Dendritic cells loaded with allogeneic tumour cell lysate plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone in patients with pleural mesothelioma as maintenance therapy after chemotherapy (DENIM): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2/3 study.

BACKGROUND: Dendritic cell immunotherapy has proven to be safe and induces an immune response in humans. We aimed to establish the efficacy of dendritic cells loaded with allogeneic tumour cell lysate (MesoPher, Amphera BV, 's-Hertogenbosch, Netherlands) as maintenance therapy in patients with pleural mesothelioma. METHODS: In this open-label, randomised, phase 2/3 study, patients with histologically confirmed unresectable pleural mesothelioma, aged 18 years or older, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0-1, and non-progressing disease after four to six cycles of standard chemotherapy (with pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 plus platinum [cisplatin 75 mg/m2 or carboplatin area under the curve of 5]) were recruited from four centres in Belgium, France, and The Netherlands. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1), using block randomisation (block size of 4), stratified by centre and histology (epithelioid vs other), to MesoPher treatment plus best supportive care or best supportive care alone. Patients received up to a maximum of five MesoPher infusions, with treatment administered on days 1, 15, and 29, and weeks 18 and 30. At each timepoint, participants received an injection of 25 × 106 dendritic cells (two-thirds of the dendritic cells were administered intravenously and a third were injected intradermally). Best supportive care was per local institutional standards. The primary endpoint was overall survival, assessed in all participants randomly assigned to treatment (full analysis set) and safety assessed in all randomly assigned participants, and who underwent leukapheresis if they were in the MesoPher group. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03610360, and is closed for accrual. FINDINGS: Between June 21, 2018, and June 10, 2021, 176 patients were screened and randomly assigned to the MesoPher group (n=88) or best supportive care alone group (n=88). One participant in the MesoPher group did not undergo leukapheresis. Mean age was 68 years (SD 8), 149 (85%) of 176 were male, 27 (15%) were female, 173 (98%) were White, two were Asian (1%), and one (1%) was other race. As of data cutoff (June 24, 2023), after a median follow up of 15·1 months (IQR 9·5-22·4), median overall survival was 16·8 months (95% CI 12·4-20·3; 61 [69%] of 88 died) in the MesoPher group and 18·3 months (14·3-21·9; 59 [67%] of 88 died) in the best supportive care group (hazard ratio 1·10 [95% CI 0·77-1·57]; log-rank p=0·62). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events were chest pain (three [3%] of 87 in the MesoPher group vs two [2%] of 88 in the best supportive care group), dyspnoea (none vs two [2%]), anaemia (two [2%] vs none), nausea (none vs two [2%]), and pneumonia (none vs two [2%]). No deaths due to treatment-emergent adverse events were recorded. Treatment-related adverse events consisted of infusion-related reactions (fever, chills, and fatigue), which occurred in 64 (74%) of 87 patients in the MesoPher group, and injection-site reactions (itch, erythema, and induration), which occurred in 73 (84%) patients, and all were grade 1-2 in severity. No deaths were determined to be treatment related. INTERPRETATION: MesoPher did not show improvement in overall survival in patients with pleural mesothelioma. Immune checkpoint therapy is now standard of care in pleural mesothelioma. Further randomised studies are needed of combinations of MesoPher and immune checkpoint therapy, which might increase efficacy without adding major toxicities. FUNDING: Amphera BV and EU HORIZON.

Comparison of FDG-PET/CT and CT for evaluation of tumor response to nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy and prognosis prediction in patients with unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma.

