What's New in Mesothelioma?

Malignant mesothelioma is a rare disease with limited treatment options. In malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), radical trimodality approaches, including surgery, radiotherapy and systemic chemo- and immunotherapy, have been delivered in some countries but remain controversial due to a lack of randomised evidence. Even in the unresectable scenario, surgery and radiotherapy play an important role in managing pleural effusions and pain, which may optimise wellbeing and maintain performance status. From the systemic treatment point of view, the recent incorporation of anti-angiogenics and, more importantly, immunotherapy has changed the standard of care in a space where chemotherapy with platinum and pemetrexed was the only therapeutic intervention with demonstrated benefits in overall survival. Histology is essential in determining an initial treatment plan as non-epithelioid MPMs may have a higher substantial survival improvement with dual immunotherapy compared with chemotherapy, whereas chemotherapy remains an option for epithelioid MPM; however, predictive biomarkers for systemic therapy are not entirely validated to guide the selection, as a subgroup of MPM patients might not benefit from immunotherapy. This overview approaches how the overall management of mesothelioma is evolving to incorporate the recent changes in the standards of care.

Tsunami of immunotherapy reaches mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is the most common type of malignant mesothelioma. It is a rare tumor linked to asbestos exposure and is associated with a poor prognosis. Until very recently, patients with advanced or unresectable disease had limited treatment options, primarily based on doublet chemotherapy with cisplatin and pemetrexed. In 2020 and 2021, after more than a decade with no major advances or new drugs, two phase III clinical trials published results positioning immunotherapy as a promising option for the first- and second-line treatment of MPM. Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of many cancers and is also showing encouraging results in malignant mesothelioma. Both immune checkpoint inhibition and dual cytotoxic T-lymphocyte–associated antigen 4 and programmed death-ligand 1 pathway blockade resulted in significantly improved overall survival in randomized phase III trials. In the CheckMate 743 trial, first-line therapy with nivolumab plus ipilimumab outperformed standard chemotherapy, while in the CONFIRM trial, nivolumab outperformed placebo in patients previously treated with chemotherapy. These two trials represent a major milestone in the treatment of MPM and are set to position immunotherapy as a viable alternative for treatment-naïve patients and patients with progressive disease after chemotherapy.

Systemic treatment in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma - real life experience

Background

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare, aggressive malignancy of the pleural cavity linked to asbestos exposure. The combination of pemetrexed and platinum is a standard first-line therapy for malignant pleural mesothelioma. Despite some progress, almost all MPM patients experience progression after first-line therapy. The second-line treatment is still being under discussion and there are very limited data available on the second-line and subsequent treatments.

Methods

The retrospective analysis included 57 patients (16 females and 41 males) from two Polish oncological institutions treated for advanced mesothelioma between 2013 and 2019. We analysed the efficacy of first-line and second-line therapy: progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR).

Results

In the first-line treatment, 55 patients received pemetrexed-based chemotherapy (PBC) and two cisplatin in monotherapy. Patients’ characteristics at baseline: median age was 64.2 years, ECOG PS ≤ 1 (86.2%), epithelial histology (85.7%). Median PFS and OS were 7.6 months and 14 months, respectively. Patients with ECOG PS ≤ 1 vs > 1 had a longer median OS (14.8 months vs 9.7 months, p = 0.057). One-year OS and PFS were 60.9% and 32.0%, respectively. Disease control rate (DCR) was 82.5%. Response to first-line therapy: PFS ≥ 6 months and PFS ≥ 12 months had a significant impact on median OS. Twelve patients received second-line therapy (seven PBC and five other cytotoxic single agents: navelbine, gemcitabine, or adriamycin/vincristine/methotrexate triplet). Median PFS and OS were 3.7 months and 7.2 months, respectively. DCR was 83%. One-year OS and PFS were 37% and 16.7%, respectively.

In the group receiving PBC, OS was prolonged by 4.5 months compared to the non-PBC group (6.0 months vs 10.5 months, p = 0.47).

Conclusion

Patients who benefited from first-line therapy and had prolonged PFS at first-line and achieve PFS longer than 6 months at first-line should be offered second-line treatment. Consideration of retreatment with the same cytotoxic agent could to be a viable option when no other treatment are available.

Anetumab ravtansine versus vinorelbine in patients with relapsed, mesothelin-positive malignant pleural mesothelioma (ARCS-M): a randomised, open-label phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Few treatment options exist for second-line treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma. We aimed to assess the antibody-drug conjugate anetumab ravtansine versus vinorelbine in patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic disease overexpressing mesothelin who had progressed on first-line platinum-pemetrexed chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab.

METHODS

In this phase 2, randomised, open-label study, done at 76 hospitals in 14 countries, we enrolled adults (aged ≥18 years) with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic malignant pleural mesothelioma, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and who had progressed on first-line platinum-pemetrexed chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab. Participants were prospectively screened for mesothelin overexpression (defined as 2+ or 3+ mesothelin membrane staining intensity on at least 30% of viable tumour cells by immunohistochemistry) and were randomly assigned (2:1), using an interactive voice and web response system provided by the sponsor, to receive intravenous anetumab ravtansine (6·5 mg/kg on day 1 of each 21-day cycle) or intravenous vinorelbine (30 mg/m2 once every week) until progression, toxicity, or death. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival according to blinded central radiology review, assessed in the intention-to-treat population, with safety assessed in all participants who received any study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02610140, and is now completed.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 3, 2015, and May 31, 2017, 589 patients were enrolled and 248 mesothelin-overexpressing patients were randomly allocated to the two treatment groups (166 patients were randomly assigned to receive anetumab ravtansine and 82 patients were randomly assigned to receive vinorelbine). 105 (63%) of 166 patients treated with anetumab ravtansine (median follow-up 4·0 months [IQR 1·4-5·5]) versus 43 (52%) of 82 patients treated with vinorelbine (3·9 months [1·4-5·4]) had disease progression or died (median progression-free survival 4·3 months [95% CI 4·1-5·2] vs 4·5 months [4·1-5·8]; hazard ratio 1·22 [0·85-1·74]; log-rank p=0·86). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (one [1%] of 163 patients for anetumab ravtansine vs 28 [39%] of 72 patients for vinorelbine), pneumonia (seven [4%] vs five [7%]), neutrophil count decrease (two [1%] vs 12 [17%]), and dyspnoea (nine [6%] vs three [4%]). Serious drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 12 (7%) patients treated with anetumab ravtansine and 11 (15%) patients treated with vinorelbine. Ten (6%) treatment-emergent deaths occurred with anetumab ravtansine: pneumonia (three [2%]), dyspnoea (two [1%]), sepsis (two [1%]), atrial fibrillation (one [1%]), physical deterioration (one [1%]), hepatic failure (one [1%]), mesothelioma (one [1%]), and renal failure (one [1%]; one patient had 3 events). One (1%) treatment-emergent death occurred in the vinorelbine group (pneumonia).

