BACKGROUND/AIM: Soluble mesothelin-related peptide (SMRP) is regarded as a biomarker of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Herein, we compared the diagnostic performances of SMRP in matched pleural effusion (PE-SMRP) and serum (S-SMRP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Diagnosis on pleural biopsies was performed for all patients including 43 with MPM, 23 with non-MPM pleural metastases (MTS) and 36 with benign (BNG) pleural diseases. SMRP was measured by a MesoMark ELISA (Cis-Bio International Gif/Yvette; France). RESULTS: Using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, 12.70 and 1.08 nM were detected as cut-off values to optimal discrimination for PE-SMRP and S-SMRP, respectively. PE-SMRP showed a better diagnostic accuracy than S-SMRP in MPM vs. MTS+BNG (area under the ROC curve=81.6 vs. 70.5; sensitivity=69.8% vs. 46.5%; specificity=88.1% vs. 84.7%; diagnostic odds ratio (DOR)=17.1 vs. 4.8). In S-SMRP-negative patients, PE-SMRP maintained an acceptable performance (Sensitivity=47.8%; DOR=8.3; p=0.001), whereas in PE-SMRP-negative patients, S-SMRP performed very poorly (Sensitivity=15.4%; DOR=1.2; p=0.858). CONCLUSION: PE-SMRP detection has a superior diagnostic accuracy than S-SMRP detection in the diagnosis of MPM.
BACKGROUND/AIM: Soluble mesothelin-related peptide (SMRP) is regarded as a biomarker of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Herein, we compared the diagnostic performances of SMRP in matched pleural effusion (PE-SMRP) and serum (S-SMRP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Diagnosis on pleural biopsies was performed for all patients including 43 with MPM, 23 with non-MPM pleural metastases (MTS) and 36 with benign (BNG) pleural diseases. SMRP was measured by a MesoMark ELISA (Cis-Bio International Gif/Yvette; France). RESULTS: Using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, 12.70 and 1.08 nM were detected as cut-off values to optimal discrimination for PE-SMRP and S-SMRP, respectively. PE-SMRP showed a better diagnostic accuracy than S-SMRP in MPM vs. MTS+BNG (area under the ROC curve=81.6 vs. 70.5; sensitivity=69.8% vs. 46.5%; specificity=88.1% vs. 84.7%; diagnostic odds ratio (DOR)=17.1 vs. 4.8). In S-SMRP-negative patients, PE-SMRP maintained an acceptable performance (Sensitivity=47.8%; DOR=8.3; p=0.001), whereas in PE-SMRP-negative patients, S-SMRP performed very poorly (Sensitivity=15.4%; DOR=1.2; p=0.858). CONCLUSION: PE-SMRP detection has a superior diagnostic accuracy than S-SMRP detection in the diagnosis of MPM.