Midazolam as adjunct therapy to morphine in the alleviation of severe dyspnea perception in patients with advanced cancer

Palliative home oxygen: practical framework for clinicians

The British Thoracic Society 2015 guidelines on home oxygen use in adults have been pivotal in guiding clinicians on the use of long-term oxygen therapy in improving survival outcomes for patients. However, guidance for use of home oxygen in the palliative care setting has not been as robust owing to the lack of evidence-based studies. Therefore, this narrative review aims to provide a clinical framework on the use of palliative home oxygen therapy by considering its prognostic and symptomatic benefits as well as offering pragmatic advice for palliative home oxygen in end-of-life care.

A Phase II Study of High-Flow Nasal Cannula for Relieving Dyspnea in Advanced Cancer Patients

CONTEXT

The efficacy and tolerability of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) for relieving dyspnea in advanced cancer patients with limited prognosis requires elucidation.

OBJECTIVES

The primary aim of this trial was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of HFNC regarding dyspnea including severe as well as moderate for longer durations in patients under palliative care.

METHODS

In this prospective study, hospitalized patients with advanced cancer who had dyspnea at rest (numeric rating scale, NRS≥3) and hypoxemia were enrolled. They were treated with HFNC for five days in the respiratory unit. Primary endpoint was mean change of modified Borg scale at 24 hours. Key secondary endpoints consisted of mean changes in modified Borg scale during the study period and feasibility (Trial Identifier, UMIN000035738).

RESULTS

Between February 2019 and February 2022, 25 patients were enrolled and 21 were analyzed. Twenty patients used inspired oxygen and the mean fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) was 0.34 (range, 0.21-1.0). At baseline, mean NRS (dyspnea) was 5.9 (range, 3-10). Median survival time was 19 days (range, 3-657). The mean change of modified Borg scale was 1.4 (80% confidence interval [CI]: 0.8-1.9) at 24 hours, 12 patients (57%) showed 1.0 points improvement of modified Borg scale. Within two hours, 15 patients showed 1.0 points improvement of modified Borg scale and such early responders were likely to maintain dyspnea improvement for 24 hours. Nineteen patients could continue HFNC for 24 hours and 11 patients completed five days of HFNC.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this trial is the first prospective study to assess the five-day efficacy and tolerability of HFNC for dyspnea in patients under palliative care. Although this did not reach the prespecified endpoint, about half of the patients showed 1.0 point improvement, a minimally clinically important difference (MCID) in the chronic lung disease. HFNC can be a palliative treatment option in advanced cancer patients with dyspnea.

Cancer-related breathlessness: opioids other than morphine - comprehensive literature review

INTRODUCTION

Although there is low-quality evidence, there has been an increase in publications on the experience of evaluating and managing cancer-related breathlessness using opioids other than morphine.

METHODS

The author conducted a non-systematic literature review in the PubMed/Medline and Embase until 4 October 2022. Eligible studies have evaluated the efficacy of opioids other than morphine for cancer-related breathlessness. Studies focused on sedation, anaesthesia, paediatric patients, opioid toxicity or basic research were excluded. Reviews/meta-analyses and non-English language publications were also excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 1556 records were identified, of which 23 studies including 469 patients who were treated with fentanyl (n=223), oxycodone (n=171) and hydromorphone (n=75) were considered eligible. Six phase II randomised clinical trials (RCTs), four observational studies and four case reports of fentanyl were found. For breathlessness on exertion, fentanyl yielded promising results, but no RCT showed significant superiority of fentanyl to placebo or morphine. For terminal breathlessness, three RCTs, five non-randomised or observational studies and one case report on oxycodone or hydromorphone were found. Although the results of the observational studies suggested that oxycodone and hydromorphone might be effective alternatives to morphine, the superiority over placebo or non-inferiority to morphine had not been demonstrated in the RCTs.

CONCLUSION

As an alternative to morphine, the author recommends fentanyl for breathless crisis or breathlessness on exertion, and oxycodone or hydromorphone for terminal breathlessness in advanced cancer. Larger and well-designed studies based on firm research policies are needed to confirm this current knowledge.

Easing Suffering for ICU Patients and Their Families: Evidence and Opportunities for Primary and Specialty Palliative Care in the ICU

Intensive care unit (ICU) admissions are often accompanied by many physical and existential pressure points that can be extraordinarily wearing on patients and their families and surrogate decision makers (SDMs). Multidisciplinary palliative support, including physicians, advanced practice nurses, nutritionists, chaplains and other team members, may alleviate many of these sources of potential suffering. However, the palliative needs of ICU patients undoubtedly exceed the bandwidth of current consultative specialty palliative medicine teams. Informed by standard-of-care palliative medicine domains, we review common ICU symptoms (pain, dyspnea and thirst) and their prevalence, sources and their treatment. We then identify palliative needs and impacts in the domains of communication, SDM support and transitions of care for patients and their families through their journey in the ICU, from discharge and recovery at home to chronic critical illness, post-ICU disability or death. Finally, we examine the evidence for strategies to incorporate specialty palliative medicine and palliative principles into ICU care for the improvement of patient- and family-centered care. While randomized controlled studies have failed to demonstrate measurable improvement in pre-determined outcomes for patient- and family-relevant outcomes, embracing the principles of palliative medicine and assuring their delivery in the ICU is likely to translate to overall improvement in humanistic, person-centered care that supports patients and their SDMs during and following critical illness.

[Prevention, Diagnosis, Therapy, and Follow-up of Lung Cancer - Interdisciplinary Guideline of the German Respiratory Society and the German Cancer Society - Abridged Version]

The current S3 Lung Cancer Guidelines are edited with fundamental changes to the previous edition based on the dynamic influx of information to this field:The recommendations include de novo a mandatory case presentation for all patients with lung cancer in a multidisciplinary tumor board before initiation of treatment, furthermore CT-Screening for asymptomatic patients at risk (after federal approval), recommendations for incidental lung nodule management , molecular testing of all NSCLC independent of subtypes, EGFR-mutations in resectable early stage lung cancer in relapsed or recurrent disease, adjuvant TKI-therapy in the presence of common EGFR-mutations, adjuvant consolidation treatment with checkpoint inhibitors in resected lung cancer with PD-L1 ≥ 50%, obligatory evaluation of PD-L1-status, consolidation treatment with checkpoint inhibition after radiochemotherapy in patients with PD-L1-pos. tumor, adjuvant consolidation treatment with checkpoint inhibition in patients withPD-L1 ≥ 50% stage IIIA and treatment options in PD-L1 ≥ 50% tumors independent of PD-L1status and targeted therapy and treatment option immune chemotherapy in first line SCLC patients.Based on the current dynamic status of information in this field and the turnaround time required to implement new options, a transformation to a "living guideline" was proposed.