OBJECTIVES: Results for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) patients following first-line treatment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab obtained with immunotherapy-modified PERCIST (imPERCIST), shown by [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT), and modified RECIST (mRECIST), shown by CT, were compared for response evaluation and prognosis prediction. RESULTS: imPERCIST indicated nine progressive metabolic disease (PMD), eight stable metabolic disease (SMD), four partial metabolic response (PMR), and five complete metabolic response (CMR) cases. mRECIST showed nine with progressive disease (PD), nine stable disease (SD), seven partial response (PR), and one complete response (CR). Although high concordance was noted (κ = 0.827), imPERCIST correctly judged a greater percentage with CMR (15.4%). Following a median 10.0 months, 15 patients showed progression and eight died from MPM. With both, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly longer in patients without progression (CMR/PMR/SMD, CR/PR/SD, respectively) as compared to PMD/PD patients (imPERCIST p < 0.0001 and p = 0.015, respectively; mRECIST p < 0.0001 and p = 0.015, respectively). METHODS: Twenty-six patients (23 males, 3 females; median 73.5 years) with histologically proven MPM and no curative surgery received nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy. FDG-PET/CT and diagnostic CT scanning at the baseline, and after 2-4 cycles (2 in three, 3 in 17, 4 in six patients) were performed. Therapeutic response findings evaluated using imPERCIST and mRECIST were compared. PFS and OS analyses were done using log-rank and Cox methods. CONCLUSION: For unresectable MPM patient examinations, FDG-PET and CT provide accurate findings for evaluating tumor response and also prognosis prediction following first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab immunotherapy (approximately three cycles).

Extended pleurectomy decortication and chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for pleural mesothelioma (MARS 2): a phase 3 randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Extended pleurectomy decortication for complete macroscopic resection for pleural mesothelioma has never been evaluated in a randomised trial. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes after extended pleurectomy decortication plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone. METHODS: MARS 2 was a phase 3, national, multicentre, open-label, parallel two-group, pragmatic, superiority randomised controlled trial conducted in the UK. The trial took place across 26 hospitals (21 recruiting only, one surgical only, and four recruiting and surgical). Following two cycles of chemotherapy, eligible participants with pleural mesothelioma were randomly assigned (1:1) to surgery and chemotherapy or chemotherapy alone using a secure web-based system. Individuals aged 16 years or older with resectable pleural mesothelioma and adequate organ and lung function were eligible for inclusion. Participants in the chemotherapy only group received two to four further cycles of chemotherapy, and participants in the surgery and chemotherapy group received pleurectomy decortication or extended pleurectomy decortication, followed by two to four further cycles of chemotherapy. It was not possible to mask allocation because the intervention was a major surgical procedure. The primary outcome was overall survival, defined as time from randomisation to death from any cause. Analyses were done on the intention-to-treat population for all outcomes, unless specified. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02040272, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between June 19, 2015, and Jan 21, 2021, of 1030 assessed for eligibility, 335 participants were randomly assigned (169 to surgery and chemotherapy, and 166 to chemotherapy alone). 291 (87%) participants were men and 44 (13%) women, and 288 (86%) were diagnosed with epithelioid mesothelioma. At a median follow-up of 22·4 months (IQR 11·3-30·8), median survival was shorter in the surgery and chemotherapy group (19·3 months [IQR 10·0-33·7]) than in the chemotherapy alone group (24·8 months [IQR 12·6-37·4]), and the difference in restricted mean survival time at 2 years was -1·9 months (95% CI -3·4 to -0·3, p=0·019). There were 318 serious adverse events (grade ≥3) in the surgery group and 169 in the chemotherapy group (incidence rate ratio 3·6 [95% CI 2·3 to 5·5], p<0·0001), with increased incidence of cardiac (30 vs 12; 3·01 [1·13 to 8·02]) and respiratory (84 vs 34; 2·62 [1·58 to 4·33]) disorders, infection (124 vs 53; 2·13 [1·36 to 3·33]), and additional surgical or medical procedures (15 vs eight; 2·41 [1·04 to 5·57]) in the surgery group. INTERPRETATION: Extended pleurectomy decortication was associated with worse survival to 2 years, and more serious adverse events for individuals with resectable pleural mesothelioma, compared with chemotherapy alone. FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (15/188/31), Cancer Research UK Feasibility Studies Project Grant (A15895).

Combination of calretinin, MALAT1, and GAS5 as a potential prognostic biomarker to predict disease progression in surgically treated mesothelioma patients.

