Mesothelioma

Table of Contents

1. Overview
2. Asbestos Causation & Latency
3. Clinical Presentation
4. Staging
5. Diagnosis & Pathology
6. Treatment
7. Prognosis & Survival
8. Legal, Occupational & Compensation
9. Key Research Papers
10. Connections
11. Featured Videos

Overview

Malignant mesothelioma is a cancer of the mesothelium — the thin layer of specialized cells lining the body's major cavities and internal organs. The pleural cavity (the space between the lungs and the chest wall) is involved in approximately 90% of cases, earning the disease its most familiar name: malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). The peritoneum accounts for roughly 7–10% of cases; the pericardium and tunica vaginalis testis are each affected in less than 1% of cases.

Globally, an estimated 30,000–40,000 new mesothelioma cases are diagnosed each year, with the United States seeing approximately 2,500–3,000 cases annually. Incidence peaked in the US and Western Europe in the 1990s–2000s following the high-exposure decades of the 1940s–1970s, when asbestos use in construction, shipbuilding, and manufacturing was unrestricted. In countries with ongoing asbestos use — notably Russia, China, India, and parts of Southeast Asia — incidence is projected to peak later in the 21st century.

MPM grows diffusely along the pleural surfaces rather than as a single discrete mass, which makes complete surgical excision technically difficult and contributes to its aggressive behavior. Tumor encasement of the lung and invasion into the chest wall, mediastinum, and diaphragm are hallmarks of advanced disease. Despite decades of clinical research, the prognosis remains poor for the majority of patients, though targeted immunotherapy introduced in 2020–2021 has produced meaningful survival improvements in a subset.

Back to Table of Contents

Asbestos Causation & Latency

Asbestos is the overwhelming cause of mesothelioma, responsible for approximately 95% of all cases. The term "asbestos" encompasses six naturally occurring silicate minerals classified into two fiber groups:

• Amphiboles — amosite (brown asbestos), crocidolite (blue asbestos), tremolite, anthophyllite, actinolite. Amphibole fibers are thin, straight, and biopersistent; they penetrate deep into the pleural tissue and are cleared very slowly, driving chronic inflammation and DNA damage. Crocidolite carries the highest mesothelioma risk per fiber.
• Chrysotile (white asbestos) — curly, more easily cleared by mucociliary mechanisms. Used in over 90% of commercial asbestos applications globally. Chrysotile is still mesothelioma-causative, but is somewhat less potent per fiber than amphiboles. Industry-funded research disputing chrysotile's carcinogenicity is not supported by independent epidemiology.

There is no safe dose of asbestos for mesothelioma risk. Even brief bystander or para-occupational exposure — a spouse shaking out an asbestos worker's work clothes, a child playing near an insulation job site — has caused mesothelioma. The latency period between first exposure and diagnosis ranges from 20 to 50 years, with a median near 40 years. This long latency means patients diagnosed today were typically exposed in the 1970s–1980s.

High-risk occupations historically include: shipyard workers, boilermakers, pipefitters, insulation installers, construction tradespeople, brake mechanics (chrysotile in friction pads), and military personnel (US Navy ships were heavily insulated with asbestos through the 1970s).

Genetic susceptibility — BAP1 cancer syndrome: Germline loss-of-function mutations in BAP1 (BRCA1-associated protein-1, a tumor suppressor on chromosome 3p21) define the BAP1 cancer syndrome. A 2011 study found them in 2 of 26 sporadic cases, and a 2018 sequencing study of 198 patients found 6 BAP1 mutations. Inherited gene changes reach beyond BAP1: in that 2018 study 23 of 198 patients (12%) carried one in a cancer-susceptibility gene, especially those with peritoneal disease, minimal asbestos exposure, young age or a second cancer. Affected families show elevated rates of mesothelioma, uveal melanoma, cutaneous melanoma and clear-cell renal cell carcinoma. Bile-duct cancer (intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma) sits at the edge of the list: the GeneReviews entry on the syndrome (updated 2024) includes cholangiocarcinoma, while the 2023 European guideline states that further evidence is required to confirm an association. Paradoxically, mesotheliomas in carriers of an inherited BAP1 change carry a markedly better prognosis than sporadic cases: a 2015 study of 23 carriers found a median survival of 5 years against under 1 year in 10,556 United States registry cases, with 47% alive at 5 years against 6.7%, which the authors described as a 7-fold improvement in long-term survival.

