2018
DOI: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2017-211321
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

British Thoracic Society Guideline for the investigation and management of malignant pleural mesothelioma

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

4
219
0
5

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 182 publications
(237 citation statements)
references
References 228 publications
4
219
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…The latter raises the issue of utilising central/expert review in difficult cases although this is not developed in the guidelines. The GCDMM guidelines suggest that histology is necessary to “reinforce the suspicion (of mesothelioma)” only this seems to contradict the most recent British Thoracic Society (BTS) statement on mesothelioma which states that cytology in mesothelioma is a “controversial subject” and even the main IMIG guidelines on mesothelioma seem to come at things from the reverse direction stating, “Do not rely on cytology alone to make a diagnosis of MPM (malignant pleural mesothelioma) unless biopsy is not possible or not required to determine treatment due to patient wishes or poor PS (performance score)” and the BTS statement says “The diagnosis of MM should always be based on the results obtained from an adequate biopsy (less commonly, an exfoliative or fine‐needle aspiration cytology evaluation) in the context of appropriate clinical, radiologic, and surgical findings.” Further education and realignment appears to be required here with consistency between IMIG groups and the wider clinical thoracic oncology community.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The latter raises the issue of utilising central/expert review in difficult cases although this is not developed in the guidelines. The GCDMM guidelines suggest that histology is necessary to “reinforce the suspicion (of mesothelioma)” only this seems to contradict the most recent British Thoracic Society (BTS) statement on mesothelioma which states that cytology in mesothelioma is a “controversial subject” and even the main IMIG guidelines on mesothelioma seem to come at things from the reverse direction stating, “Do not rely on cytology alone to make a diagnosis of MPM (malignant pleural mesothelioma) unless biopsy is not possible or not required to determine treatment due to patient wishes or poor PS (performance score)” and the BTS statement says “The diagnosis of MM should always be based on the results obtained from an adequate biopsy (less commonly, an exfoliative or fine‐needle aspiration cytology evaluation) in the context of appropriate clinical, radiologic, and surgical findings.” Further education and realignment appears to be required here with consistency between IMIG groups and the wider clinical thoracic oncology community.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…ICC markers, usually performed on PF cell blocks (CB), assist in the challenging differential diagnosis between reactive mesothelial cells, metastatic carcinomas and mesotheliomas . Of those, epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM) and claudin 4 (CL4) are considered to be suitable carcinoma markers and are regularly integrated in the recommended ICC panels . More recently, positive immunoreactivity for human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) has been found in a number of epithelial malignancies, especially in ovarian and lung tumours .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1 Five-year survival rates for malignant mesothelioma are similarly poor, between 5% and 10%, with median survival between 12 to 21 months for stage 4 and stage 1 disease, respectively. 3 However, with the development of targeted therapy and immunotherapy it is likely that the survival will improve. Overall, around 90% of cases of lung cancer are caused by tobacco smoking.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%