Skip to main content
NCBI home page
ecancermedicalscience logoLink to ecancermedicalscience
. 2016 Jun 28;10:649. doi: 10.3332/ecancer.2016.649

Cancer-associated thrombotic microangiopathy

K Govind Babu 1, Gita R Bhat 1
PMCID: PMC4929977  PMID: 27433282

Abstract

Cancer-associated thrombotic microangiopathy refers to a group of disorders characterised by microvascular thrombosis, thrombocytopenia, and ischaemic end-organ damage. Haemolytic uraemic syndrome and thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura are the two major subtypes. It can be a manifestation of the malignancy itself or a complication of its therapy. The addition of several new drugs to the therapeutic armamentarium of cancer has brought to light several novel causative factors of this hitherto uncommon complication. This review covers the aetiology, pathogenesis, clinical manifestations, complications, and the management of cancer-associated thrombotic microangiopathy. Careful review of the patient’s medical records coupled with the correlation of clinical findings and laboratory reports can help clinch the diagnosis and institute appropriate treatment on time.

Keywords: thrombotic microangiopathy, haemolytic uraemic syndrome, thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura, gemcitabine, mitomycin-C, haematopoietic stem cell transplant, immunotoxins, anti-VEGF, plasmapheresis

Introduction

Thrombotic microangiopathies (TMA) are a group of disorders characterised by disseminated occlusive microvascular thrombosis, thrombocytopenia, and ischaemic end-organ damage, most commonly in kidneys and brain. Haemolytic uraemic syndrome (HUS) and thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP) are the two main subtypes [1].

TTP is described by a pentad of clinical findings including thrombocytopenia, microangiopathic haemolytic anaemia (MAHA), neurologic deficits, such as seizures, hemiplegia and visual disturbances, renal failure, and fever. HUS is defined as a triad of MAHA with varying degrees of thrombocytopenia and renal failure [1, 2]. Fragmentation of erythrocytes as they pass through clogged arterioles gives rise to Coombs-negative haemolytic anaemia with an elevated schistocyte count. Renal insufficiency invariably occurs in HUS but is milder in TTP, where neurological symptoms often predominate [1]. The pathological features include intra-renal or systemic microvascular thrombi with endothelial swelling and microvascular obstruction [3].

von Willebrand factor (vWF) is initially secreted from Wiebel–Palade bodies as multimers tethered to the endothelial cell surface. Here, they provide glycoprotein Ib receptor sites for platelet adhesion and thrombus formation. ADAMTS13, also called von Willebrand factor-cleaving protease (vWF-cp) regulates thrombus formation by cleaving the multimeric vWF [4, 5]. Severe deficiency of ADAMTS13 (<5% of normal) has been proposed as the key pathogenetic factor for idiopathic TTP [6]. Studies have shown that cancer-associated TMA is not associated with the severe deficiency of ADAMTS13 [7].

History of cancer-associated thrombotic microangiopathy

The term ‘microangiopathic haemolytic anaemia’ was coined by Brain et al in 1962. They observed that ‘widespread intra-capillary and intra-arteriolar eosinophilic granular or amorphous thrombi’ could reduce the lumen of the blood vessels to ‘pin-point size’, leading to mechanical red cell destruction by intra-luminal shearing. They described the appearance of fragmented red cells as ‘burr, triangular, and helmet red cells’ [8]. In their series of 25 patients, the various conditions that caused MAHA were TTP, malignant hypertension, acute renal disease, and metastatic carcinomas. In 1979, Antman et al. in the review on MAHA and cancer proposed that the haemolysis and thrombocytopenia were primarily caused by mechanical obstruction of the vascular lumen by tumour cell emboli. They concluded that a variety of systemic malignancies could cause clinicopathological features of TMA without coagulation abnormalities like disseminated intravascular coagulation [9].

Aetiopathogenesis

In patients with cancer, TMA have been reported as follows:

(1) A manifestation of cancer itself:

Most cases of cancer-associated TMA have been reported in patients with mucin-producing adenocarcinoma and in those with disseminated malignancies. It has also been described in cases with isolated invasion of the bone marrow by the tumour [10]. The incidence of TMA in this population is said to range from 0.25 to 0.45 persons per million [11]. A prospective study by Lohrmann et al. determined that 5.7% of patients with metastatic carcinoma have MAHA [10]. In an extensive review by Lechner et al., adenocarcinoma was the most common histopathological subtype in patients with cancer-associated TMA. Gastric carcinoma was the most common (26.2%), followed by breast (21.4%), prostate (13.7%), and lung cancer (9.5%) [11]. It has also been reported in pancreatic adenocarcinoma, lymphoma as well as other malignancies [12]. The malignancies associated with MAHA are listed in Table 1 [8, 9, 11, 13–21].