INTERPRETATION

Anetumab ravtansine showed a manageable safety profile and was not superior to vinorelbine. Further studies are needed to define active treatments in relapsed mesothelin-expressing malignant pleural mesothelioma.

FUNDING

Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals.

Immune-Checkpoint Inhibitors for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: A French, Multicenter, Retrospective Real-World Study

Backgrounds: Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a cancer with poor prognosis. Second-line and onward therapy has many options, including immune-checkpoint inhibitors with demonstrated efficacy: 10−25% objective response rate (ORR) and 40−70% disease-control rate (DCR) in clinical trials on selected patients. This study evaluated real-life 2L+ nivolumab efficacy in MPM patients and looked for factors predictive of response. Methods: This retrospective study included (September 2017−July 2021) all MPM patients managed in 11 French centers. Results: The 109 enrolled patients’ characteristics were: median age: 69 years; 67.9% men; 82.6% epithelioid subtype. Strictly, second-line nivolumab was given to 51.4%. Median PFS and OS were 3.8 (3.2−5.9) and 12.8 (9.2−16.4) months. ORR was 17/109 (15.6%); 34/109 patients had a stabilized disease (DCR 46.8%). Univariable analysis identified several parameters as significantly (p < 0.05) prognostic of OS [HR (95% CI)]: biphasic subtype: 3.3 (1.52−7.0), intermediate Lung Immune Prognostic Index score: 0.46 (0.22−0.99), progression on the line preceding nivolumab: 2.1 (1.11−3.9) and age > 70 years: 2.5 (1.5−4.0). Multivariable analyses retained only biphasic subtype: 3.57 (1.08−11.8) and albumin < 25 g/L: 10.28 (1.5−70.7) as significant and independent predictors. Conclusions: Second-line and onward nivolumab is effective against MPM in real life but with less effectiveness in >70 years. Ancillary studies are needed to identify the predictive factors.

An Update on Emerging Therapeutic Options for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

The treatment paradigm for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) has changed little in the last 18 years. Radical intent treatment, consisting of surgical resection, radiotherapy and chemotherapy, has been offered to a highly select few; however, there is little randomised evidence to validate this approach. Prior to 2020 chemotherapy with platinum and an anti-folate was the only intervention with randomised evidence to demonstrate improved overall survival (OS) in MPM. No systemic therapy had been demonstrated to improve OS in the second line setting until 2020. The publication of the Checkmate 743 trial in 2021 demonstrated a survival benefit of combination immunotherapy over standard chemotherapy in newly diagnosed patients with MPM. This finding was shortly followed by the CONFIRM trial which demonstrates a modest but significant survival benefit of second line nivolumab versus placebo in patients having previously received standard chemotherapy. The results of these trials, recent biomarker directed therapy and chemotherapy adjuncts are discussed within this review. The integration of immunotherapy for the few patients in whom radical surgical therapy is intended is currently the subject of clinical trials and offers the prospect of improving outcomes in this rare but devastating disease.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma: an update

Malignant mesotheliomas are rare types of cancers that affect the mesothelial surfaces, usually the pleura and peritoneum. They are associated with asbestos exposure, but due to a latency period of more than 30 years and difficult diagnosis, most cases are not detected until they reach advanced stages. Treatment options for this tumor type are very limited and survival ranges from 12 to 36 months. This review discusses the molecular physiopathology, current diagnosis, and latest therapeutic options for this disease.

Risk factors of nephrotoxicity of maintenance pemetrexed in patients with metastatic non-squamous non-small cell carcinoma of lung

BACKGROUND

Nephrotoxicity is one of the concerns of prolonged maintenance therapy with pemetrexed. No reversible risk factors for pemetrexed-induced nephrotoxicity have been identified in previous studies. Identification of such factors would be clinically meaningful to maximize the chemotherapeutic benefits by avoiding premature termination of maintenance therapy which might otherwise result from the development of renal impairment.

METHODS

This was a retrospective single-center cohort study conducted in Queen Mary Hospital in Hong Kong. The study included 134 patients with advanced stage non-squamous NSCLC that received first line pemetrexed-platinum doublets followed by maintenance pemetrexed. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of nephrotoxicity. The risk factors of nephrotoxicity were identified.

RESULTS

Presence of non-evacuated third-space fluid during treatment course (OR 4.185, 95% CI = 1.150-15.191, p-value 0.030), the use of cisplatin (instead of carboplatin) during the induction phase (OR 8.761, 95% CI = 1.684-45.577, p-value 0.010) and receiving more than 15 cycles of maintenance pemetrexed (OR 3.839, 95% CI = 1.022-14.413, p-value 0.046) were identified as independent risk factors to the development of nephrotoxicity associated with maintenance pemetrexed use.