BACKGROUND: The role of cytoreductive surgery for epithelioid pleural mesothelioma within a multimodal treatment approach remains controversial. Carefully selected patients benefit from cytoreductive surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy, but there is no established biomarker to predict tumor recurrence or progression during the course of the disease. The aim of this study was to identify potential biomarkers to predict therapeutic response in terms of progression-free survival. METHODS: Between 03/2014 and 08/2022, preoperative blood samples were collected from 76 patients with epithelioid pleural mesothelioma who underwent cytoreductive surgery as part of a multimodal treatment approach. Identification of potential biomarkers was performed by determination of mesothelin and calretinin, as well as specific long non-coding RNAs and microRNAs. Receiver operating characteristic analysis, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, and Cox regression were used to assess the association between biomarker concentrations and patient recurrence status and survival. RESULTS: MALAT1, GAS5, and calretinin showed statistically significant increased biomarker levels in patients with recurrence in contrast to recurrence-free patients after surgical treatment (p < 0.0001, p = 0.0190, and p = 0.0068, respectively). The combination of the three biomarkers resulted in a sensitivity of 68 % and a specificity of 89 %. CONCLUSION: MALAT1, GAS5, and calretinin could be potential biomarkers for the prediction of tumor recurrence, improving the benefit from multimodal treatment including cytoreductive surgery.

Risk factors influencing postoperative pleural empyema in patients with pleural mesothelioma: a retrospective single-centre analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Postoperative empyema is a severe, potentially lethal complication also present, but poorly studied in patients undergoing surgery for pleural mesothelioma. We aimed to analyse which perioperative characteristics might be associated with an increased risk for postoperative empyema. METHODS: From September 1999 to February 2023 a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients undergoing surgery for pleural mesothelioma at the University Hospital of Zurich was performed. Uni- and multivariable logistic regression was used to identify associated risk factors of postoperative empyema after surgery. RESULTS: A total of 400 PM patients were included in the analysis, of which n = 50 patients developed empyema after surgery (12.5%). Baseline demographics were comparable between patients with (Eyes) and without empyema (Eno). 39% (n = 156) patients underwent extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP), of whom 22% (n = 35) developed postoperative pleural empyema; 6% (n = 15) of the remaining 244 patients undergoing pleurectomy and decortication (n = 46), extended pleurectomy and decortication (n = 114), partial pleurectomy (n = 54) or explorative thoracotomy (n = 30) resulted in postoperative empyema. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, EPP (odds ratio 2.8, 95% confidence interval 1.5-5.4, P = 0.002) emerged as the only risk factor associated with postoperative empyema when controlled for smoking status. Median overall survival was significantly worse for Eyes (16 months, interquartile range 5-27 months) than for Eno (18 months, interquartile range 8-35 months). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing EPP had a significantly higher risk of developing postoperative pleural empyema compared to patients undergoing other surgery types. Survival of patients with empyema was significantly shorter.

Impact of Operation on Disease Progression and Survival of Patients With Pleural Mesothelioma.

BACKGROUND: The effects of surgery on the survival of patients with pleural mesothelioma remain poorly understood. We compared the therapeutic outcomes of patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy, followed by surgery or refusing surgery, for pleural mesothelioma. METHODS: This retrospective study included consecutive patients who were eligible for curative-intent surgery after 3 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with platinum plus pemetrexed at our hospital during January 2011 to December 2021. Patients were divided into 2 groups. The surgery group comprised patients who underwent curative-intent surgery for pleural mesothelioma. The refusal-of-surgery group comprised patients who were medically eligible for surgery but refused to consent to surgery. Overall survival and progression-free survival were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method with the generalized Wilcoxon test. RESULTS: Of the 296 eligible patients for the study, 272 underwent surgery and 24 refused surgery. During the surgery, 204 patients (75.0%), 43 (15.8%), and 25 (9.2%) underwent pleurectomy/decortication, extrapleural pneumonectomy, and exploratory thoracotomy, respectively. The median follow-up length was 28.4 months. The median overall survival periods were 40.7 months (95% CI, 32.2-45.6 months) for surgery and 23.6 months (95% CI, 15.2-43.0 months) for refusal of surgery (P = .03). The median progression-free survival periods were 20.2 months (95% CI, 17.0-22.5 months) for surgery and 12.9 months (95% CI, 8.3-16.8 months) for refusal of surgery (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Overall survival and progression-free survival were significantly better in surgery than in refusal of surgery. Surgery may improve the survival outcomes of patients with pleural mesothelioma.

Nivolumab in pretreated pleural mesothelioma: Results from an observational real-world study of patients treated within the AIFA 5% Fund.

