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).

Pegargiminase Plus First-Line Chemotherapy in Patients With Nonepithelioid Pleural Mesothelioma: The ATOMIC-Meso Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Arginine deprivation using ADI-PEG20 (pegargiminase) combined with chemotherapy is untested in a randomized study among patients with cancer. ATOMIC-Meso (ADI-PEG20 Targeting of Malignancies Induces Cytotoxicity-Mesothelioma) is a pivotal trial comparing standard first-line chemotherapy plus pegargiminase or placebo in patients with nonepithelioid pleural mesothelioma. Objective: To determine the effect of pegargiminase-based chemotherapy on survival in nonepithelioid pleural mesothelioma, an arginine-auxotrophic tumor. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a phase 2-3, double-blind randomized clinical trial conducted at 43 centers in 5 countries that included patients with chemotherapy-naive nonepithelioid pleural mesothelioma from August 1, 2017, to August 15, 2021, with at least 12 months' follow-up. Final follow-up was on August 15, 2022. Data analysis was performed from March 2018 to June 2023. Intervention: Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive weekly intramuscular pegargiminase (36.8 mg/m2) or placebo. All patients received intravenous pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) and platinum (75-mg/m2 cisplatin or carboplatin area under the curve 5) chemotherapy every 3 weeks up to 6 cycles. Pegargiminase or placebo was continued until progression, toxicity, or 24 months. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was overall survival, and secondary end points were progression-free survival and safety. Response rate by blinded independent central review was assessed in the phase 2 portion only. Results: Among 249 randomized patients (mean [SD] age, 69.5 [7.9] years; 43 female individuals [17.3%] and 206 male individuals [82.7%]), all were included in the analysis. The median overall survival was 9.3 months (95% CI, 7.9-11.8 months) with pegargiminase-chemotherapy as compared with 7.7 months (95% CI, 6.1-9.5 months) with placebo-chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] for death, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.55-0.93; P = .02). The median progression-free survival was 6.2 months (95% CI, 5.8-7.4 months) with pegargiminase-chemotherapy as compared with 5.6 months (95% CI, 4.1-5.9 months) with placebo-chemotherapy (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.46-0.90; P = .02). Grade 3 to 4 adverse events with pegargiminase occurred in 36 patients (28.8%) and with placebo in 21 patients (16.9%); drug hypersensitivity and skin reactions occurred in the experimental arm in 3 patients (2.4%) and 2 patients (1.6%), respectively, and none in the placebo arm. Rates of poststudy treatments were comparable in both arms (57 patients [45.6%] with pegargiminase vs 58 patients [46.8%] with placebo). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of arginine depletion with pegargiminase plus chemotherapy, survival was extended beyond standard chemotherapy with a favorable safety profile in patients with nonepithelioid pleural mesothelioma. Pegargiminase-based chemotherapy as a novel antimetabolite strategy for mesothelioma validates wider clinical testing in oncology. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02709512.

PD-1-expressing macrophages and CD8 T cells are independent predictors of clinical benefit from PD-1 inhibition in advanced mesothelioma.

BACKGROUND: Few tissue biomarkers exist to date that could enrich patient with cancer populations to benefit from immune checkpoint blockade by programmed cell death protein 1/ligand-1 (PD-/L-1) inhibitors. PD-L1 expression has value in this context in some tumor types but is an imperfect predictor of clinical benefit. In malignant pleural mesothelioma, PD-L1 expression is not predictive of the benefit from PD-1 blockade. We aimed to identify novel markers in malignant pleural mesothelioma to select patients better. METHODS: We performed a multiplex-immune histochemistry analysis of tumor samples from the phase III PROMISE-meso study, which randomized 144 pretreated patients to receive either pembrolizumab or standard second-line chemotherapy. Our panel focused on CD8+T cell, CD68+macrophages, and the expression of PD-1 and PD-L1 on these and cancer cells. We analyzed single and double positive cells within cancer tissues (infiltrating immune cells) and in the stroma. In addition, we performed cell neighborhood analysis. The cell counts were compared with clinical outcomes, including responses, progression-free and overall survivals. RESULTS: We confirmed the absence of predictive value for PD-L1 in this cohort of patients. Furthermore, total CD8 T cells, CD68+macrophages, or inflammatory subtypes (desert, excluded, inflamed) did not predict outcomes. In contrast, PD-1-expressing CD8+T cells (exhausted T cells) and PD-1-expressing CD68+macrophages were both independent predictors of progression-free survival benefit from pembrolizumab. Patients with tumors simultaneously harboring PD1+T cells and PD-1+macrophages benefited the most from immune therapy. CONCLUSION: We analyzed a large cohort of patients within a phase III study and found that not only PD-1+CD8 T cells but also PD-1+CD68+ macrophages are predictive. This data provides evidence for the first time for the existence of PD-1+macrophages in mesothelioma and their clinical relevance for immune checkpoint blockade.