Dexmedetomidine for dyspnoea

Dexmedetomidine is a selective α2-adrenoreceptor agonist with a broad range of effects, including easily controllable sedation, analgesia and anxiolysis. Because of these favorable features, it has replaced traditional sedatives, such as benzodiazepines, and is becoming the first-line sedative for the patients in intensive care units. Terminally ill patients often need sedatives for symptom management, especially for dyspnoea. However, the use of dexmedetomidine in a palliative care setting has rarely been recognised to date. We experienced a patient nearing the end of life due to uncontrollable pulmonary haemorrhage on ventilator, whose dyspnoea was successfully managed by dexmedetomidine in addition to continuous intravenous infusion of oxycodone.

Do Types of Opioids Matter for Terminal Cancer Dyspnea? A Preliminary Multicenter Cohort Study

CONTEXT

Dyspnea is among the most distressing symptoms in the last weeks to days of life (terminal dyspnea). While physicians frequently use parenteral opioids other than morphine for terminal dyspnea, little is known about their effects in cancer patients.

OBJECTIVES

To explore the effectiveness and safety of parenteral morphine, oxycodone, and hydromorphone for cancer patients with terminal dyspnea.

METHODS

This was a secondary analysis of a multicenter cohort study that consecutively enrolled advanced cancer patients with moderate/severe terminal dyspnea. Participating palliative care physicians initiated parenteral opioids (morphine/oxycodone/hydromorphone), utilizing a standardized treatment algorithm. We examined the dyspnea intensity (Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale [IPOS]) at 24 and 48 hours.

RESULTS

Of 108 patients (mean age = 72), 66 (61%), 34 (32%), and 8 (7.4%) received morphine, oxycodone, and hydromorphone, respectively. At 24 hours, mean dyspnea IPOS scores significantly decreased from 3.0 (standard error (SE) = 0.1) at the baseline to 1.6 (0.1), 2.9 (0.1) to 2.0 (0.2), and 3.5 (0.2) to 1.2 (0.4) in the morphine (P < 0.001), oxycodone (P < 0.001), and hydromorphone (P = 0.011) groups, respectively. At 48 hours, the IPOS scores significantly reduced from 2.9 (0.1) at the baseline to 1.4 (0.1), 2.9 (0.1) to 1.6 (0.2), and 3.5 (0.2) to 1.2 (0.2) in the morphine (P < 0.001), oxycodone (P < 0.001), and hydromorphone (P = 0.004) groups, respectively. No significant differences in mean scores were found among the three groups at 24 (P = 0.080) and 48 hours (P = 0.322). Adverse events were rare.

CONCLUSION

Parenteral morphine, oxycodone, and hydromorphone may be similarly effective and safe for cancer patients with terminal dyspnea.

Opioids for the management of dyspnea in cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Dyspnea is a prevalent symptom that significantly reduces quality of life of cancer patients. Palliative treatment is necessary when the symptoms do not respond to treatment for their cause. Opioids are widely used as pharmacological therapy, but evidence for individual agents is inconsistent. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of opioids for dyspnea in cancer patients. We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and ICHUSHI for studies using opioids for dyspnea in adult cancer patients reported by September 2019. Screening of the retrieved literature and assessment of risk of bias and outcomes were performed by two independent authors. A meta-analysis was performed on the primary endpoint, relief of dyspnea, and secondary endpoints including quality of life, somnolence as a side effect, and serious adverse events. Twelve randomized controlled trials were evaluated regarding relief of dyspnea. Somnolence and serious adverse events were evaluated in seven and four randomized controlled trials, respectively, but no randomized controlled trials were evaluable for quality of life. Overall, opioids were more effective than placebo for dyspnea (standardized mean difference - 0.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] - 0.75 to - 0.12). Although significant difference was found between systemic morphine and placebo in the drug-specific analysis, no significant difference could be detected in the other analyses. Systemic administration of opioids is more effective than placebo in relieving dyspnea in cancer patients. Robust evidence on the efficacy and safety of opioids on dyspnea in cancer patients is lacking, and further studies are needed.

Should Benzodiazepines be Used for Reducing Dyspnea in Patients with Advanced Illnesses?

Dyspnea is a common and highly distressing symptom in patients with advanced illnesses. Many patients continue to experience chronic dyspnea despite optimal management of underlying disease(s) and various non-pharmacologic interventions, necessitating the consideration of pharmacologic therapies for palliation of dyspnea. One commonly asked question by clinicians is whether benzodiazepines have a role in the palliation of dyspnea. In this "Controversies in Palliative Care" article, three groups of thought leaders independently answer this question. Specifically, each group provides a synopsis of the key studies that inform their thought processes, share practical advice on their clinical approach, and highlight the opportunities for future research. All three groups suggest that benzodiazepines alone do not confer a benefit for dyspnea in advanced illnesses based on existing data. They also expressed concerns about the potential adverse effects such as delirium and drowsiness and recommended against benzodiazepines as first line pharmacologic therapy. Some groups suggest that benzodiazepines may be used in highly selected patients with severe anxiety associated with dyspnea. Some investigators may also consider the adjunctive use of benzodiazepines in patients with severe dyspnea despite opioids, particularly if life expectancy is limited. Benzodiazepines also have a role in palliative sedation for refractory dyspnea in the last days of life. More research is needed to confirm the benefit of benzodiazepines in these populations.

The feasibility and effects of a pharmacological treatment algorithm for cancer patients with terminal dyspnea: A multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

How clinicians treat patients with terminal dyspnea widely varies, which could hamper quality care. We visualized comprehensive pharmacological treatment delivered by palliative care physicians.

AIM

To examine adherence to a comprehensive pharmacological treatment algorithm for patients with terminal dyspnea, and to explore its outcomes during 48 h.

DESIGN

A multicenter cohort study at five sites (February 2020 to June 2021).

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

We prospectively enrolled consecutive patients with advanced cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 3-4, and moderate/severe dyspnea. Participating palliative care physicians initiated algorithm-based treatment. The primary outcome was the proportion of adherence to the treatment algorithm over 24 h (predefined goal, 70%). We evaluated the adherence, goal achievement, and dyspnea level with a numerical rating scale (NRS), as well as adverse events over 48 h.

RESULTS

All 108 patients received algorithm-based pharmacological treatment. Among 96 and 87 patients who were alive at 24 and 48 h, respectively, 96 (100%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 96%-100%) and 82 (94%; 95%CI = 87%-98%) continued to receive the algorithm treatment, respectively, and 66 (69%; 95%CI = 59%-77%) and 64 (74%; 95%CI = 63%-82%) achieved the treatment goals, respectively. Using a complete case analysis with paired t-tests, mean dyspnea NRS scores significantly reduced from 7.3 (standard error, 0.2) at the baseline to 4.9 (0.3) at 24 h (n = 72; p < 0.001), and 7.2 (0.3) at the baseline to 4.6 (0.4) at 48 h (n = 55; p < 0.001). Most adverse events were mild to moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

The comprehensive pharmacological treatment algorithm was feasible, and the study data supports its preliminary efficacy and safety. The use of this algorithm may help clinicians improve care for patients with terminal dyspnea.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of benzodiazepines for dyspnea in patients with cancer

OBJECTIVE

the role of benzodiazepines in relieving dyspnea in patients with cancer has not yet been established. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of benzodiazepines alone or in combination with opioids for dyspnea in patients with cancer.

