ArticleCancers2025
Why the MARS2 Trial Does Not Mean the End of All Mesothelioma Surgery.
Article in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical research advances in thoracic surgery and thoracic oncology in 2025: a panoramic narrative review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Real-world outcomes of multimodal treatment for pleural mesothelioma: A retrospective study in a high-volume integrated regional center.JTCVS open · 2026Article
- Neoadjuvant systemic therapy for pleural mesothelioma patients: a systematic review.Translational lung cancer research · 2025Review
- Pleural mesothelioma.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesThe published report of the MARS2 trial suggested that the addition of extended pleurectomy/decortication to chemotherapy for pleural mesothelioma was harmful. Thus, the report goes on, all disease should be considered as unresectable and no further mesothelioma surgery for survival benefit should be considered. This statement has changed clinical practice in the UK; however, the design of the MARS2 trial has several limitations which should prevent its conclusions being over interpreted. These limitations include the following: the inclusion of too many patients who would fall outside contemporary selection criteria including age, co-morbidity and histology; the unnecessary resection of too much tissue, particularly the diaphragm, and operating on patients too late in the disease process due to less than rigorous staging.
methodsWe retrospectively analysed the selection and outcome of data of 79 of the 158 (50%) patients who underwent surgery in the surgical arm of the MARS2 study who were operated by the authors in four of the five trial surgical centres. We revised the clinical staging of these patients by applying the criteria in the forthcoming 9th TNM edition including the measurement of pleural thickness.
resultsBased on reported guidelines, the selection for surgery was reset as stage I or II epithelioid PM. We found that 52 (66%) of these patients (group A) would not have been considered for surgery using contemporary selection criteria for the following reasons: non-epithelioid PM in 5; cT/4 in 35; cT2N1 in 10 and 2 cT2N0 (pN1), which would have been detected on preoperative mediastinal biopsy. Of the 27 (34%) trial patients fulfilling current criteria (group B), 12 were cT1N0, 1 was cT1N1, 6 were cT1N0pN1 and 8 were cT2N0, all with epithelioid PM. The median survival of group B was 32 (1-72) months, which was significantly higher than in group A: 8.5 (1-55) months,
conclusionsAs contemporary selection criteria were not applied in MARS2, its conclusions cannot be universally applied to all those with PM. Together with the favourable postoperative survival in this selected group, we suggest that there is still scope for a further trial of surgery in early-stage epithelioid mesothelioma.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.