A prospective study to evaluate a diagnostic algorithm for the use of fluid lymphocyte subset analysis in undiagnosed unilateral pleural effusions

&lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Background:&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/b&gt; Haematological malignancy is an important cause of pleural effusion. Pleural effusions secondary to haematological malignancy are usually lymphocyte predominant. However, several other conditions such as carcinoma, tuberculosis, and chronic heart failure also cause lymphocytic effusions. Lymphocyte subset (LS) analysis may be a useful test to identify haematological malignancy in patients with lymphocytic effusions. However, research into their utility in pleural effusion diagnostic algorithms has not yet been published. &lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Objectives:&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/b&gt; We aimed to determine the clinical utility of pleural fluid LS analysis and whether it can be applied to a diagnostic algorithm to identify effusions secondary to haematological malignancy. The secondary aim was to evaluate the diagnostic value of pleural fluid differential cell count. &lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Methods:&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/b&gt; Consecutive consenting patients presenting to our pleural service between 2008 and 2013 underwent thoracentesis and differential cell count analysis. We proposed an algorithm which selected patients with lymphocytic effusions (&gt;50%) to have further fluid sent for LS analysis. Two independent consultants agreed on the cause of the original effusion after a 12-month follow-up period. &lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Results:&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/b&gt; A total of 60 patients had samples sent for LS analysis. LS analysis had an 80% sensitivity (8/10) and a 100% specificity for the diagnosis of haematological malignancy. The positive and negative predictive values were 100 and 96.1%, respectively. Overall 344 differential cell counts were analysed; 16% of pleural effusions with a malignant aetiology were neutrophilic or eosinophilic at presentation. A higher neutrophil and eosinophil count was associated with benign diagnoses, whereas a higher lymphocyte count was associated with malignant diagnoses. &lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Conclusions:&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/b&gt; LS analysis may identify haematological malignancy in a specific cohort of patients with undiagnosed pleural effusions. A pleural fluid differential cell count provides useful additional information to streamline patient pathway decisions.</jats:p

Predicting survival in malignant pleural effusion: development and validation of the LENT prognostic score

BACKGROUND: Malignant pleural effusion (MPE) causes debilitating breathlessness and predicting survival is challenging. This study aimed to obtain contemporary data on survival by underlying tumour type in patients with MPE, identify prognostic indicators of overall survival and develop and validate a prognostic scoring system. METHODS: Three large international cohorts of patients with MPE were used to calculate survival by cell type (univariable Cox model). The prognostic value of 14 predefined variables was evaluated in the most complete data set (multivariable Cox model). A clinical prognostic scoring system was then developed and validated. RESULTS: Based on the results of the international data and the multivariable survival analysis, the LENT prognostic score (pleural fluid lactate dehydrogenase, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score (PS), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and tumour type) was developed and subsequently validated using an independent data set. Risk stratifying patients into low-risk, moderate-risk and high-risk groups gave median (IQR) survivals of 319 days (228–549; n=43), 130 days (47–467; n=129) and 44 days (22–77; n=31), respectively. Only 65% (20/31) of patients with a high-risk LENT score survived 1 month from diagnosis and just 3% (1/31) survived 6 months. Analysis of the area under the receiver operating curve revealed the LENT score to be superior at predicting survival compared with ECOG PS at 1 month (0.77 vs 0.66, p<0.01), 3 months (0.84 vs 0.75, p<0.01) and 6 months (0.85 vs 0.76, p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The LENT scoring system is the first validated prognostic score in MPE, which predicts survival with significantly better accuracy than ECOG PS alone. This may aid clinical decision making in this diverse patient population

A randomised controlled trial of intravenous zoledronic acid in malignant pleural disease: A proof of principle pilot study

© 2015 Clive et al. Introduction: Animal studies have shown Zoledronic Acid (ZA) may diminish pleural fluid accumulation and tumour bulk in malignant pleural disease (MPD). We performed a pilot study to evaluate its effects in humans. Methods: We undertook a single centre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in adults with MPD. Patients were randomised (1:1) to receive 2 doses of intravenous ZA or placebo, 3 weeks apart and were followed-up for 6 weeks. The co-primary outcomes were change in Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score measured breathlessness during trial follow-up and change in the initial area under the curve (iAUC) on thoracic Dynamic Contrast Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging (DCE-MRI) from randomisation to week 5. Multiple secondary endpoints were also evaluated. Results: Between January 2010 and May 2013, 30 patients were enrolled, 24 randomised and 4 withdrew after randomisation (1 withdrew consent; 3 had a clinical decline). At baseline, the ZA group were more breathless, had more advanced disease on radiology and worse quality of life than the placebo group. There was no significant difference between the groups with regards change in breathlessness (Adjusted mean difference (AMD) 4.16 (95%CI -4.7 to 13.0)) or change in DCE-MRI iAUC (AMD -15.4 (95%CI -58.1 to 27.3). Two of nine (22%) in the ZA arm had a >10% improvement by modified RECIST (vs 0/11 who received placebo). There was no significant difference in quality of life measured by the QLQ-C30 score (global QOL: AMD -4.1 (-13.0 to 4.9)), side effects or serious adverse event rates. Conclusions: This is the first human study to evaluate ZA in MPD. The study is limited by small numbers and imbalanced baseline characteristics. Although no convincing treatment effect was identified, potential benefits for specific subgroups of patients cannot be excluded. This study provides important information regarding the feasibility of future trials to evaluate the effects of ZA further. Trial Registration: UK Clinical Research Network ID 8877 ISRCTN17030426 www.isrctn.com

Prophylactic radiotherapy for the prevention of procedure-tract metastases after surgical and large-bore pleural procedures in malignant pleural mesothelioma (SMART): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial.

The use of prophylactic radiotherapy to prevent procedure-tract metastases (PTMs) in malignant pleural mesothelioma remains controversial, and clinical practice varies worldwide. We aimed to compare prophylactic radiotherapy with deferred radiotherapy (given only when a PTM developed) in a suitably powered trial.This article is freely available via Open Access. Click on the 'Additional Link' above to access the full-text via the publisher's site.Published (Open Access

Pleural irrigation trial (PIT): A randomised controlled trial of pleural irrigation with normal saline versus standard care in patients with pleural infection

© ERS 2015. Pleural infection is increasing in incidence. Despite optimal medical management, up to 30% of patients will die or require surgery. Case reports suggest that irrigation of the pleural space with saline may be beneficial. A randomised controlled pilot study in which saline pleural irrigation (three times per day for 3 days) plus best-practice management was compared with best-practice management alone was performed in patients with pleural infection requiring chest-tube drainage. The primary outcome was percentage change in computed tomography pleural fluid volume from day 0 to day 3. Secondary outcomes included surgical referral rate, hospital stay and adverse events. 35 patients were randomised. Patients receiving saline irrigation had a significantly greater reduction in pleural collection volume on computed tomography compared to those receiving standard care (median (interquartile range) 32.3% (19.6-43.7%) reduction versus 15.3% (-5.5-28%) reduction) (