METHODS

Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Ichushi-Web were searched for articles published from database inception to 23 September 2019. Studies of benzodiazepines alone or in combination with opioids for dyspnea were included. The primary outcome measure was the relief of dyspnea. The secondary outcome measures were anxiety, somnolence and severe adverse events.

RESULTS

of 505 publications initially identified, two trials and one trial were included in the meta-analysis of midazolam alone and in combination with morphine, respectively. With regard to the relief of dyspnea, midazolam alone showed no significant difference compared with morphine alone, with a relative risk of 0.95 (95% confidence interval: 0.47-1.89). Meanwhile, midazolam plus morphine was significantly more effective than morphine alone, with a relative risk of 1.33 (95% confidence interval: 1.02-1.75). For anxiety relief, a meta-analysis could not be performed because of insufficient data. The incidence of somnolence and severe adverse events was not significantly different between the experimental and control groups for either midazolam alone or in combination with morphine.

CONCLUSIONS

benzodiazepines alone do not significantly improve dyspnea compared with opioids alone, but a combination of benzodiazepines and opioids may be more effective. Evidence from randomized controlled trials focusing on patients with cancer has not been generated in recent years. Further appropriately designed randomized controlled trials are required.

Prophylaxis and treatment of cancer-related dyspnea with pharmacologic agents: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Cancer-related dyspnea is a common symptom in patients with cancer. It has also been reported to be a predictor of poorer prognosis, which can then change clinical treatment and advance care planning. Currently, no definitive recommendation for pharmacologic agents for cancer-related dyspnea exists. The aim of this systematic review and network meta-analysis is to compare pharmacologic agents for the prophylaxis and treatment of cancer-related dyspnea.

METHODS

A search was conducted in the databases of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL through May 2021. Standardized mean differences (SMDs), as reported by studies or calculated from baseline and follow-up dyspnea scores, were amalgamated into a summary SMD and 95% confidence interval (CI) using a restricted maximum likelihood multivariate network meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were included in this review; six reported on prophylaxis of exertional dyspnea, five on treatment of everyday dyspnea, and one on treatment of episodic dyspnea. Morphine sulfate was better at controlling everyday dyspnea than placebo (SMD 1.210; 95% CI: 0.415-2.005). Heterogeneity in study design and comparisons, however, led to some concerns with the underlying consistency assumption in network meta-analysis design.

CONCLUSION

Optimal pharmacologic interventions for cancer-related dyspnea could not be determined based on this analysis. Further trials are needed to report on the efficacy of pharmacologic interventions for the prophylaxis and treatment of cancer-related dyspnea.

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.

Palliative care for children and young people with stage 5 chronic kidney disease

Death from stage 5 chronic kidney disease (CKD 5) in childhood or adolescence is rare, but something that all paediatric renal physicians and most paediatricians will encounter. In this paper, we present the literature on three key areas of palliative care practice essential to good clinical management: shared decision-making, advance care planning, and symptom management, with particular reference to CKD 5 where kidney transplant is not an option and where a decision has been made to withdraw or withhold dialysis. Some areas of care, particularly with regard to symptom management, have not been well-studied in children and young people (CYP) with CKD 5 and recommendations with regard to drug choice and dose modification are based on adult literature, known pharmacokinetics, and clinical experience.

Research policy in supportive care and palliative care for cancer dyspnea

BACKGROUND

Dyspnea is a common and distressing symptom in patients with cancer. To improve its management, multicenter confirmatory studies are necessary. Research policy would be useful in conducting these studies. Here, we propose a new research policy for the management of dyspnea in patients with cancer.

METHODS

The first draft was developed by a policy working group of 11 specialists in the field of supportive care or palliative care for dyspnea. Then, a provisional draft was developed after review by a research support group (the Japanese Supportive, Palliative and Psychosocial Care Study Group) and five Japanese scientific societies (Japanese Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, Japanese Society of Medical Oncology, Japanese Society of Palliative Medicine, Japanese Association of Rehabilitation Medicine and Japanese Society of Clinical Oncology), and receipt of public comments.

RESULTS

The policy includes the following components of research policy on dyspnea: (i) definition of dyspnea, (ii) scale for assessment of dyspnea, (iii) reason for dyspnea or factors associated with dyspnea and (iv) treatment effectiveness outcomes/adverse events. The final policy (Ver1.0) was completed on 1 March 2021.

CONCLUSIONS

This policy could help researchers plan and conduct studies on the management of cancer dyspnea.

Visualizing How to Use Parenteral Opioids for Terminal Cancer Dyspnea: A Pilot, Multicenter, Prospective, Observational Study

CONTEXT

How physicians use opioids for dyspnea in imminently dying cancer patients (terminal dyspnea) varies markedly, which could hamper quality care.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the adherence to an algorithm-based treatment for terminal dyspnea, and explore its outcomes over 24 hours.

METHODS

This was a pre-planned subgroup analysis of a multicenter prospective observational study. Inclusion criteria were: advanced cancer patients admitted to palliative care units, ECOG performance status = 3-4, and a dyspnea intensity ≥2 on the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale (IPOS). We developed an algorithm to visualize how palliative care physicians would use parenteral opioids. Participating physicians (palliative care specialists) initiated parenteral opioids, choosing whether to use the algorithm based on their preference. We measured the adherence rate to the algorithm over 24 hours (predefined goal = 70%), and compared dyspnea IPOS scores and adverse events between patients with and without algorithm-based treatment.

RESULTS

Of 164 patients (median survival = 5 days), 71 (43%) received algorithm-based treatment, and 70 (99%; 95% confidence interval = 92%-100%) adhered to it over 24 hours. In a complete case analysis, mean dyspnea IPOS scores significantly decreased from 2.9 (standard error = 0.1) to 1.5 (0.1) in the algorithm group (n = 54; P < 0.001), and 2.9 (0.1) to 1.6 (0.1) in the non-algorithm group (n = 72; P < 0.001). There was no significant between-group difference in changes in dyspnea IPOS scores (P = 0.65). Adverse events were rare (n = 5).

CONCLUSION

The algorithm-based treatment was feasible, and might be as effective and safe as the usual care by palliative care specialists. Its implementation may help physicians provide quality care for terminal dyspnea.

Targeting miRNAs with anesthetics in cancer: Current understanding and future perspectives

Anesthetics are extensively used during cancer surgeries. The progression of cancer can be influenced by perioperative events such as exposure to general or local anesthesia. However, whether they inhibit cancer or act as a causative factor for metastasis and exert deleterious effects on cancer growth differs based on the type of cancer and the therapy administration. Recent experimental data suggested that many of the most commonly used anesthetics in surgical oncology, whether general or local agents, can alter gene expression and cause epigenetic changes via modulating miRNAs. miRNAs are single-stranded non-coding RNAs that regulate gene expression at various levels, and their dysregulation contributes to the pathogenesis of cancers. However, anesthetics via regulating miRNAs can concurrently target several effectors of cellular signaling pathways involved in cell differentiation, proliferation, and viability. This review summarized the current research about the effects of different anesthetics in regulating cancer, with a particular emphasis on the role of miRNAs. A significant number of studies conducted in this area of research illuminate the effects of anesthetics on the regulation of miRNA expression; therefore, we hope that a thorough understanding of the underlying mechanisms involved in the regulation of miRNA in the context of anesthesia-induced cancer regulation could help to define optimal anesthetic regimens and provide better perspectives for further studies.

Treatment of Dyspnea in Advanced Disease and at the End of Life

Dyspnea is a subjective experience of breathing discomfort that consists of qualitatively distinct sensations, varies in intensity, and can only be known through the patient's report. Dyspnea is akin to suffocation and is one of the most distressing symptoms experienced by patients with advanced illness and at the end of life. Common approaches to dyspnea management, such as pulmonary rehabilitation, breathing strategies, or supplemental oxygen, have become accepted through pragmatic use or because studies do not include dyspnea as a measured outcome. Patients and clinicians urgently need evidence-based treatments to alleviate this frightening symptom. To fill this gap, a group of dyspnea researchers with expertise to conduct a literature review of evidence-based interventions for dyspnea in patients with serious illness produced these guidelines. We present the evidence from the strongest recommendations for practice to the weakest recommendations and include practical considerations for clinical nurses.

Pharmacologic and Non-Pharmacologic Dyspnea Management in Advanced Cancer Patients

As there is a high propensity for patients with advanced malignancy to experience refractory dyspnea, it is necessary for physicians to be well-versed in the management of these patients' dyspneic symptoms. For symptomatic treatment of cancer patients with dyspnea, both pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic methods should be considered. The main source of pharmacologic symptom management for dyspnea is oral and parenteral opioids; benzodiazepines and corticosteroids may serve as helpful adjuncts alongside opioid treatments. However, oxygen administration and nebulized loop diuretics have not been shown to clinically benefit dyspneic cancer patients. Applying non-pharmacologic dyspnea management methods may be valuable palliative therapies for advanced cancer patients, as they provide benefit with negligible harm to the patient. Advantageous and minimally harmful non-pharmacologic dyspnea therapies include facial airflow, acupuncture and/or acupressure, breathing exercises, cognitive behavioral therapy, music therapy, and spiritual interventions. Thus, it is vital that physicians are prepared to provide symptomatic care for dyspnea in advanced cancer patients as to minimize suffering in this patient population during definitive cancer treatments or hospice care.

How Successful Is Parenteral Oxycodone for Relieving Terminal Cancer Dyspnea Compared With Morphine? A Multicenter Prospective Observational Study

CONTEXT

Parenteral morphine is widely used for dyspnea of imminently dying cancer patients (terminal dyspnea). However, the efficacy of other opioids such as oxycodone remains largely unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To explore the efficacy of parenteral oxycodone vs. morphine by continuous infusion over 24 hours in cancer patients with terminal dyspnea.

METHODS

This was a pre-planned subgroup analysis of a multicenter prospective observational study. Inclusion criteria were advanced cancer patients admitted to palliative care units, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status = 3-4, and a dyspnea intensity ≥2 on the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale (IPOS) for which oxycodone or morphine was initiated by continuous infusion. We measured dyspnea IPOS scores over 24 hours.

RESULTS

We analyzed 164 patients who received oxycodone (n = 26) and morphine (n = 138) for dyspnea (median survival = 5 days). The mean age was 70 years, 58 patients (35%) had lung cancer, and 97 (59%) had lung metastases. Complete case analysis revealed that mean dyspnea IPOS scores decreased from 3.0 (standard deviation = 0.7) to 1.5 (0.7) in the oxycodone group (difference in means = 1.5; P < 0.001), and from 2.9 (0.7) to 1.6 (1.0) in the morphine group (difference in means = 1.3; P < 0.001). No significant between-group differences existed in the IPOS scores at 24 hours (P = 0.753). Adverse events were seen in no and 5 patients in the oxycodone and morphine groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Parenteral oxycodone may be equally effective and safe as morphine in the treatment of terminal dyspnea in cancer patients. Future randomized controlled trials should confirm the efficacy and safety of opioids other than morphine for terminal dyspnea.

Physician-Perceived Predictive Factors for the Effectiveness of Drugs for Treating Cancer Dyspnea: Results of a Nationwide Survey of Japanese Palliative Care Physicians

Background: Dyspnea is a common and distressing symptom in patients with advanced cancer. Opioids, benzodiazepines, and corticosteroids are commonly prescribed pharmacological treatments for cancer dyspnea.

Objective: The objective of this survey was to investigate physician-perceived predictive factors for the effectiveness of opioids, benzodiazepines, and corticosteroids in treating cancer dyspnea.

Design: This study involves a nationwide survey using self-report questionnaires.

Setting/Subjects: Random sampling selected 268 Japanese certified palliative care physicians in Japan.

Measurements: We inquired about the 12 physician-perceived predictive factors for the effectiveness of drugs (opioids, benzodiazepines, and corticosteroids) in treating cancer dyspnea.

Results: The frequently selected physician-perceived predictive factors for the effectiveness of opioids were tachypnea, respiratory effort, opioid naive, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status 0–2, multiple lung tumors, dry cough, pleural effusion, and pleural lesion. Benzodiazepines were predicted to be effective against dyspnea in patients with depression and severe anxiety. Meanwhile, corticosteroids were predicted to be effective against dyspnea in patients with lymphangitis carcinomatosa, superior vena cava syndrome, major airway obstruction, and audible wheezing. Japanese palliative care physicians anticipate that different drug classes will be effective for treating dyspnea in patients with specific factors.

Conclusions: Japanese palliative care physicians expect that different drugs will be effective for dyspnea in patients with specific predictive factors. Future prospective studies are required to assess the effectiveness of each drug class against specific dyspnea.

Patients with Terminal Interstitial Pneumonia Require Comparable or More Palliative Pharmacotherapy for Refractory Dyspnea than Patients with Terminal Lung Cancer

Background: Dyspnea is a severe symptom of terminal-stage interstitial pneumonia (IP). We commonly use continuous morphine or midazolam for terminal refractory dyspnea.

Objective: We aimed to determine whether there is a difference in the use of continuous morphine and midazolam for terminal dyspnea between IP patients and lung cancer (LC) patients.

Design: This is a single-center retrospective study.

Setting/Subjects/Measurements: We retrospectively examined the clinical records of IP and LC patients who had died in our hospital. These patients were divided into the IP and LC groups to compare the use of morphine and midazolam.

Results: Continuous morphine was administered to 50.0% of those in the IP group and 38.0% of those in the LC group for terminal dyspnea. There was no difference in the effect at six hours after morphine initiation between the two groups, but the concomitant use of continuous midazolam and morphine was more common in the IP group than in the LC group. The dose of continuous midazolam was significantly higher in the IP group than in the LC group, and the survival time after morphine initiation was significantly shorter in the IP group.