Other rare causes:

• Erionite — a naturally occurring zeolite mineral found in volcanic rock in parts of Turkey (Cappadocia region), where mesothelioma rates in affected villages are 1,000-fold above background. A 2025 review gives mesothelioma as 21% to 51% of all deaths in the affected villages. Also found in certain western US regions.
• Therapeutic radiation — prior chest or mediastinal irradiation (e.g., for lymphoma) can rarely produce mesothelioma, typically decades later.
• Simian virus 40 (SV40) — early polio vaccines (1955–1963) were contaminated with SV40. The virus is a potent mesothelial carcinogen in animal models and has been detected in human mesothelioma tissue in some studies. Whether SV40 is genuinely causative in humans remains controversial; epidemiological studies have not shown a clear increased mesothelioma rate in vaccinated cohorts.

Back to Table of Contents

Clinical Presentation

MPM has an insidious onset. Patients often tolerate symptoms for many months before seeking care, and the early signs are nonspecific. By the time the diagnosis is established, most patients have locally advanced disease.

Cardinal symptoms of pleural mesothelioma:

• Dyspnea — the most common presenting symptom, caused by large pleural effusion compressing the ipsilateral lung. Often the chief complaint at first medical contact.
• Chest pain — characteristically dull, aching, and persistent rather than pleuritic (sharp, positional). As disease advances and tumor invades the chest wall and intercostal nerves, pain becomes severe and difficult to control.
• Pleural effusion — present in over 90% of patients at diagnosis. The effusion is exudative, often hemorrhagic, and may be large enough to cause complete white-out of the affected hemithorax on chest X-ray. Fluid re-accumulates rapidly after thoracentesis.
• Constitutional symptoms — fatigue, anorexia, and weight loss typically accompany advanced disease.

Radiographic distinction from primary lung cancer: MPM grows diffusely along pleural surfaces, producing circumferential pleural thickening that encases the lung ("rind-like" or "peel-like" appearance on computed tomography, CT). This is in contrast to primary lung cancer, which typically forms a discrete parenchymal nodule or mass. Crucially, in MPM with massive pleural disease, the mediastinum may shift toward the affected side — a paradoxical finding explained by tumor encasement contracting and fixing the ipsilateral lung. Conventional pleural effusion shifts the mediastinum away; the absence of this contralateral shift in a large effusion is a recognized clue to MPM.

Peritoneal mesothelioma: Presents with progressive abdominal distension (ascites), diffuse abdominal pain, early satiety, nausea, and changes in bowel habit. Constitutional symptoms are prominent. A peritoneal primary without a pleural component in a patient without asbestos exposure raises the possibility of the BAP1 cancer syndrome or erionite exposure.

Physical examination: Dullness to percussion and absent breath sounds over the effusion; tracheal deviation toward the affected side in the setting of extensive pleural encasement; digital clubbing and hypoxia in advanced cases.

Back to Table of Contents

Staging

MPM is staged using the tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) system of the American Joint Committee on Cancer and the Union for International Cancer Control. Because mesothelioma grows diffusely rather than as a discrete mass, T staging has reflected the extent of pleural involvement and invasion into adjacent structures rather than tumor diameter. The proposed ninth edition brings a measurement into the clinical T1 to T3 categories: the sum of the maximum pleural thickness, with cutpoints at 12 and 30 mm, drawn from 3,598 eligible patients (1,790 had the measurement). The clinical T4 category and the pathologic T descriptors stay, with invasion of the fissure reclassified as pT2.

