Managing Tumor Lysis Syndrome in the Era of Novel Cancer Therapies.

Abstract Tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) is a potentially life-threatening emergency that can develop rapidly after the release of intracellular contents from lysed malignant cells. The advent of novel and targeted therapies that have improved tumor-killing efficacy has the potential to increase the risk of TLS when used as part of front-line therapy. A recent review of TLS risk in patients with hematologic malignancies treated with newer targeted agents highlighted the need to revisit TLS risk stratification and to describe the practical challenges of TLS prevention, treatment, and monitoring. Although this era of rapid development of novel cancer therapies provides new hope for patients with hematologic malignancies, it is essential to be prepared for TLS because monitoring and prophylaxis can almost always prevent severe and life-threatening consequences. Heightened awareness of the development of TLS with novel and targeted agents, accompanied by aggressive hydration and rational, risk-appropriate management, are the keys to successful outcomes.

Tumor lysis syndrome in the era of novel and targeted agents in patients with hematologic malignancies: a systematic review.

Effective new treatments are now available for patients with hematologic malignancies. However, their propensity to cause tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) has not been systematically examined. A literature search identified published Phase I-III clinical trials of monoclonal antibodies (otlertuzumab, brentuximab, obinutuzumab, ibritumomab, ofatumumab); tyrosine kinase inhibitors (alvocidib [flavopiridol], dinaciclib, ibrutinib, nilotinib, dasatinib, idelalisib, venetoclax [ABT-199]); proteasome inhibitors (oprozomib, carfilzomib); chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells; and the proapoptotic agent lenalidomide. Abstracts from major congresses were also reviewed. Idelalisib and ofatumumab had no reported TLS. TLS incidence was ≤5 % with brentuximab vedotin (for anaplastic large-cell lymphoma), carfilzomib and lenalidomide (for multiple myeloma), dasatinib (for acute lymphoblastic leukemia), and oprozomib (for various hematologic malignancies). TLS incidences were 8.3 and 8.9 % in two trials of venetoclax (for chronic lymphocytic leukemia [CLL]) and 10 % in trials of CAR T cells (for B-cell malignancies) and obinutuzumab (for non-Hodgkin lymphoma). TLS rates of 15 % with dinaciclib and 42 and 53 % with alvocidib (with sequential cytarabine and mitoxantrone) were seen in trials of acute leukemias. TLS mitigation was employed routinely in clinical trials of alvocidib and lenalidomide. However, TLS mitigation strategies were not mentioned or stated only in general terms for many studies of other agents. The risk of TLS persists in the current era of novel and targeted therapy for hematologic malignancies and was seen to some extent with most agents. Our findings underscore the importance of continued awareness, risk assessment, and prevention to reduce this serious potential complication of effective anticancer therapy.