Mayo Clin Proc. 2006;81:835-848 © 2006 Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research

SYMPOSIUM ON ONCOLOGY PRACTICE: HEMATOLOGICAL MALIGNANCIES

Oncologic Emergencies: Diagnosis and Treatment

THORVARDUR R. HALFDANARSON, MD; WILLIAM J. HOGAN, MBBCH; TIMOTHY J. MOYNIHAN, MD

From the Division of Hematology (T.R.H., W.J.H.) and Department of Oncology (T.R.H., T.J.M.), Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minn.

Address correspondence to Thorvardur R. Halfdanarson, MD, Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905 (e-mail: halfdanarson.thorvardur@mayo.edu). Individual reprints of this article and a bound booklet of the entire Symposium on Oncology Practice: Hematological Malignancies will be available for purchase from our Web site http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.com/.

Abstract

Patients with malignancies are subject to developing a unique set of complications that require emergent evaluation and treatment. With the increasing incidence of cancer in the general population and improved survival, these emergencies will be more frequently encountered. Physicians must be able to recognize these conditions and institute appropriate therapy after a focused initial evaluation. The approach to definitive therapy is commonly multidisciplinary, involving surgeons, radiation oncologists, medical oncologists, and other medical specialists. Prompt interventions can be lifesaving and may spare patients considerable morbidity and pain. In this review, we discuss the diagnosis of and initial therapy for common emergencies in hematology and oncology.

Mayo Clin Proc. 2006;81(6):835-848

Because of the increasing incidence of cancer in the general population, combined with improved survival and increasing reliance on outpatient treatment strategies, it is imperative that primary care and emergency department physicians understand and are able to treat emergencies associated with malignancies. In this review, we discuss the diagnosis of and initial therapy for common emergencies in hematology and oncology. Oncologic emergencies can be broadly classified as those resulting from the disease itself and those resulting from therapy directed against the cancer; however, we categorize such emergencies according to organ system to facilitate the recognition and management of oncologic emergencies.

METABOLIC EMERGENCIES

Hypercalcemia

Hypercalcemia is a common problem in advanced malignancies and has been reported in 10% to 30% of patients with cancer at some time during their disease.^1,2 Hypercalcemia may be a presenting feature but is more commonly seen in patients with an established diagnosis. The most common malignancies associated with hypercalcemia are breast and lung cancer and multiple myeloma.² Hypercalcemia often portends a poor prognosis, particularly if associated with elevated parathyroid hormone–related protein (PTHrP) levels.^3-7

Pathophysiology. The pathophysiology of hypercalcemia can be divided into 3 types: humoral hypercalcemia of malignancy, often mediated by production of PTHrP; local bone destruction that results in release of cytokines, including osteoclast activating factors; and tumor production of vitamin D analogues.¹ Humoral hypercalcemia of malignancy is the most common mechanism that produces cancer-induced hypercalcemia, and one study reported that 35 (88%) of 40 patients with solid tumors and 3 (33%) of 9 patients with hematologic malignancies with hypercalcemia had an elevated PTHrP level.⁸ As a result of close structural similarities between parathyroid hormone (PTH) and PTHrP, PTHrP can simulate many of the actions of PTH, specifically bone resorption and distal tubular calcium reabsorption. In some patients serum levels of PTHrP are high, suggesting a systemic effect, whereas in other patients local production of PTHrP may be responsible.^9,10 Induction of osteolysis by malignant cells occurs commonly with breast and lung cancer and multiple myeloma. Secreted cytokines (eg, tumor necrosis factor, interleukin 1, interleukin 6, macrophage inflammatory protein 1a, and lymphotoxin) can stimulate local macrophages to differentiate into osteoclasts, resulting in bone destruction and hypercalcemia.^11,12 A recent study has demonstrated that inhibition of osteoblastic differentiation may also play a role in the etiology of myeloma bone disease.^13,14 Overproduction of vitamin D analogues, including calcitriol, is a common mechanism of hypercalcemia in lymphomas, particularly Hodgkin disease, and nonmalignant granulomatous disorders, particularly sarcoidosis.¹⁵

Clinical Presentation and Diagnosis. The symptoms of hypercalcemia are multiple and nonspecific.¹⁶ Classic symptoms include lethargy, confusion, anorexia, nausea, constipation, polyuria, and polydipsia. These symptoms correlate to some degree with the degree of the hypercalcemia and the rapidity of onset.¹⁷ A physical examination is seldom helpful in making the diagnosis of hypercalcemia. The patient is often severely hypovolemic due to excessive fluid losses and impaired fluid intake. Nonetheless, hypercalcemic patients without a preexisting cancer diagnosis should be examined carefully for evidence of malignancy.

Hypercalcemia is diagnosed by measuring ionized serum calcium. If total serum calcium is measured, one has to correct for the albumin level. The corrected calcium is calculated according to the following formula: corrected calcium=measured total calcium+[0.8×(4.0–albumin)]. The level of creatinine, other electrolytes, and alkaline phosphatase should be checked. A low serum chloride level (<100 mEq/L) is suggestive of hypercalcemia of malignancy.¹⁸ Intact PTH is usually low in hypercalcemia of malignancy. Measuring levels of PTHrP is not necessary for diagnosis but may be helpful in understanding the mechanism of hypercalcemia and assessing prognosis and response to bisphosphonates.^6,7 One study reported that patients with serum PTHrP levels higher than 12 pmol/L were less responsive to bisphosphonate therapy and that such levels were associated with a greater risk of recurrent hypercalcemia within 14 days.¹⁹

Treatment. Untreated, symptomatic hypercalcemia is a life-threatening entity that needs immediate intervention (Table 1). Hypercalcemia occurs commonly in patients with advanced cancer, and it may be appropriate, ethical, and humane to institute only comfort measures in circumstances in which patients have specified that no further active therapy be undertaken for the treatment of their malignancy. Severe hypercalcemia is usually associated with pronounced hypovolemia, and the first step in treatment is intravenous hydration with normal saline. The patient may require large volumes of fluids, and 500 to 1000 mL of normal saline can be given during the first hour and continued at a lower rate until intravascular volume repletion is achieved and urine output established. Care must be taken in hydrating persons with a history of congestive heart failure. Milder hypercalcemia may be treated without intravenous hydration. Loop diuretics should be avoided until euvolemia is achieved because hypovolemia that results in renal hypoperfusion may further decrease the renal excretion of calcium. Serum calcium should be measured frequently until responses are seen. Care should be taken in eliminating sources of calcium and discontinuing the use of medications that may increase the calcium level, such as thiazide diuretics and vitamin D.

Bisphosphonates block osteoclastic bone resorption and have revolutionized the treatment of hypercalcemia of malignancy.^20,21 The bisphosphonates most commonly used for hypercalcemia of malignancy are pamidronate and zoledronic acid. These drugs control the hypercalcemia in most cases.^22-24 Zoledronic acid may be more potent, but the clinical importance of the increased potency is of uncertain significance.^1,23 Zoledronic acid should be used cautiously in patients with renal insufficiency, and the dose should be adjusted according to the calculated creatinine clearance.