CONCLUSIONS

In order to reduce the risk of development of nephrotoxicity in NSCLC patient receiving first-line pemetrexed-platinum doublets, third-space fluid should be evacuated and carboplatin should be chosen over cisplatin whenever possible.

Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Nivolumab in Japanese Patients With Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: 3-Year Results of the MERIT Study

Introduction

We examined the long-term efficacy and safety of nivolumab, a human monoclonal antibody that inhibits interactions between the programmed cell death protein-1 receptor and its ligands (programmed death-ligand 1 and programmed death-ligand 2), in Japanese patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM).

Methods

Japanese patients with previously treated MPM (one or two regimens) were enrolled in a single-arm, phase 2 study and received nivolumab intravenously 240 mg every 2 weeks until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was the centrally assessed objective response rate. Other end points included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), treatment-related adverse events, and patient-reported outcomes (Lung Cancer Symptom Scale for mesothelioma and EuroQOL visual analog scale). Patient enrollment started on June 16, 2016. Here, we report 3-year follow-up data (cutoff date: November 12, 2019).

Results

Thirty-four patients were enrolled. The centrally assessed objective response rate was previously reported (29.4%). The 2- and 3-year OS rates were 35.3% and 23.5%, respectively, and the corresponding PFS rates were 17.0% and 12.7%. Median OS and PFS were 17.3 and 5.9 months, respectively. Eight patients were alive at 3 years of follow-up. Nivolumab was well tolerated and no new safety signals were found. The patient-reported outcomes were maintained without marked deteriorations during the study.

Conclusions

Our results reveal clinically relevant long-term efficacy and safety of nivolumab for the treatment of MPM.

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.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma: recent developments

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare, but aggressive tumor with still poor prognosis. In this article, we focus on recent developments in the management of MPM including diagnosis, staging, biomarkers, and treatment strategies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Molecular markers such as programmed death-ligand 1 (PDL-1), Breast Cancer gene 1-associated protein gene, and cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A (CDKN2A) have prognostic impact and should be considered for assessment in patient samples. In addition to histological subtype and tumor pattern, tumor volumetry plays an increasing important role in staging, assessment of treatment response, and prediction of survival. Several new blood-based biomarkers have been recently reported including peripheral blood DNA methylation, microRNAs, fibulin, and high-mobility group box 1, but have not been established in clinical routine use yet. Regarding treatment, targeted therapies, immunotherapy, and vaccination are considered as new promising strategies. Moreover, extended pleurectomy/decortication is favored over extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy represents a possible approach in combination with EPP and pleurectomy/decortication. Intracavitary treatment options are promising and deserve further investigations.

SUMMARY

Overall, there has not been a real breakthrough in the treatment of MPM. Further research and clinical trials are needed to evaluate outcome and to identify new potential treatment candidates.

Emerging biological therapies for the treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma

Introduction: Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) has limited treatment options with minimal new therapy approvals for unresectable disease in the past 15 years. However, considerable work has occurred to develop immunotherapies and biomarker driven therapy to improve patient outcomes over this period.Areas covered: This review examines current standard of care systemic therapy in the first- and second line setting. The last 12 months has seen 2 significant trials (Checkmate 743 and CONFIRM) which provide evidence supporting the role of immunotherapy in the management of MPM. Further trials are underway to assess the role of combination chemoimmunotherapy and personalized therapy. Additionally, a large number of clinical trials are ongoing to assess the efficacy of oncoviral, dendritic cell, anti-mesothelin and chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy in the treatment of MPM.Expert opinion: Recent Phase III trial results have established a role for immunotherapy in the management of MPM. The optimal sequencing and combination of chemotherapy and immunotherapy remains to be determined. Novel therapies for MPM are promising however efficacy remains to be determined and issues remain regarding access to and delivery of these therapies.

Treatment patterns and outcomes of patients with advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma in a community practice setting

Aim: To assess real-world treatment patterns and outcomes among patients with advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma. Patients & methods: Retrospective database analysis. Results: In all, 469 patients received first-line systemic anticancer therapy (SACT) at community centers. Median follow-up from diagnosis was 11.6 months. Pemetrexed + platinum was the most common first-line SACT; similar proportions of patients received cisplatin or carboplatin with pemetrexed. Only a small proportion of patients received second- and third-line therapies. Median overall survival for first-line SACT was 12.0 months (95% CI: 10.7-14.2). Results were similar with pemetrexed + cisplatin and pemetrexed + carboplatin. Median overall survival with second-line SACT was 6.4 months (95% CI: 5.1-7.6). Conclusion: There is a need for more effective SACTs for advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma.

Pemetrexed/Erlotinib as a Salvage Treatment in Patients with High EGFR-Expressing Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Following Failure of Standard Chemotherapy: A Phase II Single-Arm Prospective Study

BACKGROUND

Despite new agents to treat metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), patients eventually progress and additional therapies are needed.

OBJECTIVE

We intended to evaluate the combination of pemetrexed/erlotinib in patients with high epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-expressing (2+ or 3 on immunohistochemistry) metastatic CRC who experienced disease progression after standard chemotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We investigated pemetrexed and erlotinib (pemetrexed 500 mg/m² on Day 1 and erlotinib 100 mg/m² on Days 1-21) as a salvage treatment, given every 3 weeks, until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary outcome was overall response rate (RR).

RESULTS

From May 2017 to April 2018, 29 metastatic CRC patients with high EGFR expression who had previously received standard therapies were enrolled into this trial. The regimen was well tolerated. Skin rash, vomiting, fatigue, and anorexia were common toxic effects but were mostly manageable and controllable side effects of grades 1 or 2 only. In an intent-to-treat analysis, three partial responses (PRs) were observed in enrolled patients, revealing an overall RR of 10.3%. This value supported the statistical hypothesis of this study. Fifteen patients had stable disease and the disease control rate (DCR) was 62.1%. All three patients who achieved a PR had a tumor EGFR expression of 3+. Among the eight patients with EGFR 3+ expression, the RR and DCR were 37.5% and 75.0%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This phase II trial using pemetrexed/erlotinib in metastatic CRC with high EGFR expression met the primary endpoint of tumor response.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT03086538).

Update on biology and management of mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma is an aggressive, incurable cancer that is usually caused by asbestos exposure several decades before symptoms arise. Despite widespread prohibition of asbestos production and supply, its incidence continues to increase. It is heterogeneous in its presentation and behaviour, and diagnosis can be notoriously difficult. Identification of actionable gene mutations has proven challenging and current treatment options are largely ineffective, with a median survival of 10-12 months.However, the past few years have witnessed major advances in our understanding of the biology and pathogenesis of mesothelioma. This has also revealed the limitations of existing diagnostic algorithms and identified new treatment targets.Recent clinical trials have re-examined the role of surgery, provided new options for the management of associated pleural effusions and heralded the addition of targeted therapies. The increasing complexity of mesothelioma management, along with a desperate need for further research, means that a multidisciplinary team framework is essential for the delivery of contemporary mesothelioma care.This review provides a synthesised overview of the current state of knowledge and an update on the latest research in the field.

A Review of Pharmacologic Management in the Treatment of Mesothelioma

OPINION STATEMENT

Mesothelioma is a rare and severe form of cancer that is associated with asbestos exposure. Approximately 2500 Americans die annually from this condition with a median survival of 1 year. The latency period of this disease ranges anywhere from 20 to 70 years, with shorter latency periods associated with a higher exposure intensity to asbestos. Therefore, cases of mesothelioma are expected in the coming decades. This highlights the need for clinicians to understand the pharmacologic regimens available for treating this rare, yet serious malignancy. With multiple treatment regimens available in the treatment of this condition, clinicians should take an evidence-based approach and consider the totality of evidence and safety information while considering the best patient-centered approach for treatment. This article provides a review of current pharmacologic treatment options available for mesothelioma and goes into detail about the recommended medication regimens and dosages and the available evidence of efficacy, effectiveness, and/or safety and estimates the annual cost of treatment for these medications on the U.S. healthcare system per patient. A brief introduction is provided for several promising agents currently under investigation for mesothelioma as well.

Haematological toxicity of pemetrexed in patients with metastatic non-squamous non-small cell carcinoma of lung with third-space fluid

BACKGROUND

Pemetrexed was approved by United States Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) in combination with platinum for the treatment of advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) and malignant mesothelioma. Due to the structural similarity with methotrexate, there has been concern about the accumulation of pemetrexed in third space fluid that may result in increased toxicity. Previous small-scale studies have yet to conclusively prove this association.

METHODS

This was a retrospective single-center cohort study conducted in Queen Mary Hospital in Hong Kong. The study included 329 patients with advanced stage non-squamous NSCLC that received first line pemetrexed and platinum. Patients who had non-evacuated third-space fluid, evacuated third-space fluid and without third-space fluid were compared. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of hematological toxicity.

RESULTS

The presence of non-evacuated third-space fluid was shown to be associated with significantly more hematological toxicities, namely grade 3 or above hematological toxicities [Odd ratio (OR) = 2.450, p = 0.002], postponement of chemotherapy (OR = 3.837, p = 0.000) and need for dose adjustment (OR = 2.436, p = 0.022) when compared with those without third-space fluid. For patients with evacuated third-space fluid, these adverse effects were nullified.

CONCLUSIONS

Presence of non-evacuated third-space fluid in patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC predispose patients to significant hematological toxicity when pemetrexed and platinum chemotherapy is used. Evacuation of third-space fluid should be considered before starting pemetrexed and platinum doublet.

DNA Methylation of FKBP5 as Predictor of Overall Survival in Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive tumor with median survival of 12 months and limited effective treatments. The scope of this study was to study the relationship between blood DNA methylation (DNAm) and overall survival (OS) aiming at a noninvasive prognostic test. We investigated a cohort of 159 incident asbestos exposed MPM cases enrolled in an Italian area with high incidence of mesothelioma. Considering 12 months as a cut-off for OS, epigenome-wide association study (EWAS) revealed statistically significant (p value = 7.7 × 10^-9) OS-related differential methylation of a single-CpG (cg03546163), located in the 5'UTR region of the FKBP5 gene. This is an independent marker of prognosis in MPM patients with a better performance than traditional inflammation-based scores such as lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR). Cases with DNAm < 0.45 at the cg03546163 had significantly poor survival compared with those showing DNAm ≥ 0.45 (mean: 243 versus 534 days; p value< 0.001). Epigenetic changes at the FKBP5 gene were robustly associated with OS in MPM cases. Our results showed that blood DNA methylation levels could be promising and dynamic prognostic biomarkers in MPM.

Randomized Study of Maintenance Pemetrexed Versus Observation for Treatment of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: CALGB 30901

BACKGROUND

The role of maintenance therapy for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is unknown. We performed a randomized phase II trial to determine if continuation of pemetrexed after first-line pemetrexed and platinum would improve progression-free survival (PFS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients with unresectable MPM, without disease progression following 4 to 6 cycles of pemetrexed and platinum were randomized 1:1 to observation or continuation of pemetrexed until progression, stratified by number of cycles (< 6 or 6), cis- or carboplatin containing regimen, and histology. Study size was calculated based on the assumption that observation would produce a median PFS of 3 months and pemetrexed would yield median PFS of 6 months.