Conclusions: The efficacy of continuous morphine administration for terminal dyspnea in IP patients was similar to that in LC patients for a short time after initiation, but just before death, more patients in the IP group required concomitant use of midazolam and morphine. Thus, IP patients require comparable or more palliative treatment than LC patients.

Management of Dyspnea in Advanced Cancer: ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide guidance on the clinical management of dyspnea in adult patients with advanced cancer.

METHODS

ASCO convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations. An Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) systematic review provided the evidence base for nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic interventions to alleviate dyspnea. The review included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies with a concurrent comparison group published through early May 2020. The ASCO Expert Panel also wished to address dyspnea assessment, management of underlying conditions, and palliative care referrals, and for these questions, an additional systematic review identified RCTs, systematic reviews, and guidelines published through July 2020.

RESULTS

The AHRQ systematic review included 48 RCTs and two retrospective cohort studies. Lung cancer and mesothelioma were the most commonly addressed types of cancer. Nonpharmacologic interventions such as fans provided some relief from breathlessness. Support for pharmacologic interventions was limited. A meta-analysis of specialty breathlessness services reported improvements in distress because of dyspnea.

RECOMMENDATIONS

A hierarchical approach to dyspnea management is recommended, beginning with dyspnea assessment, ascertainment and management of potentially reversible causes, and referral to an interdisciplinary palliative care team. Nonpharmacologic interventions that may be offered to relieve dyspnea include airflow interventions (eg, a fan directed at the cheek), standard supplemental oxygen for patients with hypoxemia, and other psychoeducational, self-management, or complementary approaches. For patients who derive inadequate relief from nonpharmacologic interventions, systemic opioids should be offered. Other pharmacologic interventions, such as corticosteroids and benzodiazepines, are also discussed. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines .

Pharmacologic Interventions for Breathlessness in Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Improved survival in patients with advanced cancer has increased the need for better understanding of how to manage common symptoms that they may experience, such as breathlessness.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the benefits and harms associated with pharmacologic interventions for breathlessness in adults with advanced cancer.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for studies published from database inception through May 31, 2020, using predefined eligibility criteria within a PICOTS (population, intervention, comparator, outcome, timing, setting) format.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs), non-RCTs, and observational studies with a comparison group that evaluated benefits and/or harms and cohort studies that reported harms were selected.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers independently screened studies for eligibility, serially abstracted data, independently assessed risk of bias, and graded strength of evidence (SOE).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Benefits and harms of pharmacologic interventions were compared, focusing on breathlessness, anxiety, exercise capacity, and health-related quality of life. When possible, meta-analyses were conducted and standardized mean differences (SMDs) calculated.

RESULTS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, a total of 7729 unique citations were identified, of which 19 studies (17 RCTs and 2 retrospective studies) that included a total of 1424 patients assessed the benefits of medications for management of breathlessness in advanced cancer or reported harms. The most commonly reported type of cancer was lung cancer. Opioids were not associated with more effectiveness than placebo for improving breathlessness (SMD, -0.14; 95% CI, -0.47 to 0.18) or exercise capacity ( SMD, 0.06; 95% CI, -0.43 to 0.55) (SOE, moderate); most studies examined exertional breathlessness. Specific dose and/or route of administration of opioids did not differ in effectiveness for breathlessness (SMD, 0.15; 95% CI, -0.22 to 0.52) (SOE, low). Anxiolytics were not associated with more effectiveness than placebo for breathlessness or anxiety (reported mean between-group difference, -0.52; 95% CI, -1.045 to 0.005) (SOE, low). Evidence for other pharmacologic interventions was limited. Pharmacologic interventions demonstrated some harms compared with usual care, but dropout attributable to adverse events was minimal in these short-term studies (range 3.2%-16%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Evidence did not support the association of opioids or other pharmacologic interventions with improved breathlessness. Given that studies had many limitations, pharmacologic interventions should be considered in selected patients but need to be considered in the context of potential harms and evidence of an association of nonpharmacologic interventions with improved breathlessness.

Care for Older People with Dementia During COVID-19 Pandemic

Older people living with dementia, who are likely frail with multiple comorbidities, appear particularly vulnerable to COVID-19. Care for older people with comorbid dementia and COVID-19 is a challenge to health care professionals due to their complex needs. COVID-19 is a respiratory disease which typically presents with respiratory symptoms; however, in older people with dementia, it may present atypically with delirium. Delirium may precede respiratory symptoms, and in some cases, it may be the only symptom, leading to a delay in the diagnosis. Therefore, screening for delirium should be part of the routine clinical practice for older people with dementia and suspected COVID-19 infection. Due to the complexity of care required for older people with dementia affected by COVID-19, a holistic and individualised approach that includes acute, transitional and long-term care is required. Advanced decision-making, for example, ceiling of care and resuscitation decisions, should be made early on admission to hospital. Screening for frailty with clinical frailty scale may help to aid decision-making. Palliative care and relief of suffering should be considered from the outset. Early and regular involvement of patients and their families in care plans and periodic updates regarding any changes in the clinical condition are good clinical practice. The introduction of telehealth programmes that are suitable for older people with poor cognitive function and also cover diverse cultural backgrounds are urgently required for the future support of this vulnerable group of patients.

Oncologic Emergencies: Palliative Care in the Emergency Department Setting

BACKGROUND

Palliative care is an essential component of emergency medicine, as many patients with terminal illness will present to the emergency department (ED) for symptomatic management at the end of life (EOL).

OBJECTIVE

This narrative review evaluates palliative care in the ED, with a focus on the literature behind management of EOL symptoms, especially dyspnea and cancer-related pain.

DISCUSSION

As the population ages, increasing numbers of patients present to the ED with severe EOL symptoms. An understanding of the role of palliative care in the ED is crucial to effectively communicating with these patients to determine their goals and provide medical care in line with their wishes. Beneficence, nonmaleficence, and patient autonomy are essential components of palliative care. Patients without medical decision-making capacity may have an advance directive, do not resuscitate or do not intubate order, or Portable Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment available to assist clinicians. Effective and empathetic communication with patients and families is vital to EOL care discussions. Two of the most common and distressing symptoms at the EOL are dyspnea and pain. The most effective treatment of EOL dyspnea is opioids, with literature showing little efficacy for other therapies. The most effective treatment for cancer-related pain is opioids, with expeditious pain control achievable with a rapid fentanyl titration. It is also important to address nausea, vomiting, and secretions, as these are common at the EOL.

CONCLUSIONS

Emergency clinicians play a vital role in EOL patient care. Clear, empathetic communication and treatment of EOL symptoms are essential.

Unanswered questions and future direction in the management of terminal breathlessness in patients with cancer

Breathlessness is among the most common and deteriorating symptoms in patients with advanced cancer, which may worsen towards the end of life. Breathlessness in patients with estimated life expectancy of weeks to days has unique clinical features: it tends to worsen rapidly over days to hours as death approaches often despite current symptom control measures. Breathlessness in patients during the last weeks to days of life can be called ‘terminal breathlessness’. While evidence has accumulated for the management of breathlessness in patients with cancer who are not dying, such evidence may not be fully applied to terminal breathlessness. Only a few studies have investigated the best practice of terminal breathlessness in patients with cancer. In this paper, we summarise the current evidence for the management of terminal breathlessness, and propose future directions of clinical research.

