Management of cancer pain: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines

The role of ketamine in the treatment of chronic cancer pain

Background and aim

Ketamine is a drug used for the induction and maintenance of general anesthesia, for the treatment of postoperative and posttraumatic acute pain, and more recently, for the reduction of postoperative opioid requirements. The main mechanism of action of ketamine is the antagonization of N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors that are associated with central sensitization. In the pathogenesis of chronic pain and particularly in neuropathic pain, an important role is played by the activation of NMDA receptors. Although ketamine is indicated and used for the treatment of chronic cancer pain as an adjuvant to opioids, there are few clinical studies that clearly demonstrate the effectiveness of ketamine in this type of pain.

The aim of this study is to analyze evidence-based clinical data on the effectiveness and safety of ketamine administration in the treatment of chronic neoplastic pain, and to summarize the evidence-based recommendations for the use of ketamine in the treatment of chronic cancer pain.

Method

We reviewed the literature from the electronic databases of MEDLINE, COCHRANE, PUBMED, MEDSCAPE (1998–2014), as well as chapters of specialized books (palliative care, pain management, anesthesia).

Results

A number of studies support the effectiveness of ketamine in the treatment of chronic cancer pain, one study does not evidence clear clinical benefits for the use of ketamine, and some studies included too few patients to be conclusive.

Conclusions

Ketamine represents an option for neoplasic pain that no longer responds to conventional opioid treatment, but this drug should be used with caution, and the development of potential side effects should be carefully monitored.

Efficacy and tolerability of oral oxycodone and oxycodone/naloxone combination in opioid-naïve cancer patients: a propensity analysis

Background

World Health Organization step III opioids are required to relieve moderate-to-severe cancer pain; constipation is one of the most frequent opioid-induced side effects. A fixed combination, prolonged-release oxycodone/naloxone (OXN), was developed with the aim of reducing opioid-related gastrointestinal side effects. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of prolonged-release oxycodone (OXY) alone to OXN in opioid-naïve cancer patients with moderate-to-severe pain.

Methods

Propensity analysis was utilized in this observational study, which evaluated the efficacy, safety, and quality of life.

Results

Out of the 210 patients recruited, 146 were matched using propensity scores and included in the comparative analysis. In both groups, pain intensity decreased by ≈3 points after 60 days, indicating comparable analgesic efficacy. Responder rates were similar between groups. Analgesia was achieved and maintained with similarly low and stable dosages over time (12.0–20.4 mg/d for OXY and 11.5–22.0 mg/d for OXN). Bowel Function Index (BFI) and laxative use per week improved from baseline at 30 days and 60 days in OXN recipients (−16, P<0.0001 and −3.5, P=0.02, respectively); BFI worsened in the OXY group. The overall incidence of drug-related adverse events was 28.9% in the OXY group and 8.2% in the OXN group (P<0.01); nausea and vomiting were two to five times less frequent with OXN. Quality of life improved to a significantly greater extent in patients receiving OXN compared to OXY (increase in Short Form-36 physical component score of 7.1 points vs 3.2 points, respectively; P<0.001).

Conclusion

In patients with chronic cancer pain, OXN provided analgesic effectiveness that is similar to OXY, with early and sustained benefits in tolerability. The relationship between responsiveness to OXN and clinical characteristics is currently being investigated.

Quality of life and healthcare resource in patients receiving opioids for chronic pain: a review of the place of oxycodone/naloxone

In patients managed with opioids for chronic pain, opioid-induced bowel dysfunction—specifically, opioid-induced constipation (OIC)—is a common side effect, which has a significant impact on quality of life (QoL). The most recent developments for management of OIC are opioid antagonists, including naloxone, a competitive antagonist of peripheral opioid receptors that reverses opioid-induced peripheral gastrointestinal (GI) effects. A prolonged-release formulation of naloxone is available in combination with oxycodone (OXN PR). To review the specific role of OXN PR in the management of chronic pain and OIC and its impact on QoL and healthcare costs, a review of available relevant literature was conducted. Healthcare costs can be up to ten times higher for patients with GI events than for those without. Assessment of QoL in patients with OIC is essential, and multiple tools for its evaluation are available. The Bowel Function Index (BFI), a tool that was specifically developed and validated to measure bowel function in patients with OIC, can be an indication of QoL. In patients with moderate-to-severe chronic pain, randomized trials have demonstrated that OXN PR has equal analgesic efficacy and safety, but results in improved bowel function, compared with prolonged-release oxycodone (Oxy PR) alone. In conclusion, randomized studies using the BFI, as well as real-world clinical practice observations, have demonstrated improved QoL for patients taking OXN PR. This combination should allow more patients to benefit from the analgesic efficacy of opioid therapy and should minimize the side effects of constipation that correspond to improvements in QoL and healthcare offsets.

Pulmonary Venous Obstruction in Cancer Patients

Background. We study the clinical significance and management of pulmonary venous obstruction in cancer patients. Methods. We conducted a prospective cohort study to characterize the syndrome that we term “pulmonary vein obstruction syndrome” (PVOS) between January 2005 and March 2014. The criteria for inclusion were (1) episodes of shortness of breath; (2) chest X-ray showing abnormal pulmonary hilum shadow with or without presence of pulmonary edema and/or pleural effusion; (3) CT scan demonstrating pulmonary vein thrombosis/tumor with or without tumor around the vein. Results. Two hundred and twenty-two patients developed PVOS. Shortness of breath was the main symptom, which was aggravated by chemotherapy in 28 (13%), and medical/surgical procedures in 21 (9%) and showed diurnal change in intensity in 32 (14%). Chest X-rays all revealed abnormal pulmonary hilum shadows and presence of pulmonary edema in 194 (87%) and pleural effusion in 192 (86%). CT scans all showed pulmonary vein thrombosis/tumor (100%) and surrounding the pulmonary veins by tumor lesions in 140 patients (63%). PVOS was treated with low molecular weight heparin in combination with dexamethasone, and 66% of patients got clinical/image improvement. Conclusion. Physicians should be alert to PVOS when shortness of breath occurs and chest X-ray reveals abnormal pulmonary hilum shadows.

Characteristics and associations of pain intensity in patients referred to a specialist cancer pain clinic

Uncontrolled cancer pain (CP) has the ability to impair quality of life and interfere with daily activities. Poor CP management is consistently attributed to inadequate assessment and clarification of pain. The authors of this study identified the need to understand the nature of CP and inform evidence-based strategies for its assessment and management. The study aimed to describe the characteristics of CP and to determine predictors of pain intensity with patients referred to a CP clinic in Portugal.

BACKGROUND:

Uncontrolled cancer pain (CP) may impair quality of life. Given the multidimensional nature of CP, its poor control is often attributed to poor assessment and classification.

OBJECTIVES:

To determine the characteristics and associations of pain intensity in a specialist CP clinic.