RESULTS

A total of 72 patients were registered from December 2010 to June 2016. The study closed early after 53 patients were randomized; 49 eligible (22 on the observation arm and 27 on the pemetrexed arm) were included in the analysis. The median PFS was 3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.6-11.9 months) on observation and 3.4 months (95% CI, 2.8-9.8 months) on pemetrexed (hazard ratio [HR], 0.99; 95% CI, 0.51-1.90; P = .9733). The median overall survival (OS) was 11.8 months (95% CI, 9.3-28.7 months) for observation, and 16.3 months (95% CI, 10.5-26.0 months) for pemetrexed (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.44-1.71; P = .6737). Grade 3 or 4 toxicities on the pemetrexed arm included anemia (8%), lymphopenia (8%), neutropenia (4%), and fatigue (4%). A higher baseline level of soluble mesothelin-related peptide was associated with worse PFS (HR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.00-3.46; P = .049).

CONCLUSION

Maintenance pemetrexed following initial pemetrexed and platinum chemotherapy does not improve PFS in patients with MPM.

Amrubicin in previously treated patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma: A phase II study

Background

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of amrubicin for previously treated malignant pleural mesothelioma.

Methods

The eligibility criteria were: previously treated unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma; performance status 0–1; age ≤ 75; adequate hematological, hepatic, and renal function. The patients were injected with 35 mg/m² amrubicin on days one, two, and three every 3–4 weeks. The planned number of patients was 32.

Results

The study was terminated due to delay in enrollment and 10 patients were subsequently enrolled (nine males and one female; median age 67 [range 49–73]), of which four had epithelioid tumors, three had sarcomatoid tumors and three had biphasic tumors, respectively. According to the International Mesothelioma Interest Group (IMIG), one, four, and four patients had stage II, III, and IV, respectively, and one had postoperative recurrence. There was one (10%) partial response, four (40%) had stable disease, and five (50%) patients exhibited disease progression. The overall response and disease control rates were 10% (95% CI: 0.3–44.5%) and 60% (95% CI: 26.2–87.8%), respectively. The median progression‐free survival time was 1.6 months. The median overall survival time was 6.6 months, and the one‐, two‐, and three‐year survival rates were 23%, 23%, and 0%, respectively. The observed grade 3 or 4 toxicities included neutropenia in six (60%) patients; leukopenia in five (50%) patients; and febrile neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia, and pneumonia in one (10%) patient each.

Conclusions

There was not enough data to evaluate the efficacy because the study was terminated early. However, amrubicin showed limited activity and

acceptable toxicities when used in previously treated malignant pleural mesothelioma patients.

Lurbinectedin as second- or third-line palliative therapy in malignant pleural mesothelioma: an international, multi-centre, single-arm, phase II trial (SAKK 17/16)

BACKGROUND

Systemic second- and third-line therapies for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) result in a median progression-free survival (mPFS) of <2 months and median overall survival (mOS) of 6-9 months. Lurbinectedin binds to the DNA of the regulatory region while inhibiting tumour-associated macrophage transcription. In early trials, encouraging outcomes occurred in patients (pts) with MPM treated with lurbinectedin. We aimed to generate lurbinectedin efficacy and safety data among pts with progressive MPM.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Pts with progressing MPM treated with first-line platinum-pemetrexed chemotherapy with or without immunotherapy received lurbinectedin monotherapy. Treatment was given intravenously at 3.2 mg/m² dose every 3 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Using Simon's two-stage design, the primary endpoint, progression-free survival (PFS) at 12 weeks (PFS_12wks), was met if achieved by ≥21 pts (p0 ≤35% versus p1 ≥55%).

RESULTS

Forty-two pts from nine centres across Switzerland and Italy were recruited. Histology was epithelioid in 33 cases, sarcomatoid in 5, and biphasic in 4. Overall 10/42 (23.8%) underwent prior immunotherapy and 14/42 (33.3%) had progressed ≤6 months after first-line chemotherapy. At data cut-off PFS_12wks was met by 22/42 pts (52.4%; 90% confidence interval (CI): 38.7% to 63.5%; P = 0.015) with an mPFS of 4.1 months and mOS of 11.1 months. The best response was complete and partial remission observed in one patient each and stable disease in 20 pts. The duration of disease control was 6.6 months (95% CI: 5.2-7.4). No significant difference in PFS_12wks, mPFS, and mOS was recorded in epithelioid versus non-epithelioid cases and pts with prior immunotherapy versus those without. Similar mPFS but shorter mOS were observed among pts who progressed within ≤6 months after first-line chemotherapy. Lurbinectedin-related grade 3-4 toxicity was seen in 21 pts, mostly being neutropenia (23.8%) and fatigue (16.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

The primary efficacy endpoint was reached with acceptable toxicity. Lurbinectedin showed promising activity regardless of histology, prior immunotherapy, or outcome on prior treatment. CLINICALTRIALS.

GOV IDENTIFIER

NCT03213301.

Emerging therapies in malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare cancer of the pleural surfaces frequently related to asbestos exposure. It is characterized by a poor prognosis even for patients treated with trimodality therapy, including surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Moreover, the majority of patients are not candidates for surgery due to disease advanced stage or medical comorbidities. For these patients, the survival rate is even lower and few therapeutic options are currently available. Nevertheless, many interesting novel approaches are under investigation, among which immunotherapy represents one of the most promising emerging strategies. In this review, we will discuss the role of new therapeutic options, particularly immunotherapy, and present the results of the most important and promising clinical trials.

Targeting angiogenesis for patients with unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a global health issue, the principal cause of which is exposure to asbestos. The prevalence is anticipated to rise over the next 2 decades, particularly in developing countries, due to the 30-50-year latency period between exposure to asbestos and carcinogenic development. Unresectable MPM has a poor prognosis and limited treatment options and, as such, there is a broad range of therapeutic targets of interest, including angiogenesis, immune checkpoints, mesothelin, as well as chemotherapeutic agents. Recently, the results of several randomized trials in the first-line setting combining antiangiogenic agents with chemotherapy have been reported. This review examines the scientific rationale for targeting angiogenesis in the treatment of unresectable MPM and analyzes recent clinical results with antiangiogenic agents in development (bevacizumab, nintedanib, and cediranib) for the management of MPM.

Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: Is Tailoring the Second-Line Therapy Really "Raising the Bar?"

OPINION STATEMENT

Unresectable or relapsed malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) has dismal prognosis. First-line combination therapy with pemetrexed and a platinum analog allows a modest survival benefit, while no clear therapeutic options exist for the second-line therapy. In this setting, pemetrexed seems to be the most active drug; however, the inclusion in front-line treatment limits its use in further lines. Nevertheless, rechallenge with one or both drugs used in first-line remains a feasible strategy for responder patients. Alternatively, only few cytotoxic drugs have demonstrated a mild activity in refractory MPM. Among other options, targeted therapy has unfortunately produced disappointing results as salvage treatment probably due to the lack of a clear understanding of the tumor biology. In contrast, recent data suggest moderate efficacy and mild toxicity of immunotherapy also for the treatment of MPM. The combination of checkpoint inhibitors with chemotherapy or other immunological agents seems promising and could really "raise the bar" in this setting.

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.

Ipilimumab and nivolumab in the treatment of recurrent malignant pleural mesothelioma (INITIATE): results of a prospective, single-arm, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Single-drug checkpoint inhibition has shown efficacy in patients with recurrent malignant pleural mesothelioma. Here, we assessed the safety and efficacy of the combination of nivolumab, an anti-programmed cell death 1 antibody, plus ipilimumab, an anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte protein 4 antibody, in patients with previously treated and relapsed malignant pleural mesothelioma.

METHODS

INITIATE was a prospective single-centre, single arm, phase 2 trial. Patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma who progressed after at least one line of platinum-containing chemotherapy were enrolled. Key eligibility criteria were measurable disease according to the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours for mesotheliomas, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1, and adequate organ function. Patients received intravenous nivolumab (240 mg every 2 weeks) plus intravenous ipilimumab (1 mg/kg every 6 weeks up to four times). Treatment was continued for up to 2 years or until confirmed progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was disease control at 12 weeks. All patients who received at least one dose of therapy were included in safety analysis and all patients who received one dose of therapy and at least one radiological assessment were included in the primary analysis. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03048474.

FINDINGS

Between Oct 5, 2016, and Aug 3, 2017, 38 patients were enrolled in the study, of which two patients were excluded because they were not eligible for a biopsy. Of 36 eligible patients, one deteriorated before the start of the study so was not included in any analyses and one withdrew consent after one treatment cycle before radiological assessment so was included in the safety population only. 34 patients were evaluable for response assessment at 12 weeks. Of these, ten (29%) patients had a partial response and 13 (38%) patients had stable disease; thus, disease control was achieved by 23 (68%, 95% CI 50-83) of 34 patients. Treatment-related adverse events were reported in 33 (94%) patients. The most common adverse events were infusion-related reactions, skin disorders, and fatigue. Grade 3 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 12 (34%) of 35 patients.

INTERPRETATION

In this single-centre phase 2 trial, the combination of nivolumab plus ipilimumab showed marked efficacy in patients with recurrent malignant pleural mesothelioma. The safety profile was consistent with known data on the combination regimen. Our results warrant further investigation of this combination in a phase 3 trial.

FUNDING

Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Simultaneous presence of lung adenocarcinoma and malignant pleural mesothelioma: A case report

The co-presence of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) and lung cancer is rare. We report a 70-year-old male with exposure to asbestos. Chest computed tomography revealed a right mediastinal mass combined with an enlarged ipsilateral lymph node and left pleural effusion. Transbronchial lung biopsy revealed lung adenocarcinoma. Thoracoscopic examination revealed multiple left pleural nodules, leading to the diagnosis of MPM. Despite aggressive anticancer drug therapy, he expired due to disease progression 2.5 years after diagnosis. Autopsy confirmed an epithelioid MPM in the left pleura. MPM comorbidity in patients diagnosed with lung cancer should be considered, especially in those exposed to asbestos.

The use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the management of malignant pleural mesothelioma: a descriptive literature survey

Background

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) remains a highly symptomatic and aggressive malignancy. The treatment options are for most patients limited to palliative chemotherapy and best supportive care. Therefore, the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is recommended for the improvement of the quality of care. The aim of this literature survey is to provide an up to date review of the use of PROMs in mesothelioma. A concise comparison is made of the identified instruments.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Web of Science and Google Scholar for the use of PROMs in MPM. Quality of the study and risk of bias were assessed using the appraisal tools recommended by the Dutch Cochrane Center.

Results

A total of 31 articles on PROMs in MPM were identified that met the inclusion criteria and a total of 14 instruments. The instruments are categorized in generic (n=2), cancer-specific (n=4), lung cancer-specific (n=3), mesothelioma-specific (n=2) and symptom-specific (n=3). They were mostly used in clinical trials.

Conclusions

PROMs have the potential to improve the management of MPM. No particular instrument is specifically recommended, although there is a preference for patient-reported disease-specific instruments encompassing the concept of health-related quality of life (hrQoL) and relevant symptoms. Such instruments are the EORTC QLQ-LC13, LCSS-Meso and FACT-L, which measure the impact of malignant mesothelioma and its treatment on patients. Assessments should be made on baseline and post-treatment. The frequency of assessments should be further evaluated in this population.

