ABSTRACT
Soluble mesothelin-related peptide (SMRP) is a biomarker that has been proposed for differential diagnosis from pleural metastatic cancer, as well as prognosis and treatment monitoring of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MM). The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of SMRP in clinic management of MM. We assayed the SMRP concentrations in 354 subjects: 109 healthy volunteers with no history of exposure to asbestos, 26 patients with previous occupational asbestos exposure but who were free from pleural or parenchymal disease, 48 patients with asbestosis, 110 patients with pleural plaques, 25 patients with lung cancer, and 36 patients with MM. We also tested SMRP titers in 2 patients with MM at 5 different times of the disease, to evaluate the trend of the biomarker in the course of therapy. Our data confirm previous experiences with the use of SMRP as a diagnostic marker of MM. Low SMRP levels at diagnosis seem to have a positive prognostic significance.
Subject(s)
GPI-Linked Proteins/metabolism , Lung Neoplasms/diagnosis , Mesothelioma/diagnosis , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Biomarkers, Tumor , Female , Humans , Lung Neoplasms/pathology , Male , Mesothelin , Mesothelioma/pathology , Mesothelioma, Malignant , Middle Aged , Peptides , PrognosisABSTRACT
PURPOSE: High levels of serum-soluble mesothelin family proteins (SMRP) have been found to be associated with malignant mesothelioma (MM), but not lung cancer (LC). To verify the clinical role of this marker for both these tumors, we tested serum SMRP in the largest population of thoracic cancers ever assembled. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: SMRP blood concentrations were measured in 107 patients with MM, 215 patients with LC, 130 patients with benign respiratory diseases (BRD), and 262 controls. Statistical comparison between mean serum SMRP levels in all groups was done and receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed to evaluate the performance of this marker. RESULTS: SMRP levels were significantly higher in patients with MM and LC than in patients with benign respiratory diseases and controls (P < 0.001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for serum SMRP discriminating MM and controls was 0.77 (95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.83), with a best cutoff of 1.00 nmol/L (sensitivity, 68.2%; specificity, 80.5%). In both MM and LC, serum SMRP levels did not differ significantly between early and late stages. High SMRP levels proved to be an independent negative prognostic factor in patients with MM. CONCLUSIONS: Our data confirm that serum SMRP is a promising marker for the diagnosis, prognosis, and clinical monitoring of MM. We found that serum SMRP dosage may prove helpful in LC diagnosis as well. These data may also have positive repercussions on secondary preventive medical strategies for workers previously exposed to asbestos.
