Preview

Oncohematology

Advanced search

Toxic and infectious lung injury differential diagnosis specifics in oncohematological patients

https://doi.org/10.17650/1818-8346-2023-18-2-100-110

Abstract

Background. Assessment of lung injury in oncohematological patients is a relevant problem, since the spectrum of pathological changes is wide and includes pulmonary infections, tumor cell infiltration, cardiogenic and non-cardiogenic pulmonary edema, bronchiolitis obliterans, interstitial pneumonitis, post-radiation and post-inflammatory pneumofibrosis, pulmonary vasculopathy and pleural effusion. At the moment there are no approved recommendations with criteria of differential diagnosis for these conditions, in particular, with differences between the most common therapy complication represented by pulmonary infections and poorly explored drug-induced toxic lesions.

Aim. Identification of criteria for pneumotoxicity, allowing for differential diagnosis with pulmonary infections developing during chemotherapy, according to data routinely obtained in real clinical practice.

Materials and methods. The study group included 38 patients with cytotoxic and autoimmune lung injury caused by specific therapy (group 1); the comparison group included 38 patients with infectious lesions receiving the same antitumor drugs (group 2). The data of the anamnesis, clinical course, instrumental studies and standard laboratory tests was studied retrospectively. For statistical analysis, the Mann–Whitney, χ2, Kruskal–Wallis tests were used. ROC analysis was performed to assess the sensitivity and specificity of various factors in relation to toxic damage.

Results. Patients with lymphomas predominated in group of toxic lung injury (63 %). In patients who underwent allogeneic hematopoietic stem cells transplantation, toxic complications developed in the period from 35 to 1289 days, infectious – from 4 to 43 days. Statistically significant differences were obtained in the presence of a concomitant state of an altered immune response: 32 % of patients in the toxic lesion group versus 5 % in the infectious group had a history of allergy, and, in contrast to the infectious lesion group, in the toxic lesion group autoimmune diseases were detected. The main symptom in patients of the first group was shortness of breath, which was observed in 68 % of cases, of the second – an increased body temperature, observed in 92 % of cases; cough was also a common symptom – in 19 % and 13 % of patients respectively. In 58 % of patients of the second group, concomitant mucositis was detected, while in the first group this complication did not occur in any of them. The most common radiological pattern (71 % of cases in each group) was ground-glass opacities, in patients of the second group often combined with infiltrative changes and thickening of the bronchial walls (in 53 and 42 % of cases respectively). Among laboratory results, the largest differences between groups were observed in the leukocyte levels (with an average level of 2.5 . 109 / L in the infectious group versus 6 . 109 / L in the toxic group), eosinophils (with an average of 3.6 % in the toxic group versus 1.75 % in the infectious group), C-reactive protein (with an average level of 146.7 mg / L in the infectious group versus 52.4 mg / L in the toxic group), and creatinine (with an average of 0.085 mmol / L in the toxic group versus 0.071 mmol / L in the infectious group).

Conclusion. The data obtained in this research indicates the value of taking an anamnesis and the importance of performing additional studies in patients with suspected drug-induced lung injury, as well as identifies risk groups. Based on the revealed differences, a scale for the differential diagnosis of drug-induced toxic and infectious lung damage, which includes the results of publicly available research methods, with high sensitivity and specificity, was proposed. Further research for more specific, but, at the same time, universal for various drugs, criteria for toxic lung damage is relevant.

About the Authors

V. R. Yanbukhtina
I.P. Pavlov First Saint Petersburg State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation

Valeriya Rustamovna Yanbukhtina

6‒8 L’va Tolstogo St., Saint Petersburg 197022, Russia



I. S. Zyuzgin
N.N. Petrov National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation

68 Leningradskaya St., Pesochnyy, Saint Petersburg 197758, Russia



T. V. Shneyder
Leningrad Regional Clinical Hospital
Russian Federation

45 Lunacharskogo Prospekt, Saint Petersburg 194291, Russia



P. K. Khorosheva
I.P. Pavlov First Saint Petersburg State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation

6‒8 L’va Tolstogo St., Saint Petersburg 197022, Russia



A. A. Zver’kova
N.N. Petrov National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation

68 Leningradskaya St., Pesochnyy, Saint Petersburg 197758, Russia



I. A. Borovichkov
Leningrad Regional Clinical Hospital
Russian Federation

45 Lunacharskogo Prospekt, Saint Petersburg 194291, Russia



G. B. Kuchma
Orenburg Regional Clinical Hospital
Russian Federation

23 Aksakogo St., Orenburg 460018, Russia



E. A. Kulagin
I.P. Pavlov First Saint Petersburg State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation

6‒8 L’va Tolstogo St., Saint Petersburg 197022, Russia



L. V. Stel’makh
I.P. Pavlov First Saint Petersburg State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation

6‒8 L’va Tolstogo St., Saint Petersburg 197022, Russia



A. G. Smirnova
I.P. Pavlov First Saint Petersburg State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation

6‒8 L’va Tolstogo St., Saint Petersburg 197022, Russia



Yu. Yu. Vlasova
I.P. Pavlov First Saint Petersburg State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation

6‒8 L’va Tolstogo St., Saint Petersburg 197022, Russia



E. V. Morozova
I.P. Pavlov First Saint Petersburg State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation

6‒8 L’va Tolstogo St., Saint Petersburg 197022, Russia



Yu. D. Rabik
I.P. Pavlov First Saint Petersburg State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation

6‒8 L’va Tolstogo St., Saint Petersburg 197022, Russia



I. S. Moiseev
I.P. Pavlov First Saint Petersburg State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation

6‒8 L’va Tolstogo St., Saint Petersburg 197022, Russia



V. I. Trofimov
I.P. Pavlov First Saint Petersburg State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation

6‒8 L’va Tolstogo St., Saint Petersburg 197022, Russia



References

1. Harris B., Geyer A.I. Diagnostic Evaluation of pulmonary abnormalities in patients with hematologic malignancies and hematopoietic cell transplantation. Clin Chest Med 2017;38(2):317–31. DOI: 10.1016/j.ccm.2016.12.008

2. Kubo K., Azuma A., Kanazawa M. et al. Consensus statement for the diagnosis and treatment of drug-induced lung injuries. Respir Investig 2013;51(4):260–77. DOI: 10.1016/j.resinv.2013.09.001

3. Shannon V.R., Anderson R., Blidner A. et al. Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) 2020 clinical practice recommendations for the management of immune-related adverse events: pulmonary toxicity. Support Care Cancer 2020;28(12):6145–57. DOI: 10.1007/s00520-020-05708-2

4. Utesheva K.I., Valiev T.T., Ignatenko O.A. et al. A clinical case of immune-mediated pneumonitis after nivolumab in a patient with Burkitt lymphoma. Onkogematologiya = Oncohematology 2023;18(1):121–5. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.17650/1818‑8346‑2023‑18‑1‑121‑125

5. Yanbukhtina V.R., Moiseev I.S., Trofimov V.I. et al. Frequency and clinical presentation of drug-induced lung disease in oncohematological patients. Prakticheskaya pul’monologiya = Practical Pulmonology 2021;(3). (In Russ.). DOI: 10.24412/2409-6636-2021-12421

6. Conte P., Ascierto P.A., Patelli G. et al. Drug-induced interstitial lung disease during cancer therapies: expert opinion on diagnosis and treatment. ESMO Open 2022;7(2):100404. DOI: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2022.100404

7. Orlova G.P., Surkova E.A., Lapin S.V. Markers of exogenous interstitial lung disease activity. Pulmonologiya = Pulmonology 2016;26(2):180–5. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.18093/0869-0189-2016-26-2-180-185

8. Yamane H., Ochi N., Nagasaki Y. et al. Drug-induced interstitial lung disease in the treatment of malignant lymphoma as a potential diagnostic marker: a comparison of serum Krebs von Lungen-6 and thymus and activation-regulated chemokine/CC chemokine ligand 17. Ther Clin Risk Manag 2018;14:1457–65 DOI: 10.2147/TCRM.S169824

9. Akash J., Shannon V.R., Sheshadri A. Pneumonitis after precision oncology therapies: a concise review. J Immunother Precis Oncol 2018;1(1):26–37. DOI: 10.4103/JIPO.JIPO_9_18

10. Spagnolo P., Bonniaud P., Rossi G. et al. Drug-induced interstitial lung disease. Eur Respir J 2022;60(4):2102776. DOI: 10.1183/13993003.02776-2021

11. Bui A., Han S., Alexander M. et al. Pulmonary function testing for the early detection of drug-induced lung disease: a systematic review in adults treated with drugs associated with pulmonary toxicity. Int Med J 2020;50(11):1311–25. DOI: 10.1111/imj.14647


Review

For citations:


Yanbukhtina V.R., Zyuzgin I.S., Shneyder T.V., Khorosheva P.K., Zver’kova A.A., Borovichkov I.A., Kuchma G.B., Kulagin E.A., Stel’makh L.V., Smirnova A.G., Vlasova Yu.Yu., Morozova E.V., Rabik Yu.D., Moiseev I.S., Trofimov V.I. Toxic and infectious lung injury differential diagnosis specifics in oncohematological patients. Oncohematology. 2023;18(2):100‑110. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17650/1818-8346-2023-18-2-100-110

Views: 6799


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 1818-8346 (Print)
ISSN 2413-4023 (Online)