Subcutaneous or intramuscular calcitonin can quickly lower calcium levels to a modest degree, but the effect is usually short lived.^25,26 Nasal administration is not effective for the treatment of hypercalcemia.²⁷ Other medications include mithramycin (plicamycin) and gallium nitrate, both of which are associated with serious adverse effects and, in the case of gallium nitrate, are cumbersome to administer.^26,28-31 These drugs have fallen out of favor since the introduction of bisphosphonates. Glucocorticoids are particularly effective in cases in which the hypercalcemia is caused by elevated levels of vitamin D (1,25(OH)₂D), such as some lymphomas, particularly Hodgkin disease.^32,33 Dialysis may be appropriate for patients with renal failure or congestive heart failure when aggressive hydration and bisphosphonates cannot be used safely.^34,35 Taking measures to reduce the risk of recurrent hypercalcemia is important. Sources of oral phosphate should be eliminated, and the use of medications known to raise serum calcium levels should be discontinued. Adequate hydration should be provided, and some patients may benefit from intermittent use of bisphosphonates, especially those with metastatic bone disease. Treatment of the underlying disease with chemotherapy and radiation can successfully control the hypercalcemia in many cases in which effective therapy exists.

Tumor Lysis Syndrome

Tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) is characterized by several metabolic derangements that may be life-threatening. It is most commonly seen after therapy for aggressive hematologic malignancies, such as high-grade lymphomas and acute leukemias. In addition, TLS may be seen after the treatment of kinetically active solid tumors and may occur spontaneously.^36,37

Pathophysiology. Tumor lysis syndrome is caused by massive release of intracellular contents after tumor cell death. The nucleic acid products released result in hyperuricemia. The high concentration of uric acid can lead to crystallization within the renal tubules, resulting in obstruction of tubular flow and acute renal failure. The renal failure is further exacerbated by hypovolemia. The release of intracellular potassium along with decreasing renal function lead to hyperkalemia that may cause life-threatening arrhythmias. Increasing levels of phosphorus result in hypocalcemia and sometimes tetany, seizures, and arrhythmias.

Clinical Presentation and Diagnosis. Tumor lysis syndrome was defined as either clinical TLS or laboratory TLS by Hande and Garrow.³⁸ This classification has been refined further by Cairo and Bishop (Table 2 and Table 3).³⁶

The symptoms and signs of TLS are usually nonspecific. Generally, patients have recently started chemotherapy. Urine output may decrease, and the patient may manifest symptoms of uremia or volume overload. Seizures and arrhythmias can occur. A high index of suspicion is necessary for the timely diagnosis of TLS. Laboratory studies usually show elevated uric acid, phosphorus, potassium, and lactate dehydrogenase levels and a low calcium level. An electrocardiogram should be obtained in all patients with pronounced electrolyte abnormalities to rule out serious arrhythmias and conduction abnormalities.

Treatment. Every attempt should be made to anticipate and prevent TLS in patients at risk. The risk of TLS can be reduced by administering allopurinol for 2 to 3 days before planned chemotherapy and by maintaining good hydration status. Allopurinol can be administered intravenously in patients unable to take oral medications.^39,40 Patients at high risk, such as those with tumors of high proliferative rate, high baseline uric acid, large tumor burden (white blood cell count >50×10⁹/L, high low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level, and large tumors), and chemosensitive disease, may benefit from intravenous recombinant urate oxidase (rasburicase).^36,41,42 Rasburicase is currently approved only for pediatric patients. Patients with established TLS need hospital admission and may need cardiac monitoring. Intravenous fluids should be given to maintain a urine output of 100 mL/m² per hour or greater. An infusion rate of 3 L/m² per day (200 mL/kg per day if d10 kg) is appropriate if cardiovascular status allows. Aggressive treatment of hyperkalemia is indicated as outlined in Table 4. Calcium gluconate and sodium bicarbonate should be used in addition to insulin, dextrose, and sodium polystyrene sulfonate (Kayexalate) in severe hyperkalemia and hyperkalemia associated with cardiac conduction disturbance. Patients with hyperkalemia and renal insufficiency or volume overload may need hemodialysis. Alkalinization of the urine has been recommended in the past, but usefulness remains controversial. Uric acid is more soluble in alkaline urine, but the solubility of xanthine and hypoxanthine decreases with alkalinization of the urine. Urine alkalinization could possibly lead to formation of urinary xanthine crystals, resulting in obstruction of renal tubules if allopurinol is used concurrently.³⁶ Diuretics such as furosemide can be used cautiously to increase urine output if the patient is not hypovolemic. Hyperphosphatemia can be treated by restricting phosphate intake and with phosphate binders such as aluminum hydroxide. Dialysis is indicated in severe cases, including patients with oliguric renal failure, congestive heart failure, or severe hyperkalemia or patients who do not respond to medical therapy. Hypocalcemia should not be treated unless symptomatic. Hyperkalemia is treated conventionally with restriction of potassium intake and appropriate medications (Table 4).

NEUROLOGIC EMERGENCIES

Malignant Spinal Cord Compression

Malignant spinal cord compression (MSCC) is a relatively common problem and a true oncologic emergency. Early diagnosis is extremely important to prevent further neurologic compromise and to maintain functional status and quality of life. Between 2.5% and 6% of patients with cancer have MSCC as a complication of their disease.^43,44 All cancers can cause MSCC, but breast, lung, and prostate cancers account for almost two thirds of all cases.⁴⁵ Survival after the diagnosis of MSCC is poor, especially if paralysis is present or there is no clinical response to therapy.^43,46 The neurologic status at diagnosis and the time to development of symptoms are important prognostic factors for outcome.^47,48 Functional outcome is better if the development of symptoms is slow.^47,48 Overall survival depends on the tumor type, and patients with hematologic malignancies have better survival than patients with solid tumors. Patients with lung cancer have an especially poor prognosis.⁴³

Pathophysiology. Most spinal cord compressions develop from tumors metastatic to the vertebral bodies that subsequently erode into and encroach on the spinal cord. The thoracic spine is the most common location for metastases that cause MSCC.⁴⁹ Less commonly, tumors such as lymphomas, sarcomas, and lung cancers that occupy the paraspinous space may enter the spinal canal through the intervertebral foramen and cause cord compression. Such tumors are important to recognize because, although they will not cause bony destruction, they can lead to spinal cord damage. Rarely, metastases occur directly at the spinal cord or meninges.

The mechanism of injury to the spinal cord from an epidural tumor is due to direct compression of the neural elements interrupting axonal flow or a vascular mechanism. Venous plexus obstruction can cause marked cord edema, whereas tumor occlusion of the arterial blood supply to the spinal cord creates an acute infarction, leading to abrupt and irreversible cord ischemia.⁵⁰ Multiple inflammatory mediators and cytokines can increase the edema and the ischemia. The ischemia finally results in irreversible neuronal injury.⁵⁰

Clinical Presentation and Diagnosis. Ninety percent of patients with MSCC have back pain.⁵¹ Eighty percent of all cases of MSCC occur in patients with a preceding diagnosis of malignancy.⁵² Back pain in a patient with known cancer should be considered secondary to MSCC until proved otherwise. Other symptoms include radicular pain, motor weakness, gait disturbance, and dysfunction of bladder and bowel function.^44,51,53,54 Because neurologic deficits may not improve with treatment, it is imperative to not wait until neurologic dysfunction develops before considering the possibility of spinal cord compression. Multiple and synchronous spinal metastases are common, occurring in up to one third of patients.^55-58