METHODS:

Consecutive patients referred to the CP clinic of the Portuguese Cancer Institute (Lisbon, Portugal) had standardized initial assessments and status documentation of the following: Brief Pain Inventory ratings for ‘pain now’ as the outcome variable; initial pain intensity (iPI) on a 0 to 10 scale; pain mechanism (using the Douleur Neuropathique 4 tool to assess neuropathic pain); episodic pain; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group rating; oral morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD); Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale and Emotional Thermometer scores; and cancer diagnosis, metastases, treatment and pain duration. Univariable analyses were conducted to test the association of independent variables with iPI. Variables with P<0.1 were entered into a multivariable regression model, using backward elimination and a cut-point of P=0.2 for final model selection.

RESULTS:

Of 371 participants, 285 (77%) had moderate (4 to 6) or severe (7 to 10) iPI. The initial median MEDD was relatively low (30 mg [range 20 mg to 60 mg]). In the multivariable model, higher income, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group rating 3 to 4, cancer diagnosis (head and neck, genitourinary and gastrointestinal), adjuvant use and initial MEDD were associated with iPI (P<0.05). The model’s R² was 18.6, which explained only 19% of iPI variance.

CONCLUSIONS:

The diversity of factors associated with pain intensity and their limited explanation of its variance underscore the biopsychosocial complexity of CP. Adequacy of CP management warrants further exploration.

Developments in managing severe chronic pain: role of oxycodone-naloxone extended release

Chronic pain is a highly disabling condition, which can significantly reduce patients’ quality of life. Prevalence of moderate and severe chronic pain is high in the general population, and it increases significantly in patients with advanced cancer and older than 65 years. Guidelines for the management of chronic pain recommend opioids for the treatment of moderate-to-severe pain in patients whose pain is not responsive to initial therapies with paracetamol and/or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Despite their analgesic efficacy being well recognized, adverse events can affect daily functioning and patient quality of life. Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) occurs in 40% of opioid-treated patients. Laxatives are the most common drugs used to prevent and treat OIC. Laxatives do not address the underlying mechanisms of OIC; for this reason, they are not really effective in OIC treatment. Naloxone is an opioid receptor antagonist with low systemic bioavailability. When administered orally, naloxone antagonizes the opioid receptors in the gut wall, while its extensive first-pass hepatic metabolism ensures the lack of antagonist influence on the central-mediated analgesic effect of the opioids. A prolonged-release formulation consisting of oxycodone and naloxone in a 2:1 ratio was developed trying to reduce the incidence of OIC maintaining the analgesic effect compared with use of the sole oxycodone. This review includes evidence related to use of oxycodone and naloxone in the long-term management of chronic non-cancer pain and OIC.

A retrospective study to identify risk factors for somnolence and dizziness in patients treated with pregabalin

Background

Pregabalin is a therapeutic drug for neuropathic pain that is associated with somnolence and dizziness. These adverse events are often experienced shortly after initiating pregabalin, and may lead to treatment discontinuation. The purpose of this study was to explore factors that influence the incidence of somnolence and dizziness induced by pregabalin, and to identify patients at higher risk of adverse events.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted of patient characteristics (age, gender, renal function, initial daily dose of pregabalin, co-administration of strong opioids and hypnotics) and the incidence of somnolence and dizziness during the first week of pregabalin treatment. An electronic chart was used to collect data from 204 inpatients prescribed pregabalin at Nagoya University Hospital from June 2011 to November 2012.

Results

Among 36 patients who regularly received strong opioids, 18 (50.0 %) reported somnolence or dizziness during the first week of pregabalin treatment. The remaining 168 patients did not regularly receive strong opioids, and 25 (14.9 %) had an adverse event. In multivariate analysis, age (≧65 years, adjusted odds ratio: 2.507, 95 % CI: 1.164-5.397, p = 0.019) and regular co-administration of strong opioids (adjusted odds ratio: 5.507, 95 % CI: 2.460-12.328, p < 0.001) correlated with somnolence or dizziness.

Conclusions

These data suggest that age (≧65 years) and co-administration of strong opioids are risk factors for somnolence or dizziness during pregabalin treatment for neuropathic pain. More careful dose titration is recommended for elderly patients and those receiving concomitant strong opioids.

Pain management in nursing home residents with cancer

OBJECTIVES

To assess improvements in pain management of nursing home (NH) residents with cancer since the implementation of pain management quality indicators.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional.

SETTING

One thousand three hundred eighty-two U.S. NHs (N = 1,382).

PARTICIPANTS

Newly admitted, Medicare-eligible NH residents with cancer (N = 8,094).

MEASUREMENTS

Nationwide data on NH resident health from Minimum Data Set 2.0 linked to all-payer pharmacy dispensing records (February 2006-June 2007) were used to determine prevalence of pain, including frequency and intensity, and receipt of nonopioid and opioid analgesics. Multinomial logistic regression was used to evaluate resident-level correlates of pain and binomial logistic regression to identify correlates of untreated pain.

RESULTS

More than 65% of NH residents with cancer had any pain (28.3% daily, 37.3% <daily), 13.5% of whom had severe and 61.3% had moderate pain. Women; residents admitted from acute care or who were bedfast; and those with compromised activities of daily living, depressed mood, an indwelling catheter, or a terminal prognosis were more likely to have pain. More than 17% of residents in daily pain (95% confidence interval (CI) = 16.0-19.1%) received no analgesics, including 11.7% with daily severe pain (95% CI = 8.9-14.5%) and 16.9% with daily moderate pain (95% CI = 15.1-18.8%). Treatment was negatively associated with age of 85 and older (adjusted OR (aOR) = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.55-0.81 vs aged 65-74), cognitive impairment (aOR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.61-0.82), presence of feeding tube (aOR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.60-0.99), and restraints (aOR = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.31-0.82).

CONCLUSION

Untreated pain is still common in NH residents with cancer and persists despite pain management quality indicators.

Optimisation of the continuum of supportive and palliative care for patients with breast cancer in low-income and middle-income countries: executive summary of the Breast Health Global Initiative, 2014

Supportive care and palliative care are now recognised as critical components of global cancer control programmes. Many aspects of supportive and palliative care services are already available in some low-income and middle-income countries. Full integration of supportive and palliative care into breast cancer programmes requires a systematic, resource-stratified approach. The Breast Health Global Initiative convened three expert panels to develop resource allocation recommendations for supportive and palliative care programmes in low-income and middle-income countries. Each panel focused on a specific phase of breast cancer care: during treatment, after treatment with curative intent (survivorship), and after diagnosis with metastatic disease. The panel consensus statements were published in October, 2013. This Executive Summary combines the three panels' recommendations into a single comprehensive document covering breast cancer care from diagnosis through curative treatment into survivorship, and metastatic disease and end-of-life care. The recommendations cover physical symptom management, pain management, monitoring and documentation, psychosocial and spiritual aspects of care, health professional education, and patient, family, and caregiver education.