Developing and Assessing the Effectiveness of a Nurse-Led Home-Based Educational Programme for Managing Breathlessness in Lung Cancer Patients. A Feasibility Study

Introduction: Breathlessness is the most common and refractory symptom in lung cancer patients. Even though various educational programmes have been developed, only a few were intended for implementation in the home setting for its management.

Aim: Feasibility of a study for implementing a nurse-led educational programme for breathlessness management of lung cancer patients at home.

Method: A randomized feasibility study was undertaken between February 2017 and October 2018. Patients were recruited through referral from oncologists from two oncology centers in Cyprus under certain inclusion and exclusion criteria. Patients were randomized in the intervention or control group via a computer programme, and their named family caregivers (f.c.) were allocated in the same group. Participants were not blinded to group assignment. The intervention consisted of a PowerPoint presentation and implementation of three non-pharmacological interventions. The control group received usual care. Patients were assessed for breathlessness, anxiety, and depression levels, whereas f.c. were assessed for anxiety, depression, and burden levels. F.c. also assessed patients' dyspnea level. The duration of the study process for both the intervention and control group was over a period of 4 weeks.

Results: Twenty-four patients and their f.c. (n = 24) were allocated equally in the intervention and control group. Five patients withdrew, and the final sample entered analysis was 19 patients and 19 family caregivers. In the intervention group n = 11 + 11, and in the control group n = 8 + 8. In the intervention group patients' breathlessness and anxiety levels showed improvement and their f.c.s in the anxiety and burden levels. Major consideration was the sample size and the recruitment of the patients by the referring oncologists. Attrition was minor during the study process. No harm was recorded by the participants of the study.

Conclusions: The study provided evidence of the feasibility of the implementation of the educational programme. For the future definitive study major consideration should be patients' recruitment method in order to achieve adequate sample size. Moreover, qualitative data should be collected in relation to the intervention and the involvement of f.c. The feasibility study was registered to the Cyprus Bioethics Committee with the registration number 2016/16. There was no funding of the study.

Use of short-acting opioids in the management of breathlessness: an evidence-based review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an evidence-based review on the use of short-acting opioids for management of breathlessness in patients with advanced diseases.

RECENT FINDINGS

We identified 28 randomized controlled trials that examined the effect of short-acting opioids on breathlessness under three study settings: as a prophylactic dose given prior to exertion; as a rescue dose for treatment of breathlessness at rest or episodic breathlessness; or as a scheduled medication for overall reduction of breathlessness. These trials varied widely in regard to patient population (opioid naive or tolerant), opioid (formulation, dose, timing of administration, and scheduling) and control intervention. Taken together, there is good evidence to support that short-acting opioids can reduce breathlessness and improve activity level when given before exertion. There is some evidence that parenteral opioids are efficacious for the as needed treatment of episodic breathlessness or breathlessness at rest. However, there is only limited evidence to support scheduled short-acting opioids for overall relief of breathlessness.

SUMMARY

There is evidence to support that short-acting opioids have a pharmacologic effect on breathlessness. More research is needed to clarify how opioids can be prescribed to optimize breathlessness relief, function, and quality of life.

The Bereaved Families' Preferences for Individualized Goals of Care for Terminal Dyspnea: What Is an Acceptable Balance between Dyspnea Intensity and Communication Capacity?

Background: Toward the individualized care of terminally ill patients with dyspnea (“terminal dyspnea”), it is essential to identify individualized goals of care (GOC) to achieve an acceptable balance between dyspnea intensity and communication capacity.

Objective: To explore preferences for individualized GOC for terminal dyspnea, and factors associated with the preferences.

Design: A nationwide cross-sectional survey.

Setting/Subjects: In total, 1055 bereaved families of cancer patients admitted to 167 inpatient hospices in Japan.

Measurements: Preferences for individualized GOC for terminal dyspnea to achieve an acceptable balance between dyspnea intensity and communication capacity, should individuals experience continuous moderate or severe/overwhelming dyspnea despite optimal palliative care, and perceptions about a good death.

Results: Among 548 participants (response rate = 52%), we analyzed responses of 477 families whose loved one suffered dyspnea in the last week of life. In total, 167 (45%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 40%–50%) and 272 (80%; 95% CI = 75%–84%) participants would prioritize dyspnea relief over communication capacity, should they continuously suffer moderate or severe/overwhelming dyspnea, respectively. In multivariate analyses, the determinants of the prioritization of dyspnea relief were perceiving physical comfort as important for a good death (odds ratio [OR] = 1.389; 95% CI = 1.062–1.818; p = 0.017) in moderate dyspnea, and perceiving physical comfort (OR = 2.505; 95% CI = 1.718–3.651; p < 0.001) and not perceiving mental awareness (OR = 0.695; 95% CI = 0.529–0.913; p = 0.009) as important in severe/overwhelming dyspnea.

Conclusions: Preferences for individualized GOC for terminal dyspnea can vary among individuals and with different symptom intensity, and may be influenced by perceptions about a good death. Outcome measurements incorporating an acceptable balance between dyspnea intensity and communication capacity should be developed.

Midazolam: an essential palliative care drug

Midazolam is a commonly used benzodiazepine in palliative care and is considered one of the four essential drugs needed for the promotion of quality care in dying patients. Acting on the benzodiazepine receptor, it promotes the action of gamma-aminobutyric acid. Gamma-aminobutyric acid action promotes sedative, anxiolytic, and anticonvulsant properties. Midazolam has a faster onset and shorter duration of action than other benzodiazepines such as diazepam and lorazepam lending itself to greater flexibility in dosing than other benzodiazepines. The kidneys excrete midazolam and its active metabolite. Metabolism occurs in the liver by the P450 system. This article examines the pharmacology, pharmacodynamics, and clinical uses of midazolam in palliative care.

Symptom Management and Supportive Care of Serious COVID-19 Patients and their Families in India

Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic is causing a worldwide humanitarian crisis. Old age, comorbid conditions, end-stage organ impairment, and advanced cancer, increase the risk of mortality in serious COVID-19. A subset of serious COVID-19 patients with serious acute respiratory illness may be triaged not to receive aggressive intensive care unit (ICU) treatment and ventilation or may be discontinued from ventilation due to their underlying conditions. Those not eligible for aggressive ICU measures should receive appropriate symptom management. Early warning scores (EWS), oxygen saturation, and respiratory rate, can facilitate categorizing COVID-19 patients as stable, unstable, and end of life. Breathlessness, delirium, respiratory secretions, and pain, are the key symptoms that need to be assessed and palliated. Palliative sedation measures are needed to manage intractable symptoms. Goals of care should be discussed, and advance care plan should be made in patients who are unlikely to benefit from aggressive ICU measures and ventilation. For patients who are already in an ICU, either ventilated or needing ventilation, a futility assessment is made. If there is a consensus on futility, a family meeting is conducted either virtually or face to face depending on the infection risk and infection control protocol. The family should be sensitively communicated about the futility of ICU measures and foregoing life-sustaining treatment. Family meeting outcomes are documented, and consent for foregoing life-sustaining treatment is obtained. Appropriate symptom management enables comfort at the end of life to all serious COVID-19 patients not receiving or not eligible to receive ICU measures and ventilation.

