Pick Topic
Review Topic
List Experts
Examine Expert
Save Expert
  Site Guide ··   
Mesothelioma: HELP
Articles from New Jersey
Based on 14 articles published since 2008
||||

These are the 14 published articles about Mesothelioma that originated from New Jersey during 2008-2019.
 
+ Citations + Abstracts
1 Review Modification of existing patient-reported outcome measures: qualitative development of the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MDASI-MPM). 2018

Williams, Loretta A / Whisenant, Meagan S / Mendoza, Tito R / Haq, Shireen / Keating, Karen N / Cuffel, Brian / Cleeland, Charles S. ·Department of Symptom Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Unit 1450, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. loriwilliams@mdanderson.org. · Department of Symptom Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Unit 1450, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. · Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, 100 Bayer Boulevard, Whippany, NJ, 07981, USA. ·Qual Life Res · Pubmed #30187393.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive cancer of the lung pleura. The MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI) is a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure of symptom burden, the combined impact of disease-related and treatment-related symptoms on functioning. Validated PRO measures may require modification for use in specific study populations. We sought to modify the MDASI for patients with MPM and create a fit-for-purpose symptom-burden measure for use in a clinical trial, according to US Food and Drug Administration guidance on PRO utilization to support labeling claims. METHODS: A literature review for MPM symptoms was conducted. Patients with MPM were qualitatively interviewed about experiences of disease and treatment. Descriptive analysis identified symptoms and interference with functioning to define MPM-related symptom burden. An expert panel rated the relevance of identified symptoms to patients with MPM. Patients who received the investigational drug in a previous Phase I study were interviewed for drug-specific symptoms. RESULTS: Literature review and interviews of 20 patients identified 31 MPM-related symptoms. A conceptual model of MPM-related symptom burden was developed. After expert-panel relevance review, five MPM-specific items and the 13 core MDASI symptoms met criteria for inclusion in a provisional MDASI-MPM for psychometric testing. Interviews with six patients identified six drug-specific symptoms; three were mentioned by multiple patients. Of these three, one was not in the core MDASI. CONCLUSIONS: The MDASI-MPM has established content validity and, with the addition of one symptom item, is ready for psychometric testing as fit-for-purpose for a clinical trial of an investigational agent.

2 Review Peritoneal Metastases from Malignant Mesothelioma. 2018

Li, Claire Yue / Alexander, H Richard. ·Department of Surgery, New York Presbyterian Hospital, 170 William Street, New York, NY 10038, USA. · Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Department of Surgery, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ, USA. Electronic address: richard.alexander@rutgers.edu. ·Surg Oncol Clin N Am · Pubmed #29935688.

ABSTRACT: Diffuse malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare cancer that is ultimately fatal in almost all afflicted individuals. Morbidity and mortality from MPM is due to its propensity to progress locoregionally within the abdominal cavity. Patients with MPM most commonly present with nonspecific abdominal symptoms that usually lead to diagnosis when the condition is relatively advanced. MPM is considered a chemotherapy-resistant malignancy.

3 Review Current Management and Future Opportunities for Peritoneal Metastases: Peritoneal Mesothelioma. 2018

Alexander, H Richard / Li, Claire Yue / Kennedy, Timothy J. ·The Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey and the Department of Surgery, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ, USA. hrichardalexander@gmail.com. · The Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey and the Department of Surgery, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ, USA. ·Ann Surg Oncol · Pubmed #29423664.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: Diffuse malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare and ultimately fatal cancer that was first described just over a century ago. It is a diffuse malignancy arising from the mesothelial lining of the peritoneum; morbidity and mortality from MPM is due to its propensity to progress locoregionally within the abdominal cavity. METHODS: The purpose of this article is to review the current state-of-the-science related to the diagnosis, staging, and treatment of MPM. RESULTS: The condition afflicts men and women equally and the peak incidence is between 55 and 60 years of age although it can arise in the young and elderly. Patients afflicted with MPM most commonly present with nonspecific abdominal symptoms that usually lead to diagnosis when the condition is relatively advanced. Historically, median overall survival for MPM patients without treatment is < 1 year. The couplet of systemic pemetrexed and cisplatin has an overall response rate of approximately 25% and a median overall survival of approximately 1 year. CONCLUSION: The available data, almost all retrospective in nature, have shown that in selected patients, operative cytoreduction (CRS) and regional chemotherapy administered as hyperthermic intraoperative peritoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) or early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC) is associated with long-term survival. Studies on the molecular biology of MPM have yielded new insights relating to the potentially important role of the phosphoinsitide-3-kinase/mammalian target of rapamycin (PI3 K/mTOR) pathways and immune checkpoint inhibitors that may translate into new therapeutic options for patients with diffuse MPM.