Optimal delivery of colorectal cancer follow-up care: improving patient outcomes

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer worldwide. With population aging and increases in survival, the number of CRC survivors is projected to rise dramatically. The time following initial treatment is often described as a period of transition from intensive hospital-based care back into "regular life." This review provides an overview of recommended follow-up care for people with CRC who have been treated with curative intent, as well as exploring the current state of the research that underpins these guidelines. For patients, key concerns following treatment include the development of recurrent and new cancers, late and long-term effects of cancer and treatment, and the interplay of these factors with daily function and general health. For physicians, survivorship care plans can be a tool for coordinating the surveillance, intervention, and prevention of these key patient concerns. Though much of the research in cancer survivorship to date has focused on surveillance for recurrent disease, many national guidelines differ in their conclusions about the frequency and timing of follow-up tests. Most CRC guidelines refer only briefly to the management of side effects, despite reports that many patients have a range of ongoing physiological, psychosocial, and functional needs. Guidance for surveillance and intervention is often limited by a small number of heterogeneous trials conducted in this patient group. However, recently released survivorship guidelines emphasize the potential for the effectiveness of secondary prevention strategies, such as physical activity, to improve patient outcomes. There is also emerging evidence for the role of primary care providers and nurse coordinated care to support the transition and increase the cost-effectiveness of follow-up. The shift in focus from recurrence alone to the assessment and management of a range of survivorship issues will be important for ensuring that this growing group of patients achieves optimal outcomes.

Evidence-based Clinical Practice Guidelines for Interventional Pain Management in Cancer Pain

Intractable cancer pain not amenable to standard oral or parenteral analgesics is a horrifying truth in 10-15% of patients. Interventional pain management techniques are an indispensable arsenal in pain physician's armamentarium for severe, intractable pain and can be broadly classified into neuroablative and neuromodulation techniques. An array of neurolytic techniques (chemical, thermal, or surgical) can be employed for ablation of individual nerve fibers, plexuses, or intrathecalneurolysis in patients with resistant pain and short life-expectancy. Neuraxial administration of drugs and spinal cord stimulation to modulate or alter the pain perception constitutes the most frequently employed neuromodulation techniques. Lately, there is a rising call for early introduction of interventional techniques in carefully selected patients simultaneously or even before starting strong opioids. After decades of empirical use, it is the need of the hour to head towards professionalism and standardization in order to secure credibility of specialization and those practicing it. Even though the interventional management has found a definite place in cancer pain, there is a dearth of evidence-based practice guidelines for interventional therapies in cancer pain. This may be because of paucity of good quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating their safety and efficacy in cancer pain. Laying standardized guidelines based on existing and emerging evidence will act as a foundation step towards strengthening, credentialing, and dissemination of the specialty of interventional cancer pain management. This will also ensure an improved decision-making and quality of life (QoL) of the suffering patients.

Current management of hepatocellular carcinoma: an Eastern perspective

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the leading causes of cancer death, especially in Eastern areas. With advancements in diagnosis and treatment modalities for HCC, the survival and prognosis of HCC patients are improving. However, treatment patterns are not uniform between areas despite efforts to promote a common protocol. Although many hepatologists in Asian countries may adopt the principles of the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging system, they are also independently making an effort to expand the indications of each treatment and to combine therapies for better outcomes. Several expanded criteria for liver transplantation in HCC have been developed in Asian countries. Living donor liver transplantation is much more commonly performed in these countries than deceased donor liver transplantation, and it may be preceded by other treatments such as the down-staging of tumors. Local ablation therapies are often combined with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and the outcome is comparable to that of surgical resection. The indications of TACE are expanding, and there are new types of transarterial therapies. Although data on drug-eluting beads, TACE, and radioembolization in Asian countries are still relatively sparse compared with Western countries, these methods are gradually gaining popularity because of better tolerability and the possibility of improved response rates. Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy and radiotherapy are not included in Western guidelines, but are currently being used actively in several Asian countries. For more advanced HCCs, appropriate combinations of TACE, radiotherapy, and sorafenib can be considered, and emerging data indicate improved outcomes of combination therapies compared with single therapies. To include these paradigm shifts into newer treatment guidelines, more studies may be needed, but they are certainly in progress.

Morphine or oxycodone for cancer-related pain? A randomized, open-label, controlled trial

CONTEXT

There is wide interindividual variation in response to morphine for cancer-related pain; 30% of patients do not have a good therapeutic outcome. Alternative opioids such as oxycodone are increasingly being used, and opioid switching has become common clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES

To compare clinical response to oral morphine vs. oral oxycodone when used as first-line or second-line (after switching) treatment in patients with cancer-related pain.

METHODS

In this prospective, open-label, randomized, controlled trial (ISRCTN65155201) with a selected crossover phase, patients with cancer-related pain were randomized to receive either oral morphine or oxycodone as first-line treatment. Dose was individually titrated until the patient reported adequate pain control. Patients who did not respond to the first-line opioid (either because of inadequate analgesia or unacceptable adverse effects) were switched to the alternative opioid.

RESULTS

Two hundred patients were recruited. On intention-to-treat analysis (n = 198, morphine 98, oxycodone 100), there was no significant difference between the numbers of patients responding to morphine (61/98 = 62%) or oxycodone (67/100 = 67%) when used as a first-line opioid. Similarly, there was no significant difference in subsequent response when patients were switched to either morphine (8/12 = 67%) or oxycodone (11/21 = 52%). Per-protocol analysis demonstrated a 95% response rate when both opioids were available. There was no difference in adverse reaction scores between morphine and oxycodone either in first-line responders or nonresponders.

CONCLUSION

In this population, there was no difference between analgesic response or adverse reactions to oral morphine and oxycodone when used as a first- or second-line opioid. These data provide evidence to support opioid switching to improve outcomes.

The efficacy of low-dose transdermal fentanyl in opioid-naïve cancer patients with moderate-to-severe pain

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Little is known about the efficacy of low-dose transdermal fentanyl (TDF) patches in opioid-naïve patients with moderate-to-severe cancer pain.

METHODS

This study had an open-label, prospective design, and was conducted between April 2007 and February 2009 in seven tertiary cancer hospitals; 98 patients were enrolled. TDF was started using a low-dose formulation (12.5 µg/hr), and the dose was adjusted according to the clinical situation of individual patients. Pain intensity, the TDF doses used, and adverse events (AEs) were monitored over 4 weeks. Data were analyzed using the intent-to-treat and per-protocol principles.

RESULTS

Of the 98 patients enrolled, 64 (65%) completed the study. The median pain intensity decreased from 6.0 to 3.0 (p < 0.001) at the follow-up visit. The efficacy of low-dose TDF on pain relief was consistent across groups separated according to gender (p < 0.001), age (p < 0.001), metastasis (p < 0.001), previous treatment (p < 0.001), and baseline pain intensity (p < 0.001). The decrease in pain intensity was significantly greater in the severe group compared with the moderate group (mean ± SD, 5.10 ± 2.48 vs. 2.48 ± 1.56; p < 0.001). TDF dose (27.8 µg/hr vs. 24.8 µg/hr, p = 0.423) and the mean treatment time (7.5 days vs. 7.9 days, p = 0.740) required for pain control were not different between the two pain-intensity groups. Patients had AEs of only mild or moderate intensity; among these, nausea (38%) was the most common, followed by vomiting (22%) and somnolence (22%).

CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose TDF was an effective treatment for patients with cancer pain of moderate-to-severe intensity. Further randomized trials assessing the efficacy of TDF for severe pain and/or optimal starting doses are warranted.

Pain management of the cancer patient

INTRODUCTION

Cancer pain is one of the most important symptoms of malignant disease, which has a major impact on the quality of life of cancer patients. Therefore, it needs to be treated appropriately after a careful assessment of the types and causes of pain.

AREAS COVERED

The mainstay of cancer pain management is systemic pharmacotherapy. This is, in principle, still based on the WHO guidelines initially published in 1986. Although these have been validated, they are not evidence-based. The principles are a stepladder approach using non-opioids, weak and then strong opioids. In addition, adjuvants can be added at any step to address specific situations such as bone or neuropathic pain. Patients, even if they are on long-acting opioids, need to be provided with immediate-release opioids for breakthrough pain. In case of inefficacy or severe adverse effects of one opioid, rotation to another opioid is recommended.

EXPERT OPINION

There is a major need for more and better randomized controlled trials in the setting of cancer pain as the lack of evidence is hampering the improvement of current treatment guidelines.

Long-term evaluation of combined prolonged-release oxycodone and naloxone in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic pain: pooled analysis of extension phases of two Phase III trials

BACKGROUND

While opioids provide effective analgesia, opioid-induced constipation (OIC) can severely impact quality of life and treatment compliance. This pooled analysis evaluated the maintenance of efficacy and safety during long-term treatment with combined oxycodone/naloxone prolonged-release tablets (OXN PR) in adults with moderate-to-severe chronic pain.

METHODS

Patients (N = 474) received open-label OXN PR during 52-week extension phases of two studies, having completed 12-week, double-blind, randomized treatment with oxycodone prolonged-release tablets (Oxy PR) or OXN PR. Analgesia and bowel function were assessed at each study visit using 'Average pain over last 24 h scale and Bowel Function Index (BFI), respectively. Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication was assessed at study end only.

KEY RESULTS

Improvement in bowel function was particularly marked in patients who switched from Oxy PR in the double-blind phase to OXN PR during the extension phase, resulting in a clinically meaningful reduction (≥12 points) in BFI score: at the start of the extension phases, mean (SD) BFI score was 44.3 (28.13), and was 29.8 (26.36) for patients who had received OXN PR in the double-blind phase. One week later, BFI scores were similar for the two groups (26.5 [24.40] and 27.5 [25.60], respectively), as was observed throughout the following months. Fewer than 10% of patients received laxatives regularly. Mean 24-h pain scores were low and stable throughout the extension phases. No unexpected adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Pooled data demonstrate OXN PR is an effective long-term therapy for patients with chronic non-cancer pain, and can address symptoms of OIC. No new safety issues were observed which were attributable to the long-term administration of OXN PR.

Pain medication management processes used by oncology outpatients and family caregivers part II: home and lifestyle contexts

CONTEXT

Despite the increasing complexity of medication regimens for persistent cancer pain, little is known about how oncology outpatients and their family caregivers manage pain medications at home.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the day-to-day management of pain medications from the perspectives of oncology outpatients and their family caregivers who participated in a randomized clinical trial of a psychoeducational intervention called the Pro-Self(©) Plus Pain Control Program. In this article, we focus on pain medication management in the context of highly individualized home environments and lifestyles.

METHODS

This qualitative study was conducted as part of a randomized clinical trial, in which an embedded mixed methods research design was used. Audio-recorded dialogue among patients, family caregivers, and intervention nurses was analyzed using qualitative research methods.

RESULTS

Home and lifestyle contexts for managing pain medications included highly individualized home environments, work and recreational activities, personal routines, and family characteristics. Pain medication management processes particularly relevant in these contexts included understanding, organizing, storing, scheduling, remembering, and taking the medications. With the exception of their interactions with the intervention nurses, most study participants had little involvement with clinicians as they worked through these processes.

CONCLUSION

Pain medication management is an ongoing multidimensional process, each step of which has to be mastered by patients and their family caregivers when cancer treatment and supportive care are provided on an outpatient basis. Realistic patient- and family-centered skill-building interventions are needed to achieve effective and safe pain medication management in the contexts of individual home environments and lifestyles.

Pain medication management processes used by oncology outpatients and family caregivers part I: health systems contexts

CONTEXT

Oncology patients with persistent pain treated in outpatient settings and their family caregivers have significant responsibility for managing pain medications. However, little is known about their practical day-to-day experiences with pain medication management.

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to describe day-to-day pain medication management from the perspectives of oncology outpatients and their family caregivers who participated in a randomized clinical trial of a psychoeducational intervention called the Pro-Self(©) Plus Pain Control Program. In this article, we focus on pain medication management by patients and family caregivers in the context of multiple complex health systems.

METHODS

We qualitatively analyzed audio-recorded intervention sessions that included extensive dialogue between patients, family caregivers, and nurses about pain medication management during the 10-week intervention.

RESULTS

The health systems context for pain medication management included multiple complex systems for clinical care, reimbursement, and regulation of analgesic prescriptions. Pain medication management processes particularly relevant to this context were getting prescriptions and obtaining medications. Responsibilities that fell primarily to patients and family caregivers included facilitating communication and coordination among multiple clinicians, overcoming barriers to access, and serving as a final safety checkpoint. Significant effort was required of patients and family caregivers to insure safe and effective pain medication management.

CONCLUSION

Health systems issues related to access to needed analgesics, medication safety in outpatient settings, and the effort expended by oncology patients and their family caregivers require more attention in future research and health-care reform initiatives.

Fixed ratio (2:1) prolonged-release oxycodone/naloxone combination improves bowel function in patients with moderate-to-severe pain and opioid-induced constipation refractory to at least two classes of laxatives

OBJECTIVE

The effects of combined oxycodone/naloxone prolonged release tablets (OXN PR) were investigated in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic cancer-related or non-cancer pain. All patients had opioid-induced constipation (OIC) which persisted despite substantial laxative therapy.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This pooled analysis included 75 patients with OIC at study entry that was refractory to at least two laxatives with different modes of action. Patients completed randomized, double-blind treatment with OXN PR 20-120 mg/day for either 12 weeks (OXN 9001: non-cancer pain study) or 4 weeks (OXN 2001: cancer-related pain study). Analgesia and bowel function were assessed using the Brief Pain Inventory Short Form and Bowel Function Index (BFI), respectively. Use of laxative medication and safety were assessed throughout the studies.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT00513656, EudraCT 2005-002398-57, EudraCT 2005-003510-15.

RESULTS

Statistically and clinically significant improvements in bowel function were observed following double-blind treatment with OXN PR. Mean (SD) reduction in BFI score was 21.2 (28.8) and comparable in patients with cancer-related (19.0 [28.9]) and non-cancer pain (23.3.[29.0]; P ≤ 0.0002). Furthermore, the proportion of patients with a BFI score within normal range (≤28.8) increased from 9.5% at screening to 43.1% at Day 15 of OXN PR. While all patients used ≥2 laxatives of different classes at screening, during study treatment 36% stopped using laxatives (P < 0.001). OXN PR provided effective analgesia, evidenced by stable pain scores during study treatment, and there were no unanticipated adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

OXN PR significantly improved bowel function and reduced the use of laxatives in patients with OIC, previously unresponsive to at least two different classes of laxatives. OXN also provided effective analgesia for patients with moderate-to-severe cancer-related pain and non-cancer-related pain.