T (Primary tumor) staging:

• T1 — tumor involves the ipsilateral parietal pleura (with or without involvement of the visceral, mediastinal, or diaphragmatic pleura on the same side, but no involvement of the visceral pleura surface facing the lung).
• T2 — tumor involves ipsilateral pleural surfaces with at least one of: involvement of the diaphragmatic muscle, extension to the lung's visceral pleural surface, or confluent visceral pleural tumor (including the fissures).
• T3 — tumor is locally advanced but potentially resectable. At least one of: chest wall involvement (focal, not transmural), endothoracic fascia, pericardium (non-transmural), solitary/focally resectable pericardial involvement, mediastinal fat.
• T4 — tumor is technically unresectable. Diffuse or multifocal chest wall invasion; direct transdiaphragmatic extension to the peritoneum; direct extension to the contralateral pleura; direct extension to mediastinal organs; direct extension to the spine; extension through the pericardium (with or without pericardial effusion); or involvement of the myocardium.

N (Regional lymph nodes): N0 = no regional node metastasis; N1 = ipsilateral bronchopulmonary, hilar, or mediastinal nodes; N2 = contralateral mediastinal, ipsilateral or contralateral supraclavicular nodes.

M (Distant metastasis): M0 = no distant metastasis; M1 = distant metastasis present.

Overall stage groupings: The ninth edition proposal of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer groups stages as: Stage I (T1N0), Stage II (T1N1; T2N0), Stage IIIA (T1N2; T2N1/2; any T3), Stage IIIB (any T4) and Stage IV (any M1).

In practice, the majority of patients (60–80%) present with Stage III or IV disease, and resectability is limited to a minority even among those with earlier-stage findings.

Back to Table of Contents

Diagnosis & Pathology

Diagnosis requires tissue biopsy. Cytology from pleural fluid alone is insufficient — it has a sensitivity of only 25–30% for MPM, and current guidelines require histological confirmation in almost all cases.

Biopsy approaches:

• Computed tomography-guided needle biopsy — suitable for smaller pleural nodules or thickening. Provides a core of tissue for histology and immunohistochemistry (IHC), but sampling error is a concern for heterogeneous tumors.
• Medical thoracoscopy (pleuroscopy) — the preferred approach when feasible. Allows direct visualization of pleural surfaces, targeted biopsy of suspicious areas, and simultaneous pleurodesis. Provides larger, better-oriented specimens and higher diagnostic yield (over 90%).
• Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) — used when thoracoscopy is inconclusive or a larger sample is needed for definitive subtyping.

Histological subtypes (critical for prognosis and treatment selection):

• Epithelioid (70% of cases) — cuboidal or columnar cells arranged in tubular, papillary, or solid patterns. Best prognosis; most responsive to systemic therapy.
• Sarcomatoid (15–20%) — spindle cells resembling a sarcoma. Worst prognosis (median survival under 6 months in older reports). In a series of 214 cases from the MAPS trial, the protein PD-L1 was strongly associated with the sarcomatoid and biphasic subtypes, and CheckMate 743 reported a survival benefit from nivolumab plus ipilimumab regardless of histology. Desmoplastic mesothelioma is a sarcomatoid variant especially difficult to distinguish from reactive pleural fibrosis.
• Biphasic/mixed (10–15%) — contains both epithelioid and sarcomatoid components. Prognosis intermediate; sarcomatoid proportion correlates inversely with survival.

Immunohistochemistry (IHC) panel for diagnosis: No single marker is 100% specific, so a panel is used.

• Positive in mesothelioma: calretinin (most sensitive), CK5/6, WT1, mesothelin (MSLN), D2-40 (podoplanin).
• Negative in mesothelioma (markers of lung adenocarcinoma or other carcinomas that can mimic MPM): TTF-1, Napsin A, CEA, MOC-31, BerEP4, CD15.

