Systematic review of the role of alternative application routes for opioid treatment for moderate to severe cancer pain: an EPCRC opioid guidelines project

Optimizing the Dosing Regimen During Rotation From Subcutaneous to Transdermal Administration of Fentanyl

CONTEXT

Subcutaneous (SC) administration of fentanyl allows for rapid dose titration to treat urgent cancer-related pain. After establishing the optimal fentanyl dose, patients typically rotate towards transdermal (TD) fentanyl patches. Continuing the SC fentanyl up to 12h after application of the patch led to elevated fentanyl concentrations and fentanyl-related toxicities. Based on these findings, and simulations using a pharmacokinetic (PK) model, SC fentanyl administration was discontinued immediately following the application of the patch.

OBJECTIVES

To validate the fentanyl rotation schedule by assessing the PK equivalence in fentanyl exposure before and after rotation.

METHODS

PK samples and clinical data were prospectively collected from 12 hours prior to rotation until 12 hours after rotation in patients with cancer-related pain undergoing fentanyl rotation.

RESULTS

Between December 2021 and September 2023, 29 evaluable patients were enrolled in the study. The 90% confidence interval (CI) of the geometric mean ratio between the post- over pre-rotation area under the curve (AUC) fell within the prespecified 0.8-1.25 equivalence interval (90% CI 1.05-1.16). Patient-reported intensity of both nausea (P = 0.047) and transpiration (P = 0.034) decreased post-rotation. Pain intensity and other adverse events did not differ significantly pre and post-rotation. One patient needed adjustment of opioid therapy 40 hours after rotation due to fentanyl-related toxicities.

CONCLUSION

The updated rotation scheme, implying a 1:1 dose conversion and discontinuation of SC fentanyl directly after rotation, resulted in equivalent fentanyl exposure pre and post-rotation. Moreover, the dosing regimen showed to be safe and efficacious during rotation. The new dosing regimen when rotating from SC to TD fentanyl can be effectively and safely implemented in routine palliative care.

Successful use of Rectal Pregabalin for the Treatment of Chemotherapy-Induced Neuropathic Pain-a Case Report

INTRODUCTION

A 65-year-old female patient could no longer take oral food or medications due to a duodenal occlusion associated with metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Her pre-existing chemotherapy-induced polyneuropathy had been well treated with pregabalin orally.

METHODS

Since only preparations for oral use of pregabalin are available, pregabalin suppositories were compounded by the hospital pharmacy for rectal use in this patient.

RESULTS

With the rectal administration, the treatment was successfully continued; we measured a good increase in serum levels and the symptoms improved significantly.

DISCUSSION

Cancer patients often need to be treated with co-analgesics. At the end of life, treatment often cannot be continued due to lack of other than oral administration. Our case adds to the low evidence of pregabalin administered rectally.

Liver Metabolomics and Inflammatory Profiles in Mouse Model of Fentanyl Overdose Treated with Beta-Lactams

Fentanyl is a highly potent opioid analgesic that is approved medically to treat acute and chronic pain. There is a high potential for overdose-induced organ toxicities, including liver toxicity, and this might be due to the increase of recreational use of opioids. Several preclinical studies have demonstrated the efficacy of beta-lactams in modulating the expression of glutamate transporter-1 (GLT-1) in different body organs, including the liver. The upregulation of GLT-1 by beta-lactams is associated with the attenuation of hyperglutamatergic state, which is a characteristic feature of opioid use disorders. A novel experimental beta-lactam compound with no antimicrobial properties, MC-100093, has been developed to attenuate dysregulation of glutamate transport, in part by normalizing GLT-1 expression. A previous study showed that MC-100093 modulated hepatic GLT-1 expression with subsequent attenuation of alcohol-increased fat droplet content in the liver. In this study, we investigated the effects of fentanyl overdose on liver metabolites, and determined the effects of MC-100093 and ceftriaxone in the liver of a fentanyl overdose mouse model. Liver samples from control, fentanyl overdose, and fentanyl overdose ceftriaxone- or MC-100093-treated mice were analyzed for metabolomics using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Heatmap analysis revealed that both MC-100093 and ceftriaxone attenuated the effects of fentanyl overdose on several metabolites, and MC-100093 showed superior effects. Statistical analysis showed that MC-100093 reversed the effects of fentanyl overdose in some metabolites. Moreover, enrichment analysis revealed that the altered metabolites were strongly linked to the glucose-alanine cycle, the Warburg effect, gluconeogenesis, glutamate metabolism, lactose degradation, and ketone body metabolism. The changes in liver metabolites induced by fentanyl overdose were associated with liver inflammation, an effect attenuated with ceftriaxone pre-treatments. Ceftriaxone normalized fentanyl-overdose-induced changes in liver interleukin-6 and cytochrome CYP3A11 (mouse homolog of human CYP3A4) expression. Our data indicate that fentanyl overdose impaired liver metabolites, and MC-100093 restored certain metabolites.