4 Review Assessing Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes in Solid Tumors: A Practical Review for Pathologists and Proposal for a Standardized Method from the International Immuno-Oncology Biomarkers Working Group: Part 2: TILs in Melanoma, Gastrointestinal Tract Carcinomas, Non-Small Cell Lung Carcinoma and Mesothelioma, Endometrial and Ovarian Carcinomas, Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck, Genitourinary Carcinomas, and Primary Brain Tumors. 2017

Hendry, Shona / Salgado, Roberto / Gevaert, Thomas / Russell, Prudence A / John, Tom / Thapa, Bibhusal / Christie, Michael / van de Vijver, Koen / Estrada, M V / Gonzalez-Ericsson, Paula I / Sanders, Melinda / Solomon, Benjamin / Solinas, Cinzia / Van den Eynden, Gert G G M / Allory, Yves / Preusser, Matthias / Hainfellner, Johannes / Pruneri, Giancarlo / Vingiani, Andrea / Demaria, Sandra / Symmans, Fraser / Nuciforo, Paolo / Comerma, Laura / Thompson, E A / Lakhani, Sunil / Kim, Seong-Rim / Schnitt, Stuart / Colpaert, Cecile / Sotiriou, Christos / Scherer, Stefan J / Ignatiadis, Michail / Badve, Sunil / Pierce, Robert H / Viale, Giuseppe / Sirtaine, Nicolas / Penault-Llorca, Frederique / Sugie, Tomohagu / Fineberg, Susan / Paik, Soonmyung / Srinivasan, Ashok / Richardson, Andrea / Wang, Yihong / Chmielik, Ewa / Brock, Jane / Johnson, Douglas B / Balko, Justin / Wienert, Stephan / Bossuyt, Veerle / Michiels, Stefan / Ternes, Nils / Burchardi, Nicole / Luen, Stephen J / Savas, Peter / Klauschen, Frederick / Watson, Peter H / Nelson, Brad H / Criscitiello, Carmen / O'Toole, Sandra / Larsimont, Denis / de Wind, Roland / Curigliano, Giuseppe / André, Fabrice / Lacroix-Triki, Magali / van de Vijver, Mark / Rojo, Federico / Floris, Giuseppe / Bedri, Shahinaz / Sparano, Joseph / Rimm, David / Nielsen, Torsten / Kos, Zuzana / Hewitt, Stephen / Singh, Baljit / Farshid, Gelareh / Loibl, Sibylle / Allison, Kimberly H / Tung, Nadine / Adams, Sylvia / Willard-Gallo, Karen / Horlings, Hugo M / Gandhi, Leena / Moreira, Andre / Hirsch, Fred / Dieci, Maria V / Urbanowicz, Maria / Brcic, Iva / Korski, Konstanty / Gaire, Fabien / Koeppen, Hartmut / Lo, Amy / Giltnane, Jennifer / Rebelatto, Marlon C / Steele, Keith E / Zha, Jiping / Emancipator, Kenneth / Juco, Jonathan W / Denkert, Carsten / Reis-Filho, Jorge / Loi, Sherene / Fox, Stephen B. ·Departments of *Pathology §§§Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne †The Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology Departments of **Pathology ∥∥Medicine, University of Melbourne ¶¶Department of Anatomical Pathology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville #Department of Anatomical Pathology, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Fitzroy ††Department of Medical Oncology, Austin Health ‡‡Olivia Newton-John Cancer Research Institute, Heidelberg §§School of Cancer Medicine, La Trobe University, Bundoora §§§§§Centre for Clinical Research and School of Medicine, The University of Queensland ∥∥∥∥∥Pathology Queensland, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane §§§§§§§§§§The Cancer Research Program, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst ∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥Australian Clinical Labs, Bella Vista ‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡Directorate of Surgical Pathology, SA Pathology §§§§§§§§§§§§Discipline of Medicine, Adelaide University, Adelaide, Australia ***********Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute †††††††††††††Department of Pathology ##Divisions of Diagnostic Oncology & Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands ###Université Paris-Est ****INSERM, UMR 955 ††††Département de pathologie, APHP, Hôpital Henri-Mondor, Créteil ∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥Service de Biostatistique et d'Epidémiologie, Gustave Roussy, CESP, Inserm U1018, Université-Paris Sud, Université Paris-Saclay ¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶INSERM Unit U981, and Department of Medical Oncology, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif ##########Faculté de Médecine, Université Paris Sud, Kremlin-Bicêtre †††††††Department of Surgical Pathology and Biopathology, Jean Perrin Comprehensive Cancer Centre ‡‡‡‡‡‡‡University of Auvergne UMR1240, Clermont-Ferrand, France ‡‡‡‡Department of Medicine, Clinical Division of Oncology §§§§Institute of Neurology, Comprehensive Cancer Centre Vienna, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna ††††††††††††††Institute of Pathology, Medical University of Graz, Austria ∥∥∥∥European Institute of Oncology ¶¶¶¶School of Medicine ######Department of Pathology, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, University of Milan, Milan ¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, University of Padova #############Medical Oncology 2, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, Padua, Italy †††††Molecular Oncology Group, Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology, Barcelona †††††††††††Pathology Department, IIS-Fundacion Jimenez Diaz, UAM, Madrid, Spain §Department of Pathology and TCRU, GZA ¶¶¶Department of Pathology, GZA Ziekenhuizen, Antwerp ∥Laboratory of Experimental