The lung cancer patient, the pneumologist and palliative care: a developing alliance

Considerable evidence is now available on the value of palliative care for lung cancer patients in all stages and at all times during the course of the disease. However, pneumologists and their institutions seem to be widely in arrears with the implementation of palliative care concepts and the development of integrated structures.

This review focuses on the available evidence and experience of various frequently unmet needs of lung cancer patients, especially psychological, social, spiritual and cultural ones. A PubMed search for evidence on these aspects of palliative care as well as on barriers to the implementation, on outcome parameters and effectiveness, and on structure and process quality was performed with a special focus on lung cancer patients.

As a consequence, this review particularly draws pneumologists’ attention to improving their skills in communication with the patients, their relatives and among themselves, and to establish team structures with more far-reaching competences and continuity than existing multilateral cooperations and conferences can provide. Ideally, any process of structural and procedural improvement should be accompanied by scientific evaluation and measures for quality optimisation.

Bupivacaine administered intrathecally versus rectally in the management of intractable rectal cancer pain in palliative care

Background

Unacceptable adverse effects, contraindications to and/or ineffectiveness of World Health Organization step III “pain ladder” drugs causes needless suffering among a population of cancer patients. Successful management of severe cancer pain may require invasive treatment. However, a patient’s refusal of an invasive procedure necessitates that clinicians consider alternative options.

Objective

Intrathecal bupivacaine delivery as a viable treatment of intractable pain is well documented. There are no data on rectal bupivacaine use in cancer patients or in the treatment of cancer tenesmoid pain. This study aims to demonstrate that bupivacaine administered rectally could be a step in between the current treatment options for intractable cancer pain (conventional/conservative analgesia or invasive procedures), and to evaluate the effect of the mode of administration (intrathecal versus rectal) on the bupivacaine plasma concentration.

Cases

We present two Caucasian, elderly inpatients admitted to hospice due to intractable rectal/tenesmoid pain. The first case is a female with vulvar cancer, and malignant infiltration of the rectum/vagina. Bupivacaine was used intrathecally (0.25–0.5%, 1–2 mL every 6 hours). The second case is a female with ovarian cancer and malignant rectal infiltration. Bupivacaine was adminstered rectally (0.05–0.1%, 100 mL every 4.5–11 hours).

Methods

Total bupivacaine plasma concentrations were determined using the high-performance liquid chromatography-ultraviolet method.

Results

Effective pain control was achieved with intrathecal bupivacaine (0.077–0.154 mg·kg⁻¹) and bupivacaine in enema (1.820 mg·kg⁻¹). Intrathecal bupivacaine (0.5%, 2 mL) caused a drop in blood pressure; other side effects were absent in both cases. Total plasma bupivacaine concentrations following intrathecal and rectal bupivacaine application did not exceed 317.2 ng·mL⁻¹ and 235.7 ng·mL⁻¹, respectively. Bupivacaine elimination was slower after rectal than after intrathecal administration (t_½= 5.50 versus 2.02 hours, respectively).

Limitations

This study reports two cases only, and there could be inter-patient variation.

Conclusion

Bupivacaine in boluses administered intrathecally (0.25%, 2 mL) provided effective, safe analgesia in advanced cancer patients. Bupivacaine enema (100 mg·100 mL⁻¹) was shown to be a valuable option for control of end-of-life tenesmoid cancer pain.

Intravenous paracetamol infusion: Superior pain management and earlier discharge from hospital in patients undergoing palliative head-neck cancer surgery

Background:

Paracetamol; a cyclooxygenase inhibitor; acts through the central nervous system as well as serotoninergic system as a nonopioid analgesic. A prospective, double-blinded, and randomized-controlled study was carried out to compare the efficacy of preoperative 1g intravenous (iv) paracetamol with placebo in providing postoperative analgesia in head-neck cancer surgery.

Materials and Methods:

From 2008 February to 2009 December, 80 patients for palliative head-neck cancer surgery were randomly divided into (F) and (P) Group receiving ivplacebo and iv paracetamol, respectively, 5 min before induction. Everybody received fentanyl before induction and IM diclofenac for pain relief at8 hourly for 24 h after surgery. Visual analogue scale (VAS) and amount of fentanyl were measured for postoperative pain assessment (24 h).

Results and Statistical analysis:

The mean VAS score in 1^st, 2^nd postoperative hour, and fentanyl requirement was less and the need for rescue analgesic was delayed in ivparacetamol group which were all statistically significant. Paracetamol group had a shorter surgical intensive care unit (SICU) and hospital stay which was also statistically significant.

Conclusion:

The study demonstrates the effectiveness of ivparacetamol as preemptive analgesic in the postoperative pain control after head-neck cancer surgery and earlier discharge from hospital.

Codeine, alone and with paracetamol (acetaminophen), for cancer pain

BACKGROUND

Pain is very common in patients with cancer. Opioid analgesics, including codeine, play a significant role in major guidelines on the management of cancer pain, particularly for mild to moderate pain. Codeine is widely available and inexpensive, which may make it a good choice, especially in low-resource settings. Its use is controversial, in part because codeine is not effective in a minority of patients who cannot convert it to its active metabolite (morphine), and also because of concerns about potential abuse, and safety in children.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of codeine used alone or in combination with paracetamol for relieving cancer pain.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 2), MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to 5 March 2014, supplemented by searches of clinical trial registries and screening of the reference lists of the identified studies and reviews in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We sought randomised, double-blind, controlled trials using single or multiple doses of codeine, with or without paracetamol, for the treatment of cancer pain. Trials could have either parallel or cross-over design, with at least 10 participants per treatment group. Studies in children or adults reporting on any type, grade, and stage of cancer were eligible. We accepted any formulation, dosage regimen, and route of administration of codeine, and both placebo and active controls.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently read the titles and abstracts of all studies identified by the searches and excluded those that clearly did not meet the inclusion criteria. For the remaining studies, two authors read the full manuscripts and assessed them for inclusion. We resolved discrepancies between review authors by discussion. Included studies were described qualitatively, since no meta-analysis was possible because of the small amount of data identified, and clinical and methodological between-study heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 studies including 721 participants with cancer pain due to diverse types of malignancy. All studies were performed on adults; there were no studies on children. The included studies were of adequate methodological quality, but all except for one were judged to be at a high risk of bias because of small study size, and six because of methods used to deal with missing data or high withdrawal rates. Three studies used a parallel group design; the remainder were cross-over trials in which there was an adequate washout period, but only one reported results for treatment periods separately.Twelve studies used codeine as a single agent and three combined it with paracetamol. Ten studies included a placebo arm, and 14 included one or more of 16 different active drug comparators or compared different routes of administration. Most studies investigated the effect of a single dose of medication, while five used treatment periods of one, seven or 21 days. Most studies used codeine at doses of 30 mg to 120 mg.There were insufficient data for any pooled analysis. Only two studies reported our preferred responder outcome of 'participants with at least 50% reduction in pain' and two reported 'participants with no worse than mild pain'. Eleven studies reported treatment group mean measures of pain intensity or pain relief; overall for these outcome measures, codeine or codeine plus paracetamol was numerically superior to placebo and equivalent to the active comparators.Adverse event reporting was poor: only two studies reported the number of participants with any adverse event specified by treatment group and only one reported the number of participants with any serious adverse event. In multiple-dose studies nausea, vomiting and constipation were common, with somnolence and dizziness frequent in the 21-day study. Withdrawal from the studies, where reported, was less than 10% except in two studies. There were three deaths, in all cases due to the underlying cancer.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We identified only a small amount of data in studies that were both randomised and double-blind. Studies were small, of short duration, and most had significant shortcomings in reporting. The available evidence indicates that codeine is more effective against cancer pain than placebo, but with increased risk of nausea, vomiting, and constipation. Uncertainty remains as to the magnitude and time-course of the analgesic effect and the safety and tolerability in longer-term use. There were no data for children.