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the imaging study of choice in diagnosing MSCC.^59-61 If the history and clinical findings do not suggest metastases to the cervical spine, it is appropriate to obtain an MRI of the thoracolumbar spine only. Computed tomography (CT) myelography can be used if MRI is contraindicated or not available. Plain radiographs of the spine and radionuclide bone scans have limited sensitivity and specificity and are therefore less useful than MRI or CT in suspected cases of cord compression.⁵⁰ Plain radiographs are easy to obtain in most hospitals and emergency departments and may provide valuable information because abnormal findings have been reported in more than 80% of patients with symptomatic spinal metastases.^62,63

Treatment. Therapy should be initiated as soon as possible but preferentially after the imaging studies have been obtained. Glucocorticoids should be given immediately if there is a delay in performing the imaging studies. Dexamethasone is the most commonly used corticosteroid and is typically given as an initial intravenous dose of 10 to 16 mg followed by 4 mg every 4 hours. Higher doses of dexamethasone (up to 100 mg) may be associated with slightly better outcome but have a higher incidence of adverse effects.^61,64-66 Patients without motor deficits or massive invasion of the spine on imaging studies may do well without corticosteroids.⁶⁷ Radiation therapy has been the mainstay of the treatment, but recent studies have challenged that belief.^49,63,68 Several radiation regimens are available, but there is no evidence that one is superior to the others.⁶¹ A recent study by Patchell et al⁶⁸ showed that in patients who present with neurologic deficits, functional outcome, including the ability to ambulate and maintain continence, is better in patients who undergo radical tumor resection followed by radiation compared with patients who receive radiation therapy alone. Despite the findings of that study, the indications for surgical treatment continue to be debated and have to be carefully considered for each case. It seems reasonable to consider surgery in highly selected cases, especially in patients who maintain a good performance status, including the ability to withstand an extensive operation; when there is gross instability of the spine, rapidly progressive symptoms, or progressive symptoms during radiation therapy; or when tissue for diagnosis is needed. A surgeon experienced in spinal surgery should be consulted if there is any doubt regarding the need for a surgical intervention. Surgery may become even more feasible with the advent of less invasive surgical techniques.^49,63

Brain Metastases and Increased Intracranial Pressure

Intracranial metastases occur in up to one fourth of patients dying of cancer.⁶⁹ Any cancer can metastasize to the brain, but lung cancer, breast cancer, and melanoma are the most common culprits.⁷⁰

Pathophysiology. Brain metastases arise from hematogenous spread of the tumor, and the distribution within the brain is in accordance with the regional blood flow.⁷¹ Approximately 90% of brain metastases are found in the supratentorial region. The metastases are commonly located at the junction of the gray and white matter and in the so-called watershed areas of the brain.⁷¹ Brain edema and tumor expansion commonly result in increased intracranial pressure.

Clinical Presentation and Diagnosis. Most patients who present with brain metastases are known to have cancer. Less commonly, brain metastases are the initial presentation of a malignancy. In rare cases, the brain metastases are the only known site of disease (brain metastases of unknown primary tumor).⁷² Symptoms can be focal or generalized and depend on the location of the lesion or lesions within the brain. Brain metastases are usually associated with gradual appearance of symptoms that may be subtle, and only 50% of patients have headaches.⁷³ Patients may present with acute seizures or symptoms of increased intracranial pressure. Magnetic resonance imaging is the most sensitive and specific diagnostic modality (Figure 1).^71,74 Computed tomographic scans are less sensitive, especially for metastases in the posterior fossa.

Treatment. Brain metastases portend a poor prognosis for most patients with solid tumors and often occur in the setting of advanced systemic disease. Thus, it may be appropriate to treat only to alleviate symptoms, or in other patients it may be appropriate to provide aggressive treatment directed at the tumor. In this review, we focus on symptom management (Table 5). Elevated intracranial pressure is most commonly treated with steroids, specifically dexamethasone, because it is the most lipid soluble of all the steroids.⁷⁵ A commonly used regimen consists of an initial dose of 16 to 24 mg intravenously, followed by 4 mg every 6 hours. Lower doses (4 mg/d) may be as effective as higher doses and associated with fewer adverse effects.⁷⁶ Asymptomatic patients may not need corticosteroids. Seizures are treated with anticonvulsants, but patients with brain metastases and no history of seizures do not generally need anticonvulsant drugs.⁷⁷ Reviews of the treatment of status epilepticus have been published.^78,79 More definitive treatment, such as surgery and radiotherapy, is usually offered to selected patients who have oligometastatic disease, maintain a good performance status, and have relatively well-controlled or minimal systemic disease.^71,74 Whole-brain radiation is still the mainstay of treatment for brain metastases, but stereotactic radiosurgery is emerging as a new option for selected patients with brain metastases.^80,81

CARDIOVASCULAR EMERGENCIES

Malignant Pericardial Effusion

Pericardial effusions are commonly seen in patients with advanced cancer and are frequently asymptomatic. The presence of malignant pericardial effusions portends a poor prognosis, with most patients dying within 1 year.⁸²

Pathophysiology. Pericardial effusions can result from metastases to the pericardium, direct invasion of the cancer, or therapy.⁸³ Large or rapidly accumulating effusions may lead to compression of the heart chambers and cardiac tamponade.⁸⁴

Clinical Presentation and Diagnosis. Small pericardial effusions are frequently asymptomatic. Symptoms of pericardial effusions include dyspnea, cough, chest pain, dysphagia, hiccups, and hoarseness.⁸⁵ The onset of symptoms can be slow, but occasionally these patients present with acute symptoms. Physical findings include tachycardia, distant heart sounds, fixed jugular venous distention, upper and lower extremity edema, and pulsus paradoxus. The presenting features of cardiac tamponade commonly include exaggeration of these symptoms in addition to hypotension and shock.⁸⁴ An electrocardiogram may reveal low-voltage, nonspecific ST-T changes and electric alternans.^85,86 The preferred diagnostic method is echocardiography, which may both confirm the presence of a pericardial effusion and provide hemodynamic information, including presence of tamponade physiology.^85,87 Both CT and MRI can be used to diagnose pericardial effusions and may in addition be valuable in assessing structural abnormalities, such as intracardiac tumors or tumors that invade the pericardium.⁸⁸

Treatment. Asymptomatic effusions do not need to be treated. If patients are symptomatic or deteriorating, they may need an urgent intervention. Echocardiographically guided pericardiocentesis is a safe and effective procedure.⁸⁷ Malignant pericardial effusions can also be managed surgically for palliation of symptoms by placement of a percutaneous pericardial drain or by resection of the pericardium.^86,89 Systemic and intrapericardial chemotherapy may provide palliation of symptoms in chemotherapy-sensitive tumors.^86,90 Radiation therapy may provide palliation in selected cases.

Superior Vena Cava Syndrome

Superior vena cava syndrome (SVCS) occurs when the superior vena cava becomes occluded or compressed, restricting blood return to the heart. Malignancies are the most common cause of SVCS, but multiple benign disorders can also cause the condition. The most common malignancies that cause SVCS are lung cancer and lymphoma.⁹¹ Intraluminal thrombus can also cause SVCS by occluding the superior vena cava.^91,92 Indwelling central venous catheters are increasingly found as a cause of SVCS in patients with cancer, and they may present atypically with predominantly unilateral findings.^93-95

Pathophysiology. The thin-walled superior vena cava is easily compressed by tumors, resulting in impaired venous drainage from the head, neck, and upper extremities. If the occlusion occurs gradually, collaterals may form and mitigate the symptoms.

