Management of refractory breathlessness in patients with advanced cancer

Evaluation of diagnostic and treatment approaches to acute dyspnea in a palliative care setting among medical doctors with different educational levels

Background

Dyspnea is common in patients with advanced cancer. Diagnostic procedures in patients with dyspnea are mandatory but often time-consuming and hamper rapid treatment of the underlying refractory symptoms. Opioids are the first-line drugs for the treatment of refractory dyspnea in palliative care patients with advanced lung cancer.

Methods

To evaluate the knowledge levels of medical doctors with different educational levels on the diagnosis of and treatment options for dyspnea in patients with advanced lung cancer in a palliative care setting, a case report and survey were distributed to physicians at the University Hospital Krems, describing acute dyspnea in a 64-year-old stage IV lung cancer patient. A total of 18 diagnostic and 22 therapeutic options were included in the survey. The physicians were asked to suggest and rank in order of preference their diagnosis and treatment options. Statistical analyses of the data were performed, including comparison of the responses of the senior doctors and the physicians in training.

Results

A total of 106 surveys were completed. The respondents were 82 senior physicians and 24 physicians in training (response rates of 86% and 80%, respectively). Regarding diagnostic investigations, inspection and reading the patient’s chart were the most important diagnostic tools chosen by the respondents. The choices of performing blood gas analysis (p = 0.01) and measurement of oxygen saturation (p = 0.048) revealed a significant difference between the groups, both investigations performed more frequently by the physicians in training. As for non-pharmacological treatment options, providing psychological support was one of the most relevant options selected. A significant difference was seen in choosing the option of improving a patient’s position in relation to level of training (65.9% senior physicians vs. 30.4% physicians in training, p = 0.04). Regarding pharmacological treatment options, oxygen application was the most chosen approach. The second most frequent drug chosen was a ß-2 agonist. Only 9.8% of the senior physicians and 8.7% of the physicians in training suggested oral opioids as a treatment option, whereas intravenous opioids were suggested by 43.9% of the senior physicians and 21.7% of the physicians in training (p = 0.089). For subcutaneous application of opioids, the percentage of usage was significantly higher for the physicians in training than for the senior physicians (78.3% vs. 48.8%, p = 0.017, respectively).

Conclusion

The gold standard treatment for treating refractory dyspnea in patients with advanced lung cancer is opioids. Nevertheless, this pharmacological treatment option was not ranked as the most important. Discussing hypothetical cases of patients with advanced lung cancer and refractory dyspnea with experienced doctors as well as doctors at the beginning of their training may help improve symptom control for these patients.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-022-06996-6.

Relieving from Breathlessness in the Wind: A Meta-Analysis and Subjective Report of Effectiveness of Fan Blowing in Patients with Cardiorespiratory Diseases or Cancer

OBJECTIVES

Breathlessness is common among terminally ill patients with cardiorespiratory disease or cancer. The experience may induce secondary physiological and behavioral responses that limit patient well-being and independence and cause emotional distress.

METHODS

We conducted a meta-analysis on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the effectiveness of fan blowing on breathlessness among patients with cardiorespiratory diseases or cancer. The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, SCOPUS, and CINAHL databases were searched to retrieve potential articles. The primary outcome was breathlessness severity. The secondary outcomes were SpO₂, anxiety, depression, and quality of life. Also, we presented the changes of vital signs and subjective feeling of a male patient who used fan blowing for relieving his breathlessness.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs were available for analysis. The pooled results demonstrated no significant difference in breathlessness severity between fan-to-face blowing and control methods (standard mean difference: -0.21, 95% confidence interval: -.59 to .17); however, a significant reduction in breathlessness severity was observed in the short-time intervention compared with long-time intervention. A trend occurred toward significance in the reduction of respiratory rate in fan-to-face blowing compared with control methods (MD: -.64, 95% CI: -1.37 to .09). No differences were observed between groups in oxygen saturation, anxiety, depression, or QoL. The male patient who used fan blowing showed an improved vital signs and a satisfied subjective feeling.

CONCLUSIONS

Consistent short-time fan-to-face blowing is effective for relieving breathlessness among conscious terminally ill patients with cardiorespiratory diseases or cancer. The use of this convenient method for relieving breathlessness symptoms in terminally ill patients is recommended.

Holistic services for people with advanced disease and chronic or refractory breathlessness: a mixed-methods evidence synthesis

Background

Breathlessness is a common and distressing symptom of many advanced diseases, affecting around 2 million people in the UK. Breathlessness increases with disease progression and often becomes chronic or refractory. Breathlessness-triggered services that integrate holistic assessment and specialist palliative care input as part of a multiprofessional approach have been developed for this group, offering tailored interventions to support self-management and reduce distress.

Objectives

The aim was to synthesise evidence on holistic breathlessness services for people with advanced disease and chronic or refractory breathlessness. The objectives were to describe the structure, organisation and delivery of services, determine clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and acceptability, identify predictors of treatment response, and elicit stakeholders’ evidence-based priorities for clinical practice, policy and research.

Design

The mixed-methods evidence synthesis comprised three components: (1) a systematic review to determine the clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and acceptability of holistic breathlessness services; (2) a secondary analysis of pooled individual data from three trials to determine predictors of clinical response; and (3) a transparent expert consultation (TEC), comprising a stakeholder workshop and an online consensus survey, to identify stakeholders’ priorities.

Results

Thirty-seven papers reporting on 18 holistic breathlessness services were included in the systematic review. Most studies enrolled people with thoracic cancer, were delivered over 4–6 weeks, and included breathing training, relaxation techniques and psychological support. Meta-analysis demonstrated significant reductions in the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) distress due to breathlessness, significant reductions in the Hospital Anxiety and Depressions Scale (HADS) depression scores, and non-significant reductions in the Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire (CRQ) mastery and HADS anxiety, favouring the intervention. Recipients valued education, self-management interventions, and expertise of the staff in breathlessness and person-centred care. Evidence for cost-effectiveness was limited and inconclusive. The responder analysis (n = 259) revealed baseline CRQ mastery and NRS distress to be strong predictors of the response to breathlessness services assessed by these same measures, and no significant influence from baseline breathlessness intensity, patient diagnosis, lung function, health status, anxiety or depression. The TEC elicited 34 priorities from stakeholders. Seven priorities received high agreement and consensus, reflecting stakeholders’ (n = 74) views that services should be person-centred and multiprofessional, share their breathlessness management skills with others, and recognise the roles and support needs of informal carers.

Limitations

The evidence synthesis draws predominantly from UK services and may not be generalisable to other settings. Some meta-analyses were restricted by reporting biases and statistical heterogeneity.

Conclusions

Despite heterogeneity in composition and delivery, holistic breathlessness services are highly valued by recipients and can lead to significant improvements in the distress caused by breathlessness and depression. Outcomes of improved mastery and reduced distress caused by breathlessness are not influenced by patient diagnosis, lung function or health status. Stakeholders highlighted the need for improved access to person-centred, multiprofessional breathlessness services and support for informal carers.

Future work

Our research suggests that key therapeutic components of holistic breathlessness services be considered in clinical practice and models of delivery and educational strategies to address stakeholders’ priorities tested.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017057508.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery programme. Matthew Maddocks, Wei Gao and Irene J Higginson are supported by the NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) South London; Matthew Maddocks is supported by a NIHR Career Development Fellowship (CDF-2017-009), William D-C Man is supported by the NIHR CLAHRC Northwest London and Irene J Higginson holds a NIHR Emeritus Senior Investigator Award.

Combined Effect of Opioids and Corticosteroids for Alleviating Dyspnea in Terminal Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Review

Dyspnea is a prognostic factor that affects the quality of life of terminal cancer patients, and many reports have described opioid treatment for dyspnea alleviation. Here, we retrospectively evaluated differences in the effects of various opioids administered concomitantly with corticosteroids on dyspnea in 20 terminal-stage cancer patients (13 men, 7 women; mean age [range]: 71 [49-94] years) who received opioids concomitantly with corticosteroids. Effectiveness was assessed throughout administration using the Support Team Assessment Schedule, Japanese version (STAS-J), particularly the subscale indicating how strongly a patient is affected by symptoms. The effectiveness of combined opioid and corticosteroid therapy against dyspnea and the opioid dose comprised the primary and secondary foci, respectively. Among concomitantly treated patients, STAS-J scores at initiation (mean ± SD: 3.1 ± 0.24) and lowest recorded STAS-J scores (1.4 ± 0.22) differed significantly (P = .0034) among those receiving morphine, but not among those receiving oxycodone (P = .068) or fentanyl (P = .18). Concomitant opioid and corticosteroid treatment was associated with a ≥2-point STAS-J score improvement in 14/20 patients (effectiveness: 70%). The opioid dose did not significantly affect dyspnea alleviation. We conclude that concomitant opioid and corticosteroid treatment can effectively alleviate dyspnea in terminal cancer patients.

Continuous palliative sedation: not only a response to physical suffering

BACKGROUND

Palliative sedation is a medical intervention aimed at relieving symptoms that can no longer be controlled by conventional treatment. Ample knowledge is available regarding the nature of such symptoms, but there is no in-depth information regarding how health care workers decide about palliative sedation.

OBJECTIVE

The study objective was to investigate considerations concerning the indications for continuous palliative sedation (CPS) and issues that influence these considerations.

DESIGN

The study consisted of qualitative interviews regarding patients who had recently received CPS.

SETTING/SUBJECTS

The study involved physicians and nurses working in general practice, nursing homes, and hospitals.

MEASUREMENT

Analyses by a multidisciplinary research team used the constant comparative method.

RESULTS

Together with physical symptoms, psychological and existential suffering may combine to produce a refractory state for which other treatment options than CPS were not available or considered inappropriate. A limited life expectancy was by many considered crucial (e.g., to avoid hastening death) and by some less important (e.g., because the patient's suffering was considered to be key). Issues influencing the decision to use CPS related to patient preferences (e.g., dignity, not wanting to experience further suffering) or family issues (impact of suffering on family, family requesting CPS).

CONCLUSIONS

The indication for CPS typically originates from physical symptoms and nonphysical problems producing a refractory state in which a patient suffers unbearably. In such states, preferences of patients and families and the life expectancy criterion are weighed against the severity of refractory symptoms. Therefore the use of CPS is not only a response to the physical suffering of patients in the dying phase.

Drug interactions in palliative care--it's more than cytochrome P450

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to identify the combination of substances with high potential for drug interactions in a palliative care setting and to provide concise recommendations for physicians.

METHODS

We used a retrospective systematic chart analysis of 200 consecutive inpatients. The recently developed and internationally advocated classification system OpeRational ClAssification of Drug Interactions was applied using the national database of the Federal Union of German Associations of Pharmacists. Charts of patients with potential for severe DDIs were examined manually for clinical relevance.

RESULTS

In 151 patients (75%) a total of 631 potential drug interactions were identified. Opioids (exception: methadone), non-opioids (exception: non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs), benzodiazepines, proton-pump inhibitors, laxatives, co-analgesics (exception: carbamazepine) and butylscopolamine were generally safe. High potential for drug interactions included combinations of scopolamine, neuroleptics, metoclopramide, antihistamines, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, (levo-) methadone, amitriptyline, carbamazepine and diuretics. The manual analyses of records from eight patients with risk for severe drug interactions provided no indicator for clinical relevance in these specific patients. Drug interactions attributed to the cytochrome pathway played a minor role (exception: carbamazepine).

CONCLUSION

Most relevant drug interactions can be expected with: (i) drugs (inter-) acting via histamine, acetylcholine or dopamine receptors; and (ii) Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Even in last hours of life the combination of substances (e.g. anticholinergics) may produce relevant drug interactions (e.g. delirium).

PERSPECTIVE

Data on the potential for drug-drug interactions in palliative case is extremely scarce, but drug interactions can be limited if a few facts are considered. A synopsis of the findings of these studies is presented as concise recommendation to minimize drug interactions.