Molecular and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) testing:

• BAP1 loss by IHC — loss of nuclear BAP1 staining is highly specific for mesothelioma vs. reactive mesothelial proliferation in difficult cases.
• CDKN2A (9p21.3) homozygous deletion by FISH — also highly specific for malignant mesothelioma; helps distinguish from benign pleural disease. BAP1 loss and/or CDKN2A deletion together provide over 95% specificity in diagnostically challenging cases.
• Germline BAP1 testing — used for patients with personal or family history suggesting BAP1 cancer syndrome. The authors of the 2018 sequencing study concluded that their data support germline genetic testing for patients with mesothelioma.

Imaging: Contrast computed tomography of the chest and abdomen is the standard staging modality, demonstrating pleural thickening, effusion, and chest wall or mediastinal involvement. PET-CT adds metabolic activity assessment and helps detect occult nodal or distant metastases to guide surgical planning. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) chest is useful for evaluating diaphragmatic or chest wall invasion when surgery is contemplated.

Back to Table of Contents

Treatment

The approach to MPM treatment depends on histology, stage, performance status, and whether the patient is a surgical candidate. The majority of patients have unresectable disease at diagnosis and are treated with systemic therapy.

Systemic Therapy (Unresectable / Most Patients)

Nivolumab + Ipilimumab (First-Line Immunotherapy): The CheckMate 743 trial randomized 605 patients to nivolumab (anti-PD-1) plus ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4) versus cisplatin/pemetrexed chemotherapy. The immunotherapy combination produced a median overall survival of 18.1 months vs. 14.1 months for chemotherapy (hazard ratio (HR) 0.74). The benefit was most pronounced in non-epithelioid (sarcomatoid and biphasic) histology — a subgroup where chemotherapy offers minimal benefit. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved nivolumab/ipilimumab for first-line unresectable MPM in October 2020, the first new approval in this disease in 16 years.

Cisplatin + Pemetrexed (Chemotherapy Backbone): The EMPHACIS trial (Vogelzang et al., 2003) established cisplatin/pemetrexed as standard first-line chemotherapy, showing improved median survival (12.1 vs. 9.3 months) and quality of life compared to cisplatin alone. Carboplatin can substitute for cisplatin in patients with renal impairment. Pemetrexed requires folic acid and vitamin B12 supplementation to reduce toxicity. Response rate is approximately 40%; median survival is 12–15 months.

Bevacizumab + Cisplatin/Pemetrexed: The MAPS trial (Zalcman et al., 2016) showed that adding bevacizumab (a drug against vascular endothelial growth factor) to cisplatin/pemetrexed increased median overall survival from 16.1 to 18.8 months (hazard ratio 0.77). This regimen remains an option in patients not receiving immunotherapy, though bevacizumab adds toxicity (hypertension, thromboembolism risk).

Pembrolizumab + Platinum/Pemetrexed: A phase 3 trial tested adding pembrolizumab to chemotherapy in 440 people with untreated advanced pleural mesothelioma. Median overall survival was 17.3 months vs. 16.1 months (hazard ratio 0.79), and 3-year survival was 25% vs. 17%. Severe (grade 3 or 4) treatment-related side effects occurred in 27% vs. 15%.

Second-line therapy: No clearly proven second-line regimen exists. The phase 3 CONFIRM trial compared nivolumab with placebo in 332 people whose disease had progressed after platinum chemotherapy. Its first report gave median progression-free survival of 3.0 vs. 1.8 months (hazard ratio 0.67) and overall survival of 10.2 vs. 6.9 months (hazard ratio 0.69, p=0.009). The later report, at 37.2 months of follow-up, states that the progression-free survival endpoint "but not overall survival was met", with a response rate of 10.3%. Pembrolizumab (PD-1 inhibitor) showed activity in a Phase II trial and is used off-label. Gemcitabine or vinorelbine provide modest benefit. Clinical trials are another route some patients take at relapse.