Pain mitigation and management strategies for anti-GD2 infusions: An expert consensus

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting disialoganglioside 2 (GD2) are an important treatment advance for high-risk neuroblastoma, including in patients with refractory or relapsed disease. Dinutuximab and dinutuximab beta are administered for ≥8 hours (and up to 10 days for dinutuximab beta), whereas naxitamab is administered over 0.5 to 2 hours as tolerated. As acute pain is a class effect of anti-GD2 mAbs, effective pain management is crucial to successful treatment. Here, we provide an overview of current pain-management strategies for anti-GD2 mAb infusions, with a focus on strategies suitable for naxitamab infusions, which cause a more rapid onset of often severe pain. We discuss opioid analgesics, ketamine, gabapentin, and other similar agents and nonpharmacologic approaches. Potential future pain-management options are also discussed, in addition to the use of sedatives to reduce the anxiety that may be associated with infusion-related pain. In this expert consensus paper, specific guidance for pain management during naxitamab infusions is provided, as these infusions are administered over 0.5 to 2 hours and may not need overnight hospitalization based on the physician's assessment, and require rapid-onset analgesia options suitable for potential outpatient administration.

Use of Opioids for Adults With Pain From Cancer or Cancer Treatment: ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide guidance on the use of opioids to manage pain from cancer or cancer treatment in adults.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature identified systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials of the efficacy and safety of opioid analgesics in people with cancer, approaches to opioid initiation and titration, and the prevention and management of opioid adverse events. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 1, 2010, to February 17, 2022. American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations.

RESULTS

The evidence base consisted of 31 systematic reviews and 16 randomized controlled trials. Opioids have primarily been evaluated in patients with moderate-to-severe cancer pain, and they effectively reduce pain in this population, with well-characterized adverse effects. Evidence was limited for several of the questions of interest, and the Expert Panel relied on consensus for these recommendations or noted that no recommendation could be made at this time.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Opioids should be offered to patients with moderate-to-severe pain related to cancer or active cancer treatment unless contraindicated. Opioids should be initiated PRN (as needed) at the lowest possible dose to achieve acceptable analgesia and patient goals, with early assessment and frequent titration. For patients with a substance use disorder, clinicians should collaborate with a palliative care, pain, and/or substance use disorder specialist to determine the optimal approach to pain management. Opioid adverse effects should be monitored, and strategies are provided for prevention and management.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

MASCC multidisciplinary evidence-based recommendations for the management of malignant bowel obstruction in advanced cancer

PURPOSE

To provide evidence-based recommendations on the management of malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) for patients with advanced cancer.

METHODS

The Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) MBO study group conducted a systematic review of databases (inception to March 2021) to identify studies about patients with advanced cancer and MBO that reported on the following outcomes: symptom management, bowel obstruction resolution, prognosis, overall survival, and quality of life. The review was restricted to studies published in English, but no restrictions were placed on publication year, country, and study type. As per the MASCC Guidelines Policy, the findings were synthesized to determine the levels of evidence to support each MBO intervention and, ultimately, the graded recommendations and suggestions.

RESULTS

The systematic review identified 17,656 published studies and 397 selected for the guidelines. The MASCC study group developed a total of 25 evidence-based suggestions and recommendations about the management of MBO-related nausea and vomiting, bowel movements, pain, inflammation, bowel decompression, and nutrition. Expert consensus-based guidance about advanced care planning and psychosocial support is also provided.

CONCLUSION

This MASCC Guideline provides comprehensive, evidence-based recommendations about MBO management for patients with advanced cancer.

Evaluation of efficacy and safety of subcutaneous acetaminophen in geriatrics and palliative care (APAPSUBQ)

Introduction

Subcutaneous infusion (SC) or hypodermoclysis is an old perfusion technique that is often used off-label although it has been shown to be effective. Acetaminophen (paracetamol) subcutaneous injection is performed in some centers despite the lack of conclusive evidence on its effectiveness. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of subcutaneous infusion of Acetaminophen in the treatment of pain and fever in geriatrics and in palliative care and to determine its safety profile and possible side effects.