Current chemotherapy strategies in malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive malignancy with a 5-year survival rate of ~10%. Since most patients present with irresectable disease, the vast majority is treated with chemotherapy. The only registered therapy for MPM is platinum-pemetrexed doublet therapy, although only up to half of patients have clinical benefit from this palliative treatment. Of the anti-angiogenesis agents, only bevacizumab and nintedanib have shown activity with platinum-pemetrexed doublet therapy. Other anti-angiogenesis agents like thalidomide did not prolong (progression free) survival or response rate. Eventually, all patients will get a recurrence and no active second line therapy has been identified to date. The clinical benefit of (switch) maintenance therapy after first line treatment and combination strategies of different chemotherapies with angiogenesis inhibitors are currently under investigation. The major challenges are finding optimal treatment combinations and to select the adequate treatment for an individual patient. This review focusses on the current standard of chemotherapy and new systemic therapy strategies under investigation.

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.

NGR-hTNF in combination with best investigator choice in previously treated malignant pleural mesothelioma (NGR015): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Malignant pleural mesothelioma is an aggressive cancer with highly vascularised tumours. It has poor prognosis and few treatment options after failure of first-line chemotherapy. NGR-hTNF is a vascular-targeting drug that increases penetration of intratumoral chemotherapy and T-cell infiltration by modifying the tumour microenvironment. In this trial, we aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of NGR-hTNF in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma who had progressed during or after a first-line treatment.

METHODS

NGR015 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial done in 41 centres in 12 countries. Eligible participants had malignant pleural mesothelioma of any histological subtype (epithelial, sarcomatoid, or mixed), were aged 18 years or older, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 and radiologically documented progressive disease after one pemetrexed-based chemotherapy regimen. Participants were randomly assigned to receive weekly NGR-hTNF 0·8 μg/m² intravenously plus best investigator choice (n=200), or placebo plus best investigator choice (n=200). Best investigator choice was decided before random assignment and could be single-agent gemcitabine (1000-1250 mg/m² intravenously), vinorelbine (25 mg/m² intravenously or 60 mg/m² orally), doxorubicin (60-75 mg/m² intravenously), or best supportive care only. Patients were randomised (1:1) with a block size of four after stratification for performance status and best investigator choice. The primary study endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is closed to new participants and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01098266).

FINDINGS

Between April 12, 2010 and Jan 21, 2013, we enrolled 400 eligible participants. 381 (95%) of 400 patients were selected to receive chemotherapy before all participants were randomly assigned to receive NGF-hTNF plus best investigator choice (n=200) or placebo plus best investigator choice (n=200). At the cutoff date (April 29, 2014), the median follow-up was 18·7 months (IQR 15·1-24·4), and overall survival did not differ between the two treatment groups (median 8·5 months [95% CI 7·2-9·9] in the NGR-hTNF group vs 8·0 months [6·6-8·9] in the placebo group; hazard ratio 0·94, 95% CI 0·75-1·18; p=0·58). Grade 3 or worse study-emergent adverse events occurred in 136 (70%) of patients receiving NGR-hTNF versus 118 (61%) of patients receiving placebo, with the most common being neutropenia (35 [18%] of 193 patients vs 36 [19%] of 193 patients), pain (11 [6%] vs 16 [8%]), dyspnoea (nine [5%] vs seven [4%]), and chills (nine [5%] vs none). 50 (26%) patients in the NGR-hTNF group had a serious adverse event, compared with 47 (24%) in the placebo group. Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 17 (9%) patients in the NGR-hTNF group and 20 patients (10%) in the placebo group. There were 12 deaths in the NGR-hTNF group and 13 deaths in the placebo group, but none were treatment related.

INTERPRETATION

The study did not meet its primary endpoint. The hypothesis-generating findings from the subgroup analyses deserve a confirmatory randomised trial because patients who rapidly progress after first-line treatment have a poor prognosis.

FUNDING

MolMed.

Prognostic factors and treatment outcomes of malignant pleural mesothelioma in Eastern Asian patients - A Taiwanese study

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

There are scarce reports on the prognostic factors and treatment outcomes of patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) in Asia. This study aimed to address these matters in a real-world setting.

METHODS

Medical records of patients with histologically proven MPM diagnosed between 1977 and 2016 at the National Taiwan University Hospital were reviewed. Variables including age, gender, performance status, asbestos exposure, smoking history, histology subtype, staging, and treatment received were recorded. All patients were followed until death or March 1st, 2017. Survival and prognostic factors were analyzed by the Kaplan-Meir method and the Cox proportional hazard model.

RESULTS

A total of 93 patients was identified, including 65 men and 28 women. An increasing trend of MPM cases diagnosed was observed in the past 40 years. Stage I/II disease (HR 0.24, 95% CI 0.13-0.46) and epithelioid histology (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.23-0.75) were associated with favorable prognosis, whereas age ≥70 years (HR 2.66, 95% CI 1.36-5.22) and ECOG ≥2 (HR 5.03, 95% CI 2.69-9.4) were poor prognostic factors. After adjustment for prognostic factors, surgery in stage I-III MPM (HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.15-0.83) and systemic therapy in stage III/IV disease (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.19-0.94) conferred a survival benefit.

CONCLUSION

This is one of the largest case series of MPM reported in Asia outside of Japan. Prognostic factors in the study population included age, performance status, stage, and histology subtype. Surgery in potentially resectable disease and systemic therapy in advanced MPM confer a survival benefit in Asian patients.

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 .