A prognostic score for patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) receiving second-line immunotherapy or chemotherapy in the ETOP 9-15 PROMISE-meso phase III trial.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical and laboratory parameters associated with response for patients with advanced pre-treated malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) are lacking. We aimed to identify prognostic and predictive markers among patients with relapsed MPM who were randomised into the ETOP 9-15 PROMISE-meso phase III trial, evaluating pembrolizumab and chemotherapy. METHODS: Baseline clinical and laboratory parameters were investigated for prognostic or predictive value on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in a retrospective analysis, based on the full cohort of 144 MPM patients. These consisted of immune-inflammatory indexes (neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio [NLR], systemic immune-inflammatory index [SII], lactate dehydrogenase [LDH]) along with other already known prognostic baseline characteristics and laboratory values. Cut-offs were chosen independently of outcome. Based on Cox multivariable analysis for PFS in the whole cohort, a risk factor model was built to illustrate the prognostic stratification of patients by the combination of the derived independent prognostic factors, taking into account the EORTC score, a validated prognostic score in MPM. All models were stratified by histology and adjusted by treatment. RESULTS: In the stratified multivariable analysis in the whole cohort, high SII (hazard ratio (HR) 2.06; 95%CI 1.39-3.05) and low haemoglobin (HR 1.62; 95%CI 1.06-2.50) were associated with worse PFS. Based on these two prognostic factors, a mesothelioma risk score (MRS) was constructed with three PFS risk prognosis categories: favourable, intermediate and poor with 0, 1 and 2 risk factors, respectively (corresponding percent of cohort: 24%, 34% and 42% and median PFS: 5.8, 4.2 and 2.1 months). The derived MRS stratified the prognosis for PFS and OS, overall and within each of the EORTC groups. No significant predictors of treatment benefit were identified. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed MRS is prognostic of patient outcome and it fine-tunes the prognosis of patients with pre-treated MPM alone or when used with the already established EORTC score.

Mesothelioma and Radical Surgery 2 (MARS 2): protocol for a multicentre randomised trial comparing (extended) pleurectomy decortication versus no (extended) pleurectomy decortication for patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma.

INTRODUCTION: Mesothelioma remains a lethal cancer. To date, systemic therapy with pemetrexed and a platinum drug remains the only licensed standard of care. As the median survival for patients with mesothelioma is 12.1 months, surgery is an important consideration to improve survival and/or quality of life. Currently, only two surgical trials have been performed which found that neither extensive (extra-pleural pneumonectomy) or limited (partial pleurectomy) surgery improved survival (although there was some evidence of improved quality of life). Therefore, clinicians are now looking to evaluate pleurectomy decortication, the only radical treatment option left. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The MARS 2 study is a UK multicentre open parallel group randomised controlled trial comparing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of surgery-(extended) pleurectomy decortication-versus no surgery for the treatment of pleural mesothelioma. The study will test the hypothesis that surgery and chemotherapy is superior to chemotherapy alone with respect to overall survival. Secondary outcomes include health-related quality of life, progression-free survival, measures of safety (adverse events) and resource use to 2 years. The QuinteT Recruitment Intervention is integrated into the trial to optimise recruitment. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Research ethics approval was granted by London - Camberwell St. Giles Research Ethics Committee (reference 13/LO/1481) on 7 November 2013. We will submit the results for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: ISRCTN-ISRCTN44351742 and ClinicalTrials.gov-NCT02040272.

Pain and Anxiety Experienced by Patients Following Placement of a Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy.

BACKGROUND: Abdominal pain following percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement is a recognized complication. However, the prevalence and degree of severity of pain are poorly characterized. We assessed abdominal pain and anxiety levels associated with PEG placement in communicative and noncommunicative patients. METHODS: A prospective questionnaire assessed patients' anxiety and abdominal pain 1 hour before, 1 hour after, and 24 hours after PEG placement using 11-point Likert-type scales. Patients were followed up until pain had resolved. Procedural data, analgesia requirements, and complications were recorded. For analysis, patients were divided into 2 groups: communicative (able to self-assess) and noncommunicative (clinician assessed). RESULTS: Seventy consecutive patients were assessed. Of the 49 self-assessed patients, 11 (22%) reported immediate pain, 32 (65%) reported pain at 1 hour (24 mild, 5 moderate, 3 severe), and 40 (82%) reported pain at 24 hours. Pain most commonly lasted between 24 and 48 hours (25 patients). Of the 21 clinician-assessed patients, only 1 was deemed to have pain, and this was at 24 hours. Four (6%) patients were admitted with pain. There was no relationship between preplacement anxiety scores and postplacement pain scores. DISCUSSION: Abdominal pain after PEG placement pain is common but resolved by 48 hours in most patients. In patients able to communicate, clinicians scored pain lower compared with patients' scores. It is likely that pain is not identified in patients unable to communicate. Patients need to be better informed about the possibility of postprocedural pain and routinely offered access to appropriate analgesia.

Resveratrol attenuates cisplatin renal cortical cytotoxicity by modifying oxidative stress.

Cisplatin, a cancer chemotherapy drug, is nephrotoxic. The aim of this study was to investigate whether resveratrol (RES) reduced cisplatin cytotoxicity and oxidative stress. Rat renal cortical slices were pre-incubated 30min with 0 (VEH, ethanol) or 30µg/ml RES followed by 60, 90 or 120min co-incubation with 0, 75, or 150µg/ml cisplatin. Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) leakage was unchanged at 60 and 90min by cisplatin. Cisplatin increased (p<0.05) LDH leakage at 120min which was protected by RES. Cisplatin induced oxidative stress prior to LDH leakage as cisplatin depressed glutathione peroxidase and superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity, increased lipid peroxidation, protein carbonyls and 4-hydroxynonenal (4-HNE) adducted proteins within 60min. RES failed to reverse glutathione (GSH) depression by cisplatin. In order to eliminated an extracellular interaction between RES and cisplatin, additional studies (RINSE studies) allowed a 30min RES uptake into slices, transfer of slices to buffer lacking RES, followed by 120min cisplatin incubation. RES in the RINSE studies prevented LDH leakage by cisplatin indicating that RES protection was not via a physical interaction with cisplatin in the media. These findings indicate that RES diminished cisplatin in vitro renal toxicity and prevented the development of oxidative stress.