Surgery (Selected Resectable Patients)

Surgery is reserved for a minority of patients with early-stage (T1–T3), epithelioid, node-negative disease and excellent performance status, treated at specialized centers.

• Pleurectomy/Decortication (P/D) — removes the parietal and visceral pleura while sparing the underlying lung. Lung-sparing approach with lower operative mortality (1–5%) than extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP). Now generally preferred over EPP at most centers because of comparable or better survival outcomes with lower morbidity. Extended P/D also removes the ipsilateral pericardium and hemidiaphragm when involved. That comparison is with EPP only. The first randomized test of this operation, MARS 2 (335 patients, 86% with the epithelioid type), found shorter median survival with extended P/D plus chemotherapy than with chemotherapy alone (19.3 vs. 24.8 months) and more serious side effects (318 vs. 169 events; incidence rate ratio 3.6).
• Extrapleural Pneumonectomy (EPP) — radical resection removing the entire lung, all pleural surfaces, the ipsilateral hemidiaphragm, and the pericardium en bloc. Higher operative mortality (3–7% at specialized centers, higher elsewhere). The MARS feasibility trial (50 patients randomized) found median survival of 14.4 months with EPP vs. 19.5 months without it (hazard ratio 1.90, 95% confidence interval 0.92–3.93; after adjustment 2.75, 1.21–6.26, p=0.016), and its authors concluded that EPP offers no benefit and possibly harms patients. The procedure has become less favored, though some high-volume centers still perform it in selected patients in multimodality protocols.

Radiation

SMART protocol (Surgery for Mesothelioma After Radiation Therapy): Neoadjuvant hemithoracic intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) followed by EPP, developed at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre. Delivers high-dose radiation to the intact chest before lung removal, allowing higher doses without radiation pneumonitis risk. Early results showed improved local control.

Palliative radiation: Useful for controlling chest wall pain, preventing seeding along biopsy tracts, and managing symptomatic disease progression at specific sites.

Peritoneal Mesothelioma — HIPEC

For selected patients with peritoneal mesothelioma and epithelioid histology confined to the peritoneum, cytoreductive surgery (CRS) combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) with cisplatin has produced 5-year survival rates of 35–50% in retrospective series at specialized centers — far better than systemic chemotherapy alone for this subtype.

Supportive and Symptomatic Management

Pleural effusion management (repeated thoracentesis, indwelling pleural catheter, or talc pleurodesis via thoracoscopy) is central to quality of life. Pain management — escalating from nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids to nerve blocks and intrathecal analgesia — becomes the dominant clinical challenge in advanced MPM. Palliative care integration from the time of diagnosis improves both quality of life and, in some studies, overall survival.

Back to Table of Contents

Prognosis & Survival

Malignant pleural mesothelioma carries one of the poorest prognoses in oncology. The outlook is heterogeneous and is improving for specific subgroups.

Historical benchmarks (pre-immunotherapy):

• Median overall survival with supportive care alone: 6–8 months.
• Median overall survival with cisplatin/pemetrexed: 12–15 months.
• 5-year overall survival: approximately 5–10% across all stages and histologies.

Contemporary outcomes (with immunotherapy):

• Nivolumab/ipilimumab (CheckMate 743): median overall survival 18.1 months overall.
• Non-epithelioid subgroup: 18.1 months with immunotherapy vs. 8.8 months with chemotherapy — a striking difference that drove the approval.
• At 3 years, 23% of nivolumab/ipilimumab patients were alive vs. 15% in the chemotherapy arm, and 28% vs. 0% of those who responded to treatment still had an ongoing response.
• At 5 years, 14% of nivolumab/ipilimumab patients were alive vs. 6% with chemotherapy (hazard ratio 0.74), with similar benefit regardless of tumor type under the microscope.