How to cite this article: Salins N, Mani RK, Gursahani R, Simha S, Bhatnagar S. Symptom Management and Supportive Care of Serious COVID-19 Patients and their Families in India. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(6):435–444.

The Association Between Benzodiazepines and Survival in Patients With Cancer: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Patients with cancer often experience distressing symptoms such as anxiety or dyspnea, which can be managed with benzodiazepines; however, concerns regarding the impact of these drugs on survival may dissuade prescribing and compliance.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to identify and appraise studies examining benzodiazepine use and survival in adults with cancer, to investigate the relationship and context of use.

METHODS

Systematic review of the international literature prepared according to preferred reporting items for systematic reviews. Comprehensive searches of the MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, and AMED databases using medical subject heading and free-text search combinations with no date or language restrictions were undertook. Handsearching of references was conducted. Risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria.

RESULTS

Two thousand two hundred fifty-seven unique records were identified, with 18 meeting inclusion criteria, representing 4117 patients. All studies were very low quality. No study found an increase in mortality in association with benzodiazepine use, whereas two demonstrated an increase.

CONCLUSION

Existing evidence shows no association between benzodiazepine use in patients with cancer and decreased survival. None of the studies evaluated the association between benzodiazepine use and survival in earlier stages of cancer, and the quality of studies retrieved signifies a need for further robust studies to draw more definitive conclusions. Further investigation in patients with cancer using well-designed, high-quality research with survival as a primary outcome should be conducted.

Midazolam: Safety of use in palliative care: A systematic critical review

PURPOSE

The undesired effects of midazolam can be life-threatening. This paper delineates the findings related to the pharmacokinetics, adverse effects and drug-drug interactions as well as associated therapeutic implications for safe midazolam use.

METHODS

A systematic review of literature was conducted.

RESULTS

The pharmacokinetics of midazolam depends on hepatic and renal functions, fat tissue mass, route and duration of administration, as well as potential drug-drug interactions. Palliative care patients constitute a high-risk group prone to side effects of drugs, due to polytherapy and multi-organ failure.

CONCLUSION

Midazolam is one of three most frequently administered drugs in palliative care. The indications for its use include anxiety, dyspnea, seizures, vomiting refractory to treatment, agitation, myoclonus, status epilepticus, restlessness, delirium, pruritus, hiccups, insomnia, analgosedation, palliative sedation and preventing or counteracting undesired effects of ketamine.

Reflections on palliative sedation

'Palliation sedation' is a widely used term to describe the intentional administration of sedatives to reduce a dying person's consciousness to relieve intolerable suffering from refractory symptoms. Research studies generally focus on either 'continuous sedation until death' or 'continuous deep sedation'. It is not always clear whether instances of secondary sedation (i.e. caused by specific symptom management) have been excluded. Continuous deep sedation is controversial because it ends a person's 'biographical life' (the ability to interact meaningfully with other people) and shortens 'biological life'. Ethically, continuous deep sedation is an exceptional last resort measure. Studies suggest that continuous deep sedation has become 'normalized' in some countries and some palliative care services. Of concern is the dissonance between guidelines and practice. At the extreme, there are reports of continuous deep sedation which are best described as non-voluntary (unrequested) euthanasia. Other major concerns relate to its use for solely non-physical (existential) reasons, the under-diagnosis of delirium and its mistreatment, and not appreciating that unresponsiveness is not the same as unconsciousness (unawareness). Ideally, a multiprofessional palliative care team should be involved before proceeding to continuous deep sedation. Good palliative care greatly reduces the need for continuous deep sedation.

Effects of Oral Morphine on Dyspnea in Patients with Cancer: Response Rate, Predictive Factors, and Clinically Meaningful Change (CJLSG1101)

BACKGROUND

Although the efficacy of parenteral morphine for alleviating dyspnea has been previously demonstrated in several studies, little is known regarding the efficacy of oral morphine for dyspnea among patients with cancer, including its response rate and predictive factors of effectiveness. Therefore, the aim of this study was to clarify the effectiveness of oral morphine on dyspnea in patients with cancer and elucidate the predictive factors of its effectiveness.

SUBJECTS, MATERIALS, AND METHODS

In this multicenter prospective observational study, we investigated the change in dyspnea intensity in patients with cancer before and after the administration of oral morphine by using a visual analog scale (VAS). We also administered a self-assessment questionnaire to determine whether the patients believed oral morphine was effective.

RESULTS

Eighty patients were enrolled in the study, and 71 of these patients were eligible. The least square mean of the VAS scores for dyspnea intensity was 53.5 at baseline, which decreased significantly to 44.7, 40.8, and 35.0 at 30, 60, and 120 minutes after morphine administration, respectively. Fifty-four patients (76.1%) reported that oral morphine was effective on the self-assessment questionnaire. Among the background factors, a high score for "sense of discomfort" on the Cancer Dyspnea Scale (CDS) and a smoking history of fewer pack-years were associated with greater effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

Oral morphine was effective and feasible for treating cancer-related dyspnea. A higher score for "sense of discomfort" on the CDS and a smaller cumulative amount of smoking may be predictive factors of the effectiveness of oral morphine.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This study demonstrated that oral morphine was effective in alleviating cancer-related dyspnea due to multiple factors including primary lung lesions, airway narrowing, and pleural effusion. Approximately 76% of patients reported that oral morphine was effective. A higher score for "sense of discomfort" on the Cancer Dyspnea Scale and a lower cumulative amount of smoking may be predictive factors for the effectiveness of oral morphine. Interestingly, respiratory rates in patients who reported the morphine to be effective decreased significantly after oral morphine administration, unlike the respiratory rates in "morphine-ineffective" patients.

Clinical Use of an Order Protocol for Distress in Pediatric Palliative Care

Several children receiving palliative care experience dyspnea and pain. An order protocol for distress (OPD) is available at Sainte-Justine Hospital, aimed at alleviating respiratory distress, pain and anxiety in pediatric palliative care patients. This study evaluates the clinical use of the OPD at Sainte-Justine Hospital, through a retrospective chart review of all patients for whom the OPD was prescribed between September 2009 and September 2012. Effectiveness of the OPD was assessed using chart documentation of the patient’s symptoms, or the modified Borg scale. Safety of the OPD was evaluated by measuring the time between administration of the first medication and the patient’s death, and clinical evolution of the patient as recorded in the chart. One hundred and four (104) patients were included in the study. The OPD was administered at least once to 78 (75%) patients. A total of 350 episodes of administration occurred, mainly for respiratory distress (89%). Relief was provided in 90% of cases. The interval between administration of the first protocol and death was 17 h; the interval was longer in children with cancer compared to other illnesses (p = 0.02). Data from this study support the effectiveness and safety of using an OPD for children receiving palliative care.

