Looking Beyond Clinical Trials for Mesothelioma TreatmentResearch & Clinical Trials
Written by Tim Povtak
Asbestos.com is the nation’s most trusted mesothelioma resource
The Mesothelioma Center at Asbestos.com has provided patients and their loved ones the most updated and reliable information on mesothelioma and asbestos exposure since 2006.
Our team of Patient Advocates includes a medical doctor, a registered nurse, health services administrators, veterans, VA-accredited Claims Agents, an oncology patient navigator and hospice care expert. Their combined expertise means we help any mesothelioma patient or loved one through every step of their cancer journey.
More than 30 contributors, including mesothelioma doctors, survivors, health care professionals and other experts, have peer-reviewed our website and written unique research-driven articles to ensure you get the highest-quality medical and health information.
About The Mesothelioma Center at Asbestos.com
- Assisting mesothelioma patients and their loved ones since 2006.
- Helps more than 50% of mesothelioma patients diagnosed annually in the U.S.
- A+ rating from the Better Business Bureau.
- 5-star reviewed mesothelioma and support organization.
My family has only the highest compliment for the assistance and support that we received from The Mesothelioma Center. This is a staff of compassionate and knowledgeable individuals who respect what your family is experiencing and who go the extra mile to make an unfortunate diagnosis less stressful. Information and assistance were provided by The Mesothelioma Center at no cost to our family.LashawnMesothelioma patient’s daughter
How to Cite Asbestos.com’s Article
Povtak, T. (2022, November 22). Looking Beyond Clinical Trials for Mesothelioma Treatment. Asbestos.com. Retrieved October 2, 2023, from https://www.asbestos.com/news/2022/11/22/mesothelioma-treatment-clinical-trials/
Povtak, Tim. "Looking Beyond Clinical Trials for Mesothelioma Treatment." Asbestos.com, 22 Nov 2022, https://www.asbestos.com/news/2022/11/22/mesothelioma-treatment-clinical-trials/.
Povtak, Tim. "Looking Beyond Clinical Trials for Mesothelioma Treatment." Asbestos.com. Last modified November 22, 2022. https://www.asbestos.com/news/2022/11/22/mesothelioma-treatment-clinical-trials/.
Clinical trial results should not always be the guiding force when a mesothelioma cancer patient and their medical team determine what therapy path to take, according to one recent study. A look at real-world populations might be just as important.
A research team at the University of Pennsylvania Department of Medicine has made the point with a retrospective, observational analysis of second-line treatment for pleural mesothelioma.
The analysis came on the heels of a multicenter clinical trial from the European Thoracic Oncology Platform that evaluated the efficacy of pembrolizumab (Keytruda), an immunotherapy drug, when compared to chemotherapy in a second-line setting for mesothelioma.
Despite high pretrial expectations, the use of pembrolizumab showed no survival advantage over the use of chemotherapy for mesothelioma in a second-line setting. Progression-free survival was only 2.5 months with pembrolizumab, compared to 3.4 months for chemotherapy. Median survival was 10.7 months and 12.4 months, respectively.
“Obviously, there is a lot of excellent work being done in the clinical trial space, especially with a rare disease and novel therapies like this,” Dr. Roger Kim, lead study author at the University of Pennsylvania, told The Mesothelioma Center at Asbestos.com. “But it is really important to assess those same kind of treatments in real-world populations. That may be the biggest take-home message from our study.”
Clinical Trials vs. Real-World Results
Mesothelioma clinical trials often involve carefully selected patients, many of whom are in a less-advanced stage of disease, healthier overall and able to meet specific criteria to qualify.
For this latest study, researchers took a multicenter retrospective look at 176 patients with advanced pleural mesothelioma who had received platinum-based chemotherapy initially and at least two lines of systemic therapy.
After relapse, 61 received chemotherapy and 115 received pembrolizumab or nivolumab, similar immunotherapy drugs, also known as immune checkpoint inhibitors. The results were considerably different.
Mesothelioma treatment with the immunotherapy drugs produced a median overall survival of 8.7 months, compared to only five months for those receiving chemotherapy. The estimated 12-month survival rate projection was 36.7% and 15.6%, respectively.
“We were able to demonstrate an increased benefit when compared to chemotherapy,” Kim said. “Patients who received chemotherapy – in our real-world population – fared much poorer than in the clinical trial, which is reflective of the older, generally sicker populations of patients we see in the clinic in the real world.”
Treatments Benefit Patients With Advanced Disease
In contrast to the European clinical trial, the retrospective study found that the immune checkpoint inhibitors benefited those with a more advanced stage of mesothelioma. Lung Cancer published the study findings in late 2021.
Patients in the latest study – the real-world population – were older (median age 75) than in the clinical trial (70). There also was a much lower percentage of patients with the more treatable epithelioid histology.
They generally had a more limited life expectancy, according to study authors. More than 10% had undergone aggressive surgery before even starting the first-line systemic therapy.
“Different baseline characteristics, different patient populations, may perform differently with the same exact medications,” Kim said. “It’s important to know.”
Prior studies had suggested a potentially larger benefit from the immune checkpoint inhibitor drugs for those with a tougher-to-treat histology.
“That our outcomes differed from those reported in the clinical trial highlights the importance of assessing real-world evidence when evaluating novel therapies in populations that differ from those included in clinical trials,” the study concluded.