Opioids for cancer‐related pain in children and adolescents

Palliative care for children: methodology for the development of a national clinical practice guideline

BACKGROUND

Provision of paediatric palliative care for children with life-threatening or life-limiting conditions and their families is often complex. Guidelines can support professionals to deliver high quality care. Stakeholders expressed the need to update the first Dutch paediatric palliative care guideline with new scientific literature and new topics. This paper provides an overview of the methodology that is used for the revision of the Dutch paediatric palliative care guideline and a brief presentation of the identified evidence.

METHODS

The revised paediatric palliative care guideline was developed with a multidisciplinary guideline panel of 72 experts in paediatric palliative care and nine (bereaved) parents of children with life-threatening or life-limiting conditions. The guideline covered multiple topics related to (refractory) symptom treatment, advance care planning and shared-decision making, organisation of care, psychosocial care, and loss and bereavement. We established six main working groups that formulated 38 clinical questions for which we identified evidence by updating two existing systematic literature searches. The GRADE (CERQual) methodology was used for appraisal of evidence. Furthermore, we searched for additional literature such as existing guidelines and textbooks to deal with lack of evidence.

RESULTS

The two systematic literature searches yielded a total of 29 RCTs or systematic reviews of RCTs on paediatric palliative care interventions and 22 qualitative studies on barriers and facilitators of advance care planning and shared decision-making. We identified evidence for 14 out of 38 clinical questions. Furthermore, we were able to select additional literature (29 guidelines, two textbooks, and 10 systematic reviews) to deal with lack of evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

The revised Dutch paediatric palliative care guideline addresses many topics. However, there is limited evidence to base recommendations upon. Our methodology will combine the existing evidence in scientific literature, additional literature, expert knowledge, and perspectives of patients and their families to provide recommendations.

Managing Pain and Discomfort in Children with Cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Approximately 15,600 children are diagnosed with cancer annually. Many of these children have cancer-related pain that improves with cancer treatment, but some develop intractable pain from cancer progression or sequelae from treatment modalities. The purpose of this paper is to provide a critical evaluation of the literature relevant to pain management in children with cancer. We intend to emphasize important and up-to-date findings in pharmacology, interventional pain management, and complementary and alternative medicine.

RECENT FINDINGS

Alternative medications and routes of administration, complementary and alternative medicine techniques, and interventional pain procedures offer possible routes for a multi-pronged pediatric cancer pain management plan, although high-level data is often lacking. To improve pediatric cancer pain management, a multifaceted approach embracing the biopsychosocial model of pain is recommended, incorporating evidence-based pharmacology, complementary and alternative medicine techniques, and if needed, interventional pain procedures.

Old Drug, New Pain. Roles and Challenges of Methadone Therapy in Pediatric Palliative Care: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Pediatric palliative care (PPC) is defined as the prevention and relief from suffering of families and children with life-limiting (LLDs) or life-threatening diseases (LTDs). These patients often experience pain, with morphine being the most widely used drug to treat it. Few studies investigated the role of methadone in PPC patients, although it is considered among the most effective and underutilized drugs in PPC.

OBJECTIVES

Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and dosage of methadone in PPC.

METHODS

Between August and October 2021 PubMed, Scopus and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies on the use of methadone in children with LLDs and LTDs. Articles were included if they met the following criteria: published in the last 10 years, English language, patients aged 0-23 years; children enrolled in a PPC center or receiving declared support from a PPC service; reporting of specific data on methadone in interventional trials, observational studies, or case series on >10 patients. The reporting of the article was guided by the PRISMA guidelines, and a critical appraisal of the included studies was performed using the JBI-tool.

RESULTS

After duplicates removal and full-text assessment, four studies were included and another one was added after checking the references of the retrieved papers. All were retrospective, and the literature is concordant in documenting the lack of evidence. A total of 116 children received methadone in PPC. From our review emerges the poor quality of data collection: in only one study pain was assessed with standardized scales. All studies documented the effectiveness of methadone in treating complex pain, either nociceptive or neuropathic. No serious adverse events were reported, with no cases of cardiac arrhythmias.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that methadone could represent a suitable strategy for treating pain in PPC. However, the evidence base is insufficient, and further research is warranted.