Inhibition of FGF/FGFR autocrine signaling in mesothelioma with the FGF ligand trap, FP-1039/GSK3052230

Fibroblast growth factor (FGF) ligand-dependent signaling has a fundamental role in cancer development and tumor maintenance. GSK3052230 (also known as FP-1039) is a soluble decoy receptor that sequesters FGFs and inhibits FGFR signaling. Herein, the efficacy of this molecule was tested in models of mesothelioma, a tumor type shown to express high levels of FGF2 and FGFR1. GSK3052230 demonstrated antiproliferative activity across a panel of mesothelioma cell lines and inhibited growth of tumor xenografts in mice. High expression of FGF2 and FGFR1 correlated well with response to FGF pathway inhibition. GSK3052230 inhibited MAPK signaling as evidenced by decreased phospho-ERK and phospho-S6 levels in vitro and in vivo. Additionally, dose-dependent and statistically-significant reductions in tumor vessel density were observed in GSK3052230-treated tumors compared to vehicle-treated tumors. These data support the role of GSK3052230 in effectively targeting FGF-FGFR autocrine signaling in mesothelioma, demonstrate its impact on tumor growth and angiogenesis, and provide a rationale for the current clinical evaluation of this molecule in mesothelioma patients.

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.

Chemotherapy treatment in malignant pleural mesothelioma: a difficult history

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare neoplasm that typically arises from mesothelial surfaces of the pleural cavity. Despite treatment improvements, it carries a dismal prognosis. The majority of patients either have unresectable disease or are not candidates for surgery due to medical comorbidities or old age. For such patients, chemotherapy (CT) represents the gold-standard treatment. To date, combination CT with cisplatin plus pemetrexed represents the most widely used regimen in first-line setting for patients with unresectable MPM. Other first-line options are currently available, including the use of raltitrexed instead of pemetrexed combined with platinum. In this review, we discuss the role of CT in MPM mainly focusing on the results of the trials conducted in first-line setting.

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.

Tremelimumab as second-line or third-line treatment in relapsed malignant mesothelioma (DETERMINE): a multicentre, international, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2b trial

BACKGROUND

New therapeutic strategies for malignant mesothelioma are urgently needed. In the DETERMINE study, we investigated the effects of the cytotoxic-T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) monoclonal antibody tremelimumab in patients with previously treated advanced malignant mesothelioma.

METHODS

DETERMINE was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b trial done at 105 study centres across 19 countries in patients with unresectable pleural or peritoneal malignant mesothelioma who had progressed after one or two previous systemic treatments for advanced disease. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 and measurable disease as defined in the modified Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.0 for pleural mesothelioma or RECIST version 1.1 for peritoneal mesothelioma. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) in blocks of three, stratified by European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer status (low risk vs high risk), line of therapy (second line vs third line), and anatomic site (pleural vs peritoneal), by use of an interactive voice or web system, to receive intravenous tremelimumab (10 mg/kg) or placebo every 4 weeks for 7 doses and every 12 weeks thereafter until a treatment discontinuation criterion was met. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. The trial is ongoing but no longer recruiting participants, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01843374.

FINDINGS

Between May 17, 2013, and Dec 4, 2014, 571 patients were randomly assigned to receive tremelimumab (n=382) or placebo (n=189), of whom 569 patients received treatment (two patients in the tremelimumab group were excluded from the safety population because they did not receive treatment). At the data cutoff date (Jan 24, 2016), 307 (80%) of 382 patients had died in the tremelimumab group and 154 (81%) of 189 patients had died in the placebo group. Median overall survival in the intention-to-treat population did not differ between the treatment groups: 7·7 months (95% CI 6·8-8·9) in the tremelimumab group and 7·3 months (5·9-8·7) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·92 [95% CI 0·76-1·12], p=0·41). Treatment-emergent adverse events of grade 3 or worse occurred in 246 (65%) of 380 patients in the tremelimumab group and 91 (48%) of 189 patients in the placebo group; the most common were dyspnoea (34 [9%] patients in the tremelimumab group vs 27 [14%] patients in the placebo group), diarrhoea (58 [15%] vs one [<1%]), and colitis (26 [7%] vs none). The most common serious adverse events were diarrhoea (69 [18%] patients in the tremelimumab group vs one [<1%] patient in the placebo group), dyspnoea (29 [8%] vs 24 [13%]), and colitis (24 [6%] vs none). Treatment-emergent events leading to death occurred in 36 (9%) of 380 patients in the tremelimumab group and 12 (6%) of 189 in the placebo group; those leading to the death of more than one patient were mesothelioma (three [1%] patients in the tremelimumab group vs two [1%] in the placebo group), dyspnoea (three [1%] vs two [1%]); respiratory failure (one [<1%] vs three [2%]), myocardial infarction (three [1%] vs none), lung infection (three [1%] patients vs none), cardiac failure (one [<1%] vs one [<1%]), and colitis (two [<1%] vs none). Treatment-related adverse events leading to death occurred in five (1%) patients in the tremelimumab group and none in the placebo group. The causes of death were lung infection in one patient, intestinal perforation and small intestinal obstruction in one patient; colitis in two patients, and neuritis and skin ulcer in one patient.

INTERPRETATION

Tremelimumab did not significantly prolong overall survival compared with placebo in patients with previously treated malignant mesothelioma. The safety profile of tremelimumab was consistent with the known safety profile of CTLA-4 inhibitors. Investigations into whether immunotherapy combination regimens can provide greater efficacy than monotherapies in malignant mesothelioma are ongoing.

FUNDING

AstraZeneca.

Novel systemic therapy against malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma is an aggressive tumor of the pleura with an overall poor prognosis. Even with surgical resection, for which only a subset of patients are eligible, long term disease free survival is rare. Standard first-line systemic treatment consists of a platinum analog, an anti-metabolite, and sometimes anti-angiogenic therapy, but there is currently no well-established standard therapy for refractory or relapsed disease. This review focuses on efforts to develop improved systemic therapy for the treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) including cytotoxic systemic therapy, a variety of tyrosine kinase inhibitors and their downstream effector pathways, pharmacologic targeting of the epigenome, novel approaches to target proteins expressed on mesothelioma cells (such as mesothelin), arginine depletion therapy, and the emerging role of immunotherapy. Overall, these studies demonstrate the challenges of improving systemic therapy for MPM and highlight the need to develop therapeutic strategies to control this disease.