Elevated reticulocyte count--a clue to the diagnosis of haemolytic-uraemic syndrome (HUS) associated with gemcitabine therapy for metastatic duodenal papillary carcinoma: a case report

Pediatric onco-nephrology: time to spread the word : Part I: early kidney involvement in children with malignancy

Onco-nephrology has been a growing field within the adult nephrology scope of practice. Even though pediatric nephrologists have been increasingly involved in the care of children with different forms of malignancy, there has not been an emphasis on developing special expertise in this area. The fast pace of discovery in this field, including the development of new therapy protocols with their own kidney side effects and the introduction of the CD19-targeted chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR-T) therapy, has introduced new challenges for general pediatric nephrologists because of the unique effects of these treatments on the kidney. Moreover, with the improved outcomes in children receiving cancer therapy come an increased number of survivors at risk for chronic kidney disease related to both their cancer diagnosis and therapy. Therefore, it is time for pediatric onco-nephrology to take its spot on the expanding subspecialties map in pediatric nephrology.

Gemcitabine-induced haemolytic uremic syndrome, although infrequent, can it be prevented: A case report and review of literature

Gemcitabine is an antineoplastic used to treat several malignancies including pancreatic cancer. Its toxicity profile is well known with myelotoxicity, increased vascular permeability and peripheral oedema as most frequent adverse events. However, several cases of acute renal failure have been reported and haemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS) seems to be the underlying process. The cause of HUS remains unknown but its consequences can be lethal. Therefore, a high grade of suspicion is crucial to diagnose it and promptly treat it. This hopefully will reduce its morbidity. HUS is characterized by progressive renal failure associated with microangiopathic haemolytic anaemia and thrombocytopenia. The primary event is damage to endothelial cells and thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) is the histopathological lesion. TMA affects mainly renal microvasculature. However, some cases evolve with central nervous or cardiovascular systems involvement. We present here a case of gemcitabine-induced HUS, with renal and cardiovascular system affected at the time of diagnosis which to our knowledge this is the first time of such case to be reported.

Thrombotic microangiopathy, cancer, and cancer drugs

Thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) is a complication that can develop directly from certain malignancies, but more often results from anticancer therapy. Currently, the incidence of cancer drug-induced TMA during the last few decades is >15%, primarily due to the introduction of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents. It is important for clinicians to understand the potential causes of cancer drug-induced TMA to facilitate successful diagnosis and treatment. In general, cancer drug-induced TMA can be classified into 2 types. Type I cancer drug-induced TMA includes chemotherapy regimens (ie, mitomycin C) that can potentially promote long-term kidney injury, as well as increased morbidity and mortality. Type II cancer drug-induced TMA includes anti-VEGF agents that are not typically associated with cumulative dose-dependent cell damage. In addition, functional recovery of kidney function often occurs after drug interruption, assuming a type I agent was not given prior to or during therapy. There are no randomized controlled trials to provide physician guidance in the management of TMA. However, previously accumulated information and research suggest that endothelial cell damage has an underlying immunologic basis. Based on this, the emerging trend includes the use of immunosuppressive agents if a refractory or relapsing clinical course that does not respond to plasmapheresis and steroids is observed.

Gemcitabine-induced hemolytic uremic syndrome in pancreatic cancer: a case report and review of the literature

Hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS) is a rare thrombotic complication characterized by a triad of microangiopathic hemolytic anemia, thrombocytopenia, and acute renal failure. HUS may be caused by several different conditions, including infection, malignancy, and chemotherapeutic agents, such as mitomycin, cisplatin, and most recently, gemcitabine. The outcome of gemcitabine-induced HUS is poor, and the disease has a high mortality rate. This study reports a case of gemcitabine-induced HUS in a patient with pancreatic cancer in Korea.

Gemcitabine induced hemolytic uremic syndrome

BACKGROUND

Gemcitabine is frequently used for the treatment of many cancers. Not infrequently it leads to development of hemolytic uremic syndrome, presenting with hemolytic anemia, acute kidney injury and occasionally peripheral edema, livedo reticularis and digital necrosis.