Clinical Presentation and Diagnosis. The onset of SVCS is usually insidious but may occur rapidly, especially if the underlying cause is a rapidly growing tumor or thrombosis. The most common symptoms are dyspnea, facial swelling, and cough that may be aggravated by bending forward or stooping. The most common signs are distended neck and chest wall veins, facial edema and plethora, and edema of the upper extremities.^91,92,96 The diagnosis is usually made with CT with or without venography, but MRI can also be used.⁹⁷

Treatment. Usually, SVCS is not a true medical emergency unless neurologic symptoms are present; therefore, in patients who present without a preceding diagnosis of malignancy, biopsies should be performed before instituting therapy. Mediastinoscopy, bronchoscopy, and biopsy can be safely performed in the setting of SVCS.⁹⁸ Stenting of the superior vena cava has been shown to be effective and feasible in relieving the symptoms of SVCS.^99-101 Radiotherapy is a standard treatment modality for sensitive tumors but may take a few weeks to show effect.^102,103 Chemotherapy and corticosteroids can also be used, especially in tumors that are sensitive.¹⁰⁴

HEMATOLOGIC EMERGENCIES

Hyperviscosity Due to Dysproteinemia (Monoclonal Gammopathy)

Hyperviscosity is defined as an increased intrinsic resistance of fluid to flow. It can be seen in a variety of disorders, including monoclonal gammopathies such as Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) and acute leukemias.¹⁰⁵ In this review, we discuss hyperleukocytosis related to leukemia separately.

Pathophysiology. The hyperviscosity seen in association with WM is related to high levels of the large IgM molecule.¹⁰⁶ Symptoms of hyperviscosity are rare with monoclonal gammopathies other than IgM, and patients with myeloma that produces IgA monoclonal protein appear to be more prone to develop symptomatic hyperviscosity than patients with IgG myeloma due to the tendency of the IgA to polymerize.¹⁰⁵ Less than 7% of patients with newly diagnosed myeloma have hyperviscosity.¹⁰⁷ The clinical symptoms are primarily related to increased stasis of blood flow, resulting in ischemia and hemorrhages. Patients with WM are unlikely to develop symptoms if the serum viscosity is less than 4 cP and if the serum concentration of IgM is less than 4 g/L.

Clinical Presentation and Diagnosis. Waldenström macroglobulinemia occurs predominantly in elderly patients, with a median age at onset of 60 years. The onset of hyperviscosity is usually gradual and commonly results from effects of impaired perfusion on the central nervous system and the eyes (Table 6). Impaired hemostasis that manifests primarily as mucocutaneous bleeding may be prominent. Common symptoms include mental status changes, visual changes, retinal hemorrhage, papilledema, and engorged retinal veins. Purpura is common because of quantitative or qualitative defects of platelets.

Treatment. When hyperviscosity secondary to a monoclonal gammopathy is diagnosed, it is important to exercise caution with red blood cell transfusions for anemic patients because increasing the hematocrit may greatly increase plasma viscosity. The fastest method to decrease plasma viscosity is plasmapheresis, which is a relatively safe procedure in experienced hands. Plasmapheresis is especially effective in patients with WM because most of the IgM monoclonal protein is within the intravascular space.¹⁰⁸ A single plasmapheresis can successfully decrease the hyperviscosity and associated clinical improvement, whereas it usually takes several therapies to achieve the same benefit for patients with IgA or IgG myeloma.¹⁰⁸ Ultimately, control of the underlying disease with glucocorticoids and chemotherapeutic agents, such as alkylating agents (melphalan, chlorambucil, cyclophosphamide) or nucleoside analogues (cladribine or rituximab), are required to prevent recurrent symptoms.

Hyperleukocytosis and Leukostasis

Increased viscosity secondary to leukocytosis is a well-recognized complication associated with acute leukemias.¹⁰⁹ Hyperviscosity has also been reported in patients with erythrocytosis and severe thrombocytosis.^110,111 Hyperleukocytosis is seen in up to 13% of patients with acute myelogenous leukemia and may even be more common in the pediatric population. Symptomatic hyperleukocytosis is less common in acute lymphoblastic leukemia.¹⁰⁹ Hyperleukocytosis that results in leukostasis is much less common in chronic lymphocytic and myelogenous leukemias, despite extremely elevated cell counts.

Pathophysiology. Earlier reports had suggested that an increased number of circulating leukocytes was the major factor that resulted in sluggish capillary blood flow (leukostasis).¹¹² More recently, investigators have suggested that abnormal expression of adhesion molecules is a crucial element in the pathophysiology of leukostasis.¹¹³

Clinical Presentation and Diagnosis. The clinical manifestations of hyperleukocytosis and leukostasis are in many ways similar to the manifestations of hyperviscosity due to a monoclonal protein discussed previously, but pulmonary symptoms such as dyspnea are also common. Pulmonary symptoms of leukostasis may be difficult to distinguish from infection because patients may have pulmonary infiltrates and fever. Fever is common in patients with hyperleukocytosis and is uncommonly related to an infection. Most patients have severely elevated leukocyte counts, but occasional patients have symptoms with leukocyte counts less than 100×10⁹/L.¹¹³ Thrombocytopenia and coagulopathy are commonly seen in association with acute leukemia and hyperleukocytosis.

Treatment. Prompt leukoreduction is the mainstay of therapy for hyperleukocytosis and can be achieved quickly with leukapheresis. In patients with acute myelogenous leukemia, leukapheresis therapy is commonly begun when the leukocyte count is above 1.0×10⁹/L, and the goal is to reduce the count to at least 0.5×10⁹/L.¹¹³ Although leukapheresis may reduce early mortality in patients with acute myelogenous leukemia, the improvement in overall survival is less certain.^114,115 Leukapheresis alone is never sufficient as therapy however, and chemotherapy needs to be initiated as soon as possible. Hydroxyurea in a dosage of 50 to 100 mg/kg daily can be used while awaiting more definitive chemotherapy.¹¹⁶ These patients should also receive prophylactic therapy for TLS as described previously. Transfusions need to be used with caution because the transfused red blood cells may substantially increase the blood viscosity. Cranial irradiation is occasionally considered in patients with acute neurologic changes, although its role is controversial and no controlled series confirm benefit. Similarly, little evidence is available to support a clear role for pulmonary irradiation for leukostasis that results in hypoxia.

INFECTIOUS COMPLICATIONS

Neutropenic Fever

Infections in cancer patients are common and a significant cause of morbidity and mortality, especially in patients with leukemia undergoing chemotherapy. Fever is defined as a single oral temperature in excess of 38.3ºC (101.3ºF) or a sustained temperature of more than 38ºC (100.4ºF) for more than 1 hour.¹¹⁷ For this review, we consider an absolute neutrophil count less than 1.0×10⁹/L as neutropenia. A neutrophil count less than 0.5×10⁹/L is considered severe neutropenia.