Urology, Department of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven ‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡Department of Pathology, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium ¶Department of Pathology, AZ Klina, Brasschaat ††††††Department of Pathology, GZA Ziekenhuizen, Sint-Augustinus, Wilrijk ∥∥∥Molecular Immunology Unit ‡‡‡‡‡‡Department of Medical Oncology, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles ‡Breast Cancer Translational Research Laboratory/Breast International Group, Institut Jules Bordet **************European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters *******Department of Pathology, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium §§§§§§§Department of Surgery, Kansai Medical School, Hirakata, Japan #######Severance Biomedical Science Institute and Department of Medical Oncology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea ∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥Tumor Pathology Department, Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center ¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶Institute of Oncology, Gliwice Branch, Gliwice, Poland ‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡Pathology and Tissue Analytics, Roche Innovation Centre Munich, Penzberg †††††††††Institute of Pathology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin ‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡VMscope GmbH, Berlin ¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶German Breast Group GmbH, Neu-Isenburg, Germany **********Trev & Joyce Deeley Research Centre, British Columbia Cancer Agency ††††††††††Department of Biochemistry and Microbiology, University of Victoria, Victoria Departments of ‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡Medical Genetics #########Pathology and Laboratory Medicine ¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Genetic Pathology Evaluation Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC ###########Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada §§§§§§§§§§§Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, Doha, Qatar ‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Rhode Island Hospital and Lifespan Medical Center §§§§§§§§Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence ¶¶¶¶¶National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Operations Center/NRG Oncology, Pittsburgh, PA †††Breast Cancer Research Program, Vanderbilt Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Departments of ‡‡‡Pathology, Microbiology and Immunology ########Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Centre *********Vanderbilt Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville §§§§§§§§§Department of Pathology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven ∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥Department of Oncology, Montefiore Medical Centre, Albert Einstein College of Medicine ∥∥∥∥∥∥∥Montefiore Medical Center ¶¶¶¶¶¶¶The Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY ********Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital #####Cancer Research Institute and Department of Pathology, Beth Israel Deaconess Cancer Center ******Harvard Medical School ¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶Division of Hematology-Oncology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center ††††††††Department of Cancer Biology ‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡‡Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA ∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO ‡‡‡‡‡Department of Cancer Biology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL ∥∥∥∥∥∥Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN ¶¶¶¶¶¶Cancer Immunotherapy Trials Network, Central Laboratory and Program in Immunology, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA ††††††††††††Department of Pathology, New York University Langone Medical Centre ############New York University Medical School *************Perlmutter Cancer Center §§§§§§§§§§§§§Pulmonary Pathology, New York University Center for Biospecimen Research and Development, New York University ***************Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center ####Departments of Radiation Oncology and Pathology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY *****Department of Pathology, University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX ∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥Pathology Department, Stanford University Medical Centre, Stanford ∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥∥Department of Pathology, Stanford University, Palo Alto ***Department of Pathology, School of Medicine, University of California, San Diego §§§§§§§§§§§§§§Research Pathology, Genentech Inc., South San Francisco, CA *************Laboratory of Pathology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda ¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶Translational Sciences, MedImmune, Gaithersberg, MD §§§§§§Academic Medical Innovation, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover ##############Translational Medicine, Merck & Co. Inc., Kenilworth, NJ. ·Adv Anat Pathol · Pubmed #28777143.