Table 1. Systemic malignancies associated with microangiopathic haemolytic anaemia [8, 9, 11, 13–21].

Solid tumours:
Gastrointestinal malignancies Gastric cancer
Colon cancer
Carcinoma of anal canal (squamous cell)
Metastatic appendiceal carcinoma
Breast cancer
Lung cancer Adenocarcinoma
Squamous cell carcinoma
Small cell lung cancer
Genitourinary malignancies Prostate cancer
Ovarian cancer
Renal cell carcinoma
Seminal vesicle tumour
Hepatobiliary cancers Hepatocellular carcinoma
Pancreatic cancer
Cholangiocarcinoma
Endocrine Multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1
Pheochromocytoma
Neuroendocrine tumour
Prolactin producing pituitary adenoma
Others Kaposi sarcoma
Carcinoma of unknown origin
Hematologic malignancies:
Non-Hodgkin lymphoma
Acute lymphoblastic leukaemia
Myelodysplastic syndrome
Hodgkin lymphoma
Multiple myeloma
Open in a new tab

It has been postulated that, along with abnormal angiogenesis in the marrow, aggressive growth of tumours and secondary myelofibrosis may injure the endothelial cell lining of the marrow vasculature by direct invasion. This could result in release of ultra large VWF multimers (ULVWF). In addition, a possible decrease in availability of VWF-cleaving protease (ADAMTS13), possibly through formation of autoantibodies against ADAMTS13 may contribute to the development of TMA. Fragmentation of red blood cells due to direct contact with intraluminal fibrin thrombi or tumour emboli within blood vessels may lead to MAHA [22]. The effect of mucin on endothelial dysfunction has also been proposed as a mechanism for the development of TMA [23].

(2) As a complication of chemotherapy:

Chemotherapy may cause TMA by two mechanisms, namely an acute immune-mediated reaction or dose-dependent toxicity. Acute and presumed immune-mediated TMA has been reported with oxaliplatin [24]. Oxaliplatin-dependent, platelet-reactive antibodies have been documented in patients with acute oxaliplatin-induced thrombocytopenia [25].

The incidence of gemcitabine induced HUS ranges from 0.015% to 0.31%. The median duration of therapy is 5.8 months, with most of the patients developing HUS within one to two months of the last infusion. It develops after a median cumulative dose of 20 g/m2, with a broad range from 2.5 g/m2 to 48 g/m2. Mortality may be as high as 60% [26–30]. Although gemcitabine-induced TMA is typically dose-dependent, there are case reports of acute TMA following the first or second infusion [31]. It is said to occur due to uncontrolled proximal alternative pathway complement activation. This leads to an increased terminal membrane attack complex giving rise to endothelial cell activation. There is activation of monocytes, neutrophils, and platelet activation and aggregation. Gemcitabine may directly damage endothelial cells, resulting in platelet aggregation and intravascular haemolysis [32].

The incidence of mitomycin-C-induced HUS ranges from 2% to 15%. The risk increases significantly when the cumulative dose exceeds 30 mg/m2 to 40 mg/m2 and after one year of treatment. The prognosis is poor with 75% mortality related to renal failure. Direct endothelial cell injury likely plays a central role. Following endothelial injury and exposure of the subendothelium, activation of platelets and the clotting cascade may occur [27, 28, 30, 33].

The other chemotherapeutic agents that have been implicated in the aetiology of HUS include 5-fluorouracil, bleomycin, cisplatin, cytosine arabinoside, daunomycin, deoxycoformycin, estramustine, and methyl-CCNU [34, 35].

(3) In the setting of bone marrow transplantation:

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an important long-term complication of haematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT), particularly allogeneic in which it develops in 15% to 20% of survivors [36]. Most of the cases of CKD after HCT are thought to be related to a low-grade TMA. However, the incidence in patients undergoing bone marrow transplantation is uncertain, given the difficulty in establishing a diagnosis [37]. It is characterised by slowly rising serum creatinine, hypertension, and disproportionate anaemia. Some cases might have an acute, fulminant presentation with associated renal dysfunction and neurologic manifestations that may represent endothelial damage driven by donor–host interactions [38]. Careful review of previous reports reveals intermittent or persistent elevation of lactate dehydrogenase, low serum haptoglobin, thrombocytopenia, anaemia, and sometimes schistocytosis [39].