Long-term safety and efficacy of oxycodone/naloxone prolonged-release tablets in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic cancer pain

Aim

To evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of prolonged-release oxycodone/naloxone (OXN PR) and its impact on quality of life (QoL), in patients with moderate-to-severe cancer pain.

Methods

This was an open-label extension (OLE) of a 4 week, randomized, double-blind (DB) study in which patients with moderate-to-severe cancer pain had been randomized to OXN PR or oxycodone PR (OxyPR). During the OLE phase, patients were treated with OXN PR capsules (≤20/60 mg/day) for ≤24 weeks. Outcome measures included safety, efficacy and QoL.

Results

One hundred and twenty-eight patients entered the OLE, average pain scores based on the modified Brief Pain Inventory—Short Form were low and stable over the 24-week period. The improvement in bowel function and constipation symptoms as measured by the Bowel Function Index and patient assessment of constipation in patients treated with OXN PR during the 4-week DB study was maintained. In patients treated with OxyPR during the DB phase, bowel function and constipation symptoms were improved during the OLE. In the DB and in the OLE, health status and QoL were similar for patients treated with OXN PR and OxyPR. There were no unexpected safety or tolerability issues.

Conclusions

In patients with moderate-to-severe cancer pain, long-term use of OXN PR is well tolerated and effective, resulting in sustained analgesia, improved bowel function and improved symptoms of constipation.

Changes in health-related quality of life and quality of care among terminally ill cancer patients and survival prediction: Multicenter prospective cohort study

Objective:

This study examined changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and quality of care (QoC) as perceived by terminally ill cancer patients and a stratified set of HRQoL or QoC factors that are most likely to influence survival at the end of life (EoL).

Method:

We administered questionnaires to 619 consecutive patients immediately after they were diagnosed with terminal cancer by physicians at 11 university hospitals and at the National Cancer Center in Korea. Subjects were followed up over 161.2 person-years until their deaths. We measured HRQoL using the core 30-item European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire, and QoC using the Quality Care Questionnaire–End of Life (QCQ–EoL). We evaluated changes in HRQoL and QoC issues during the first three months after enrollment, performing sensitivity analysis by using data generated via four methods (complete case analysis, available case analysis, the last observation carried forward, and multiple imputation).

Results:

Emotional and cognitive functioning decreased significantly over time, while dyspnea, constipation, and pain increased significantly. Dignity-conserving care, care by healthcare professionals, family relationships, and QCQ–EoL total score decreased significantly. Global QoL, appetite loss, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG–PS) scores were significantly associated with survival.

Significance of results:

Future standardization of palliative care should be focused on assessment of these deteriorated types of quality. Accurate estimates of the length of life remaining for terminally ill cancer patients by such EoL-enhancing factors as global QoL, appetite loss, and ECOG–PS are needed to help patients experience a dignified and comfortable death.

Fentanyl pectin nasal spray as treatment for incident predictable breakthrough pain (BTP) in oral mucositis induced by chemoradiotherapy in head and neck cancer

BACKGROUND

Painful mucositis is one of the most distressing toxicities of chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for head and neck cancer (HNC), with the characteristics of incidental predictable breakthrough pain (BTP) during swallowing. Fentanyl pectin nasal spray (FPNS) could be a good therapeutic option.

METHODS

Patients were prospectively considered if receiving basal analgesic therapy with opiates for painful mucositis of grade ⩾4 on a numerical rating scale from 0 to 10. They were offered FPNS 100mcg before oral intake. When patients reached the effective dose, they evaluated the basal pain intensity before FPNS use and after 10, 20, 30 and 40min.

RESULTS

Seventeen HNC patients were offered FPNS before oral intake, with 15 patients completing treatment. Mean reduction of incidental BTP intensity after FPNS was 3.1 points (range 1.2-5.8). Mean time elapsed since FPNS use and highest pain reduction was 26min.

CONCLUSIONS

FPNS demonstrated activity against BTP when swallowing in HNC patients. These data should be considered as hypothesis-generating.

Under- or Overtreatment of Pain in the Patient With Cancer: How to Achieve Proper Balance

Achieving balance in the appropriate use of opioids for the treatment of cancer pain is complex. The definition of “balance” is continually being modified. Palliative care professionals, pain specialists, and oncologists have long been advocating for the aggressive management of pain for patients with advanced cancer. Some progress has been made in this arena but barriers persist. Fear of addiction by patients, family members, and oncology professionals presents a serious obstacle to the provision of adequate pain control. This is further complicated by societal factors that receive extensive media coverage, such as diversion of prescribed opioids for recreational use and increasing deaths as a result of this inappropriate use of prescription opioids. This growing concern has led to more opioid regulation, which increases obstacles to pain management in this population. Another evolving concern is whether the long-term use of opioids is safe and effective. Data from the chronic nonmalignant pain literature suggest that toxicities may result and misuse has been underestimated, yet little information is available in the cancer population. These issues lead to serious questions regarding how balance might be successfully achieved for patients in an oncology setting. Can pain relief be provided while reducing negative consequences of treatment? Which patient should be prescribed what medications, in what situations, for what kind of pain, and who should be managing the pain?

Neuropathic cancer pain: What we are dealing with? How to manage it?