ABSTRACT: Assessment of the immune response to tumors is growing in importance as the prognostic implications of this response are increasingly recognized, and as immunotherapies are evaluated and implemented in different tumor types. However, many different approaches can be used to assess and describe the immune response, which limits efforts at implementation as a routine clinical biomarker. In part 1 of this review, we have proposed a standardized methodology to assess tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in solid tumors, based on the International Immuno-Oncology Biomarkers Working Group guidelines for invasive breast carcinoma. In part 2 of this review, we discuss the available evidence for the prognostic and predictive value of TILs in common solid tumors, including carcinomas of the lung, gastrointestinal tract, genitourinary system, gynecologic system, and head and neck, as well as primary brain tumors, mesothelioma and melanoma. The particularities and different emphases in TIL assessment in different tumor types are discussed. The standardized methodology we propose can be adapted to different tumor types and may be used as a standard against which other approaches can be compared. Standardization of TIL assessment will help clinicians, researchers and pathologists to conclusively evaluate the utility of this simple biomarker in the current era of immunotherapy.

5 Review Primary Peritoneal Mesothelioma Resulting in Small Bowel Obstruction: A Case Report and Review of Literature. 2015

Frontario, S Christopher N / Loveitt, Andrew / Goldenberg-Sandau, Anna / Liu, Jun / Roy, Darshan / Cohen, Larry W. ·Department of Surgery, Rowan University School of Osteopathic Medicine, Stratford, NJ, USA. · Department of Patholoy, Kennedy University Hospital, Cherry Hill, NJ, USA. · Department of Surgery, Kennedy University Hospital, Cherry Hill, NJ, USA. ·Am J Case Rep · Pubmed #26222965.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Peritoneal mesothelioma is a rare malignancy that affects the serosal surfaces of the peritoneum. The peritoneum is the second most common site of mesothelium affected following the pleura. The aggressive nature and vague presentation pose many obstacles in not only diagnosis but also the treatment of patients with this disease. CASE REPORT: We present a case of a 76-year-old woman who presented with small bowel obstruction secondary to carcinomatosis secondary to primary peritoneal mesothelioma. The patient had multiple risk factors with asbestos exposure and prior therapeutic radiation. CONCLUSIONS: We discuss the highly varied and elusive presentation of peritoneal mesothelioma. Cumulative asbestos exposure, either directly or indirectly, remains the leading cause of mesothelioma. However, there are other non-asbestos etiologies. Small bowel obstruction often is a late-presenting symptom of widespread tumor burden. A concise review of the current diagnostic and surgical treatment of primary peritoneal mesothelioma demonstrates that early diagnosis and implementation remains vital.

6 Clinical Trial Clinical safety and activity of pembrolizumab in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (KEYNOTE-028): preliminary results from a non-randomised, open-label, phase 1b trial. 2017