Histology is the dominant prognostic factor:

• Epithelioid: median survival 14–19 months; best response to treatment.
• Biphasic: median survival 10–14 months.
• Sarcomatoid: median survival 4–7 months.

Clinical prognostic scoring:

• European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) score — in the 1998 analysis, poor prognosis was linked to poor performance status, a high white blood cell count, a probable or possible (rather than definite) histologic diagnosis, male gender, and sarcomatous tissue as the subtype. One-year survival was 40% in the good-prognosis group and 12% in the poor-prognosis group.
• Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) prognostic groups — six prognostic subgroups from 337 patients, with median survival ranging from 13.9 to 1.4 months. Predictors of poor survival in the 1998 analysis were pleural involvement, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) above 500 IU/L, poor performance status, chest pain, platelets above 400,000/microL, nonepithelial histology, and age over 75.

BAP1 germline mutation: Counterintuitively, germline BAP1-mutant mesotheliomas tend to have better prognosis than sporadic cases: in a 2015 study, 47% of 23 carriers were alive at 5 years against 6.7% of United States registry cases, which the authors described as a 7-fold improvement in long-term survival. Proposed explanations, not tested in that study, include enhanced antitumor immune responses in a setting of homologous recombination deficiency and earlier detection through surveillance in known BAP1 families.

Surgical patients (highly selected): Median survival after P/D in favorable-histology stage I–II patients at expert centers reaches 20–35 months in retrospective series, with some reports of 5-year survivors. These figures reflect extreme patient selection and cannot be extrapolated to the general population: in the randomized MARS 2 trial, median survival with extended P/D plus chemotherapy was 19.3 months.

Back to Table of Contents

Legal, Occupational & Compensation

Because mesothelioma is caused almost exclusively by asbestos exposure — a known industrial hazard whose dangers were concealed for decades by asbestos manufacturers — the legal and compensation landscape is substantial and well-developed.

Asbestos bankruptcy trusts: Many asbestos manufacturers, insulators, and suppliers declared bankruptcy under the weight of mesothelioma liability. Under Chapter 11 reorganization, they established asbestos personal injury trusts to pay future claims. As of the mid-2020s, more than 60 trusts hold over $30 billion in assets, and billions more have already been paid out. Eligible claimants (or their estates) can file with multiple trusts simultaneously. Trust claims can often be pursued in parallel with civil litigation.

Civil litigation: Patients may sue manufacturers and distributors of asbestos-containing products used during their working life. The statute of limitations in most US states begins at the time of mesothelioma diagnosis (discovery rule) — not at the time of exposure, which would otherwise bar most claims given the 20–50 year latency. Damages can include medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, and punitive damages. Wrongful death claims may be filed by family members.

Workers' compensation: Available in most states for occupational asbestos exposure, though benefits are typically lower than civil tort damages and are subject to exclusive-remedy limitations. Filing workers' compensation does not preclude civil litigation against third-party product manufacturers.

VA benefits: Veterans — particularly Navy veterans who served on asbestos-insulated ships — can be eligible for VA disability compensation and healthcare for mesothelioma as a service-connected condition. The VA's asbestos page lists two requirements: a health condition caused by asbestos, and contact with asbestos during military service. The documents it asks for are medical records stating the condition, service records listing the job or specialty, and a doctor's statement connecting the contact to the condition.

Global asbestos regulation: More than 55 countries have enacted total bans on asbestos production, use, and importation, including the European Union, Australia, Japan, and the United Kingdom. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized a rule banning chrysotile asbestos (the last asbestos type still in commercial use in the US) in 2024. Russia, China, Kazakhstan, and Brazil continue to mine and export chrysotile.

Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) permissible exposure limit (PEL): Currently 0.1 fibers/cm³ as an 8-hour time-weighted average, with an excursion limit of 1.0 f/cm³ for 30 minutes. These limits are not "safe" — they reflect feasibility rather than zero-risk thresholds, and mesothelioma has no demonstrated exposure threshold.