Cancer pain is a serious health problem, and imposes a great burden on the lives of patients and their families. Pain can be associated with delay in treatment, denial of treatment, or failure of treatment. If the pain is not treated properly it may impair the quality of life. Neuropathic cancer pain (NCP) is one of the most complex phenomena among cancer pain syndromes. NCP may result from direct damage to nerves due to acute diagnostic/therapeutic interventions. Chronic NCP is the result of treatment complications or malignancy itself. Although the reason for pain is different in NCP and noncancer neuropathic pain, the pathophysiologic mechanisms are similar. Data regarding neuropathic pain are primarily obtained from neuropathic pain studies. Evidence pertaining to NCP is limited. NCP due to chemotherapeutic toxicity is a major problem for physicians. In the past two decades, there have been efforts to standardize NCP treatment in order to provide better medical service. Opioids are the mainstay of cancer pain treatment; however, a new group of therapeutics called coanalgesic drugs has been introduced to pain treatment. These coanalgesics include gabapentinoids (gabapentin, pregabalin), antidepressants (tricyclic antidepressants, duloxetine, and venlafaxine), corticosteroids, bisphosphonates, N-methyl-D-aspartate antagonists, and cannabinoids. Pain can be encountered throughout every step of cancer treatment, and thus all practicing oncologists must be capable of assessing pain, know the possible underlying pathophysiology, and manage it appropriately. The purpose of this review is to discuss neuropathic pain and NCP in detail, the relevance of this topic, clinical features, possible pathology, and treatments of NCP.

[Pain therapy in oncology: results of a nationwide survey]

BACKGROUND

Pain is one of the most prevalent and distressing symptoms of patients suffering from cancer. In the field of oncology comprehensive expertise is pursued not only with respect to the administration of anticancer treatment but to all fields that relate to the needs of cancer patients. However, the results of studies have revealed persisting and relevant deficits in pain therapy in the setting of oncology.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An online survey was performed involving all members of the German Society for Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO) with respect to training and continuing education in pain therapy, the relevance for routine oncology and knowledge, to determine the level of expertise in pain therapy and the assessment of tumor-specific therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 183 out of 1,962 questionnaires could be evaluated. Oncologists are often engaged in pain therapy and 80 % of the respondents perceived themselves as being primarily responsible for pain control. Education and assessment were identified as barriers to sufficient pain therapy. Case vignettes revealed only few relevant therapeutic misinterpretations.

CONCLUSION

This first survey of German oncologists exploring expertise in cancer pain therapy, showed similar problems in education and pain assessment as previous international studies. Despite the claimed responsibility for pain management, there were a small but relevant number of oncologists who showed serious therapeutic misinterpretations in case studies.

Effectiveness and tolerability of low-dose oral oxycodone/naloxone added to anticonvulsant therapy for noncancer neuropathic pain: an observational analysis

BACKGROUND

Opioids may alleviate chronic neuropathic pain (NP), but are considered second/third-line analgesia due to their poor gastrointestinal (GI) tolerability. A fixed combination of prolonged-release oxycodone and naloxone (OXN) has been developed to overcome the GI effects. The aim of this analysis was to evaluate analgesic effectiveness and tolerability of low-dose OXN in patients with moderate-to-severe noncancer NP despite analgesia.

METHODS

This retrospective observation of consecutive adult patients, treated open-label for 8 weeks at a single Italian centre, evaluated effectiveness (pain intensity numerical rating scale [NRS], Patients' Global Impression of Change [PGIC], Douleur Neuropathique 4 inventory [DN4] and Chronic Pain Sleep Inventory [CPSI]), doses of daily OXN and adjuvant medication, rescue paracetamol use, bowel function index (BFI), laxative use, and safety.

RESULTS

Of 200 patients (mean age 65.9 years; 54% female) with NP included in the analysis; 97% completed 8 weeks' treatment. At the observation start, all patients were taking anticonvulsants and complained of constipation, and 60% were receiving opioids. Pain intensity and DN4 score decreased significantly by endpoint (NRS p < 0.0001; DN4 p < 0.0001) and need for rescue analgesics abated. Reduction in pain intensity throughout the observation was similar regardless of NP aetiology. According to PGIC, 87.8% of patients were much/extremely improved, CPSI (p < 0.0001) and BFI were significantly improved (p < 0.0001) and laxative use decreased. No differences were found between patients <65 years vs those ≥65 years. OXN was generally well tolerated.

STUDY LIMITATIONS

Study limitations including the retrospective observational design, the lack of a control group and the single-centre design may limit the generalizability of our findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose OXN (25.0 ± 12.5 mg/day) added to anticonvulsants was highly effective in controlling noncancer NP of varied aetiology, with reduced need for rescue analgesia and improved quality of sleep, and was well tolerated, with improved bowel function and reduced laxative use. The efficacy and tolerability of OXN demonstrated in this real-world setting suggest its utility in this difficult to manage patient population.

The effectiveness of the quality program Pac-IficO to improve pain management in hospitalized cancer patients: a before-after cluster phase II trial

Background

Cancer-related pain continues to be a major healthcare issue worldwide. Despite the availability of effective analgesic drugs, published guidelines and educational programs for Health Care Professionals (HCPs) the symptom is still under-diagnosed and its treatment is not appropriate in many patients. The objective of the study is to evaluate the efficacy of the Pac-IFicO programme in improving the quality of pain management in hospitalised cancer patients.

Methods/design

This is a before-after cluster phase II study. After the before assessment, the experimental intervention – the Pac-IFicO programme – will be implemented in ten medicine, oncology and respiratory disease hospital wards. The same assessment will be repeated after the completion of the intervention. The Pac-IFicO programme is a complex intervention with multiple components. It includes focus group with ward professionals for identifying possible local obstacles to optimal pain control, informative material for the patients, an educational program performed through guides from the wards, and an organisational intervention to the ward. The primary end-point of the study is the proportion of cancer patients with severe pain. Secondary end-points include opioids administered in the wards, knowledge in pain management, and quality of pain management. We plan to recruit about 500 cancer patients. This sample size should be sufficient, after appropriate statistical adjustments for clustering, to detect an absolute decrease in the primary end-point from 20% to 9%.

Discussion

This trial is aimed at exploring with an experimental approach the efficacy of a new quality improvement educational intervention.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02035098

Pain related to cancer treatments and diagnostic procedures: a no man's land?

BACKGROUND

While guidelines are available for the management of cancer-related pain, little attention is given to the assessment and treatment of pain caused by treatments and diagnostic procedures in cancer patients.

METHODS

We evaluated the literature on pain related to cancer treatment and diagnostic procedures within a critical analysis.

RESULTS

The data available are sparse, suggesting that little attention has been directed at this important aspect of oncology. This points to potentially suboptimal patient management.

CONCLUSIONS

Appropriate studies are necessary in order to understand the incidence and appropriate management of pain, both during and/or after oncological treatments and diagnostic procedures. At the same time, Health Care Professionals should have heightened awareness of the causes and treatment of pain with the aim of anticipating and managing pain most appropriately for each individual patient. This is clearly an important component of holistic patient care before, during, and after oncological treatment.

Patient-reported quality of supportive care among patients with colorectal cancer in the Veterans Affairs Health Care System

PURPOSE

High-quality supportive care is an essential component of comprehensive cancer care. We implemented a patient-centered quality of cancer care survey to examine and identify predictors of quality of supportive care for bowel problems, pain, fatigue, depression, and other symptoms among 1,109 patients with colorectal cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with new diagnosis of colorectal cancer at any Veterans Health Administration medical center nationwide in 2008 were ascertained through the Veterans Affairs Central Cancer Registry and sent questionnaires assessing a variety of aspects of patient-centered cancer care. We received questionnaires from 63% of eligible patients (N = 1,109). Descriptive analyses characterizing patient experiences with supportive care and binary logistic regression models were used to examine predictors of receipt of help wanted for each of the five symptom categories.

