Trimodality Therapy With Induction Chemotherapy Followed by Extrapleural Pneumonectomy and Adjuvant High-Dose Hemithoracic Radiation for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) remains associated with poor outcome. We examined the results of trimodality therapy with cisplatin-based chemotherapy followed by extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP) and adjuvant high-dose (50 to 60 Gy) hemithoracic radiation therapy for MPM. Patients and Methods We conducted a retrospective review of all patients prospectively evaluated for trimodality therapy protocol between January 2001 and December 2007 in our institution. Results A total of 60 patients were suitable candidates. Histology was epithelioid (n = 44) or biphasic (n = 16). Chemotherapy regimens included cisplatin/vinorelbine (n = 26), cisplatin/pemetrexed (n = 24), cisplatin/raltitrexed (n = 6), or cisplatin/gemcitabine (n = 4). EPP was performed in 45 patients, and hemithoracic radiation therapy to at least 50 Gy was administered postoperatively to 30 patients. Completion of the trimodality therapy in the absence of mediastinal node involvement was associated with the best survival (median survival of 59 months v ≤ 14 months in the remaining patients, P = .0003). The type of induction chemotherapy had no significant impact on survival. Pathologic nodal status remained a significant predictor of poor survival despite completion of the trimodality therapy. After completion of the protocol, the 5-year disease-free survival was 53% for patients with N0 disease, reaching 75% in patients with ypT1-2N0 and 45% in patients with ypT3-4N0. Conclusion This large, single-center experience with induction chemotherapy followed by EPP and adjuvant high-dose hemithoracic radiation for MPM shows that half of the patients are able to complete this protocol. The results are encouraging for patients with N0 disease. However, N2 disease remains a major factor impacting on survival, despite completion of the entire trimodality regimen.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".