Breakthrough cancer pain in 2020

Peripheral Mechanism of Cancer-Induced Bone Pain

Cancer-induced bone pain (CIBP) is a type of ongoing or breakthrough pain caused by a primary bone tumor or bone metastasis. CIBP constitutes a specific pain state with distinct characteristics; however, it shares similarities with inflammatory and neuropathic pain. At present, although various therapies have been developed for this condition, complete relief from CIBP in patients with cancer is yet to be achieved. Hence, it is urgent to study the mechanism underlying CIBP to develop efficient analgesic drugs. Herein, we focused on the peripheral mechanism associated with the initiation of CIBP, which involves tissue injury in the bone and changes in the tumor microenvironment (TME) and dorsal root ganglion. The nerve-cancer and cancer-immunocyte cross-talk in the TME creates circumstances that promote tumor growth and metastasis, ultimately leading to CIBP. The peripheral mechanism of CIBP and current treatments as well as potential therapeutic targets are discussed in this review.

Application of a WeChat Mini Program to provide pharmaceutical care for cancer pain patients: A randomized controlled trial

Objective

This study aimed to develop an individual WeChat Mini Program to provide pharmaceutical care to better manage cancer pain patients and to evaluate its feasibility and the differences in analgesic efficacy, medication adherence and safety versus conventional pharmacy interventions.

Methods

In this parallel randomized clinical trial, 42 cancer pain patients were equally allocated into the experimental group and the control group. The experimental group received individualized pharmaceutical care based on the "Yao Nin You Wo" WeChat Mini Program, while the control group received conventional care during the 4-week period. Main outcomes contained pain scores, medication adherence, incidences and relief rates of breakthrough pain, and incidences of adverse events. Relief rates of pain were also calculated according to pain scores.

Results

At the beginning of intervention, none of the pain scores and medication adherence showed relevant differences between the two groups (all P > .05). After intervention, the experimental group had significantly lower pain scores compared to the control group (P = .003). Breakthrough pain of both groups was alleviate; not only the incidence of breakthrough pain considerably was lower at 4 weeks than at baseline, but the relief rate of breakthrough in the experimental group was higher than that in the control group. Compared with the control group, the medication adherence rate of the experimental group was significantly improved (P = .02). Types of adverse events that happened in experimental and groups were similar, but the total incidence of adverse events in the experimental group was lower than that in the control group.

Conclusions

WeChat Mini Program is a useful and facilitative tool with the potential to improve cancer pain self-management ability in discharged patients. In addition, pharmacists could play a key role through the Mini Program to connect with patients successfully by providing personalized pharmaceutical services.

Breakthrough and Episodic Cancer Pain from a Palliative Care Perspective

Cancer pain intensity (PI) fluctuates, but the relationship between pain flares and background pain with respect to pain management is not settled. We studied how flare and background PIs corresponded with treatment results for background cancer pain. Patients admitted to an acute palliative care unit with average and/or worst PI ≥ 1 on the 11-point numeric rating scale were included. Average and worst PI at admission and average PI at discharge were collected. We examined how the difference and ratio between worst and average PI and average PI at admission, were associated with average PI development during hospitalization. Positive differences between worst and average PI at admission were defined as pain flares. Ninety out of 131 patients had pain flares. The reduction in average PI for patients with flares was 0.9 and for those without, 1.9 (p = 0.02). Patients with large worst minus average PI differences reported the least improvement, as did those with large worst/average PI ratios. Patients with pain flares and average PI ≤ 4 at admission had unchanged average PI during hospitalization, while those with pain flares and average PI > 4 experienced pain reduction (2.1, p < 0.001). Large pain flares, in absolute values and compared to background PI, were associated with inferior pain relief.

Once again... breakthrough cancer pain: an updated overview

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

Management of pain in patients with bone metastases

Cancer-induced bone pain (CIBP) has a considerable impact on patients’ quality of life as well as physical and mental health. At present, patients with CIBP are managed according to the three-step analgesic therapy algorithm proposed by the World Health Organization. Opioids are commonly used as the first-line treatment for moderate-to-severe cancer pain but are limited due to addiction, nausea, vomiting and other gastrointestinal side effects. Moreover, opioids have a limited analgesic effect in some patients. In order to optimize the management of CIBP, we must first identify the underlying mechanisms. In some patients, surgery, or surgery combined with radiotherapy or radiofrequency ablation is the first step in the management of CIBP. Various clinical studies have shown that anti-nerve growth factor (NGF) antibodies, bisphosphonates, or RANKL inhibitors can reduce the incidence and improve the management of cancer pain. Herein, we review the mechanisms of cancer pain and potential therapeutic strategies to provide insights for optimizing the management of CIBP.