Exposure of the kidneys to radiation as a part of the pre-HCT conditioning damages the renal microvasculature. This is the primary cause of renal damage. Concurrent chemotherapy and genetic factors (angiotensin-converting enzyme genotype) play a modulatory role along with post-HCT factors such as use of calcineurin inhibitors (especially sirolimus), the presence of graft versus host disease, the presence of procoagulant state and infection [39–42]. Sirolimus inhibits VEGF resulting in glomerular podocyte injury [43, 44]. Damage to endothelial cells along with cell swelling and fibrin deposition causes microvascular occlusion and results in haemolysis. Glomerular ischaemia gives rise to hypertension and over time leads to fibrosis and renal failure [45].

(4) In those receiving antibodies and immunotoxins:

HUS has been reported in adults and children treated with immunotoxins and is generally reversible [46]. The causative agents include anti-CD 22 immunotoxins CAT-3888, formerly called BL22 [47–49] and moxetumomab pasudotox [50], combotox which is a 2 deglycosylated ricin A chain immunotoxins directed against CD 19 and CD 22 and DAB486IL-2, a recombinant immunotoxin that targets IL-2 [51].

The mechanism of immunotoxin-induced TMA is not well understood. In ricin-induced HUS as demonstrated in animal models, upregulation of pro-inflammatory cytokines MCP-1, TNF-α, IL-1β, and IL-6 promotes an inflammatory environment. This leads to infiltration of the glomeruli with macrophages that stimulate secretion of vWF. This leads to the development of glomerular thrombosis, renal failure, haemolysis, and thrombocytopenia [52, 53]. In case of anti-CD 22 immunotoxins cross reactivity to a different target or non-specific uptake into cells by pinocytosis may play a role [54].

HUS is a dose-limiting toxicity of apolizumab, a humanised monoclonal antibody against an antigen on the β-chain of HLA-DR called 1D10. Alemtuzumab, an anti-CD 52 monoclonal antibody has also been known to induce HUS. It is reversible [55]. Release of cytokines, TNF-α and IL-6 may be causative.

Anti-VEGF therapy

Several anti-VEGF agents, such as bevacizumab [44], sunitinib [56–58], and aflibercept [59], have been associated with TMA, suggesting a potential classwide effect. Eremina et al. have described six biopsy documented cases of TMA-resembling HUS following administration of bevacizumab. These patients developed proteinuria or raised serum creatinine following the initiation of bevacizumab, ultimately leading to renal biopsy. Following discontinuation of therapy, improvement in renal function was noted, suggesting at least partial reversibility.

It has been proposed that inhibition of VEGF in the glomerular microvasculature prevents the formation and maintenance of a healthy, fenestrated endothelium. Without active VEGF signalling, the endothelium is compromised. This leads to loss of integrity of the glomerular filtration barrier [44].

Imatinib

Al Aly et al. have published a case report on a 22-year-old lady with hypereosinophilic syndrome who developed TMA while on Imatinib. ADAMTS13 activity was below the normal range. There was marked elevation of ADAMTS13 inhibitor levels. She was treated with plasma exchange and haemodialysis, leading to haematological recovery but persistent renal impairment [60].

Diagnosing thrombotic microangiopathy

The diagnosis of TMA is based on recognising microvascular thrombosis, red blood cell destruction, and platelet consumption. At present, there are no guidelines to establish the diagnosis.

Blake–Haskins et al. have proposed a detailed grading of TMA. Grade 1 refers to evidence of erythrocyte destruction, without clinical consequences. It has been described as the appearance of schistocytes (≥ 5/HPF) in a patient with no schistocytes at baseline or an increase (≥ 5/HPF) in the frequency of schistocytes over the baseline. Grade 2 includes laboratory findings, such as schistocytosis, drop in haemoglobin by 1 g/dL, and mild renal insufficiency, without clinical consequences. Grade 3 refers to laboratory findings along with clinical consequences. The patient has schistocytosis and drop in haemoglobin by 1 g/dL and either grade 4 thrombocytopenia or moderate renal insufficiency. Grade 4 TMA includes to the presence of life-threatening consequences such as clinically significant haemorrhage requiring intervention, thrombosis, and/or embolism or renal insufficiency requiring intervention. Grade 5 refers to death due to TMA [61].