Cancer-related concerns and needs among young adults and children on cancer treatment in Tanzania: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Cancer is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Seventy percent of deaths of cancer occur in low or middle-income countries, where the resources to provide cancer treatment and care are minimal. Tanzania currently has very inadequate facilities for cancer treatment as there are only five sites, some with limited services; two are in Dar es Salaam and one each in Mwanza, Kilimanjaro and Mbeya that offer cancer treatment. Despite cancer being a prevalent problem in Tanzania, there is a significant shortage of information on the experiences of young people who receive cancer treatment and care. The aim of this study was to explore cancer-related concerns and needs of care and support among young adults and children who are receiving cancer treatment in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.

METHODS

Using an explorative, qualitative design, two focus group discussions (FGDs) with young adults (18 to 25 years) and four FGDs with children (9 to 17 years) were held. Data were transcribed into English and analyzed using content analysis.

RESULTS

Identified concerns included physical effects, emotional effects, financial impacts, poor early care, and poor treatment. Identified needs included the need for improved care in hospital by the staff, need for community support, financial needs, needs for improved cancer care and treatment in the hospitals, and the need for increased education about cancer. Resilience was identified, particularly around hope or faith, having hope to be healed, and receiving good care from staff.

CONCLUSION

Young adults and children receiving cancer treatment in Tanzania have many needs and concerns. Improvements with regard to the care provided in hospital by the staff, the cancer care and treatment in the hospital, and population-wide education about cancer are necessary to address the identified needs and concerns. Further studies on specific approaches to address the concerns and needs are also warranted.

Opioids for cancer pain - an overview of Cochrane reviews

BACKGROUND

Pain is a common symptom with cancer, and 30% to 50% of all people with cancer will experience moderate to severe pain that can have a major negative impact on their quality of life. Opioid (morphine-like) drugs are commonly used to treat moderate or severe cancer pain, and are recommended for this purpose in the World Health Organization (WHO) pain treatment ladder. The most commonly-used opioid drugs are buprenorphine, codeine, fentanyl, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, methadone, morphine, oxycodone, tramadol, and tapentadol.

OBJECTIVES

To provide an overview of the analgesic efficacy of opioids in cancer pain, and to report on adverse events associated with their use.

METHODS

We identified systematic reviews examining any opioid for cancer pain published to 4 May 2017 in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in the Cochrane Library. The primary outcomes were no or mild pain within 14 days of starting treatment, withdrawals due to adverse events, and serious adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine reviews with 152 included studies and 13,524 participants, but because some studies appeared in more than one review the number of unique studies and participants was smaller than this. Most participants had moderate or severe pain associated with a range of different types of cancer. Studies in the reviews typically compared one type of opioid or formulation with either a different formulation of the same opioid, or a different opioid; few included a placebo control. Typically the reviews titrated dose to effect, a balance between pain relief and adverse events. Various routes of administration of opioids were considered in the reviews; oral with most opioids, but transdermal administration with fentanyl, and buprenorphine. No review included studies of subcutaneous opioid administration. Pain outcomes reported were varied and inconsistent. The average size of included studies varied considerably between reviews: studies of older opioids, such as codeine, morphine, and methadone, had low average study sizes while those involving newer drugs tended to have larger study sizes.Six reviews reported a GRADE assessment (buprenorphine, codeine, hydromorphone, methadone, oxycodone, and tramadol), but not necessarily for all comparisons or outcomes. No comparative analyses were possible because there was no consistent placebo or active control. Cohort outcomes for opioids are therefore reported, as absolute numbers or percentages, or both.Reviews on buprenorphine, codeine with or without paracetamol, hydromorphone, methadone, tramadol with or without paracetamol, tapentadol, and oxycodone did not have information about the primary outcome of mild or no pain at 14 days, although that on oxycodone indicated that average pain scores were within that range. Two reviews, on oral morphine and transdermal fentanyl, reported that 96% of 850 participants achieved that goal.Adverse event withdrawal was reported by five reviews, at rates of between 6% and 19%. Participants with at least one adverse event were reported by three reviews, at rates of between 11% and 77%.Our GRADE assessment of evidence quality was very low for all outcomes, because many studies in the reviews were at high risk of bias from several sources, including small study size.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The amount and quality of evidence around the use of opioids for treating cancer pain is disappointingly low, although the evidence we have indicates that around 19 out of 20 people with moderate or severe pain who are given opioids and can tolerate them should have that pain reduced to mild or no pain within 14 days. This accords with the clinical experience in treating many people with cancer pain, but overstates to some extent the effectiveness found for the WHO pain ladder. Most people will experience adverse events, and help may be needed to manage the more common undesirable adverse effects such as constipation and nausea. Perhaps between 1 in 10 and 2 in 10 people treated with opioids will find these adverse events intolerable, leading to a change in treatment.