Search

Pleural mesothelioma (PM) is a fatal disease with limited treatment options. Recently, PM management has improved with the development of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). In first-line therapy, dual PD-1 and CTLA-4 blockade enhances tumor control and patient survival compared with chemotherapy. Unfortunately, only a fraction of patients is responsive to immunotherapy, and approaches to reshape the tumor immune microenvironment and make ICIs more effective are urgently required. Here, we evaluated the effect of Hyperthermic IntraThOracic Chemotherapy (HITOC), a treatment that combines fever-range hyperthermia with local intrapleural cisplatin chemotherapy, on the tumor immune microenvironment and response to ICIs. To do this, we developed a murine PM model of HITOC. We found that HITOC significantly improved tumor control and animal survival through a mechanism involving the development of a cytotoxic immune response. Additionally, HITOC enhanced immune checkpoint expression by T lymphocytes and synergized with dual PD-1 and CTLA-4 inhibition, leading to further improvement in animal survival. Finally, the analysis of peritoneal mesothelioma patient samples treated by pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) revealed a similar immunomodulation. In conclusion, HITOC remodels the tumor immune microenvironment of PM by promoting T-cell infiltration into the tumor and could be considered in combination with ICIs in the context of a clinical trial.

Since the late 1990s, and Henrik Kehlet's hypothesis that a reduction of the body's stress response to major surgeries could decrease postoperative morbidity, "Enhanced Recovery After Surgery" (ERAS) care pathways have been streamlined. They are now well accepted and considered standard in many surgical disciplines. Yet, to this day, there is no specific ERAS protocol for chest wall resections (CWRs), the removal of a full-thickness portion of the chest wall, including muscle, bone and possibly skin. This is most unfortunate because these are high-risk surgeries, which carry high morbidity rates. In this review, we propose an overview of the current key elements of the ERAS guidelines for thoracic surgery that might apply to CWRs. A successful ERAS pathway for CWR patients would entail, as is the standard approach, three parts: pre-, peri- and postoperative elements. Preoperative items would include specific information, targeted patient education, involvement of all members of the team, including the plastic surgeons, smoking cessation, dedicated nutrition and carbohydrate loading. Perioperative items would likely be standard for thoracotomy patients, namely carefully selective pre-anesthesia sedative medication only in some rare instances, low-molecular-weight heparin throughout, antibiotic prophylaxis, minimization of postoperative nausea and vomiting, avoidance of fluid overload and of urinary drainage. Postoperative elements would include early mobilization and feeding, swift discontinuation of intravenous fluid supply and chest tube removal as soon as safe. Optimal pain management throughout also appears to be critical to minimize the risk of respiratory complications. Together, all these items are achievable and may hold the key to successful introduction of ERAS pathways to the benefit of CWR patients., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://jtd.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/jtd-23-911/coif). The series “Chest Wall Resections and Reconstructions” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. M.G. serves as an unpaid editorial board member of Journal of Thoracic Disease from February 2023 to January 2025. The authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare., (2024 Journal of Thoracic Disease. All rights reserved.)

Background: Chest wall resections/reconstructions are a validated approach to manage tumors invading the thorax. However, how resection characteristics affect postoperative morbidity and mortality is unknown. We determined the impact of chest wall resection size and location on patient short and long-term postoperative outcomes., Methods: We reviewed all consecutive patients who underwent resections/reconstructions for chest wall tumors between 2003 and 2018. The impact of chest wall resection size and location and reconstruction on perioperative morbidity/mortality and oncological outcome were evaluated for each patient., Results: Ninety-three chest wall resections were performed in 88 patients for primary (sarcoma, breast cancer, n=66, 71%) and metastatic (n=27, 29%) chest wall tumors. The mean chest bony resection size was 107 (range, 15-375) cm 2 and involved ribs only in 57% (n=53) or ribs combined to sternal/clavicular resections in 43% of patients (n=40). Chest defect reconstruction methods included muscle flaps alone (14%) prosthetic material alone (25%) or a combination of both (61%). Early systemic postoperative complications included pneumonia (n=15, 16%), atelectasis (n=6, 6%), pleural effusion (n=15, 16%) and arrhythmia (n=6, 6%). The most frequent long-term reconstructive complications included wound dehiscence (n=4), mesh infection (n=5) and seroma (n=4). Uni- and multivariable analyses indicated that chest wall resection size (>114 cm 2 ) and location (sternum) were significantly associated with the occurrence of pneumonia and atelectasis [odds ratio (OR) =3.67, P=0.05; OR =78.92, P=0.02, respectively]. Disease-free and overall survival were 37±43 and 48±42 months for primary malignancy and of 24±33 and 48±53 months for metastatic chest wall tumors respectively with a mean follow-up of 46±44 months., Conclusions: Chest wall resections present good long-term oncological outcomes. A resection size above 114 cm 2 and the involvement of the sternum are significantly associated with higher rates of postoperative pneumonia/atelectasis. This subgroup of patients should have reinforced perioperative physical therapy protocols., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://tcr.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/tcr-21-2143/coif). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (2022 Translational Cancer Research. All rights reserved.)