The clinical features of fulminant HUS/TTP include the classic pentad of MAHA, thrombocytopenia, fever, rapidly progressive renal failure, and neurological deficits [1]. Some may have a subacute presentation with mild thrombocytopenia and gradual deterioration of renal function [1]. Renal dysfunction is seen in almost all the cases and is manifested by elevations in serum creatinine and/or worsening haematuria. Evidence of haemolysis such as fall in haemoglobin, low levels of haptoglobin; elevation of LDH and reticulocyte count and indirect hyperbilirubinaemia is seen frequently. Identification of schistocytes in by peripheral smear may not be documented in all cases.

In the series by Humphreys et al., new or exacerbated hypertension was a prominent feature in gemcitabine-induced HUS. It is important to note that this feature preceded the diagnosis of HUS in all cases. The severity of hypertension correlates with poor outcome [39]. Hypertension in TMA is due to glomerular ischaemia caused by microvascular capillary obstruction [45].

The differences between MAHA caused by systemic malignancy and TTP associated with severe ADAMTS13 deficiency, as per the Oklahoma TTP-HUS registry are as follows [13, 14, 62]:

  • Patients with cancer-associated MAHA present at an older ager (mean age: 56 years) versus those with TTP associated with severe ADAMTS13 deficiency (mean age: 40 years).

  • We must look for the evidence of active malignancy in those with a history of cancer. Even if the cancer appears to be in remission, evidence of recurrence, such as bone marrow biopsy is necessary.

  • Progressive weakness, weight loss, and pain are common in patients with cancer-associated MAHA. They have a longer duration of symptoms (median duration: 21 days) versus those with TTP associated with ADAMTS13 deficiency (median duration: 8 days).

  • Pulmonary involvement characterised by dyspnoea, cough, and abnormal chest X-ray is a feature of cancer-associated MAHA.

  • Leucoerythroblastic reaction and extreme and extreme elevation of LDH are seen in those with cancer-associated MAHA.

  • The median value of ADAMTS13 activity is 50% in those with cancer-associated MAHA.

  • MAHA associated with systemic malignancies fails to respond to plasma exchange. On the other hand, patients with TTP due to ADAMTS13 deficiency respond promptly with rapid reversal of neurologic symptoms, reduction of LDH levels over 1 to 2 days and rise in platelet counts over 3 to 4 days.

Is renal biopsy always required?

Renal biopsy is very rarely required, unless the presentation is atypical. The clinical and laboratory features often point to a diagnosis of HUS/TTP. Biopsy findings do not significantly alter management. Biopsy is an invasive procedure and carries increased risk in these patients with thrombocytopenia and other comorbidities. The typical histopathological features are mesangiolysis, basement membrane duplication, glomerular endothelial cell swelling, and tubular injury with interstitial fibrosis [63].

Role of bone marrow biopsy

Patients with history of cancer, including those who appear to be in complete remission need an extensive workup, including bone marrow biopsy to look for the evidence of malignancy [13]. Marrow infiltration by metastatic carcinoma or lymphoma may lead to thrombocytopenia and MAHA [14–16].

Complications

Acute respiratory distress syndrome may develop in patients with a fulminant course. It is associated with a high mortality rate because treatment is even more difficult in a patient with underlying disease [1]. Seizures have been reported in those with the involvement of the central nervous system (CNS). Pancreatic insufficiency may occur, which is manifested as diabetes mellitus, which usually is transient. The muscle, liver, and heart (cardiomyopathy and myocarditis) also can be affected [2]. CKD with hypertension is one of the long-term outcomes [39]. End-stage renal disease (ESRD) may develop.

Differential diagnosis

HUS should be differentiated from isolated renal insufficiency in the presence of myelotoxicity. In the latter scenario, patients usually do not have laboratory evidence of haemolysis with microangiopathy (schistocytes, raised reticulocyte count, indirect hyperbilirubinaemia, elevated lactate dehydrogenase or fibrin split products). Anaemia and thrombocytopenia associated with myelosuppression tend to be more severe. Mild renal insufficiency unrelated to HUS should resolve quickly or return to baseline on rehydration or treatment of the underlying pre-renal state. In renal failure unrelated to HUS, renal biopsy, if performed, will not show the classic microvascular damage with arterioles and small arteries occluded by eosinophilic hyaline thrombi containing fibrin and platelet aggregates [64]. In patients with malignancy, the other causes of thrombocytopenia and haemolysis include disseminated intravascular coagulation and sepsis.

