Malignant pleural mesothelioma: biology and diagnostic
Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is increasing concern about cancer incidence and poor prognosis, although real progress in caring for patients. The diagnosis is usually made on the modern stage, when radical treatment is no longer available. It undergoes a significant increase in survival in MPM, including the early diagnosis of the disease. Biologically, a number of potential tumor markers soluble, including mesothelia and osteopontin, have been proposed to assist the diagnosis, but none have been approved to date. Mesothelin, measured in blood and pleural fluid appears to be the most interesting candidate. However, although this marker has a decent symptomatic and prognostic importance, its high specificity for the subtype of epithelioid mesothelioma (most often) restricts its use in practice. Other molecules are somewhat interesting, sometimes, despite good sensitivity, especially because of their low diagnostic specificity. Finally, available data do not argue for routine use in biology in the diagnosis of MPM, thoracoscopy, and the remaining histology verified. We must continue our search and evaluation of soluble mesothelia tumor markers in clinical trials.
Another malignant pleural mesothelioma breast cancer: biology and diagnosis
Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a serious issue because of the increasing incidence and poor prognosis of its in the world although the real improvement of disease management. The majority of patients are diagnosed late throughout the disease, when treatment is the more radical variant of this year. Earlier this year, it was necessary to significantly increase survival of patients diagnosed with MPM. Some of the soluble markers, including soluble Mesothelin, and osteopontin, have been proposed previously calculated for any diagnosis of MPM has not been approved yet. Soluble Mesothelin, estimated blood and pleural effusion, it seems that the most promising candidate. However, even if he has a decent diagnostic and prognostic significance, it is quite a special epithelioid subtype, one of the most common mesothelioma, Malthus imitating its used in practice. Although sometimes a good sensitivity, etc., as possible marker's osteopontin has a low specificity because of the diagnosis of MPM is a little interesting. In conclusion, the present data do not justify the routine use of biology for MPM diagnosis does suggest the need for continued evaluation of soluble Mesothelin injustement to clinical studies and the search for potential tumor markers other.