BACKGROUND: Pleural mesothelioma is a rare cancer with a dismal prognosis and few therapeutic options, especially in the pretreated setting. Immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors as single agents yielded interesting results in refractory pleural mesothelioma, achieving a response rate between 10-20%, median progression-free survival of 2-5 months and median overall survival of 7-13 months. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective, multi-institutional study of pleural mesothelioma patients treated with nivolumab in second and further line was performed. The endpoints of the study are response rate, disease control rate, progression free survival and overall survival. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients with pleural mesothelioma treated with nivolumab in second and further line were enrolled at seven Italian institutions. The response rate was 8%, disease control rate was 37%, median progression free survival was 5.7 months (95% CI: 2.9-9.0) and median overall survival was 11.1 (95% CI 6.2-19.9) months. A higher neutrophils and neutrophils to lymphocytes ratio at baseline were associated with worse prognosis. CONCLUSION: Nivolumab as a single agent is fairly active in a cohort of unselected pretreated pleural mesothelioma patients. Further investigations on clinical and translational factors are needed to define which patient might benefit most from nivolumab treatment in pleural mesothelioma.

Pediatric, Adolescent and Young Adult (AYA) Peritoneal and Pleural Mesothelioma: A National Cancer Database Review.

PURPOSE: Malignant peritoneal and pleural mesothelioma are rare in young patients, with a paucity of data regarding clinical characteristics and outcomes. We aimed to describe the clinical characteristics, treatment strategies, and outcomes for pediatric and adolescent/young adult (AYA) patients. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for malignant peritoneal and pleural mesothelioma in pediatric and AYA patients (ages 0-39) from 2004 to 2019. Stratification was performed for pediatric (age 0-21) and young adult (age 22-39) patients. Chi-squared, multivariable cox regression, and Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed. RESULTS: We identified 570 total patients, 46 pediatric and 524 young adult, with mesothelioma (363 peritoneal and 207 pleural). There were significant differences in sex distribution as patients with peritoneal mesothelioma were more frequently female (63.1%). Patients with peritoneal mesothelioma were more likely to have radical surgery compared to pleural mesothelioma (56.7% v. 24.6%, respectively). A majority of patients with peritoneal and pleural mesothelioma received chemotherapy (66.4% and 61.4%, respectively). For peritoneal mesothelioma, surgical resection was associated with improved overall survival, whereas male sex, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and radiation were associated with worse overall survival. For pleural mesothelioma, intraoperative chemotherapy was associated with improved overall survival, whereas Black race was associated with worse overall survival. Mean overall survival was greater for patients with peritoneal mesothelioma (125 months) compared to those with pleural mesothelioma (69 months), which remained significant after stratification of pediatric and young adult patients. CONCLUSION: By analyzing a large cohort of pediatric and AYA mesothelioma, this study highlights clinical, prognostic, and survival differences between peritoneal and pleural disease. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III. TYPE OF STUDY: Retrospective.

Rate advancement measurement for lung cancer and pleural mesothelioma in asbestos-exposed workers.

INTRODUCTION: Exposure to asbestos increases the risk of lung cancer and mesothelioma. Few studies quantified the premature occurrence of these diseases in asbestos-exposed workers. Focus on premature disease onset (rate advancement or acceleration) can be useful in risk communication and for the evaluation of exposure impact. We estimated rate advancement for total mortality, lung cancer and pleural mesothelioma deaths, by classes of cumulative asbestos exposure in a pooled cohort of asbestos cement (AC) workers in Italy. METHOD: The cohort study included 12 578 workers from 21 cohorts, with 6626 deaths in total, 858 deaths from lung cancer and 394 from pleural malignant neoplasm (MN). Rate advancement was estimated by fitting a competitive mortality Weibull model to the hazard of death over time since first exposure (TSFE). RESULT: Acceleration time (AT) was estimated at different TSFE values. The highest level of cumulative exposure compared with the lowest, for pleural MN AT was 16.9 (95% CI 14.9 to 19.2) and 33.8 (95% CI 29.8 to 38.4) years at TSFE of 20 and 40 years, respectively. For lung cancer, it was 13.3 (95% CI 12.0 to 14.7) and 26.6 (95% CI 23.9 to 29.4) years, respectively. As for total mortality, AT was 3.35 (95% CI 2.98 to 3.71) years at 20 years TSFE, and 6.70 (95% CI 5.95 to 7.41) at 40 years TSFE. CONCLUSION: The current study observed marked rate advancement after asbestos exposure for lung cancer and pleural mesothelioma, as well as for total mortality.

Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in malignant pleural mesothelioma: prediction of outcome based on DCE-MRI measurements in patients undergoing cytotoxic chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) response rate to chemotherapy is low. The identification of imaging biomarkers that could help guide the most effective therapy approach for individual patients is highly desirable. Our aim was to investigate the dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MR parameters as predictors for progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with MPM treated with cisplatin-based chemotherapy. METHODS: Thirty-two consecutive patients with MPM were enrolled in this prospective study. Pretreatment and intratreatment DCE-MRI were scheduled in each patient. The DCE parameters were analyzed using the extended Tofts (ET) and the adiabatic approximation tissue homogeneity (AATH) model. Comparison analysis, logistic regression and ROC analysis were used to identify the predictors for the patient's outcome. RESULTS: Patients with higher pretreatment ET and AATH-calculated Ktrans and ve values had longer OS (P≤.006). Patients with a more prominent reduction in ET-calculated Ktrans and kep values during the early phase of chemotherapy had longer PFS (P =.008). No parameter was identified to predict PFS. Pre-treatment ET-calculated Ktrans was found to be an independent predictive marker for longer OS (P=.02) demonstrating the most favourable discrimination performance compared to other DCE parameters with an estimated sensitivity of 89% and specificity of 78% (AUC 0.9, 95% CI 0.74-0.98, cut off > 0.08 min-1). CONCLUSIONS: In the present study, higher pre-treatment ET-calculated Ktrans values were associated with longer OS. The results suggest that DCE-MRI might provide additional information for identifying MPM patients that may respond to chemotherapy.

New Era for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: Updates on Therapeutic Options.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare malignancy with few treatment options. Recent advances have led to US Food and Drug Administration approvals and changes in the standard of care with a novel biomedical device approved for use with platinum-pemetrexed, and also for immunotherapy agents to be included as a frontline treatment option in unresectable disease. Although predictive biomarkers for systemic therapy are not currently in use in clinical practice, it is essential to correctly identify the MPM histology to determine an optimal treatment plan. Patients with nonepithelioid MPM may have a greater magnitude of benefit to dual immunotherapy checkpoint inhibitors and this regimen should be preferred in the frontline setting for these patients. However, all patients with MPM can derive benefit from immunotherapy treatments, and these agents should ultimately be used at some point during their treatment journey. There are ongoing studies in the frontline unresectable setting that may further define the frontline therapy space, but a critical area of research will need to focus on the immunotherapy refractory population. This review article will describe the new developments in the areas of biology with genomics and chromothripsis, and also focus on updates in treatment strategies in radiology, surgery, radiation, and medical oncology with cellular therapies. These recent innovations are generating momentum to find better therapies for this disease.

Extrapleural Pneumonectomy Versus Pleurectomy/Decortication for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma.

BACKGROUND: Whether extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP) or extended pleurectomy/decortication (P/D) is the optimal resection for malignant pleural mesothelioma remains controversial. We therefore compared perioperative outcomes and long-term survival of patients who underwent EPP versus P/D. METHODS: Patients with the diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma who underwent either EPP or P/D from 2000 to 2019 were identified from our departmental database. Propensity score matching was performed to minimize potential confounders for EPP or P/D. Survival analysis was performed by the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox multivariable analysis. RESULTS: Of 282 patients, 187 (66%) underwent EPP and 95 (34%) P/D. Even with propensity score matching, perioperative mortality was significantly higher for EPP than for P/D (11% vs 0%; P = .031); when adjusted for perioperative mortality, median overall survival between EPP and P/D was 15 versus 22 months, respectively (P = .276). Cox multivariable analysis for the matched cohort identified epithelioid histology (hazard ratio [HR], 0.56; P = .029), macroscopic complete resection (HR, 0.41; P = .004), adjuvant radiation therapy (HR, 0.57; P = .019), and more recent operative years (HR, 0.93; P = .011)-but not P/D-to be associated with better survival. Asbestos exposure (HR, 2.35; P = .003) and pathologic nodal disease (HR, 1.61; P = .048) were associated with worse survival. CONCLUSIONS: In a multimodality treatment setting, P/D and EPP had comparable long-term oncologic outcomes, although P/D had much lower perioperative mortality. The goal of surgical cytoreduction should be macroscopic complete resection achieved by the safest operation a patient can tolerate.