Treatment and outcome

Is there a scope for early detection and prevention of TMA?

In case of gemcitabine induced HUS, early diagnosis may be aided by weekly visits to the chemotherapy day care by the patient might give a chance to detect new or exacerbated hypertension as it develops [65]. Renal shielding during total body irradiation in the setting of allogeneic HCT is said to be protective [66].

As of today, there is no definitive approach for cancer-associated TMA. Treatments comprise of the following main categories:

  1. When a given therapy is implicated as causative, it should be discontinued. Reintroducing the drug at a lower dose may be a strategy to avoid recurrent TMA, while allowing for continued treatment. Retreatment has been successfully carried out with CAT-3888, DAB486IL-2, and bevacizumab. However, it may be difficult to choose an appropriate dose for reintroduction and the risks and benefits involved need to be carefully assessed [44, 49, 67].

  2. Immunocomplex removal: This includes plasmapheresis, immunoadsorption, haemodialysis, or exchange transfusion. Although the efficacies of plasma exchange and immunoadsorption chromatography are arguable, either or both should be initiated promptly at diagnosis in all patients. These may need to be continued for months [11].

  3. Immunosuppressive therapies: The value of corticosteroids is uncertain [1].

  4. Miscellaneous: Blood pressure should be controlled.

  5. Eculizumab: It is a recombinant humanised monoclonal antibody that binds to complement C5 protein, inhibiting its cleavage and thus preventing the generation of the terminal complement attack complex C5b-9. The common adverse events are headache, anaemia, and diarrhoea. Neisseria meningitides vaccination is indicated at least two weeks prior to treatment. It was initially approved for the treatment of paroxysmal nocturnal haemoglobinuria and has also been used in atypical HUS.

Al Ustwani et al. have reported the use of eculizumab in four patients with gemcitabine-induced HUS. In their series, patients were initiated upon eculizumab as the patients did not show improvement of renal function or haemolysis even after administration of corticosteroids stopping gemcitabine for three to five weeks. It resulted in the resolution of microangiopathic haemolysis and thrombocytopenia in all four patients. All patients had significant improvement in renal function but did not return to baseline. None of the patients had serious adverse events [32].

Conclusion

The diagnosis of cancer-associated TMA needs a high index of suspicion. Careful review of diagnosis of cancer, treatment history and interpretation of subtle clinical signs will aid in clinching the diagnosis. Patients with smaller tumour burden, or those in whom anticancer therapy is effective, and in cases where vigilance has led to early diagnosis tend to do better. It has also been suggested that prognosis is better when TMA occurs as a manifestation of the underlying cancer than as a complication of therapy.