Pathophysiology. Most episodes of febrile neutropenia occur in patients receiving chemotherapy. Less commonly, patients with acute leukemias, myelodysplastic syndromes, or other diseases that create leukopenias may present de novo with febrile neutropenia. Most patients currently being treated with chemotherapy now receive treatment in the outpatient setting. The risk of developing febrile neutropenia depends on both the depth and the duration of the neutrophil nadir, as well as comorbid conditions or complications such as mucositis. The timing of the neutrophil nadir depends on the type of chemotherapy given, but for most outpatient chemotherapy, the neutrophil nadir typically occurs 5 to 10 days after the last dose. Most often, white blood cell recovery occurs within 5 days of this nadir. Certain regimens, especially those used to treat leukemias and lymphomas, produce a longer-lasting and more profound neutropenia.

Microbiology. Multiple gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria can cause infections in neutropenic patients, but frequently no organisms are recovered. Enteric gram-negative bacilli have historically been the bacteria most commonly recovered from the bloodstream of febrile neutropenic patients. Gram-positive bacteria are assuming more importance.^118,119

Clinical Presentation and Diagnosis. Fever is commonly the only symptom, but patients may also have localizing symptoms and physical findings. Common infections may present atypically due to the lack of neutrophils. Skin infections may manifest as subtle rash or erythema, patients with meningitis may not have the typical physical findings such as nuchal rigidity, and urinary tract infections may be asymptomatic. Moreover, because of profound neutropenia, patients can have lung infections without pulmonary infiltrates and no pyuria despite having a urinary tract infection. A thorough physical examination should be performed. The oral cavity should be examined carefully, looking for erythema and mucosal ulcers. All sites of intravenous catheters and tunneled catheters should be inspected, looking for erythema, tenderness, and purulent exudate. The perianal area should be inspected and palpated gently. Digital rectal examination or any other rectal manipulations are discouraged.

Blood cultures should be obtained as soon as possible. One sample should be drawn from a peripheral vein and another from a central venous catheter if one is in place.^117,120 Samples for urine cultures should be collected, and sputum should be sent for cultures if there is productive cough. Stool samples and cerebrospinal fluid should be cultured, but only if there is clinical suspicion of infections in these sites.¹¹⁸ Chest radiographs are commonly normal or show nonspecific findings. High-resolution CT may be helpful in patients with suspected lung infection and a normal chest radiograph.¹²¹

Treatment. Once febrile neutropenia is diagnosed, instituting therapy should not be delayed. Broad-spectrum antibiotics should be administered once the necessary cultures have been obtained. Commonly used antibiotics and antibiotic combinations for infectious complications are listed in Table 7. Patients with fever but no other symptoms should be treated even if the physical examination and the initial laboratory studies and radiographs show no evidence of infection. Afebrile patients should be treated as well if an infection is strongly suspected. Use of broad-spectrum antibiotics is essential, and in certain circumstances, a drug active against gram-positive bacteria is recommended. Such circumstances include known colonization with gram-positive bacteria, suspected infection of a central venous line or device, and severe sepsis with or without hypotension. Gram-positive coverage should also be considered in patients with suspected skin infection or severe mucosal damage and when prophylactic antibiotics against gram-negative bacteria have been used. Vancomycin is the most commonly used drug for suspected infections with gram-positive bacteria. Single-drug therapy with a broad-spectrum antibiotic appears to be as effective as double gram-negative coverage in most circumstances, is associated with fewer adverse effects, and is generally recommended over 2-drug therapy (dual therapy). Antifungal or antiviral drugs are usually not needed as a part of initial therapy. The following approach is commonly used (Figure 2).

Selected patients with neutropenic fever can be treated in the outpatient setting. Close follow-up and unrestricted access to health care personnel are essential when patients are receiving outpatient therapy for neutropenic fever (Figure 3). Certain social situations are contraindications to outpatient therapy, including history of noncompliance, inability to care for oneself, lack of caregivers, no telephone, or lack of reliable transportation. Several patient-related factors favor lower risk of severe infection in these patients (Table 8).¹¹⁷

The Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer has introduced a prediction device to assess patients suitable for outpatient antibiotic therapy (Table 9).¹²² The initial evaluation focuses on assessing the burden of illness. Several factors are evaluated and assigned a score. Individual scores are totaled, and the patient is given a total score. A total score of 21 or higher indicates patients with low risk of a serious infection (Table 9). The best studied regimen used in outpatient therapy of neutropenic fever is a combination of ciprofloxacin (500 mg every 8 hours) and amoxicillin/clavulanate (500 mg every 8 hours). Daily assessment by a health care professional is recommended for the first 3 days to assess response, tolerability, and compliance to therapy. A recent meta-analysis has shown that the use of myeloid growth factors in patients with established neutropenic fever can reduce the length of hospitalization and the neutrophil recovery time, but these reductions are minimal.¹²³ The effects of myeloid growth factors on infection-related mortality are uncertain. In general, these drugs should not be used unless consulting with a specialist in hematology and oncology or infectious diseases.

CONCLUSION

Emergencies are common in patients with cancer, and these patients frequently seek help in emergency departments and offices of primary care physicians. Prompt evaluation that leads to a diagnosis and urgent institution of therapy can be lifesaving or essential to prevent irreversible loss of function. With timely intervention and a multidisciplinary approach to therapy, many of these patients can return to their previous level of function and independence. Therefore, it is important that all health care professionals likely to encounter patients with cancer have a sound knowledge of the most common oncologic emergencies.

We acknowledge Angela Dispenzieri, MD, for her assistance with the section on hyperviscosity.

REFERENCES

1. Stewart AF.  Hypercalcemia associated with cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:373-379.
   
   
2. Body JJ.  Hypercalcemia of malignancy. Semin Nephrol. 2004;24:48-54.
   
   
3. Ling PJ, A’Hern RP, Hardy JR.  Analysis of survival following treatment of tumour-induced hypercalcaemia with intravenous pamidronate (APD). Br J Cancer. 1995;72:206-209.
   
   
4. Ralston SH, Gallacher SJ, Patel U, Campbell J, Boyle IT.  Cancer-associated hypercalcemia: morbidity and mortality: clinical experience in 126 treated patients. Ann Intern Med. 1990;112:499-504.
   
   
5. Kristensen B, Ejlertsen B, Mouridsen HT, Loft H.  Survival in breast cancer patients after the first episode of hypercalcaemia. J Intern Med. 1998;244:189-198.
   
   
6. Pecherstorfer M, Schilling T, Blind E, et al. Parathyroid hormone-related protein and life expectancy in hypercalcemic cancer patients. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1994;78:1268-1270.
   
   
7. Wimalawansa SJ.  Significance of plasma PTH-rp in patients with hypercalcemia of malignancy treated with bisphosphonate. Cancer. 1994;73:2223-2230.
   
   
8. Ratcliffe WA, Hutchesson AC, Bundred NJ, Ratcliffe JG.  Role of assays for parathyroid-hormone-related protein in investigation of hypercalcaemia. Lancet. 1992;339:164-167.
   
   
9. Grill V, Ho P, Body JJ, et al. Parathyroid hormone-related protein: elevated levels in both humoral hypercalcemia of malignancy and hypercalcemia complicating metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1991;73:1309-1315.
   
   
10. Guise TA, Yin JJ, Taylor SD, et al. Evidence for a causal role of parathyroid hormone-related protein in the pathogenesis of human breast cancer-mediated osteolysis. J Clin Invest. 1996;98:1544-1549.
    
