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
2011

Extra-pleural pneumonectomy vs. no extra-pleural pneumonectomy for malignant pleural mesothelioma

Sample size: 50 publication 10 minutes Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Tom Treasure, Loic Lang-Lazdunski, David Waller, Judith M Bliss, Carol Tan, James Entwisle, Michael Snee, Mary O'Brien, Gill Thomas, Suresh Senan, Ken O'Byrne, Lucy S Kilburn, James Spicer, David Landau, John Edwards, Gill Coombes, Liz Darlison, Julian Peto

Primary Institution: University College London

Hypothesis

Does extra-pleural pneumonectomy improve survival and quality of life in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma compared to no surgery?

Conclusion

The study suggests that extra-pleural pneumonectomy offers no survival benefit and may harm patients compared to no surgery.

Supporting Evidence

  • 112 patients were registered, and 50 were randomly assigned to treatment.
  • EPP was completed satisfactorily in 16 of 24 patients assigned to EPP.
  • Median survival was 14.4 months for the EPP group and 19.5 months for the no EPP group.
  • Quality of life scores were lower in the EPP group, but no significant differences were reported.
  • 30-day mortality was 12.5% in the EPP group.

Takeaway

This study looked at whether a type of surgery helps people with a serious lung disease. It found that the surgery didn't help and might even make things worse.

Methodology

A multicentre randomised controlled trial in 12 UK hospitals with patients randomly assigned to either EPP or no EPP after chemotherapy.

Potential Biases

Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation, which could introduce bias.

Limitations

The study had a small sample size and was not masked, which may affect the reliability of the results.

Participant Demographics

Patients aged 18 years or older with pathologically confirmed mesothelioma.

Statistical Information

P-Value

0.016

Confidence Interval

95% CI 1.21–6.26

Statistical Significance

p=0.016

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70149-8

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication