Opening up disruptive ways of management in cancer pain: the concept of multimorphic pain

[Optimal pain management for cancer patients with chronic renal failure]

The management of multimorphic cancer pain is a major supportive care in oncology, for which many national and international recommendations have recently been updated. Any cancer patient must benefit from access to supportive care from the diagnosis, throughout the entire care pathway. Chronic renal failure, from any etiology, requires special attention and constant attention to details from interdisciplinary caregivers' teams to propose the best analgesic therapeutic strategy, combining complementary and interventional approaches to treatments. Analgesic therapies, in particular opioids and antineuropathics, require specific precautions. A therapeutic alliance integrating clinical pharmacy as a supportive care in its own right, is a major asset allowing the optimization and securing of analgesic drug treatments, conditioning both their efficacy, their tolerance and therapeutic observance, in the goal of improving the patient's quality of life.

The Efficacy of a Multidisciplinary Approach and Diagnostic-Therapeutic Algorithm for Vertebral Metastases with Spinal Cord Compression

Background and Objectives: Metastatic spinal cord compression represents a substantial risk to patients, given its potential for spinal cord and/or nerve root compression, which can result in severe morbidity. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a diagnostic-therapeutic algorithm developed at our hospital to mitigate the devastating consequences of spinal cord compression in patients with vertebral metastases. Materials and Methods: The algorithm, implemented in our practice in January 2022, is based on collective clinical experience and involves collaboration between emergency room physicians, oncologists, spine surgeons, neuroradiologists, radiation oncologists, and oncologists. To minimize potential confounding effects from the COVID-19 pandemic, data from the years 2019 and 2021 (pre-protocol) were collected and compared with data from the years 2022 and 2023 (post-protocol), excluding the year 2020. Results: From January 2022 to December 2023, 488 oncological patients were assessed, with 45 presenting with urgency due to suspected spinal cord compression. Out of these, 44 patients underwent surgical procedures, with 25 performed in emergency settings and 19 cases in elective settings. Comparatively, in 2019 and 2021, 419 oncological patients were evaluated, with 28 presenting with urgency for suspected spinal cord compression. Of these, 17 underwent surgical procedures, with 10 performed in emergency scenarios and 7 in elective scenarios. Comparing the pre-protocol period (years 2019 and 2021) to the post-protocol period (years 2022 and 2023), intrahospital consultations (commonly patients neurologically compromised) for spine metastasis decreased (105 vs. 82), while outpatient consultations increased remarkably (59 vs. 124). Discussion: Accurate interpretation of symptoms within the context of metastatic involvement is crucial for patients with a history of malignancy, whether presenting in the emergency room or oncology department. Even in the absence of a cancer history, careful interpretation of pain characteristics and clinical signs is crucial for diagnosing vertebral metastasis with incipient or current spinal cord compression. Early surgical or radiation intervention is emphasized as it provides the best chance to prevent deficits or improve neurological status. Preliminary findings suggest a notable increase in both the number of patients diagnosed with suspected spinal cord compression and the proportion undergoing surgical intervention following the implementation of the multidisciplinary protocol. The reduced number of intrahospital consultations (commonly patients neurologically compromised) and the increased number of visits of outpatients with vertebral metastases indicate a heightened awareness of the issue, leading to earlier identification and intervention before neurological worsening necessitating hospitalization. Conclusions: A comprehensive treatment planning approach is essential, and our multidisciplinary algorithm is a valuable tool for optimizing patient outcomes. The protocol shows potential in improving timely management of spinal cord compression in oncological patients. Further analysis of the factors driving these changes is warranted. Limitations: This study has limitations, including potential biases from the retrospective nature of data collection and the exclusion of 2020 data due to COVID-19 impact. To enhance the robustness of our results, long-term studies are required. Moreover, the single-center study design may limit the validity of the findings. Further multicenter studies would be beneficial for validating our results and exploring underlying factors in detail.

Fentanyl in cancer pain management: avoiding hasty judgments and discerning its potential benefits

Cancer pain is an important challenge in treatment and requires a rapid onset of action for its control. In particular, breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) should be adequately controlled with a stable dose of a short-acting oral opioid. Fentanyl is a synthetic, highly selective opioid with many advantageous chemical properties, including high lipophilicity and distinct pharmacokinetic properties. It is recommended for pain management in a variety of settings, including acute pain, chronic pain and BTcP. To date, its variously designed formulations allow non-invasive administration; amongst others, sublingual fentanyl has proven useful in the management of BTcP and in improving the quality of life of patients with cancer. This review provides an update on the management of BTcP with fentanyl, with consideration of safety, as it remains an important tool in the treatment of cancer pain.

Effects of music-based interventions on cancer-related pain, fatigue, and distress: an overview of systematic reviews

PURPOSE

To summarize the available evidence from systematic reviews with meta-analysis on the effects of music-based interventions in adults diagnosed with cancer.

METHODS

An overview of systematic reviews was conducted. CINHAL, Embase, PEDro, PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched from inception until November 2022. Systematic reviews with meta-analysis in individuals with cancer (any type), any comparator, and outcomes of cancer-related pain, fatigue, and psychosocial symptoms were eligible. The methodological quality of systematic reviews and the amount of spin of information in the abstract were assessed. The Graphical Representation of Overlap for OVErviews tool (GROOVE) was used to explore the overlap of primary studies among systematic reviews.

RESULTS

Thirteen systematic reviews, with over 9000 participants, containing 119 randomized trials and 34 meta-analyses of interest, were included. Music-based interventions involved passive music listening or patients' active engagement. Most systematic reviews lacked a comprehensive search strategy, did not assess the certainty in the evidence and discussed their findings without considering the risk of bias of primary studies. The degree of overlap was moderate (5.81%). Overall, combining music-based interventions and standard care seems to be more effective than standard care to reduce cancer-related pain, fatigue, and distress. Mixed findings were found for other psychosocial measures.

CONCLUSION

Music-based interventions could be an interesting approach to modulate cancer-related pain, fatigue, and distress in adults with cancer. The variability among interventions, together with important methodological biases, detract from the clinical relevance of these findings.

Cancer Pain Management: A Narrative Review of Current Concepts, Strategies, and Techniques

Pain is frequently reported during cancer disease, and it still remains poorly controlled in 40% of patients. Recent developments in oncology have helped to better control pain. Targeted treatments may cure cancer disease and significantly increase survival. Therefore, a novel population of patients (cancer survivors) has emerged, also enduring chronic pain (27.6% moderate to severe pain). The present review discusses the different options currently available to manage pain in (former) cancer patients in light of progress made in the last decade. Major progress in the field includes the recent development of a chronic cancer pain taxonomy now included in the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) and the update of the WHO analgesic ladder. Until recently, cancer pain management has mostly relied on pharmacotherapy, with opioids being considered as the mainstay. The opioids crisis has prompted the reassessment of opioids use in cancer patients and survivors. This review focuses on the current utilization of opioids, the neuropathic pain component often neglected, and the techniques and non-pharmacological strategies available which help to personalize patient treatment. Cancer pain management is now closer to the management of chronic non-cancer pain, i.e., "an integrative and supportive pain care" aiming to improve patient's quality of life.

Cancer Pain Treatment Strategies in Patients with Cancer

Management of cancer pain is challenging. Despite the poor evidence, opioid therapy still remains the cornerstone for the management of cancer-related pain. Opioids should be given according to the clinical presentation in the different stages of disease. There is no drug of choice, as most opioids are effective. Thus, the choice should be based on the individual characteristics of patients. Optimization of opioid therapy may allow individual treatment according to the patient's characteristics and pain syndromes, providing timely alternatives in the different stages of disease. While most patients respond to an appropriate treatment associated with a comprehensive assessment and symptom control, a high level of experience and knowledge is necessary in determining conditions to maximize the analgesic response, eventually adding adjuvants in some specific circumstances. Alternative opioids may improve the balance between analgesia and adverse effects in the presence of a poor response to the first opioid in a large number of patients. Finally, a selected population can benefit from some interventional procedures.

Multidisciplinary Approach to Patients With Metastatic Spinal Cord Compression: A Diagnostic Therapeutic Algorithm to Improve the Neurological Outcome

Introduction

The morbidity associated with metastatic spinal disease is significant because of spinal cord and/or nerve root compression. The purpose of this paper is to define a diagnostic-therapeutic path for patients with vertebral metastases and from this path to build an algorithm to reduce the devastating consequences of spinal cord compression.

Materials and Methods

The algorithm is born from the experience of a primary care center. A spine surgeon, an emergency room (ER) physician, a neuroradiologist, a radiation oncologist, and an oncologist form the multidisciplinary team. The ER physician or the oncologist intercept the patient with symptoms and signs of a metastatic spinal cord compression. Once the suspicion is confirmed, the following steps of the flow-chart must be triggered. The spine surgeon takes charge of the patient and, on the base of the anamnestic data and neurological examination, defines the appropriate timing for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in collaboration with the neuroradiologist. From the MRI outcome, the spine surgeon and the radiation oncologist consult each other to define further therapeutic alternatives. If indicated, surgical treatment should precede radiation therapy. The oncologist gets involved after surgery for systemic therapy.

Results

In 2021, the Spine and Spinal Cord Surgery department evaluated 257 patients with vertebral metastasis. Fifty-three patients presented with actual or incipient spinal cord compression. Among these, 27 were admitted due to rapid progression of symptoms, neurological deficits and/or spine instability signs. The level was thoracic in 21 cases, lumbar in 4 cases, cervical in 1 case, sacral in 1 case. Fifteen were operated on, 10 of these programmed and 5 in emergency.

Discussion

Patients with a history of malignancy can present to the ER or to the oncology department with symptoms that must be correctly framed in the context of a metastatic involvement. Even when there is no previous cancer history, the patient's pain characteristics and clinical signs must be interpreted to yield the correct diagnosis of vertebral metastasis with incipient or current spinal cord compression. The awareness of the alert symptoms and the application of an integrated paradigm consent to frame the patients with spinal cord compression, obtaining the benefits of a homogeneous step-by-step diagnostic and therapeutic path. Early surgical or radiation therapy treatment gives the best hope for preventing the worsening, or even improving, the deficits.

Conclusions

Metastatic spinal cord compression can cause neurological deficits compromising quality of life. Treatment strategies should be planned comprehensively. A multidisciplinary approach and the application of the proposed algorithm is of paramount importance to optimize the outcomes of these patients.

Interventional and Non-interventional Medical Rehabilitation Approaches to Axial Spine Pain in Vertebral Metastatic Disease

As targeted therapies help patients with advanced cancer live longer, interventions for management of axial spine pain will become more common. Unfortunately, the indications for and safety of these procedures have been relatively unexplored compared with non-cancer adults. This review focuses on the following aspects of axial spine pain management in patients with vertebral metastatic disease: (1) pathophysiology and symptoms of cancer- and non-cancer-related spine pain; (2) safety and efficacy of non-interventional rehabilitation approaches to treat this pain; (3) considerations for interventional pain approaches to acute and chronic pain in patients with vertebral metastatic disease. This review also summarizes gaps in the literature and describes specific cases in which the described interventions have been applied.

[The management of multimorphic cancer pain, from diagnosis to treatment]

Cancer pain remains a major public health issue. Despite progress in pain medicine thanks to the interest shown in early and timely supportive care, more than half the patients managed for cancer are in pain. One of the key factors in high quality multidisciplinary management throughout the care pathway is to assess more than just pain: it is necessary to assess the patient as a whole. Understanding the complexity of cancer pain - or the various types of pain - through the innovative multimorphic cancer pain model, effectively opens up new perspectives for a targeted, personalised, and multimodal approach. The subsequent treatment strategies, whether drug-based with opioids, or interventional, are codified by guidelines based on scientific evidence for the healthcare professionals and, ultimately, patients.

Effectiveness of naloxegol in patients with cancer pain suffering from opioid-induced constipation

Purpose

Naloxegol, an oral once-daily peripherally acting mu-opioid receptor antagonist, is indicated for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation (OIC) with inadequate response to laxative(s), in cancer and non-cancer patients. This study mainly aimed to assess in real-life conditions the efficacy and safety of naloxegol in cancer pain patients and the evolution of their quality of life.

Methods

A non-interventional, 4-week follow-up study was conducted in 24 French oncology and pain centers between 2018 and 2019. Eligible patients were aged ≥ 18 years, treated with opioids for cancer pain, and started naloxegol for OIC with inadequate response to laxatives. The rate of the response to naloxegol (primary criterion) was assessed at W4. The evolution of quality of life was measured using the Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life (PAC-QOL).

Results

A total of 124 patients were included (mean age, 62 ± 12 years; ECOG ≤ 2, 79%; primary cancer, lung 18%, breast 16%, prostate 11%, head and neck 9%, digestive 9%…; metastatic stage, 80%). At inclusion, the median opioid dosage was 60 mg of oral morphine or equivalent. At W4, the response rate was 73.4% (95% CI [63.7–83.2%]), and 62.9% (95% CI [51.5–74.2%]) of patients had a clinically relevant change in quality of life (decrease in PAC-QOL score ≥ 0.5 point). Adverse events related to naloxegol were reported in 8% of patients (7% with gastrointestinal events; one serious diarrhea).

Conclusion

This real-world study shows that naloxegol is effective and well tolerated in cancer pain patients with OIC and that their quality of life improves under treatment.

Understanding the Chameleonic Breakthrough Cancer Pain

Breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) is a variegated phenomenon, that often presents in different ways in each individual, and may change its presentation in the same individual during the course of disease. An appropriate assessment is fundamental for depicting the pattern of BTcP in individuals. This information is determinant for a personalised management of BTcP. The use of opioids as needed, is recommended for the management of BTcP. There are several options which should be chosen according to the individual pattern of BTcP. In general, a drug with a short onset and offset should be preferred. Although oral opioids may still have specific indications, fentanyl products have been found to be more rapid and effective, providing analgesia in 5-15 min. The most controversial point regards the opioid dose to be used. The presence of tolerance suggests using a dose that is proportional to the dose used for background analgesia. In contrast, regulatory studies have suggested using the minimal available dose to be titrated until the effective dose. Further large studies should definitely settle this never-ending question.

The Complex Balance between Analgesic Efficacy, Change of Dose and Safety Profile Over Time, in Cancer Patients Treated with Opioids: Providing the Clinicians with an Evaluation Tool

Background: Scanty data exist on the integration between the analgesic effect of opioids, dose changes, and adverse events in cancer patients. Methods: To provide further information on this issue, we analysed data on 498 advanced-stage cancer patients treated with strong opioids. At baseline and three visits (at days 7, 14, and 21), pain intensity, oral morphine-equivalent daily dose, and the prevalence of major adverse events were measured. The proportion of responders (pain intensity decrease ≥30% from baseline) and non-responders, as well as of patients with low or high dose escalation, was calculated. Results: Pain intensity strongly decreased from baseline (pain intensity difference −4.0 at day 7 and −4.2 at day 21) in responders, while it was quite stable in non-responders (pain intensity difference −0.8 at day 7 and −0.9 at day 21). In low dose escalation patients (82.4% at final visit), daily dose changed from 52.3 to 65.3 mg; in high dose escalation patients (17.6%), it varied from 94.1 to 146.7 mg. Among responders, high dose escalation patients experienced significantly more frequent adverse events compared to low or high dose escalation patients, while no differences were observed in non-responders. Conclusions: The response to opioids results from the combination of three clinical aspects, which are strongly interrelated. These results provide some thoughts to help clinical evaluations and therapeutic decisions regarding opioid use.