Alley, Evan W / Lopez, Juanita / Santoro, Armando / Morosky, Anne / Saraf, Sanatan / Piperdi, Bilal / van Brummelen, Emilie. ·Hematology and Oncology Division, Penn Presbyterian Medical Center, University of Pennsylvania Health System, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Electronic address: evan.alley@uphs.upenn.edu. · Drug Development Unit, Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK. · Humanitas Cancer Center, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy. · Merck, Kenilworth, NJ, USA. · Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands. ·Lancet Oncol · Pubmed #28291584.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Malignant pleural mesothelioma is a highly aggressive cancer with poor prognosis and few treatment options following progression on platinum-containing chemotherapy. We assessed the safety and efficacy of pembrolizumab (an anti-programmed cell death receptor 1 [PD-1] antibody) in advanced solid tumours expressing programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and report here on the interim analysis of the malignant pleural mesothelioma cohort. METHODS: Previously treated patients with PD-L1-positive malignant pleural mesothelioma were enrolled from 13 centres in six countries. Patients received pembrolizumab (10 mg/kg every 2 weeks) for up to 2 years or until confirmed progression or unacceptable toxicity. Key eligibility criteria included measurable disease, failure of standard therapy, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. PD-L1 positivity was defined as expression in 1% or more of tumour cells by immunohistochemistry. Response was assessed based on investigator review using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST; version 1.1). Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability, analysed in the all-patients-as-treated population, and objective response, analysed for the full-analysis set. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02054806, and is ongoing but not recruiting participants. FINDINGS: As of June 20, 2016, 25 patients received pembrolizumab. 16 (64%) patients reported a treatment-related adverse event; the most common adverse event were fatigue (six [24%]), nausea (six [24%]), and arthralgia (five [20%]). Five (20%) patients reported grade 3 treatment-related adverse events. Three (12%) patients required dose interruption because of immune-related adverse events: one (4%) of 25 each had grade 3 rhabdomyolysis and grade 2 hypothyroidism; grade 3 iridocyclitis, grade 1 erythema multiforme, and grade 3 erythema; and grade 2 infusion-related reaction. No treatment-related deaths or discontinuations occurred. Five (20%) patients had a partial response, for an objective response of 20% (95% CI 6·8-40·7), and 13 (52%) of 25 had stable disease. Responses were durable (median response duration 12·0 months [95% CI 3·7 to not reached]); two patients remained on treatment at data cutoff. INTERPRETATION: Pembrolizumab appears to be well tolerated and might confer anti-tumour activity in patients with PD-L1-positive malignant pleural mesothelioma. Response durability and efficacy in this patient population warrants further investigation. FUNDING: Merck.

7 Clinical Trial Pilot and Feasibility Trial Evaluating Immuno-Gene Therapy of Malignant Mesothelioma Using Intrapleural Delivery of Adenovirus-IFNα Combined with Chemotherapy. 2016

Sterman, Daniel H / Alley, Evan / Stevenson, James P / Friedberg, Joseph / Metzger, Susan / Recio, Adri / Moon, Edmund K / Haas, Andrew R / Vachani, Anil / Katz, Sharyn I / Sun, Jing / Heitjan, Daniel F / Hwang, Wei-Ting / Litzky, Leslie / Yearley, Jennifer H / Tan, Kay See / Papasavvas, Emmanouil / Kennedy, Paul / Montaner, Luis J / Cengel, Keith A / Simone, Charles B / Culligan, Melissa / Langer, Corey J / Albelda, Steven M. ·Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. · Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. · Division of Thoracic Surgery, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. · Department of Radiology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. · Department of Biostatistics & Epidemiology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. · Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. · Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, New Jersey. · Wistar Institute, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. · Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. · Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. albelda@mail.med.upenn.edu. ·Clin Cancer Res · Pubmed #26968202.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: "In situ vaccination" using immunogene therapy has the ability to induce polyclonal antitumor responses directed by the patient's immune system. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) received two intrapleural doses of a replication-defective adenoviral vector containing the human IFNα2b gene (Ad.IFN) concomitant with a 14-day course of celecoxib followed by chemotherapy. Primary outcomes were safety, toxicity, and objective response rate; secondary outcomes included progression-free and overall survival. Biocorrelates on blood and tumor were measured. RESULTS: Forty subjects were treated: 18 received first-line pemetrexed-based chemotherapy, 22 received second-line chemotherapy with pemetrexed (n = 7) or gemcitabine (n = 15). Treatment was generally well tolerated. The overall response rate was 25%, and the disease control rate was 88%. Median overall survival (MOS) for all patients with epithelial histology was 21 months versus 7 months for patients with nonepithelial histology. MOS in the first-line cohort was 12.5 months, whereas MOS for the second-line cohort was 21.5 months, with 32% of patients alive at 2 years. No biologic parameters were found to correlate with response, including numbers of activated blood T cells or NK cells, regulatory T cells in blood, peak levels of IFNα in blood or pleural fluid, induction of antitumor antibodies, nor an immune-gene signature in pretreatment biopsies. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of intrapleural Ad.IFN, celecoxib, and chemotherapy proved safe in patients with MPM. OS rate was significantly higher than historical controls in the second-line group. Results of this study support proceeding with a multicenter randomized clinical trial of chemo-immunogene therapy versus standard chemotherapy alone. Clin Cancer Res; 22(15); 3791-800. ©2016 AACR.