Patient resources: The Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation describes support groups, financial assistance information, and help with choosing specialists and treatments including clinical trials. Because the limitation period in most US states runs from diagnosis, legal options can expire if no claim is filed in time.

Back to Table of Contents

Key Research Papers

1. Calabrò L, et al. "Efficacy and safety of an intensified schedule of tremelimumab for chemotherapy-resistant malignant mesothelioma: an open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study." Lancet Respir Med. 2015;3(4):301–309. — PubMed PMID: 25819643
2. Testa JR, et al. "Germline BAP1 mutations predispose to malignant mesothelioma." Nat Genet. 2011;43(10):1022–1025. — PubMed PMID: 21874000
3. Vogelzang NJ, et al. "Phase III study of pemetrexed in combination with cisplatin versus cisplatin alone in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma." J Clin Oncol. 2003;21(14):2636–2644. — PubMed PMID: 12860938
4. Zalcman G, et al. "Bevacizumab for newly diagnosed pleural mesothelioma in the Mesothelioma Avastin Cisplatin Pemetrexed Study (MAPS): a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial." Lancet. 2016;387(10026):1405–1414. — PubMed PMID: 26719230
5. Husain AN, et al. "Guidelines for pathologic diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma: 2012 update of the consensus statement from the International Mesothelioma Interest Group." Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013;137(5):647–667. — PubMed PMID: 22929121
6. Sheffield BS, et al. "BAP1 immunohistochemistry and p16 FISH to separate benign from malignant mesothelial proliferations." Am J Surg Pathol. 2015;39(7):977–982. — PubMed PMID: 25634745
7. Rice D, et al. "Recommendations for uniform definitions of surgical techniques for malignant pleural mesothelioma: a consensus report of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer International Staging Committee." J Thorac Oncol. 2011;6(8):1304–1312. — PubMed PMID: 21847060
8. Hodgson JT, McElvenny DM, Darnton AJ, Price MJ, Peto J. "The expected burden of mesothelioma mortality in Great Britain from 2002 to 2050." Br J Cancer. 2005;92(3):587–593. — PubMed PMID: 15668716
9. Delgermaa V, et al. "Global mesothelioma deaths reported to the World Health Organization between 1994 and 2008." Bull World Health Organ. 2011;89(10):716–724, 724A–724C. — PubMed PMID: 22084509
10. American Thoracic Society. "Diagnosis and initial management of nonmalignant diseases related to asbestos." Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2004;170(6):691–715. — PubMed PMID: 15355871
11. Baas P, et al. "First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab in unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma (CheckMate 743): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial." Lancet. 2021;397(10272):375–386. — PubMed PMID: 33485464
12. Wolff H, Vehmas T, Oksa P, Rantanen J, Vainio H. "Asbestos, asbestosis, and cancer, the Helsinki criteria for diagnosis and attribution 2014: recommendations." Scand J Work Environ Health. 2015;41(1):5–15. — PubMed PMID: 25299403
13. Husain AN, et al. "Guidelines for pathologic diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma 2017 update of the consensus statement from the International Mesothelioma Interest Group." Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2018;142(1):89–108. — PubMed PMID: 28686500
14. Peters S, et al. "First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy in patients with unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma: 3-year outcomes from CheckMate 743." Ann Oncol. 2022;33(5):488–499. — PubMed PMID: 35124183
15. Scherpereel A, et al. "Five-year clinical outcomes with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for unresectable pleural mesothelioma in CheckMate 743." J Clin Oncol. 2026;44(9):742–749. — PubMed PMID: 41734361