RESULTS

There were significant gaps in patient-centered quality of supportive care, beginning with symptom assessment. In multivariable modeling, the impact of clinical factors and patient race on odds of receiving wanted help varied by symptom. Coordination of care quality predicted receipt of wanted help for all symptoms, independent of patient demographic or clinical characteristics.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed substantial gaps in patient-centered quality of care, difficult to characterize through quality measurement relying on medical record review alone. It established the feasibility of collecting patient-reported quality measures. Improving quality measurement of supportive care and implementing patient-reported outcomes in quality-measurement systems are high priorities for improving the processes and outcomes of care for patients with cancer.

Prevention and treatment of oral mucositis in patients with head and neck cancer treated with (chemo) radiation: report of an Italian survey

PURPOSE

There is a limited number of therapies with a high level of recommendations for mucositis, while several strategies are currently employed with a limited evidence for efficacy. A national survey among Italian oncologists who treat head and neck cancer (HNC) was conducted in order to assess the most common preventive and therapeutic protocols (including nutritional support and pain control) for oral mucositis (OM) in patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy.

METHODS

From September to November 2012, a nationwide electronic survey with 21 focused items was proposed to chemotherapy and radiotherapy centers.

RESULTS

We collected 111 answers. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) scale is employed by 55% of the physicians in assessing mucosal toxicity. The most relevant predictive factors for OM development are considered smoke, alcohol use, planned radiotherapy, and concurrent use of radiosensitizing chemotherapy. Prophylactic gastrostomy is adopted in <10% of the patients. Preventive antibiotics or antimycotics are prescribed by 46% of the responders (mainly local or systemic antimycotic drugs). Alkalinizing mouthwashes or coating agents are frequently adopted (70% of the cases). Among therapeutic interventions, systemic fluconazole is administered by 80% of the physicians. Pain is mainly treated by weak followed by strong opioids.

CONCLUSIONS

A variety of preventive and therapeutic protocols for OM exists among the participating Italian centers, with some uniformity in respect to nutritional support, use of antimycotic and painkillers. There is an urgent need for well-conducted clinical trials aimed at assessing the best choices for OM prevention and treatment in HNC.

Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in cancer-related psychiatric disorders across the trajectory of cancer care: a review

At least 25-30% of patients with cancer and an even higher percentage of patients in an advanced phase of illness meet the criteria for a psychiatric diagnosis, including depression, anxiety, stress-related syndromes, adjustment disorders, sleep disorders and delirium. A number of studies have accumulated over the last 35 years on the use of psychotropic drugs as a pillar in the treatment of psychiatric disorders. Major advances in psycho-oncology research have also shown the efficacy of psychotropic drugs as adjuvant treatment of cancer-related symptoms, such as pain, hot flushes, pruritus, nausea and vomiting, fatigue, and cognitive impairment. The knowledge about pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, clinical use, safety, side effects and efficacy of psychotropic drugs in cancer care is essential for an integrated and multidimensional approach to patients treated in different settings, including community-based centres, oncology, and palliative care. A search of the major databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycLIT, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library) was conducted in order to summarize relevant data concerning the efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy for cancer-related psychiatric disorders in cancer patients across the trajectory of the disease.

Brief review: Neuraxial analgesia in refractory malignant pain

PURPOSE

This narrative review aims to inform health care practitioners of the current literature surrounding the use of intrathecal (IT) and epidural analgesia in cancer patients with refractory pain at end of life. Topics discussed and reviewed include: patient selection, treatment planning, procedure, equipment, medications, complications, policies and procedures, as well as directions for future research.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Cancer pain is inadequately treated in an estimated 10% of patients with malignant pain despite the implementation of the World Health Organization three-step analgesic ladder. This has prompted some to advocate for the addition of a fourth step that would include neuraxial interventions. There is moderate evidence supporting the safety and efficacy of IT drug therapy in cancer patients with refractory pain. A detailed assessment and interdisciplinary team approach is necessary to develop and implement care plans for patients requiring neuraxial analgesia. Neuraxial analgesia can significantly improve pain and reduce side effects, but this must be balanced against the increased complexity of care and the risk of uncommon but serious complications.

CONCLUSION

Neuraxial drug delivery gives clinicians more options to manage refractory pain at end of life and should be offered to patients with intractable cancer pain. Teams should be interprofessional with clear delineation of roles and responsibilities. They should discuss advanced discharge planning with the patient prior to implantation as well as provide on-call support.

Celiac plexus neurolysis in pancreatic cancer: the endoscopic ultrasound approach

Pain in pancreatic cancer is often a major problem of treatment. Administration of opioids is frequently limited by side effects or insufficient analgesia. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided celiac plexus neurolysis (EUS-CPN) represents an alternative for the palliative treatment of visceral pain in patients with pancreatic cancer. This review focuses on the indications, technique, outcomes of EUS-CPN and predictors of pain relief. EUS-CPN should be considered as the adjunct method to standard pain management. It moderately reduces pain in pancreatic cancer, without eliminating it. Nearly all patients need to continue opioid use, often at a constant dose. The effect on quality of life is controversial and survival is not influenced. The approach could be done in the central position of the celiac axis, which is easy to perform, or in the bilateral position of the celiac axis, with similar results in terms of pain alleviation. The EUS-CPN with multiple intraganglia injection approach seems to have better results, although extended studies are still needed. Further trials are required to enable more confident conclusions regarding timing, quantity of alcohol injected and the method of choice. Severe complications have rarely been reported, and great care should be taken in choosing the site of alcohol injection.

Chemotherapy prescribing errors: an observational study on the role of information technology and computerized physician order entry systems

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy administration is a high-risk process. Aim of this study was to evaluate the frequency, type, preventability, as well as potential and actual severity of outpatient chemotherapy prescribing errors in an Oncology Department where electronic prescribing is used.

METHODS

Up to three electronic prescriptions per patient record were selected from the clinical records of consecutive patients who received cytotoxic chemotherapy between January 2007 and December 2008. Wrong prescriptions were classified as incomplete, incorrect or inappropriate. Error preventability was classified using a four-point scale. Severity was defined according to the Healthcare Failure Mode and Effect Analysis Severity Scale.

RESULTS

Eight hundred and thirty-five prescriptions were eligible. The overall error rate was 20%. Excluding systematic errors (i.e. errors due to an initially faulty implementation of chemotherapy protocols into computerized dictionaries) from the analysis, the error rate decreased to 8%. Incomplete prescriptions were the majority. Most errors were deemed definitely preventable. According to error presumptive potential for damage, 72% were classified as minor; only 3% had the potential to produce major or catastrophic injury. Sixty-eight percent were classified as near misses; adverse drug events had no or little effect on clinical outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Chemotherapy prescribing errors may arise even using electronic prescribing. Although periodic audits may be useful to detect common errors and guide corrective actions, it is crucial to get the computerized physician order entry system and set-ups correct before implementation.