8 Clinical Trial Vorinostat in patients with advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma who have progressed on previous chemotherapy (VANTAGE-014): a phase 3, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial. 2015

Krug, Lee M / Kindler, Hedy L / Calvert, Hilary / Manegold, Christian / Tsao, Anne S / Fennell, Dean / Öhman, Ronny / Plummer, Ruth / Eberhardt, Wilfried E E / Fukuoka, Kazuya / Gaafar, Rabab M / Lafitte, Jean-Jacques / Hillerdal, Gunnar / Chu, Quincy / Buikhuisen, Wieneke A / Lubiniecki, Gregory M / Sun, Xing / Smith, Margaret / Baas, Paul. ·Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: krugl@mskcc.org. · University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. · University College London Cancer Institute, London, UK. · Heidelberg University Medical Center, Mannheim, Germany. · MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. · University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. · University Hospital of Skåne/Lund, Lund, Sweden. · Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. · University Hospital Essen, Ruhrlandklinik, University Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany. · Kinki University Faculty of Medicine, Osaka, Japan. · National Cancer Institute, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt. · Centre Hospitalier Regional Universitaire de Lille, Lille, France. · Karolinska Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. · Cross Cancer Institute/University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. · Netherlands Cancer Institute and the Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands. · Merck & Co, Kenilworth, NJ, USA. · Merck & Co, Kenilworth, NJ, USA; Sanofi US, Sanofi, Bridgewater, NJ, USA. · Cross Cancer Institute/University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada; The Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands. ·Lancet Oncol · Pubmed #25800891.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Vorinostat is a histone deacetylase inhibitor that changes gene expression and protein activity. On the basis of the clinical benefit reported in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma treated in a phase 1 study of vorinostat, we designed this phase 3 trial to investigate whether vorinostat given as a second-line or third-line therapy improved patients' overall survival. METHODS: This double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial was done in 90 international centres. Patients with measurable advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma and disease progression after one or two previous systemic regimens were eligible. After stratification for Karnofsky performance status, histology, and number of previous chemotherapy regimens, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by use of an interactive voice response system with a block size of four to either treatment with vorinostat or placebo. Patients received oral vorinostat 300 mg (or matching placebo) twice daily on days 1, 2, 3, 8, 9, 10, 15, 16, and 17 of a 21-day cycle. The primary endpoints were overall survival and safety and tolerability of vorinostat. The primary efficacy comparison was done in the intention-to-treat population, and safety and tolerability was assessed in the treated population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00128102. FINDINGS: From July 12, 2005, to Feb 14, 2011, 661 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either vorinostat (n=329) or placebo (n=332) and included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Median overall survival for vorinostat was 30·7 weeks (95% CI 26·7-36·1) versus 27·1 weeks (23·1-31·9) for placebo (hazard ratio 0·98, 95% CI 0·83-1·17, p=0·86). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events for patients treated with vorinostat were fatigue or malaise (51 [16%] patients in the vorinostat group vs 25 [8%] in the placebo group]) and dyspnoea (35 [11%] vs 45 [14%]). INTERPRETATION: In this randomised trial, vorinostat given as a second-line or third-line therapy did not improve overall survival and cannot be recommended as a therapy for patients with advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma. FUNDING: Merck & Co.

9 Clinical Trial Hemithoracic intensity modulated radiation therapy after pleurectomy/decortication for malignant pleural mesothelioma: toxicity, patterns of failure, and a matched survival analysis. 2015