16. Chu Q, et al. "Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy in untreated advanced pleural mesothelioma in Canada, Italy, and France: a phase 3, open-label, randomised controlled trial." Lancet. 2023;402(10419):2295–2306. — PubMed PMID: 37931632
17. Fennell DA, et al. "Nivolumab versus placebo in patients with relapsed malignant mesothelioma (CONFIRM): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, phase 3 trial." Lancet Oncol. 2021;22(11):1530–1540. — PubMed PMID: 34656227
18. Fennell DA, et al. "Constitutive inflammation and epithelial-mesenchymal transition dictate sensitivity to nivolumab in CONFIRM: a placebo-controlled, randomised phase III trial." Nat Commun. 2025;16(1):6688. — PubMed PMID: 40691143
19. Lim E, et al. "Extended pleurectomy decortication and chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for pleural mesothelioma (MARS 2): a phase 3 randomised controlled trial." Lancet Respir Med. 2024;12(6):457–466. — PubMed PMID: 38740044
20. Treasure T, et al. "Extra-pleural pneumonectomy versus no extra-pleural pneumonectomy for patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma: clinical outcomes of the Mesothelioma and Radical Surgery (MARS) randomised feasibility study." Lancet Oncol. 2011;12(8):763–772. — PubMed PMID: 21723781
21. Nowak AK, et al. "The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Pleural Mesothelioma Staging Project: proposal for revision of the TNM stage groupings in the forthcoming (ninth) edition of the TNM classification for pleural mesothelioma." J Thorac Oncol. 2024;19(9):1339–1351. — PubMed PMID: 38734072
22. Gill RR, et al. "The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Mesothelioma Staging Project: proposals for revisions of the "T" descriptors in the forthcoming ninth edition of the TNM classification for pleural mesothelioma." J Thorac Oncol. 2024;19(9):1310–1325. — PubMed PMID: 38521202
23. Curran D, et al. "Prognostic factors in patients with pleural mesothelioma: the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer experience." J Clin Oncol. 1998;16(1):145–152. — PubMed PMID: 9440736
24. Herndon JE, et al. "Factors predictive of survival among 337 patients with mesothelioma treated between 1984 and 1994 by the Cancer and Leukemia Group B." Chest. 1998;113(3):723–731. — PubMed PMID: 9515850
25. Panou V, et al. "Frequency of germline mutations in cancer susceptibility genes in malignant mesothelioma." J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(28):2863–2871. — PubMed PMID: 30113886
26. Brosseau S, et al. "Shorter survival in malignant pleural mesothelioma patients with high PD-L1 expression associated with sarcomatoid or biphasic histology subtype: a series of 214 cases from the Bio-MAPS cohort." Clin Lung Cancer. 2019;20(5):e564–e575. — PubMed PMID: 31279641
27. Chen G, et al. "Environmental and occupational exposure to erionite and related health risks: progress and prospects." Ann Work Expo Health. 2025;69(7):677–692. — PubMed PMID: 40515516
28. Baumann F, et al. "Mesothelioma patients with germline BAP1 mutations have 7-fold improved long-term survival." Carcinogenesis. 2015;36(1):76–81. — PubMed PMID: 25380601
29. Lalloo F, et al. "Clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and surveillance of BAP1 tumour predisposition syndrome." Eur J Hum Genet. 2023;31(11):1261–1269. — PubMed PMID: 37607989
30. Pilarski R, et al. "BAP1 Tumor Predisposition Syndrome." In: GeneReviews. Seattle (WA): University of Washington, Seattle; 2016 (updated 2024 Dec 5). — PubMed PMID: 27748099

Back to Table of Contents

Connections

• Oncology
• Asbestos — the mineral fiber responsible for roughly 95% of mesothelioma cases.
• Asbestosis
• Lung Cancer
• Silicosis
• Interstitial Lung Disease
• Pleural Effusion
• Pneumothorax
• Toxins
• BAP1 Tumour Predisposition Syndrome — the inherited gene change behind family clusters of mesothelioma and eye melanoma

Back to Table of Contents

Featured Videos