Nivolumab versus placebo in patients with relapsed malignant mesothelioma (CONFIRM): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: No phase 3 trial has yet shown improved survival for patients with pleural or peritoneal malignant mesothelioma who have progressed following platinum-based chemotherapy. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of nivolumab, an anti-PD-1 antibody, in these patients. METHODS: This was a multicentre, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel group, randomised, phase 3 trial done in 24 hospitals in the UK. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, with histologically confirmed pleural or peritoneal mesothelioma, who had received previous first-line platinum-based chemotherapy and had radiological evidence of disease progression, were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive nivolumab at a flat dose of 240 mg every 2 weeks over 30 min intravenously or placebo until disease progression or a maximum of 12 months. The randomisation sequence was generated within an interactive web response system (Alea); patients were stratified according to epithelioid versus non-epithelioid histology and were assigned in random block sizes of 3 and 6. Participants and treating clinicians were masked to group allocation. The co-primary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival and overall survival, analysed according to the treatment policy estimand (an equivalent of the intention-to-treat principle). All patients who were randomly assigned were included in the safety population, reported according to group allocation. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03063450. FINDINGS: Between May 10, 2017, and March 30, 2020, 332 patients were recruited, of whom 221 (67%) were randomly assigned to the nivolumab group and 111 (33%) were assigned to the placebo group). Median follow-up was 11·6 months (IQR 7·2-16·8). Median progression-free survival was 3·0 months (95% CI 2·8-4·1) in the nivolumab group versus 1·8 months (1·4-2·6) in the placebo group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·67 [95% CI 0·53-0·85; p=0·0012). Median overall survival was 10·2 months (95% CI 8·5-12·1) in the nivolumab group versus 6·9 months (5·0-8·0) in the placebo group (adjusted HR 0·69 [95% CI 0·52-0·91]; p=0·0090). The most frequently reported grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were diarrhoea (six [3%] of 221 in the nivolumab group vs two [2%] of 111 in the placebo group) and infusion-related reaction (six [3%] vs none). Serious adverse events occurred in 90 (41%) patients in the nivolumab group and 49 (44%) patients in the placebo group. There were no treatment-related deaths in either group. INTERPRETATION: Nivolumab represents a treatment that might be beneficial to patients with malignant mesothelioma who have progressed on first-line therapy. FUNDING: Stand up to Cancer-Cancer Research UK and Bristol Myers Squibb.

Prediction modeling using routine clinical parameters to stratify survival in malignant pleural mesothelioma patients complicated with malignant pleural effusion.

BACKGROUND: Malignant pleural effusion (MPE) is common in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). The survival of patients with MPM and MPE is heterogeneous. The LENT and BRIMS scores using routine clinical parameters were developed to predict the survival of patients with unselected MPE and MPM, respectively. This study aimed to stratify the survival of selected MPM patients with MPE. METHODS: Data were collected from subjects diagnosed with MPM and MPE. The LENT and BRIMS scores were applied using a combination of clinical variables to stratify subjects and compare survival characteristics. RESULTS: In total, 101 patients with MPM complicated by MPE were included in the study. The median follow-up time was 71 months (interquartile range: 24-121 months). Overall median survival was 24 (interquartile range: 12-52 months). Based on the LENT score, the low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups accounted for 65.3% (66 cases), 34.7% (35 cases), and 0%, respectively. The cumulative survival rates of the two groups were statistically significant (p = 0.031). The area under the curve (AUC) of the LENT score was 0.662. Based on the BRIMS score, the first, second, third, and fourth risk groups accounted for 1.0% (1 case), 42.9% (35 cases), 28.7% (29 cases), and 19.4% (36 cases), respectively. Survival was significantly higher in patients in the risk groups 1 and 2 than in patients in the risk groups 3 and 4 (p  = 0.037). The AUC of the BRIMS score was 0.605. CONCLUSIONS: Using routinely available clinical variables, both LENT and BRIMS scores could stratify selected MPM and MPE patients into risk groups with statistically different survival.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma: clinical experience and prognostic value of derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and PD-L1 expression