Chance, William W / Rice, David C / Allen, Pamela K / Tsao, Anne S / Fontanilla, Hiral P / Liao, Zhongxing / Chang, Joe Y / Tang, Chad / Pan, Hubert Y / Welsh, James W / Mehran, Reza J / Gomez, Daniel R. ·Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. · Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. · Department of Thoracic/Head and Neck Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. · Princeton Radiation Oncology, Monroe Township, New Jersey. · Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. Electronic address: dgomez@mdanderson.org. ·Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys · Pubmed #25442335.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: To investigate safety, efficacy, and recurrence after hemithoracic intensity modulated radiation therapy after pleurectomy/decortication (PD-IMRT) and after extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP-IMRT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: In 2009-2013, 24 patients with mesothelioma underwent PD-IMRT to the involved hemithorax to a dose of 45 Gy, with an optional integrated boost; 22 also received chemotherapy. Toxicity was scored with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0. Pulmonary function was compared at baseline, after surgery, and after IMRT. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to calculate overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), time to locoregional failure, and time to distant metastasis. Failures were in-field, marginal, or out of field. Outcomes were compared with those of 24 patients, matched for age, nodal status, performance status, and chemotherapy, who had received EPP-IMRT. RESULTS: Median follow-up time was 12.2 months. Grade 3 toxicity rates were 8% skin and 8% pulmonary. Pulmonary function declined from baseline to after surgery (by 21% for forced vital capacity, 16% for forced expiratory volume in 1 second, and 19% for lung diffusion of carbon monoxide [P for all = .01]) and declined still further after IMRT (by 31% for forced vital capacity [P=.02], 25% for forced expiratory volume in 1 second [P=.01], and 30% for lung diffusion of carbon monoxide [P=.01]). The OS and PFS rates were 76% and 67%, respectively, at 1 year and 56% and 34% at 2 years. Median OS (28.4 vs 14.2 months, P=.04) and median PFS (16.4 vs 8.2 months, P=.01) favored PD-IMRT versus EPP-IMRT. No differences were found in grade 4-5 toxicity (0 of 24 vs 3 of 24, P=.23), median time to locoregional failure (18.7 months vs not reached, P not calculable), or median time to distant metastasis (18.8 vs 11.8 months, P=.12). CONCLUSIONS: Hemithoracic intensity modulated radiation therapy after pleurectomy/decortication produced little high-grade toxicity but led to progressive declines in pulmonary function; OS and PFS were better in PD-IMRT compared with EPP-IMRT.

10 Article Mesothelioid reaction following talc pleurodesis: a case report. 2017

Faynberg, Tatyana / Patel, Neha / Nayar, Amrit P / Shienbaum, Alan J. ·Department of Surgery, Rowan University School of Osteopathic Medicine, Stratford, NJ, USA. · Department of Surgery, Kennedy University Hospital, Cherry Hill, NJ, USA. · Department of Pathology, Rowan University School of Osteopathic Medicine, Stratford, NJ, USA. shienbaj@rowan.edu. · Department of Pathology, Kennedy University Hospital, Cherry Hill, NJ, USA. shienbaj@rowan.edu. ·Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg · Pubmed #28271362.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: Talc pleurodesis is a well-established procedure performed to obliterate the pleural space to prevent recurrent pleural effusion and/or recurrent pneumothorax. Pleurodesis is commonly accomplished by draining the pleural fluid, if present, followed by either a mechanical procedure, such as abrasion, pleurectomy, or instillation of a chemical irritant into the pleural space, which results in inflammation and fibrosis which obliterates the pleural space. The reported complications of talc pleurodesis are hypoxemia, hypotension, tachycardia, dyspnea, chest pain, and fever. CASE PRESENTATION: Herein, we present a case of a 43-year-old female patient who developed an intense mesothelioid reaction which occurred 7 years following talc pleurodesis. CONCLUSION: This case represents a unique mesothelioid reaction which became manifested several years after recurrent talc pleurodesis. Such a mesothelioid reaction can clinically and radiographically mimic malignant mesothelioma. We conclude that Talc pleurodesis played a causative role in this patient developing an intense mesothelioid reaction. A mesothelioid reaction should be included in the differential diagnosis in patients with pleural thickening/pleural plaque formation who have previously been treated with talc pleurodesis.

11 Article Analytical Transmission Electron Microscopy of Amphibole Fibers From the Lungs of Quebec Miners. 2015

Germine, Mark / Puffer, John H. ·a Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences Rutgers University , Newark , New Jersey , USA. ·Arch Environ Occup Health · Pubmed #25386835.

ABSTRACT: The objective of this study is to describe the morphology, molecular structure, and chemistry of amphibole fibers from lung samples from workers in the chrysotile mines at Asbestos and Thetford Mines, Quebec. A fibrous tremolite-actinolite contaminant in an asbestos ore sample from the deposit at Asbestos was used for comparison. Lattice imaging was performed using high-resolution transmission electron microscopy (HRTEM). Silica-rich amorphous coatings (SIRA) that may be related to carcinogenesis are noted on all of the HRTEM photographs of fibers retained in lung, but not on fiber surfaces of the bulk comparison sample. Fibers found in lung samples and in a bulk comparison sample are produced primarily by splitting of thicker crystals and, as such, might not be considered asbestos fibers on the basis of certain mineralogical criteria. Implications of SIRA coatings with respect to carcinogenesis are worthy of further study.

