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

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.

Effectiveness of opioid switching for dyspnea and its predictors in cancer patients: a single-center retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Morphine is the most used opioid for dyspnea, but other opioids such as oxycodone and fentanyl are increasingly used, and opioid switching to these is sometimes undertaken. No studies have verified the effectiveness of opioid switching for relief of dyspnea. We retrospectively investigated the effectiveness of opioid switching for dyspnea and its predictors.

METHODS

All patients with opioid switching for dyspnea during hospitalization at Komaki City Hospital from January 2019 to August 2022 were included. Opioid switching was defined as a change to another opioid, and the assessment period for evaluating the effectiveness and adverse events of opioid switching was set as 1 week. Patients with Numeric Rating Scale or Japanese version of the Support Team Assessment Schedule reduction for dyspnea of at least 1, or with clear improvement based on medical records, were considered valid. Mitigating factors for dyspnea were identified using logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 976 patients with opioid switching, 57 patients had opioid switching for relief of dyspnea. Of these, opioid switching was effective in 21 patients (36.8%). In a multivariate analysis, older patients (odds ratio: 5.52, 95% CI: 1.50-20.20, P < 0.01), short prognosis for post-opioid switching (odds ratio: 0.20, 95% CI: 0.04-0.87, P = 0.03) and cachexia (odds ratio: 0.12, 95% CI: 0.02-0.64, P < 0.01) were significantly associated with opioid switching effects for dyspnea. There were no serious adverse events after opioid switching.

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that opioid switching for dyspnea may have some effect. Furthermore, opioid switching for dyspnea may be more effective in older patients and less effective in terminally ill patients or in those with cachexia.

Current Management Options for Dyspnea in Cancer Patients

OPINION STATEMENT

Dyspnea is one of the most frequent and distressing symptoms in patients with advanced cancer. As dyspnea deteriorates patients' quality of life markedly and tends to worsen as the disease progresses, comprehensive assessment and timely treatment of the underlying etiologies are essential. International guidelines recommend various non-pharmacological and pharmacological management options. However, there is a scarcity of confirmatory clinical trials on cancer dyspnea, and the overall level of evidence is weak. Recently, observational and survey studies indicated a wide range of practice patterns of palliative care specialists, providing important insight into the real-world management of dyspnea. In this paper, we summarize current management options for dyspnea in cancer patients, highlight major controversies in the literature, and propose future research directions toward quality care for patients with dyspnea and their families.

Systemic Opioids for Dyspnea in Cancer Patients: A Real-world Observational Study

CONTEXT

Although Systemic opioids are recommended as a pharmacological treatment for cancer-related dyspnea, their effectiveness and safety needs to be investigated in a real-world context OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of systemic regular opioids for dyspnea in cancer patients, in the real-world palliative care practice.

METHODS

This was a multicenter prospective observational study. We consecutively enrolled adult cancer patients starting regular opioids (morphine, oxycodone, hydromorphone, or fentanyl) for dyspnea from 12 palliative care services across Japan. We evaluated dyspnea intensity using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) and Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale (IPOS) every 24 hours until 72 hours after starting opioids (T1-T3). We also evaluated common opioid-related adverse events (AEs) and other severe AEs.

RESULTS

We enrolled 402 cancer patients. The proportion of responders was 68.8% (95%confidence intervals (CI): 0.63-0.74) at T1, 75.7% (95%CI: 0.70-0.81) at T2, and 82.1% (95%CI: 0.76-0.87) at T3. The mean differences in dyspnea NRS from baseline were 1.73 (95%CI: 1.46-1.99) at T1, 1.99 (95%CI: 1.71-2.28) at T2, and 2.47 (95%CI:2.13-2.82) at T3. The most common treatment-emergent AE was somnolence with an incidence of the severe form of approximately 10% throughout the study period. In the multivariate analysis, baseline dyspnea NRS ≥6 had a positive correlation with dyspnea relief by systemic regular opioids, while liver metastasis, clinician-predicted survival days, and opioid tolerance had a negative correlation.

CONCLUSION

Regular systemic opioids were effective for dyspnea in real-world cancer patients.

Effectiveness and safety of opioids for dyspnea in patients with lung cancer: secondary analysis of multicenter prospective observational study

Background

Patients with lung cancer are more likely to have comorbidities [e.g., interstitial lung disease (ILD)], chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) and metastases that may affect dyspnea and the effectiveness and safety of opioids for dyspnea than other cancer types. Therefore, this study examined the effectiveness and safety of opioids for dyspnea, among the patients with lung cancer.

Methods

The present study is a secondary analysis of a multicenter prospective observational study examining the effectiveness and safety of opioids for dyspnea in patients with cancer in Japan. For this secondary analysis, patients with lung cancer with a documented dyspnea Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) at baseline were included. The primary outcome was dyspnea NRS, and Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale/Support Team Assessment Schedule (IPOS/STAS) scores change between baseline and 24 hours after baseline. As secondary outcomes, we investigated the predictors of opioid effectiveness for dyspnea improvement and adverse events (nausea, somnolence, and delirium).

Results

This study analyzed 124 patients with lung cancer with known dyspnea NRS at baseline. The median age was 74, and the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 107 patients were 3-4. Both NRS and IPOS/STAS score of dyspnea significantly improved 24 hours after opioid initiation [-1.64, 95% confidence interval (CI): -2.12 to -1.17, P<0.001; -1.03; 95% CI: -1.21 to -0.85, P<0.001; respectively]. Moreover, the improvement of NRS score was greater than the minimal clinically important difference of 1 point. In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, ILD was significantly associated with a better improvement [(hazard ratio (HR): 3.39, 95% CI: 1.34-11.09, P=0.043]. Somnolence was the most common grade 3-4 adverse event (n=16), followed by delirium (n=9).

Conclusions

Opioids were effective and safe for treating dyspnea in patients with lung cancer. Furthermore, lung cancer patients with ILD may benefit more from opioids.