Palliative Care in Lung Cancer: When to Start

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite recent advances in the care of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), significant morbidity and mortality remains. Symptoms caused by the cancer and its treatments can be profoundly debilitating. Palliative care aims to reduce this burden. In this review, we discuss the definition, purpose, benefits, and optimal timing of palliative care in advanced NSCLC.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several studies evaluating the value of early palliative care for patients with advanced NSCLC and other advanced malignancies have identified benefits for patients, caregivers, and health systems. For patients with advanced NSCLC, introduction of palliative care early in the disease course improves quality of life and even overall survival. Early institution of palliative care should become standard of care for patients with advanced NSCLC.

Fentanyl treatment for end-of-life dyspnoea relief in advanced cancer patients

PURPOSE

We assessed the effects of subcutaneous-endovenous fentanyl on dyspnoea in a cohort of advanced cancer patients.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study in a cohort of advanced cancer patients with dyspnoea at rest who received subcutaneous or intravenous fentanyl. Patients with no shortness of breath at rest or at minimal exertion, no rescue doses per 24 h, were deemed to be responders to fentanyl. The period of assessment was 6 days from the beginning of fentanyl treatment.

RESULTS

Seventy-two patients were evaluated: 65% males, 50% ≥ 75 years, Palliative Performance Scale (PPS) median of 30%. Seventy-six percent of the patients were responders to fentanyl. Fentanyl efficacy was not statistically related to age, gender, cancer type, previous opioid treatment, steroid and midazolam doses and PPS. The median fentanyl dose in responders was 25 mcg/h (interquartile range 12-70). It was significantly related to age (37 vs 12 mcg/h, for ≤ 75 vs > 75 years, respectively; p = 0.02). There was not a significant difference between fentanyl doses of responders and non-responder patients. Thirty-six, 23 and 15 patients had sustained improvements in dyspnoea over 48, 72 and 96 h. Fentanyl had no significant toxicity. The length of inclusion in the study and exclusion were related to low performance status (hazard ratio 0.961; _95%CI 0.927-0.996; Cox-regression) but not to fentanyl doses (hazard ratio 0.875; _95%CI 0.620-1.234; Cox-regression).

CONCLUSION

Our preliminary data suggest that subcutaneous-endovenous fentanyl may be associated with dyspnoea relief in dying patients. Further research is needed to confirm these findings.

Palliative Care in Heart Failure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review illustrates the dynamic role of palliative care in heart failure management and encapsulates the commonly utilized pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic therapeutic strategies for symptom palliation in heart failure. In addition, we provide our experience regarding patient care issues common to the domain of heart failure and palliative medicine which are commonly encountered by heart failure teams.

RECENT FINDINGS

Addition of palliative care to conventional heart failure management plan results in improvement in quality of life, anxiety, depression, and spiritual well-being among patients. Palliative care should not be confused with hospice care. Palliative care teams should be involved early in the care of heart failure patients with the aims of improving symptom palliation, discussing goals of care and improving quality of life without compromising utilization of evidence-based heart failure therapies. A consensus on the appropriate timing of involvement and evidence for many symptom palliation therapies is still emerging.

Safety and Effectiveness of Palliative Drug Treatment in the Last Days of Life-A Systematic Literature Review

CONTEXT

Dying patients commonly experience potentially distressing symptoms. Palliative care guidelines recommend opioids, anticholinergics, antipsychotics, and benzodiazepines for symptom relief.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to systematically review the effectiveness and safety of palliative drug treatment in the last days of life of adult patients, focusing on the management of pain, dyspnea, anxiety, restlessness, and death rattle.

METHODS

A systematic search of the literature was published before December 2016 in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane, ClinicalTrials.gov, and SveMed+. Studies on safety or effectiveness of drug therapy in dying adults with at least one outcome on symptom control, adverse effects, or survival were included. Data for included studies were extracted. Study quality was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Quality assessment tool for quantitative studies.

RESULTS

Of the 5940 unique titles identified, 12 studies met the inclusion criteria. Five studies assessed anticholinergics for death rattle, providing no evidence that scopolamine hydrobromide and atropine were superior to placebo. Five studies examined drugs for dyspnea, anxiety, or terminal restlessness, providing some evidence supporting the use of morphine and midazolam. Two studies examined opioids for pain, providing some support for morphine, diamorphine, and fentanyl. Eight studies included safety outcomes, revealing no important differences in adverse effects between the interventions and no evidence for midazolam shortening survival.

CONCLUSION

There is a lack of evidence concerning the effectiveness and safety of palliative drug treatment in dying patients, and the reviewed evidence provides limited guidance for clinicians to assist in a distinct and significant phase of life.

Dyspnea

Dyspnea is a subjective experience of breathing discomfort that can only be known through a patient's report. Numeric rating or visual analog scales allow assessment of intensity when the patient can self-report. The Respiratory Distress Observation Scale is a valid, reliable tool for estimating distress when self-report cannot be elicited. Treating dyspnea begins with managing the underlying condition. Other dyspnea-specific evidence-based interventions include morphine and fentanyl, upright positioning, oxygen, invasive and noninvasive ventilation, and balancing rest with activity. Effectiveness has not been established for benzodiazepines, nebulized furosemide, oxygen in the face of normoxemia, other opioids, and nebulized fentanyl.

Symptomatic treatment of dyspnea in advanced cancer patients : A narrative review of the current literature

BACKGROUND

Dyspnea is a common, very distressing symptom in advanced cancer patients that challenges them, their relatives, and healthcare professionals. This narrative review summarizes important literature dealing with the evidence for opioids, benzodiazepines, oxygen, and steroids for treating dyspnea in advanced cancer patients.

METHODS

A selective literature search was undertaken in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library and extended with literature from the reference lists of included studies up to April 2016. Inclusion criteria were that patients were suffering from advanced cancer and were receiving either opioids, benzodiazepines, corticosteroids, or oxygen. The outcome of interest was the reduction of dyspnea measured via a visual analogue scale (VAS), a numerical rating scale (NRS), or a Borg scale. This narrative review describes in detail the findings of 13 studies.

RESULTS

Nine studies deal with the effectiveness of opioids for reducing dyspnea in advanced cancer patients. Five of these found a significant benefit to the use of opioids compared to a placebo. Three found no significant improvements, and two favored combinations of opioids and benzodiazepines. Few high-quality studies were available that used benzodiazepines (n = 3, no difference, significant improvement with midazolam + morphine, significant difference for midazolam) or oxygen (n = 2, both without significant difference). Only one study examined treating dyspnea with steroids in patients with advanced cancer, and that study indicated a benefit of steroids compared to a placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Opioids are the drug of choice for treating refractory dyspnea in advanced cancer patients. Neither benzodiazepines nor oxygen showed significant benefit. In addition, there is insufficient literature available to draw a conclusion about the effectiveness of steroids for treating persistent dyspnea in advanced cancer patients.