Multidisciplinary approach, continuous care and opioid management in cancer pain: case series and review of the literature

Underlying cancer pain has heterogenous aetiologies and mechanisms. It requires detailed and comprehensive pain assessment, combined with personalized treatment. A multidisciplinary team is essential to providing the best management of cancer pain at every disease stage, improving the quality of life and outcomes in patients with cancer. This narrative literature review emphasizes the value of providing all patients with multidisciplinary pain management in their preferred care setting. Real-life experiences are also reported to witness the efforts of physicians to properly manage cancer pain. This article is part of the Management of breakthrough cancer pain Special Issue: https://www.drugsincontext.com/special_issues/management-of-breakthrough-cancer-pain.

Multidimensional Statistical Technique for Interpreting the Spontaneous Breakthrough Cancer Pain Phenomenon. A Secondary Analysis from the IOPS-MS Study

Breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) is a temporary exacerbation of pain that "breaks through" a phase of adequate pain control by an opioid-based therapy. The non-predictable BTcP (NP-BTcP) is a subtype of BTcP that occurs in the absence of any specific activity. Since NP-BTcP has an important clinical impact, this analysis is aimed at characterizing the NP-BTcP phenomenon through a multidimensional statistical technique. This is a secondary analysis based on the Italian Oncologic Pain multiSetting-Multicentric Survey (IOPS-MS). A correlation analysis was performed to characterize the NP-BTcP profile about its intensity, number of episodes per day, and type. The multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) determined the identification of four groups (phenotypes). A univariate analysis was performed to assess differences between the four phenotypes and selected covariates. The four phenotypes represent the hierarchical classification according to the status of NP-BTcP: from the best (phenotype 1) to the worst (phenotype 4). The univariate analysis found a significant association between the onset time >10 min in the phenotype 1 (37.3%)' vs. the onset > 10 min in phenotype 4 (25.8%) (p < 0.001). Phenotype 1 was characterized by the gastrointestinal type of cancer (26.4%) with respect to phenotype 4, where the most frequent cancer affected the lung (28.8%) (p < 0.001). Phenotype 4 was mainly managed with rapid-onset opioids, while in phenotype 1, many patients were treated with oral, subcutaneous, or intravenous morphine (56.4% and 44.4%, respectively; p = 0.008). The ability to characterize NP-BTcP can offer enormous benefits for the management of this serious aspect of cancer pain. Although requiring validation, this strategy can provide many indications for identifying the diagnostic and therapeutic gaps in NP-BTcP management.

Characterizing Breakthrough Cancer Pain Using Ecological Momentary Assessment with a Smartphone App: Feasibility and Clinical Findings

BACKGROUND

mobile applications (apps) facilitate cancer pain ecological momentary assessment (EMA) and provide more reliable data than retrospective monitoring. The aims of this study are (a) to describe the status of persons with cancer pain when assessed ecologically, (b) to analyze the utility of clinical alarms integrated into the app, and (c) to test the feasibility of implementing an app for daily oncological pain monitoring.

METHODS

in this feasibility study, 21 patients (mean age = 56.95 years, SD = 10.53, 81.0% men) responded to an app-based evaluation of physical status (baseline and breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP)) and mental health variables (fatigue, mood, and coping) daily during 30 days.

RESULTS

cancer pain characterization with the app was similar to data from the literature using retrospective assessments in terms of BTcP duration and perceived medication effectiveness. However, BTcP was less frequent when evaluated ecologically. Pain, fatigue, and mood were comparable in the morning and evening. Passive coping strategies were the most employed daily. Clinical alarms appear to be useful to detect and address adverse events. App implementation was feasible and acceptable.

CONCLUSION

apps reduce recall bias and facilitate a rapid response to adverse events in oncological care. Future efforts should be addressed to integrate EMA and ecological momentary interventions to facilitate pain self-management via apps.

Prophylactic corticosteroid to prevent pain flare in bone metastases treated by radiotherapy

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of prophylactic corticosteroids to prevent pain flare (PF) in bone metastases treated with radiotherapy performing a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCT).

Materials and methods

RCTs were identified on Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the proceedings of annual meetings through June 2020. We followed the PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. A meta-analysis was performed to assess if corticosteroids reduce the PF, pain progression, and the mean of days with PF compared with the placebo. A p-value < 0.05 was considered significant.

Results

Three RCTs with a total of 713 patients treated were included. The corticosteroids reduced the occurrence of early PF 20.5% (51/248) versus 32% (80/250) placebo, OR = 0.55 (95% CI: 0.36-0.82, p = 0.002). The mean days of PF were reduced to 1.6 days (95% CI: 1.3-1.9, p = 0.0001). Prophylactic corticosteroids had more patients with no PF and no pain progression, OR = 1.63 (95% CI: 1.14-2.32, p = 0.007). No significant corticosteroids effect was observed for pain progression (p = ns) and late PF occurrence (p = ns).

Conclusion

Prophylactic corticosteroids reduced the incidence of early PF, the days with PF, resulting in a superior rate of patients with no PF and no pain progression, but with no significant benefit for reducing pain progression or late PF occurrence.