Background Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare and aggressive tumor, with a poor prognosis. MPM needs to find prognostic factors of survival. We provided the management of patients with MPM and sought to determine whether pre-treatment levels of derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (dNLR) as well as PD-L1 expression were reliable prognostic factors of survival. Methods We conducted a single-institution retrospective study, including all patients with MPM treated at La Paz University Hospital between December 2009 and March 2018. Baseline disease, demographics, clinical data, treatment characteristics and complete blood cell counts were collected. We examined dNLR at baseline and data for PD-L1 expression were analyzed in tumor cells by immunohistochemistry. Results We included 25 patients. The median overall survival (OS) was 15.7 months (95% CI 11.3–20.0). 5 patients had a dNLR greater than 3 (20%). Patients with a dNLR greater than 3 had shorter median OS (8.5 months), than patients with a dNLR less than 3 (17.0 months), with statistically significant differences (p = 0.038). Ten patients (40%) had positive PD-L1 expression (≥ 1%). Patients with positive PD-L1 expression had shorter median OS (8.5 months) than patients with negative PDL1 expression (15.7 months), but without statistically significant association (p = 0.319). Conclusion The survival data obtained in our sample are consistent with those previously reported. Pretreatment levels of dNLR greater than 3 and positive PD-L1 expression could be significant prognostic factors for poor survival in patients with MPM. Further and prospective studies are needed to explore this relationship and to derive definitive conclusions (AU)

Gemcitabine with or without ramucirumab as second-line treatment for malignant pleural mesothelioma (RAMES): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: There is a preclinical rationale for inhibiting angiogenesis in mesothelioma. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of the anti-VEGFR-2 antibody ramucirumab combined with gemcitabine in patients with pretreated malignant pleural mesothelioma. METHODS: RAMES was a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial done at 26 hospitals in Italy. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, and histologically proven malignant pleural mesothelioma progressing during or after first-line treatment with pemetrexed plus platinum. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks plus either intravenous placebo (gemcitabine plus placebo group) or ramucirumab 10 mg/kg (gemcitabine plus ramucirumab group) on day 1 every 3 weeks, until tumour progression or unacceptable toxicity. Central randomisation was done according to a minimisation algorithm method, associated with a random element using the following stratification factors: ECOG performance status, age, histology, and first-line time-to-progression. The primary endpoint was overall survival, measured from the date of randomisation to the date of death from any cause. Efficacy analyses were assessed in all patients who had been correctly randomised and received their allocated treatment, and safety analyses were assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03560973, and with EudraCT, 2016-001132-36. FINDINGS: Between Dec 22, 2016, and July 30, 2018, of 165 patients enrolled 161 were correctly assigned and received either gemcitabine plus placebo (n=81) or gemcitabine plus ramucirumab (n=80). At database lock (March 8, 2020), with a median follow-up of 21·9 months (IQR 17·7-28·5), overall survival was longer in the ramucirumab group (HR 0·71, 70% CI 0·59-0·85; p=0·028). Median overall survival was 13·8 months (70% CI 12·7-14·4) in the gemcitabine plus ramucirumab group and 7·5 months (6·9-8·9) in the gemcitabine plus placebo group. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 35 (44%) of 80 patients in the gemcitabine plus ramucirumab group and 24 (30%) of 81 in the gemcitabine plus placebo group. The most common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (16 [20%] for gemcitabine plus ramucirumab vs ten [12%] for gemcitabine plus placebo) and hypertension (five [6%] vs none). Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in five (6%) in the gemcitabine plus ramucirumab group and in four (5%) patients in the gemcitabine plus placebo group; the most common was thromboembolism (three [4%] for gemcitabine plus ramucirumab vs two [2%] for gemcitabine plus placebo). There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Ramucirumab plus gemcitabine significantly improved overall survival after first-line standard chemotherapy, with a favourable safety profile. This combination could be a new option in this setting. FUNDING: Eli Lilly Italy. TRANSLATION: For the Italian translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