    
11. Garrett IR, Durie BG, Nedwin GE, et al. Production of lymphotoxin, a bone-resorbing cytokine, by cultured human myeloma cells. N Engl J Med. 1987;317:526-532.
    
    
12. Choi SJ, Cruz JC, Craig F, et al. Macrophage inflammatory protein 1-alpha is a potential osteoclast stimulatory factor in multiple myeloma. Blood. 2000;96:671-675.
    
    
13. Tian E, Zhan F, Walker R, et al. The role of the Wnt-signaling antagonist DKK1 in the development of osteolytic lesions in multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:2483-2494.
    
    
14. Glass DA II, Patel MS, Karsenty G.  A new insight into the formation of osteolytic lesions in multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:2479-2480.
    
    
15. Seymour JF, Gagel RF.  Calcitriol: the major humoral mediator of hypercalcemia in Hodgkin’s disease and non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas. Blood. 1993;82:1383-1394.
    
    
16. Deftos LJ.  Hypercalcemia in malignant and inflammatory diseases. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am. 2002;31:141-158.
    
    
17. Bushinsky DA, Monk RD.  Electrolyte quintet: calcium [published correction appears in Lancet. 2002;359:266]. Lancet. 1998;352:306-311.
    
    
18. Mundy GR, Guise TA.  Hypercalcemia of malignancy. Am J Med. 1997;103:134-145.
    
    
19. Gurney H, Grill V, Martin TJ.  Parathyroid hormone-related protein and response to pamidronate in tumour-induced hypercalcaemia. Lancet. 1993;341:1611-1613.
    
    
20. Fleisch H.  Bisphosphonates: mechanisms of action. Endocr Rev. 1998;19:80-100.
    
    
21. Berenson JR, Lipton A.  Bisphosphonates in the treatment of malignant bone disease. Annu Rev Med. 1999;50:237-248.
    
    
22. Nussbaum SR, Younger J, Vandepol CJ, et al. Single-dose intravenous therapy with pamidronate for the treatment of hypercalcemia of malignancy: comparison of 30-, 60-, and 90-mg dosages. Am J Med. 1993;95:297-304.
    
    
23. Major P, Lortholary A, Hon J, et al. Zoledronic acid is superior to pamidronate in the treatment of hypercalcemia of malignancy: a pooled analysis of two randomized, controlled clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:558-567.
    
    
24. Saunders Y, Ross JR, Broadley KE, Edmonds PM, Patel S, Steering Group.  Systematic review of bisphosphonates for hypercalcaemia of malignancy. Palliat Med. 2004;18:418-431.
    
    
25. Ljunghall S.  Use of clodronate and calcitonin in hypercalcemia due to malignancy. Recent Results Cancer Res. 1989;116:40-45.
    
    
26. Warrell RPJr, Israel R, Frisone M, Snyder T, Gaynor JJ, Bockman RS.  Gallium nitrate for acute treatment of cancer-related hypercalcemia: a randomized, double-blind comparison to calcitonin. Ann Intern Med. 1988;108:669-674.
    
    
27. Dumon JC, Magritte A, Body JJ.  Nasal human calcitonin for tumor-induced hypercalcemia. Calcif Tissue Int. 1992;51:18-19.
    
    
28. Perlia CP, Gubisch NJ, Wolter J, Edelberg D, Dederick MM, Taylor SG III.  Mithramycin treatment of hypercalcemia. Cancer. 1970;25:389-394.
    
    
29. Deftos LJ, Neer R.  Medical management of the hypercalcemia of malignancy. Annu Rev Med. 1974;25:323-331.
    
    
30. Thurlimann B, Waldburger R, Senn HJ, Thiebaud D.  Plicamycin and pamidronate in symptomatic tumor-related hypercalcemia: a prospective randomized crossover trial. Ann Oncol. 1992;3:619-623.
    
    
31. Leyland-Jones B.  Treating cancer-related hypercalcemia with gallium nitrate. J Support Oncol. 2004;2:509-516.
    
    
32. Ralston SH, Gardner MD, Dryburgh FJ, Jenkins AS, Cowan RA, Boyle IT.  Comparison of aminohydroxypropylidene diphosphonate, mithramycin, and corticosteroids/calcitonin in treatment of cancer-associated hypercalcaemia. Lancet. 1985;2:907-910.
    
    
33. Binstock ML, Mundy GR.  Effect of calcitonin and glucocorticoids in combination on the hypercalcemia of malignancy. Ann Intern Med. 1980;93:269-272.
    
    
34. Camus C, Charasse C, Jouannic-Montier I, et al. Calcium free hemodialysis: experience in the treatment of 33 patients with severe hypercalcemia. Intensive Care Med. 1996;22:116-121.
    
    
35. Koo WS, Jeon DS, Ahn SJ, Kim YS, Yoon YS, Bang BK.  Calcium-free hemodialysis for the management of hypercalcemia. Nephron. 1996;72:424-428.
    
    
36. Cairo MS, Bishop M.  Tumour lysis syndrome: new therapeutic strategies and classification. Br J Haematol. 2004;127:3-11.
    
    
37. Davidson MB, Thakkar S, Hix JK, Bhandarkar ND, Wong A, Schreiber MJ.  Pathophysiology, clinical consequences, and treatment of tumor lysis syndrome. Am J Med. 2004;116:546-554.
    
    
38. Hande KR, Garrow GC.  Acute tumor lysis syndrome in patients with high-grade non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Am J Med. 1993;94:133-139.
    
    
39. Feusner J, Farber MS.  Role of intravenous allopurinol in the management of acute tumor lysis syndrome. Semin Oncol. 2001;28(2, suppl 5):13-18.
    
    
40. Smalley RV, Guaspari A, Haase-Statz S, Anderson SA, Cederberg D, Hohneker JA.  Allopurinol: intravenous use for prevention and treatment of hyperuricemia [published correction appears in J Clin Oncol. 2000;18:2188]. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18:1758-1763.
    
    
41. Bosly A, Sonet A, Pinkerton CR, et al. Rasburicase (recombinant urate oxidase) for the management of hyperuricemia in patients with cancer: report of an international compassionate use study. Cancer. 2003;98:1048-1054.
    
    
42. Jeha S, Kantarjian H, Irwin D, et al. Efficacy and safety of rasburicase, a recombinant urate oxidase (Elitek), in the management of malignancy-associated hyperuricemia in pediatric and adult patients: final results of a multicenter compassionate use trial. Leukemia. 2005;19:34-38.
    
    
43. Loblaw DA, Laperriere NJ, Mackillop WJ.  A population-based study of malignant spinal cord compression in Ontario. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2003;15:211-217.
    
    
44. Bach F, Larsen BH, Rohde K, et al. Metastatic spinal cord compression: occurrence, symptoms, clinical presentations and prognosis in 398 patients with spinal cord compression. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 1990;107:37-43.
    
    
45. Loblaw DA, Smith K, Lockwood G, Laperriere N.  The Princess Margaret Hospital Experience of malignant spinal cord compression [abstract]. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2003;22:119. Abstract 477.
    
    
46. Helweg-Larsen S, Sorensen PS, Kreiner S.  Prognostic factors in metastatic spinal cord compression: a prospective study using multivariate analysis of variables influencing survival and gait function in 153 patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;46:1163-1169.
    