CASE REPORT

A 78 year old man with non-small cell lung cancer developed uremic syndrome following treatment with multiple chemotherapy agents including gemcitabine. He was treated aggressively with hemodialysis and plasmapheresis. Initially he responded but upon attempts at decreasing the frequency of plasmapheresis, lactate dehydrogenase increased and platelet count decreased, indicating continuing hemolysis. Hemolysis responded to splenectomy but he continued to require hemodialysis treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Although many cases of gemcitabine induced HUS have been reported, its cause and pathogenesis remain unclear and it should be used with caution. Frequent monitoring of renal function and close observation of the patient are essential.

Therapeutic apheresis in the treatment of hemolytic uremic syndrome in view of pathophysiological aspects

Hemolytic-uremic syndrome (HUS) is a disease that can lead to acute kidney injury and often to other serious sequelae, including death. The disease is characterized by microangiopathic hemolytic anemia, thrombocytopenia, and acute kidney injury. In view of the different courses of HUS, a minimum of three different pathogenetic types leading to HUS can be subdivided as follows: HUS caused by infection, idiopathic HUS (non-Shiga toxin HUS), and HUS in systemic diseases and after toxin exposure. The etiology and pathogenesis of HUS are not completely understood and its therapy is complicated. After the introduction of therapeutic apheresis as a supportive therapy in HUS, several authors reported successful treatment in more than 87% of treated patients. The supportive therapy is indicated basically in severe courses of HUS and is superior to available therapy interventions.

Guidelines on the use of therapeutic apheresis in clinical practice--evidence-based approach from the Apheresis Applications Committee of the American Society for Apheresis

The American Society for Apheresis (ASFA) Apheresis Applications Committee is charged with a review and categorization of indications for therapeutic apheresis. Beginning with the 2007 ASFA Special Issue (fourth edition), the subcommittee has incorporated systematic review and evidence-based approach in the grading and categorization of indications. This Fifth ASFA Special Issue has further improved the process of using evidence-based medicine in the recommendations by refining the category definitions and by adding a grade of recommendation based on widely accepted GRADE system. The concept of a fact sheet was introduced in the Fourth edition and is only slightly modified in this current edition. The fact sheet succinctly summarizes the evidence for the use of therapeutic apheresis. The article consists of 59 fact sheets devoted to each disease entity currently categorized by the ASFA as category I through III. Category IV indications are also listed.

Gemcitabine-associated thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura

Gemcitabine-associated thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP) is a rare complication of gemcitabine treatment with a incidence ranging from 0.015% to 1.4%. Clinically, this disease manifests as haemolytic anaemia, thrombocytopenia, and renal insufficiency; hypertension and neurological and pulmonary symptoms are also known complications. The risk of TTP increases as the cumulative dose of gemcitabine approaches 20,000 mg/m(2). The pathophysiology of this disease entity is unknown although several theories, involving both immune and non-immune mechanisms, have been proposed. The most effective treatment is discontinuation of gemcitabine, the provision of antihypertensive medications as needed, and consideration of plasmapheresis or use of immunoadsorption column in severe cases.

[Hemolytic uremic syndrome as a complication of gemcitabine treatment: report of six cases and review of the literature]

Hemolytic uremic syndrome is a rare condition during gemcitabine therapy.

METHODS

We report six new cases of hemolytic uremic syndrome related to gemcitabine, three issued from a retrospective study of 136 consecutive patients treated with gemcitabine for which a systematic screening of this side effect has been performed and 29 cases with clinical data available identified in the literature in order to better characterised frequency and clinical presentation of this side effect.

RESULTS

In our series, frequency of HUS is 2.2% and is higher than this previously reported (0.015%) or estimated with the data of clinical trials analysed (0.072 %). For 35 cases with clinical data available, the patients were always treated for a local advanced and/or metastatic disease. For our cases and for literature cases, at the time of diagnosis of hemolytic uremic syndrome, mean number of doses received (mean+/-standard deviation. Minimum/maximum)) (personal cases: 26.5+/-6.6. 16/36, literature cases: 21+/-11. 8/54), cumulative dose received (g/m2) (personal cases : 24.5+/-6.3. 16/31.6, literature cases: 21.7+/-12.4. 2.4/54) and duration of treatment (months) (personal cases: 8.2+/-1.9. 5.6/11, literature cases: 8.5+/-4.0. 3/18) are very closed and high individual variations observed for these factors are not consistent with a time and/or dose dependant toxicity. New-onset hypertension or exacerbation of underlying hypertension is the most common clinical manifestation, with mild anemia; thrombocytopenia is inconstant. The degree of severity of renal failure is highly variable. The existence of subacute clinical form with progressive worsening of the symptoms and biological form at the time of diagnosis suggest the interest of a systematic clinical and biological screening of this side effect, before each injection of gemcitabine. Early prognosis is linked to the evolution of hemolytic uremic syndrome and after hemolytic uremic syndrome healing, cancer progression. Treatment include gemcitabine discontinuation, antihypertensive drugs and if necessary fresh frozen plasma.

CONCLUSIONS

Systematic clinical and biological screening of hemolytic uremic syndrome during gemcitabine therapy should allow to better know this complication, to recognize and treat it earlier with a potential positive impact for patients.

Hemolytic uremic syndrome following prolonged gemcitabine therapy: report of four cases from a single institution

Hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS) has been described following the administration of multiple antineoplastic agents, most notably mitomycin C. More recently, several cases of gemcitabine-induced HUS have been observed with the overall incidence of gemcitabine-induced HUS estimated at 0.015-0.25%. We here report on four patients who developed HUS following gemcitabine therapy at our institution within the last year (incidence 1.4%). All these patients had advanced-stage disease, were heavily pretreated, and received prolonged gemcitabine application, suggesting that in this subgroup of patients HUS may be more frequently encountered than documented so far.

Gemcitabine-associated hemolytic-uremic syndrome

BACKGROUND

Gemcitabine has mild renal toxicity, but cases of gemcitabine-associated hemolytic-uremic syndrome (HUS) have been reported.

METHODS

A case is presented of a 45-year-old woman on prolonged gemcitabine treatment for ovarian cancer who developed HUS and recovered after drug discontinuation. A mini-review of the literature based on a MEDLINE search follows.

RESULTS

Including our own patient, a total of 26 cases of gemcitabine-associated HUS were identified. Median patient age was 52 years. Treatment was for various tumors at advanced stages, and in some patients, other anticancer drugs previously had been administered. Mean time between initiation of gemcitabine therapy and onset of HUS was 7.4 +/- 3.5 months, or 21.9 +/- 10.9 doses of gemcitabine. The calculated median cumulative dose of gemcitabine was 20,000 mg/m(2) (range, 2,450 to 48,000 mg/m(2), or a total of 70,000 mg). The onset of disease was noted up to 2 months after the last gemcitabine infusion. Diagnosis of HUS was confirmed histologically in 13 patients and based on clinical findings in the other 15. Treatment included drug discontinuation, steroids, fresh frozen plasma, hemodialysis, absorption chromatography, plasmapheresis, and various combinations thereof. Of 23 patients with reported outcome, 11 died within a few weeks. In two cases, death was believed to be a direct consequence of HUS. Reexposure to the drug was reported in three patients but was uncomplicated in only one.

CONCLUSION

There are only a few confirmed cases of gemcitabine-associated HUS despite the widespread use of the drug. This potentially fatal complication is difficult to treat and should be widely known.

[Hemolytic-uremic syndrome complicating a long-term treatment with gemcitabine. Report of a case and review of the literature]

INTRODUCTION

Gemcitabine is a nucleoside analog used in solid tumors since 1987. The main side effect is myelosuppression. Acute renal failure with thrombotic microangiopathy has also been reported. We report a new case and suggest to screen for this complication.

EXEGESIS

A 71-year-old man with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas was treated with gemcitabine. He developed episodes of recurred haemolysis followed by haemolytic uremic syndrome. One single haemodialysis session was performed. No other known causes for haemolytic and uremic syndrome were found. Gemcitabine appears to be a new cause of thrombotic microangiopathy. It results from cumulative effects, arises preferentially when there is a renal dysfunction and diagnosis is often delayed. Treatment must be stopped.

CONCLUSION

We suggest that reticulocyte count, haptoglobin level and urinalysis could help the clinician to maintain high vigilance and to have a rapid diagnosis for this rare disorder.