The use of a next-generation sequencing-derived machine-learning risk-prediction model (OncoCast-MPM) for malignant pleural mesothelioma: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Current risk stratification for patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma based on disease stage and histology is inadequate. For some individuals with early-stage epithelioid tumours, a good prognosis by current guidelines can progress rapidly; for others with advanced sarcomatoid cancers, a poor prognosis can progress slowly. Therefore, we aimed to develop and validate a machine-learning tool-known as OncoCast-MPM-that could create a model for patient prognosis. METHODS: We did a retrospective study looking at malignant pleural mesothelioma tumours using next-generation sequencing from the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center-Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets (MSK-IMPACT). We collected clinical, pathological, and routine next-generation sequencing data from consecutive patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma treated at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (New York, NY, USA), as well as the MSK-IMPACT data. Together, these data comprised the MSK-IMPACT cohort. Using OncoCast-MPM, an open-source, web-accessible, machine-learning risk-prediction model, we integrated available data to create risk scores that stratified patients into low-risk and high-risk groups. Risk stratification of the MSK-IMPACT cohort was then validated using publicly available malignant pleural mesothelioma data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (ie, the TCGA cohort). FINDINGS: Between Feb 15, 2014, and Jan 28, 2019, we collected MSK-IMPACT data from the tumour tissue of 194 patients in the MSK-IMPACT cohort. The median overall survival was higher in the low-risk group than in the high-risk group as determined by OncoCast-MPM (30·8 months [95% CI 22·7-36·2] vs 13·9 months [10·7-18·0]; hazard ratio [HR] 3·0 [95% CI 2·0-4·5]; p<0·0001). No single factor or gene alteration drove risk differentiation. OncoCast-MPM was validated against the TCGA cohort, which consisted of 74 patients. The median overall survival was higher in the low-risk group than in the high-risk group (23·6 months [95% CI 15·1-28·4] vs 13·6 months [9·8-17·9]; HR 2·3 [95% CI 1·3-3·8]; p=0·0019). Although stage-based risk stratification was unable to differentiate survival among risk groups at 3 years in the MSK-IMPACT cohort (31% for early-stage disease vs 30% for advanced-stage disease; p=0·90), the OncoCast-MPM-derived 3-year survival was significantly higher in the low-risk group than in the high-risk group (40% vs 7%; p=0·0052). INTERPRETATION: OncoCast-MPM generated accurate, individual patient-level risk assessment scores. After prospective validation with the TCGA cohort, OncoCast-MPM might offer new opportunities for enhanced risk stratification of patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma in clinical trials and drug development. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health/National Cancer Institute.

RRM1 and ERCC1 as biomarkers in patients with locally advanced and metastatic malignant pleural mesothelioma treated with continuous infusion of low-dose gemcitabine plus cisplatin.

BACKGROUND: Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare but aggressive neoplasia that usually presents at advanced stages. Even though some advances have been achieved in the management of patients with MPM, this malignancy continuous to impose a deleterious prognosis for affected patients (12-18 months as median survival, and 5-10% 5-year survival rate), accordingly, the recognition of biomarkers that allow us to select the most appropriate therapy are necessary. METHODS: Immunohistochemistry semi-quantitative analysis was performed to evaluate four different biomarkers (ERCC1, RRM1, RRM2, and hENT-1) with the intent to explore if any of them was useful to predict response to treatment with continuous infusion gemcitabine plus cisplatin. Tissue biopsies from patients with locally advanced or metastatic MPM were analyzed to quantitatively asses the aforementioned biomarkers. Every included patient received treatment with low-dose gemcitabine (250 mg/m2) in a 6-h continuous infusion plus cisplatin 35 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks as first-line therapy. RESULTS: From the 70 eligible patients, the mean and standard deviation (SD) for ERCC1, RRM1, RRM2 and hENT-1 were 286,178.3 (± 219, 019.8); 104,647.1 (± 65, 773.4); 4536.5 (± 5, 521.3); and 2458.7 (± 4, 983.4), respectively. Patients with high expression of RRM1 had an increased median PFS compared with those with lower expression (9.5 vs 4.8 months, p = < 0.001). Furthermore, high expression of RRM1 and ERCC1 were associated with an increased median OS compared with their lower expression counterparts; [(23.1 vs 7.2 months for RRM1 p = < 0.001) and (17.4 vs 9.8 months for ERCC1 p = 0.018)]. CONCLUSIONS: ERCC1 and RRM1 are useful biomarkers that predict better survival outcomes in patients with advanced MPM treated with continuous infusion of gemcitabine plus cisplatin.