    
47. Kim RY, Spencer SA, Meredith RF, et al. Extradural spinal cord compression: analysis of factors determining functional prognosis—prospective study. Radiology. 1990;176:279-282.
    
    
48. Rades D, Heidenreich F, Karstens JH.  Final results of a prospective study of the prognostic value of the time to develop motor deficits before irradiation in metastatic spinal cord compression. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002;53:975-979.
    
    
49. Klimo PJr, Schmidt MH.  Surgical management of spinal metastases. Oncologist. 2004;9:188-196.
    
    
50. Prasad D, Schiff D.  Malignant spinal-cord compression. Lancet Oncol. 2005;6:15-24.
    
    
51. Helweg-Larsen S, Sorensen PS.  Symptoms and signs in metastatic spinal cord compression: a study of progression from first symptom until diagnosis in 153 patients. Eur J Cancer. 1994;30A:396-398.
    
    
52. Schiff D, O’Neill BP, Suman VJ.  Spinal epidural metastasis as the initial manifestation of malignancy: clinical features and diagnostic approach. Neurology. 1997;49:452-456.
    
    
53. Gilbert RW, Kim JH, Posner JB.  Epidural spinal cord compression from metastatic tumor: diagnosis and treatment. Ann Neurol. 1978;3:40-51.
    
    
54. Helweg-Larsen S.  Clinical outcome in metastatic spinal cord compression: a prospective study of 153 patients. Acta Neurol Scand. 1996;94:269-275.
    
    
55. van der Sande JJ, Kroger R, Boogerd W.  Multiple spinal epidural metastases: an unexpectedly frequent finding. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1990;53:1001-1003.
    
    
56. Helweg-Larsen S, Hansen SW, Sorensen PS.  Second occurrence of symptomatic metastatic spinal cord compression and findings of multiple spinal epidural metastases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995;33:595-598.
    
    
57. Pigott KH, Baddeley H, Maher EJ.  Pattern of disease in spinal cord compression on MRI scan and implications for treatment. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 1994;6:7-10.
    
    
58. Schiff D, O’Neill BP, Wang CH, O’Fallon JR.  Neuroimaging and treatment implications of patients with multiple epidural spinal metastases. Cancer. 1998;83:1593-1601.
    
    
59. Cook AM, Lau TN, Tomlinson MJ, Vaidya M, Wakeley CJ, Goddard P.  Magnetic resonance imaging of the whole spine in suspected malignant spinal cord compression: impact on management. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 1998;10:39-43.
    
    
60. Loughrey GJ, Collins CD, Todd SM, Brown NM, Johnson RJ.  Magnetic resonance imaging in the management of suspected spinal canal disease in patients with known malignancy. Clin Radiol. 2000;55:849-855.
    
    
61. Loblaw DA, Perry J, Chambers A, Laperriere NJ.  Systematic review of the diagnosis and management of malignant extradural spinal cord compression: the Cancer Care Ontario Practice Guidelines Initiative’s Neuro-Oncology Disease Site Group. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:2028-2037.
    
    
62. Stark RJ, Henson RA, Evans SJ.  Spinal metastases: a retrospective survey from a general hospital. Brain. 1982;105(pt 1):189-213.
    
    
63. Ecker RD, Endo T, Wetjen NM, Krauss WE.  Diagnosis and treatment of vertebral column metastases. Mayo Clin Proc. 2005;80:1177-1186.
    
    
64. Vecht CJ, Haaxma-Reiche H, van Putten WL, de Visser M, Vries EP, Twijnstra A.  Initial bolus of conventional versus high-dose dexamethasone in metastatic spinal cord compression. Neurology. 1989;39:1255-1257.
    
    
65. Sorensen S, Helweg-Larsen S, Mouridsen H, Hansen HH.  Effect of high-dose dexamethasone in carcinomatous metastatic spinal cord compression treated with radiotherapy: a randomised trial. Eur J Cancer. 1994;30A:22-27.
    
    
66. Heimdal K, Hirschberg H, Slettebo H, Watne K, Nome O.  High incidence of serious side effects of high-dose dexamethasone treatment in patients with epidural spinal cord compression. J Neurooncol. 1992;12:141-144.
    
    
67. Maranzano E, Latini P, Beneventi S, et al. Radiotherapy without steroids in selected metastatic spinal cord compression patients: a phase II trial. Am J Clin Oncol. 1996;19:179-183.
    
    
68. Patchell RA, Tibbs PA, Regine WF, et al. Direct decompressive surgical resection in the treatment of spinal cord compression caused by metastatic cancer: a randomised trial. Lancet. 2005;366:643-648.
    
    
69. Posner JB, Chernik NL.  Intracranial metastases from systemic cancer. Adv Neurol. 1978;19:579-592.
    
    
70. Lassman AB, DeAngelis LM.  Brain metastases. Neurol Clin. 2003;21:1-23, vii.
    
    
71. Tosoni A, Ermani M, Brandes AA.  The pathogenesis and treatment of brain metastases: a comprehensive review. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2004;52:199-215.
    
    
72. Polyzoidis KS, Miliaras G, Pavlidis N.  Brain metastasis of unknown primary: a diagnostic and therapeutic dilemma. Cancer Treat Rev. 2005;31:247-255.
    
    
73. Klos KJ, O’Neill BP.  Brain metastases. Neurologist. 2004;10:31-46.
    
    
74. Kaal EC, Niel CG, Vecht CJ.  Therapeutic management of brain metastasis. Lancet Neurol. 2005;4:289-298.
    
    
75. Kaal EC, Vecht CJ.  The management of brain edema in brain tumors. Curr Opin Oncol. 2004;16:593-600.
    
    
76. Vecht CJ, Hovestadt A, Verbiest HB, van Vliet JJ, van Putten WL.  Dose-effect relationship of dexamethasone on Karnofsky performance in metastatic brain tumors: a randomized study of doses of 4, 8, and 16 mg per day. Neurology. 1994;44:675-680.
    
    
77. Glantz MJ, Cole BF, Forsyth PA, et al. Practice parameter: anticonvulsant prophylaxis in patients with newly diagnosed brain tumors: report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology. 2000;54:1886-1893.
    
    
78. Marik PE, Varon J.  The management of status epilepticus. Chest. 2004;126:582-591.
    
    
79. Walker M.  Status epilepticus: an evidence based guide. BMJ. 2005;331:673-677.
    
    
80. Tsao MN, Lloyd NS, Wong RK, Rakovitch E, Chow E, Laperriere N.  Supportive Care Guidelines Group of Cancer Care Ontario’s Program in Evidence-based Care. Radiotherapeutic management of brain metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Treat Rev. 2005;31:256-273.
    
    
81. Hazard LJ, Jensen RL, Shrieve DC.  Role of stereotactic radiosurgery in the treatment of brain metastases. Am J Clin Oncol. 2005;28:403-410.
    
    
82. Garcia-Riego A, Cuinas C, Vilanova JJ.  Malignant pericardial effusion. Acta Cytol. 2001;45:561-566.
    
    
83. DeCamp MMJr, Mentzer SJ, Swanson SJ, Sugarbaker DJ.  Malignant effusive disease of the pleura and pericardium. Chest. 1997;112(4, suppl):291S-295S.
    
