An exception that proves the rule: recurrence free survival five years after extrapleural pneumonectomy for malignant pleural mesothelioma

Our plain-English summary of An exception that proves the rule: recurrence free survival five years after extrapleural pneumonectomy for malignant pleural mesothelioma, by T. Treasure, F. Macbeth (Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery, 2014).

The study

• Authors: T. Treasure, F. Macbeth
• Journal: Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Published: 2014;9:181
• Type of article: Comment
• Cited by: 2 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher · Free full text

Abstract

Are case reports at all relevant and useful? A case report of an unusual case of mesothelioma prompts a discussion and concludes that they do have a role but that their observations and conclusions need to be treated with care.

In plain English

This article was a commentary, not original research. Its two authors responded to a case report by Yamashita and colleagues, published in the same journal, about one patient with malignant pleural mesothelioma who had long-term disease control after surgery alone. The authors explained why the case was unusual. The tumour was a localised, large chest wall tumour, the characteristic disease along the visceral pleura was not present, and under the microscope disease did not reach the edge of what was removed. They stated that in typical cases having radical surgery the tumour always crosses the resection margin. They called both of the case report's explanations for the long survival reasonable: a margin-free removal, or a subgroup with lower malignant potential. They added that the survival may owe more to lower malignant potential than to the surgery. In their view the case does not help in managing most patients, but it is a reminder that each patient is unique. The authors concluded that case reports have a role but should be treated with care. Asbestos exposure was not discussed.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Commentary on a published case report (not original research)
• Who was studied: No group was studied. The commentary discussed one patient with malignant pleural mesothelioma described in a separate case report by Yamashita and colleagues.
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that this case report describes a rare exception that merits publication and points to a general rule. They concluded that case reports should be read with interest but treated with care.

Topics

The National Library of Medicine indexes this study under subjects our site covers: Lung cancer, Mesothelioma.

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Extrapleural Pneumonectomy (EPP), Pleural Mesothelioma, Mesothelioma.

Related studies

• Second surgery for recurrence of malignant pleural mesothelioma after extrapleural pneumonectomy — L. Politi, G. Borzellino (2010)
• The recurrence of malignant pleural mesothelioma 14 years after extrapleural pneumonectomy: possible histological transformation — T. Kinoshita, G. Ishii, et al. (2012)
• Patterns of failure, toxicity, and survival after extrapleural pneumonectomy and hemithoracic intensity-modulated radiation therapy for malignant pleural mesothelioma — D.R. Gomez, D.S. Hong, et al. (2013)
• Post-recurrence chemotherapy for mesothelioma patients undergoing extrapleural pneumonectomy — T. Takuwa, M. Hashimoto, et al. (2017)
• Fifteen years in the evaluation of extrapleural pneumonectomy: Lessons to be learned — T. Treasure, F. Macbeth (2015)
• Extrapleural pneumonectomy for early stage malignant pleural mesothelioma: a harmful procedure — O. Rena, C. Casadio (2012)

Browse more research in Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery, or return to medical research.