Abbreviations used in this article

ADAMTS13

A disintegrin-like and metalloprotease with thrombospondin type-1 repeats

CKD

Chronic kidney disease

HUS

Haemolytic uraemic syndrome

MAHA

Microangiopathic haemolytic anaemia

TMA

Thrombotic microangiopathy

TTP

Thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura

ULVWF multimers

Ultra large von Willebrand factor multimers

vWF

von Willebrand factor

vWF-cp

von Willebrand factor-cleaving protease

References

  • 1.Fojo AT. DeVita, Vincent T, Hellman S, Lawrence TS, Rosenberg SA, Wolters Kluwer, editors. Metabolic emergencies. 10. pp. 1822–1831. In: Devita, Hellman and Rosenberg’s cancer: Principles and practice of oncology.
  • 2.Corrigan JJ, Boineau FG. Hemolytic-uremic syndrome. Pediatr Rev. 2001;22:365–369. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Moake JL. Thrombotic microangiopathies. N Eng J Med. 2002;347:589–600. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra020528. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Ruggeri ZM. The role of von Willebrand factor in thrombus formation. Thromb Res. 2007;120(Suppl 1):S5–S9. doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2007.03.011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Sadler JE. Biochemistry and genetics of von Willebrand factor. Annu Rev Biochem. 1998;67:395–424. doi: 10.1146/annurev.biochem.67.1.395. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Bianchi V, Robles R, Alberio L, et al. Von Willebrand factor-cleaving protease (ADAMTS13) in thrombocytopenic disorders: a severely deficient activity is specific for thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura. Blood. 2002;100:710–713. doi: 10.1182/blood-2002-02-0344. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Fontana S, Gerritsen HE, Hovinga JK, et al. Microangiopathic haemolytic anaemia in metastasizing malignant tumours is not associated with a severe deficiency of the von Willebrand factor-cleaving protease. Br J Haematol. 2001;113:100–102. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2141.2001.02704.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Brain MC, Dacie JV, Hourihane OB. Microangiopathic hemolytic anemia: the possible role of vascular lesions in pathogenesis. Br J Haematol. 1962;8:358–374. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2141.1962.tb06541.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Antman KH, Skarin AT, Mayer RJ, et al. Microangiopathic hemolytic anemia and cancer: a review. Medicine. 1979;58:377–384. doi: 10.1097/00005792-197909000-00004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Lohrmann HP, Adam W, Heymer B, et al. Microangiopathic hemolytic anemia in metastatic carcinoma: report of eight cases. Ann Intern Med. 1973;79:368–375. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-79-3-368. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Lechner K, Obermeier HL. Cancer-related microangiopathic hemolytic anemia. Clinical and laboratory features in 168 reported cases. Medicine. 2012;91:1–11. doi: 10.1097/MD.0b013e3182603598. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Mungall S, Mathieson P. Hemolytic uremic syndrome in metastatic adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Am J Kidney Dis. 2002;40:1334–1336. doi: 10.1053/ajkd.2002.36929. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.George JN. Systemic malignancies as a cause of unexpected microangiopathic hemolytic anemia and thrombocytopenia. Oncology. 2011;25(10):908–914. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Francis KK, Kalyanam N, Terrell DR, et al. Disseminated malignancy misdiagnosed as thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura: a report of 10 cases and a systematic review of the literature. The Oncologist. 2007;12:11–19. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.12-1-11. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Oberic L, Buffet M, Schwarzinger M, et al. Cancer awareness in atypical thrombotic microangiopathies. The Oncologist. 2009;14:769–779. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2009-0067. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Elliott MA, Letendre L, Gastineau DA, et al. Cancer-associated microangiopathic hemolytic anemia with thrombocytopenia: an important diagnostic consideration. Eur J Haematol. 2010;85:43–50. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0609.2010.01448.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Neidhardt B, Hartwich G, Preiss G, et al. EMicroangiopathic hemolytic anemia in metastasizing appendiceal carcinoma. Med Welt. 1979;30:1822Y1826. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Kouides PA, Phatak PD, Cramer SF. Fatal thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP) presenting concurrently with metastatic multiple endocrine neoplasia (MEN) type I. Hematopathol Mol Hematol. 1996;10:161Y170. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Kovacs K, Garvey MB. Thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura associated with a prolactin-producing pituitary adenoma. Am J Hematol. 2003;74:55Y59. doi: 10.1002/ajh.10366. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Sakai C, Takagi T, Oguro M, et al. Malignant pheochromocytoma accompanied by microangiopathic hemolytic anemia: a case report. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 1994;24:171Y174. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Schweizer H, Boehm J, Winterer JT, et al. Phaeochromocytoma and thrombotic microangiopathy: favourable outcome despite advanced renal failure. J Clin Pathol. 2010;63:754Y756. doi: 10.1136/jcp.2010.077511. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Brain MC, Azzopardi JG, Baker LR, et al. Microangiopathic haemolytic anaemia and mucin forming adenocarcinoma. Br J Haematol. 1970;18:183–192. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2141.1970.tb01433.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Werner TL, Agarwal N, Carney HM, et al. Management of cancer-associated thrombotic microangiopathy: what is the right approach? Am J Hematol. 2007;82:295–298. doi: 10.1002/ajh.20783. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Dahabreh I, Tsoutsos G, Tseligas D, et al. Hemolytic uremic syndrome following the infusion of oxaliplatin: case report. BMC Clin Pharmacol. 2006;6:5–8. doi: 10.1186/1472-6904-6-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Curtis BR, Kaliszewski J, Marques MB, et al. Immune-mediated thrombocytopenia resulting from sensitivity to oxaliplatin. Am J Hematol. 2006;81:193–198. doi: 10.1002/ajh.20516. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Flombaum CD, Mouradian JA, Casper ES, et al. Thrombotic microangiopathy as a complication of long-term therapy with gemcitabine. Am J Kidney Dis. 1999;33:555–562. doi: 10.1016/S0272-6386(99)70194-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Pisoni R, Ruggenenti P, Remuzzi G. Drug-induced thrombotic microangiopathy: incidence, prevention and management. Drug Saf. 2001;24:491–501. doi: 10.2165/00002018-200124070-00002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Dlott JS, Danielson CF, Blue-Hnidy DE, et al. Drug-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura/hemolytic uremic syndrome: a concise review. Ther Apher Dial. 2004;8:102–111. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-0968.2003.00127.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Izzedine H, Isnard-Bagnis C, Launay-Vacher V, et al. Gemcitabine-induced thrombotic microangiopathy: a systematic review. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2006;21:3038–3045. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfl507. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Lesesne JB, Rothschild N, Erickson B, et al. Cancer-associated hemolytic-uremic syndrome: analysis of 85 cases from a national registry. J Clin Oncol. 1989;7:781–789. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1989.7.6.781. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.De Smet D, Jochmans K, Neyns B. Development of thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura after a single dose of gemcitabine. Ann Hematol. 2008;87:495–496. doi: 10.1007/s00277-007-0429-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Al Ustwani O, Lohr J, Dy G, et al. Eculizumab therapy for gemcitabine induced hemolytic uremic syndrome: case series and concise review. J Gastrointest Oncol. 2014;1:E30–E33. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2078-6891.2013.042. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Valavaara R, Nordman E. Renal complications of mitomycin C therapy with special reference to the total dose. Cancer. 1985;55:47–50. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19850101)55:1<47::aid-cncr2820550108>3.0.co;2-#. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Sheldon R, Slaughter D. A syndrome of microangiopathic hemolytic anemia, renal impairment, and pulmonary edema in chemotherapy treated patients with adenocarcinoma. Cancer. 1986;58:1428–1436. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19861001)58:7<1428::aid-cncr2820580709>3.0.co;2-j. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Walter RB, Joerger M, Pestalozzi BC. Gemcitabine-associated hemolytic-uremic syndrome. Am J Kidney Dis. 2002;40:E16. doi: 10.1053/ajkd.2002.35758. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Zager RA. Acute renal failure in the setting of bone marrow transplantation. Kidney Int. 1994;46:1443–1458. doi: 10.1038/ki.1994.417. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Verburgh CA, Vermeij CG, Zijlmans JM, et al. Haemolytic uraemic syndrome following bone marrow transplantation. Case report and review of the literature. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1996;11:1332–1337. doi: 10.1093/ndt/11.7.1332. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Martinez MT, Bucher Ch, Stussi G, et al. Transplant-associated microangiopathy (TAM) in recipients of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplants. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2005;36:993–1000. doi: 10.1038/sj.bmt.1705160. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Humphreys BD, Soiffer RJ, Magee CC. Renal failure associated with cancer and its treatment: an update. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2005;16:151–161. doi: 10.1681/ASN.2004100843. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Miralbell R, Bieri S, Mermillod B, et al. Renal toxicity after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation: the combined effects of total-body irradiation and graft-versus-host disease. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14:579–585. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1996.14.2.579. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Lawton CA, Fish BL, Moulder JE. Effect of nephrotoxic drugs on the development of radiation nephropathy after bone marrow transplantation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1994;28:883–889. doi: 10.1016/0360-3016(94)90108-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Henry NL, Li S, Kim HT, et al. Sirolimus and thrombotic microangiopathy after allogeneic stem cell transplantation. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2004;15:578A. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2005.04.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Cutler C, Henry N, Magee C, et al. Sirolimus and thrombotic microangiopathy after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2005;11:551–557. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2005.04.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Eremina V, Jefferson JA, Kowaleska J, et al. VEGF inhibiton and renal thrombotic microangiopathy. N Eng J Med. 2008;358:1129–1136. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0707330. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Remuzzi G, Ruggenenti P, Bertani T. Thrombotic microangiopathy. In: Tisher CC, editor. Philadelphia: Lippincott; 1994. pp. 1154–1184. In: Renal pathology. [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Wayne AS, Fitzgerald DJ, Kreitman RJ, et al. Immunotoxins for leukemia. Blood. 2014;123:2470–2477. doi: 10.1182/blood-2014-01-492256. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Kreitman RJ, Squires DR, Stetler-Stevenson M, et al. Phase I trial of recombinant immunotoxin RFB4 (dsFv)-PE38 (BL22) in patients with B-cell malignancies. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:6719–6729. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.11.437. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Kreitman RJ, Wilson WH, Bergeron K, et al. Efficacy of the anti-CD22 recombinant immunotoxin BL22 in chemotherapy-resistant hairy-cell leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:241–247. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200107263450402. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Kreitman RJ, Stetler-Stevenson M, Margulies I, et al. Phase II trial of recombinant immunotoxin RFB4 (dsFv)-PE38 (BL22) in patients with hairy cell leukemia. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:2983–2990. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.20.2630. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Alderson RF, Kreitman RJ, Chen T, et al. CAT-8015: a second-generation pseudomonas exotoxin A-based immunotherapy targeting CD22-expressing hematologic malignancies. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15:832–839. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-1456. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Messmann RA, Vitetta ES, Headlee D, et al. A phase I study of combination therapy with immunotoxins IgG-HD37-deglycosylated ricin A chain (dgA) and IgG-RFB4-dgA (Combotox) in patients with refractory CD19(þ), CD22(þ) B cell lymphoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2000;6:1302–1313. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Taylor CM, Williams JM, Lote CJ, et al. A laboratory model of toxin-induced hemolytic uremic syndrome. Kidney Int. 1999;55:1367–1374. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1755.1999.00387.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Korcheva V, Wong J, Corless C, et al. Administration of ricin induces a severe inflammatory response via nonredundant stimulation of ERK, JNK, and P38 MAPK and provides a mouse model of hemolytic uremic syndrome. Am J Pathol. 2005;166:323–339. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9440(10)62256-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Pastan I, Hassan R, FitzGerald DJ, et al. Immunotoxin treatment of cancer. Annu Rev Med. 2007;58:221–237. doi: 10.1146/annurev.med.58.070605.115320. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Lin TS, Stock W, Xu H, et al. A phase I/II dose escalation study of apolizumab (Hu1D10) using a stepped-up dosing schedule in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia and acute leukemia. Leuk Lymphoma. 2009;50:1958–1963. doi: 10.3109/10428190903186486. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Frangie C, Lefaucheur C, Medioni J, et al. Renal thrombotic microangiopathy caused by anti-VEGF-antibody treatment for metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. Lancet Oncol. 2007;8:177–178. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(07)70037-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Kapiteijn E, Brand A, Kroep J, et al. Sunitinib induced hypertension, thrombotic microangiopathy and reversible posterior leukencephalopathy syndrome. Ann Oncol. 2007;18:1745–1747. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdm454. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Bollee G, Patey N, Cazajous G, et al. Thrombotic microangiopathy secondary to VEGF pathway inhibition by sunitinib. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2009;24:682–685. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfn657. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Izzedine H, Brocheriou I, Deray G, et al. Thrombotic microangiopathy and anti-VEGF agents. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2007;22:1481–1482. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfl565. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Al Aly Z, Philoctete Ashley JM, Gellens ME, et al. Thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura in a patient treated with imatinib mesylate: true association or mere coincidence? Am J Kidney Dis. 2005;45:762–768. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2004.12.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Blake-Haskins JA, Lechleider RJ, Kreitman RJ. Thrombotic microangiopathy with targeted cancer agents. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17:5858–5866. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-0804. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.George JN. How I treat patients with thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura—2010. Blood. 2010;116:4060–4069. doi: 10.1182/blood-2010-07-271445. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Cohen EP, Hussain S, Moulder JE. Successful treatment of radiation nephropathy with angiotensin II blockade. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;55:190–193. doi: 10.1016/S0360-3016(02)03793-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Fung MC, Storniolo AM, Nguyen B, et al. A review of hemolytic uremic syndrome in patients treated with gemcitabine therapy. Cancer. 1999;85:2023–2032. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19990501)85:9%3C2023::AID-CNCR21%3E3.0.CO;2-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Humphreys BD, Sharman JP, Henderson JM, et al. Gemcitabine associated thrombotic microangiopathy. Cancer. 2004;100:2664–2670. doi: 10.1002/cncr.20290. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Lawton CA, Barber-Derus SW, Murray KJ, et al. Influence of renal shielding on the incidence of late renal dysfunction associated with T-lymphocyte deplete bone marrow transplantation in adult patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1992;23:681–686. doi: 10.1016/0360-3016(92)90035-G. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Foss FM, Borkowski TA, Gilliom M, et al. Chimeric fusion protein toxin DAB486IL-2 in advanced mycosis fungoides and the Sezary syndrome: correlation of activity and interleukin-2 receptor expression in a phase II study. Blood. 1994;84:1765–1774. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from ecancermedicalscience are provided here courtesy of ecancer Global Foundation

RESOURCES