    
84. Spodick DH.  Acute cardiac tamponade. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:684-690.
    
    
85. Karam N, Patel P, deFilippi C.  Diagnosis and management of chronic pericardial effusions. Am J Med Sci. 2001;322:79-87.
    
    
86. Shepherd FA.  Malignant pericardial effusion. Curr Opin Oncol. 1997;9:170-174.
    
    
87. Tsang TS, Oh JK, Seward JB.  Diagnosis and management of cardiac tamponade in the era of echocardiography. Clin Cardiol. 1999;22:446-452.
    
    
88. Breen JF.  Imaging of the pericardium. J Thorac Imaging. 2001;16:47-54.
    
    
89. Moores DW, Dziuban SW Jr.  Pericardial drainage procedures. Chest Surg Clin N Am. 1995;5:359-373.
    
    
90. Martinoni A, Cipolla CM, Cardinale D, et al. Long-term results of intrapericardial chemotherapeutic treatment of malignant pericardial effusions with thiotepa. Chest. 2004;126:1412-1416.
    
    
91. Yahalom J.  Superior vena cava syndrome. In: DeVita VT Jr, Hellman S, Rosenberg SA, eds. Cancer: Principles and Practice of Oncology. 7th ed. Philadelphia, Pa: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2005:2273-2280.
    
    
92. Wudel LJJr, Nesbitt JC.  Superior vena cava syndrome. Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2001;2:77-91.
    
    
93. Bertrand M, Presant CA, Klein L, Scott E.  Iatrogenic superior vena cava syndrome: a new entity. Cancer. 1984;54:376-378.
    
    
94. Morales M, Llanos M, Dorta J.  Superior vena cava thrombosis secondary to Hickman catheter and complete resolution after fibrinolytic therapy. Support Care Cancer. 1997;5:67-69.
    
    
95. Otten TR, Stein PD, Patel KC, Mustafa S, Silbergleit A.  Thromboembolic disease involving the superior vena cava and brachiocephalic veins. Chest. 2003;123:809-812.
    
    
96. Parish JM, Marschke RFJr, Dines DE, Lee RE.  Etiologic considerations in superior vena cava syndrome. Mayo Clin Proc. 1981;56:407-413.
    
    
97. Qanadli SD, El Hajjam M, Bruckert F, et al. Helical CT phlebography of the superior vena cava: diagnosis and evaluation of venous obstruction. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;172:1327-1333.
    
    
98. Yellin A, Rosen A, Reichert N, Lieberman Y.  Superior vena cava syndrome: the myth—the facts. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1990;141(5, pt 1):1114-1118.
    
    
99. Lanciego C, Chacon JL, Julian A, et al. Stenting as first option for endovascular treatment of malignant superior vena cava syndrome. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001;177:585-593.
    
    
100. Courtheoux P, Alkofer B, Al Refai M, Gervais R, Le Rochais JP, Icard P.  Stent placement in superior vena cava syndrome. Ann Thorac Surg. 2003;75:158-161.
     
     
101. Urruticoechea A, Mesia R, Dominguez J, et al. Treatment of malignant superior vena cava syndrome by endovascular stent insertion: experience on 52 patients with lung cancer. Lung Cancer. 2004;43:209-214.
     
     
102. Donato V, Bonfili P, Bulzonetti N, et al. Radiation therapy for oncological emergencies. Anticancer Res. 2001;21(3C):2219-2224.
     
     
103. Davenport D, Ferree C, Blake D, Raben M.  Radiation therapy in the treatment of superior vena caval obstruction. Cancer. 1978;42:2600-2603.
     
     
104. Rowell NP, Gleeson FV.  Steroids, radiotherapy, chemotherapy and stents for superior vena caval obstruction in carcinoma of the bronchus: a systematic review. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2002;14:338-351.
     
     
105. Gertz MA, Kyle RA.  Hyperviscosity syndrome. J Intensive Care Med. 1995;10:128-141.
     
     
106. Mehta J, Singhal S.  Hyperviscosity syndrome in plasma cell dyscrasias. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2003;29:467-471.
     
     
107. Kyle RA, Gertz MA, Witzig TE, et al. Review of 1027 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Mayo Clin Proc. 2003;78:21-33.
     
     
108. Zarkovic M, Kwaan HC.  Correction of hyperviscosity by apheresis. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2003;29:535-542.
     
     
109. Porcu P, Cripe LD, Ng EW, et al. Hyperleukocytic leukemias and leukostasis: a review of pathophysiology, clinical presentation and management. Leuk Lymphoma. 2000;39:1-18.
     
     
110. Kwaan HC, Bongu A.  The hyperviscosity syndromes. Semin Thromb Hemost. 1999;25:199-208.
     
     
111. Kwaan HC, Wang J.  Hyperviscosity in polycythemia vera and other red cell abnormalities. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2003;29:451-458.
     
     
112. Lightman MA.  Rheology of leukocytes, leukocyte suspensions, and blood in leukemia: possible relationship to clinical manifestations. J Clin Invest. 1973;52:350-358.
     
     
113. Porcu P, Farag S, Marcucci G, Cataland SR, Kennedy MS, Bissell M.  Leukocytoreduction for acute leukemia. Ther Apher. 2002;6:15-23.
     
     
114. Giles FJ, Shen Y, Kantarjian HM, et al. Leukapheresis reduces early mortality in patients with acute myeloid leukemia with high white cell counts but does not improve long-term survival. Leuk Lymphoma. 2001;42:67-73.
     
     
115. Thiebaut A, Thomas X, Belhabri A, Anglaret B, Archimbaud E.  Impact of pre-induction therapy leukapheresis on treatment outcome in adult acute myelogenous leukemia presenting with hyperleukocytosis. Ann Hematol. 2000;79:501-506.
     
     
116. Grund FM, Armitage JO, Burns P.  Hydroxyurea in the prevention of the effects of leukostasis in acute leukemia. Arch Intern Med. 1977;137:1246-1247.
     
     
117. Hughes WT, Armstrong D, Bodey GP, et al. 2002 Guidelines for the use of antimicrobial agents in neutropenic patients with cancer. Clin Infect Dis. 2002;34:730-751.
     
     
118. Sipsas NV, Bodey GP, Kontoyiannis DP.  Perspectives for the management of febrile neutropenic patients with cancer in the 21st century. Cancer. 2005;103:1103-1113.
     
     
119. Zinner SH.  Changing epidemiology of infections in patients with neutropenia and cancer: emphasis on gram-positive and resistant bacteria. Clin Infect Dis. 1999;29:490-494.
     
     
120. Mermel LA, Farr BM, Sherertz RJ, et al. Guidelines for the management of intravascular catheter-related infections. Clin Infect Dis. 2001;32:1249-1272.
     
     
121. Heussel CP, Kauczor HU, Heussel GE, et al. Pneumonia in febrile neutropenic patients and in bone marrow and blood stem-cell transplant recipients: use of high-resolution computed tomography. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:796-805.
     
     
122. Klastersky J, Paesmans M, Rubenstein EB, et al. The Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer risk index: a multinational scoring system for identifying low-risk febrile neutropenic cancer patients. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18:3038-3051.
     
     
123. Clark OA, Lyman GH, Castro AA, Clark LG, Djulbegovic B.  Colony-stimulating factors for chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:4198-4214.