12 Article Leucovorin rescue allows effective high-dose pralatrexate treatment and an increase in therapeutic index in mesothelioma xenografts. 2014

Tedeschi, Philip M / Kathari, Yamini K / Farooqi, Iqra N / Bertino, Joseph R. ·Departments of Pharmacology and Medicine, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 195 Little Albany Street, New Brunswick, NJ, USA. ·Cancer Chemother Pharmacol · Pubmed #25205429.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: To investigate the ability of leucovorin (LV) to abrogate dose-limiting toxicities of pralatrexate (PDX) while maintaining efficacy, in vivo. METHODS: H2052 mesothelioma cells were treated with the antifolates methotrexate (MTX), PDX and pemetrexed, with and without LV rescue 24 h later. Cell killing was evaluated 48 h later. Female nude mice bearing H2052 xenografts were treated with varying doses and schedules of the antifolate PDX and LV. RESULTS: In vitro, H2052 cells were more sensitive to PDX as compared to MTX and pemetrexed. Administration of LV 24 h after antifolate treatment reduced efficacy of antifolates MTX and pemetrexed, but not PDX. In vivo, LV was found to reduce toxicity of PDX at the maximum tolerated dose without sacrificing efficacy. Lethal doses of PDX were rescued by LV, and mice bearing the H2052 tumor demonstrated prolonged and enhanced tumor regression. CONCLUSIONS: High-dose PDX with subsequent LV rescue may be a viable treatment strategy in mesothelioma and other cancers. The inclusion of LV rescue into new and existing PDX treatment protocols should be explored as a way to expand the tolerability and effectiveness of PDX in the clinic.

13 Article Mesothelioma in occupational cohort studies: methodological considerations. 2014

Wojcik, Nancy C / Schnatter, A Robert / Huebner, Wendy W. ·From ExxonMobil Biomedical Sciences, Inc (Ms Wojcik and Dr Schnatter), Epidemiology & Health Surveillance, Annandale, NJ · and Independent Consultant, Epidemiologist (Dr Huebner), Montclair, NJ. ·J Occup Environ Med · Pubmed #24351897.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: This article describes effective strategies for the identification and valid assessment of mortality due to mesothelioma. METHODS: We manually reviewed all death certificates for mention of mesothelioma for all International Classification of Diseases (ICD) revisions. We tested the accuracy of our ascertainment method by comparing New Jersey death certificate data from our health status registry with histologically confirmed cases from the New Jersey State Cancer Registry. RESULTS: We found reasonably good agreement between death certificate diagnoses and histologically confirmed cases, κ coefficient 0.86 (95% confidence interval, 0.76 to 0.95). Most mesothelioma deaths in our test and North American cohorts were coded to unspecified anatomical sites. CONCLUSIONS: Limiting ascertainment to pleura and peritoneum ICD codes underestimates mesothelioma deaths. Reviewing all ICD codes that could contain mesothelioma is the only effective method for complete capture of mesothelioma diagnoses.

14 Article Primary malignant pericardial mesothelioma presenting as effusive-constrictive pericarditis. 2011

Sharma, Parikshit S / Katechis, Dennis. ·Englewood Hospital Medical Center, Englewood, New Jersey USA. psharma.doc@gmail.com ·J Invasive Cardiol · Pubmed #21828406.

ABSTRACT: Effusive-constrictive pericarditis is a clinical hemodynamic syndrome characterized by constriction of the heart by the visceral pericardium in the presence of a tense pericardial effusion. The hallmark of effusive-constrictive pericarditis is the persistence of elevated right atrial pressures and ventricular interdependence after relief of the elevated intrapericardial pressures. The present report discusses the unique case of a 46-year-old white female who presented with dyspnea on exertion and chest tightness in the setting of an effusive-constrictive pericarditis. The patient was subsequently diagnosed with primary malignant pericardial mesothelioma, an extremely rare neoplasm with a very poor prognosis.