Pleural fluid biomarkers for the diagnosis and management of malignant pleural effusions: a clinical review

Initial pleural fluid analysis is a fundamental step in the evaluation of suspected malignant pleural effusion (MPE). Most MPEs present as exudates, often hemorrhagic, with mononuclear cell predominance. Basic biochemical parameters-glucose, total protein, LDH, ADA, and pH-help distinguish MPE from other causes and offer prognostic information. Low glucose and pH, and elevated LDH, are associated with higher tumor burden and poorer outcomes. Flow cytometry can detect high-fluorescence cells suggestive of malignancy, while additional markers like CRP, cholesterol, amylase, and lipids provide complementary diagnostic value, especially when interpreted alongside tumor markers (TMs). Among TMs in pleural fluid, CEA is the most validated and widely used, showing high specificity for MPE. Others-such as CA 15.3, CYFRA 21-1, CA 125, CA 19.9, NSE, and HE4-offer variable sensitivity and specificity depending on tumor type and clinical context. False positives can occur in benign or inflammatory conditions, emphasizing the need for cautious interpretation. Other cancer biomarkers in pleural fluid-such as VEGF, Apolipoprotein E, calprotectin, endostatin, and homocysteine-may enhance diagnostic and prognostic capabilities. VEGF and endostatin reflect tumor angiogenesis and may also serve as therapeutic targets, while homocysteine shows promise in detecting MPEs not identified by conventional TMs. Multimarker strategies significantly improve diagnostic accuracy. Combinations of two pleural fluid TMs, such as CEA with CA 15.3, or diagnostic models like the MPER score (CEA + homocysteine), have shown excellent performance. Panels with three or more markers, including inflammatory or metabolic biomarkers (ADA, CRP, and %polymorphonuclear leukocytes) further enhance sensitivity and specificity. Molecular analysis in pleural fluid has emerged as a promising approach for the diagnosis of MPE, enabling the detection of mRNA, DNA methylation patterns, lncRNAs, miRNAs, or circulating tumor DNA. Although these biomarkers have demonstrated good diagnostic accuracy, they are not yet implemented in routine clinical practice, and most studies have primarily focused on MPE due to lung cancer. In malignant pleural mesothelioma, where cytology has limited sensitivity, the most extensively investigated markers in pleural fluid are mesothelin and fibulin-3. Among conventional tumor markers, the pleural fluid CYFRA 21-1/CEA ratio has shown high diagnostic accuracy, further enhanced when combined with mesothelin. Pleural fluid fibulin-3 has also been identified as an independent prognostic factor for survival.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences
Published
2025-09-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/10408363.2025.2559697
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Pleural and Pulmonary Diseases
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.56
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Pleural fluid biomarkers for the diagnosis and management of malignant pleural effusions: a clinical review

José Diego Santotoribio
3 citations
Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences
Pleural and Pulmonary Diseases
4.56
article

Pleural fluid biomarkers for the diagnosis and management of malignant pleural effusions: a clinical review

José Diego Santotoribio
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Initial pleural fluid analysis is a fundamental step in the evaluation of suspected malignant pleural effusion (MPE). Most MPEs present as exudates, often hemorrhagic, with mononuclear cell predominance. Basic biochemical parameters-glucose, total protein, LDH, ADA, and pH-help distinguish MPE from other causes and offer prognostic information. Low glucose and pH, and elevated LDH, are associated with higher tumor burden and poorer outcomes. Flow cytometry can detect high-fluorescence cells suggestive of malignancy, while additional markers like CRP, cholesterol, amylase, and lipids provide complementary diagnostic value, especially when interpreted alongside tumor markers (TMs). Among TMs in pleural fluid, CEA is the most validated and widely used, showing high specificity for MPE. Others-such as CA 15.3, CYFRA 21-1, CA 125, CA 19.9, NSE, and HE4-offer variable sensitivity and specificity depending on tumor type and clinical context. False positives can occur in benign or inflammatory conditions, emphasizing the need for cautious interpretation. Other cancer biomarkers in pleural fluid-such as VEGF, Apolipoprotein E, calprotectin, endostatin, and homocysteine-may enhance diagnostic and prognostic capabilities. VEGF and endostatin reflect tumor angiogenesis and may also serve as therapeutic targets, while homocysteine shows promise in detecting MPEs not identified by conventional TMs. Multimarker strategies significantly improve diagnostic accuracy. Combinations of two pleural fluid TMs, such as CEA with CA 15.3, or diagnostic models like the MPER score (CEA + homocysteine), have shown excellent performance. Panels with three or more markers, including inflammatory or metabolic biomarkers (ADA, CRP, and %polymorphonuclear leukocytes) further enhance sensitivity and specificity. Molecular analysis in pleural fluid has emerged as a promising approach for the diagnosis of MPE, enabling the detection of mRNA, DNA methylation patterns, lncRNAs, miRNAs, or circulating tumor DNA. Although these biomarkers have demonstrated good diagnostic accuracy, they are not yet implemented in routine clinical practice, and most studies have primarily focused on MPE due to lung cancer. In malignant pleural mesothelioma, where cytology has limited sensitivity, the most extensively investigated markers in pleural fluid are mesothelin and fibulin-3. Among conventional tumor markers, the pleural fluid CYFRA 21-1/CEA ratio has shown high diagnostic accuracy, further enhanced when combined with mesothelin. Pleural fluid fibulin-3 has also been identified as an independent prognostic factor for survival.

Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences
Biomedical Research and Innovation Institute of Cadiz (ES), Hospital Universitario Puerto Real (ES)
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Pleural and Pulmonary Diseases
4.56
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.