Material and methods

This experimental study was conducted between 2018 and 2019 on adult patients in palliative care or in geriatrics in several hospitals and nursing homes in Lebanon. Primary outcomes were change in temperature; change in pain score on the numerical rating scale (NS) or on the Algoplus scale after 60 min from the start of the infusion; and the appearance of local side effects at the infusion site. Changes in the various parameters at 30 min and 180 min were also evaluated as secondary outcomes.

Results

Thirty-one patients were included in the study, with a total of 120 doses of acetaminophen. At 60 min, the mean decrease in pain on the NS was 5.35 points, while the mean decrease in temperature was 0.79 degrees Celsius. At 60 min, 75%, CI = [47.62-92.73] of the patients who received acetaminophen for pain and 66.67%, CI = [38.38-88.17] of those who received it for fever had clinically significant improvement. The overall effect of subcutaneous acetaminophen, defined as any clinically significant effect on pain or fever, was 70.97%, CI = [51.96-85.78]. The overall effect at 30 min and at 180 min was 23.33%, CI = [9.93-42.28] and 87.10%, CI = [70.17-96.37], respectively. The side effects reported 30 min after the injection and observed after at least one of the doses were: local edema in 16 patients (51.61%), induration in one patient (3.23%), local pain in one patient (3.23%) and local heat in one patient (3.23%). At 180 min, only 2 patients (6.45%) still had edema at the infusion site.

Conclusion

Subcutaneous administration of acetaminophen is effective and well tolerated in geriatric and palliative care patients. It is appropriate when no other route is available, especially for home-based care. Comparative studies are needed to allow the expansion of this practice.

Symptoms During Outpatient Cancer Treatment and Options for Their Management

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients account for a large segment of the German healthcare system, with a 5-year prevalence of around 1.7 million persons. Advances in oncological treatment, now frequently performed on an outpatient basis, are granting many of these individuals a longer life span. At the same time, cancer patients often suffer disease-related symptoms and adverse effects from their tumor treatment, which may strongly impair their quality of life despite the improved techniques for management of side effects.

METHODS

This review is based on a selective literature search of the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases carried out in December 2019 and January 2020. Special attention was paid to guidelines, expert opinions, and recommendations from professional societies.

RESULTS

Alongside decreased well-being, cancer patients often suffer from fatigue (70-100%), loss of appetite (6-53%), pain (30-80 %), and dyspnea (10-70%). The prevalence and severity of the symptoms varies depending on the tumor entity and the patient's sex. A meta-analysis showed that besides causal treatment, physical activity achieves moderately strong effects in tumor-associated fatigue syndrome (Cohen's d = 0.30 [0.25; 0.36]). The WHO recommends early use of opioids in tumor-associated pain. A meta-analysis of randomized trials described symptom relief by means of opioids also in dyspnea (standardized mean difference: -0.32 [-0.53; -0.10]). Increasingly, guidelines are recommending regular palliative medical symptom screening.

CONCLUSION

Regular documentation of symptoms in outpatients offers the opportunity for targeted management of symptoms during treatment with the involvement of various disciplines such as palliative medicine, exercise therapy, and psychotherapy.

Management of pain in colorectal cancer patients

In this review we focus on the pathophysiology of CRC-related pain and discuss currently applied pain management. Pain is a symptom reported by over 70 % of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. It remains a feared and debilitating consequence of both cancer and cancer-related treatment. There are many options for pain management in CRC, consisting of intravenous, oral or topical medications. In order to address the full spectrum of pain, proper treatment should address the nociceptive, neuropathic and/or psychogenic pain component. Currently available methods do not bring pain relief to satisfying number of patients and, if used improperly, can cause a number of complications. Therefore, future treatments should focus primarily on alleviating pain, but also on reducing possible side effects. In this article we cover recent and promising pharmacological and non- pharmacological developments emerging in the field of CRC treatment.

Continuous subcutaneous infusion for pain control in dying patients: experiences from a tertiary palliative care center

BACKGROUND

Continuous subcutaneous infusion (CSCI) via ambulatory infusion pump (AIP) is a valuable method of pain control in palliative care. When using CSCI, low-dose methadone as add-on to other opioids might be an option in complex pain situations. This study aimed to investigate the effects, and adverse effects, of CSCI for pain control in dying patients, with particular interest in methadone use.

METHODS

This was an observational cohort study. Imminently dying patients with pain, admitted to specialized palliative inpatient wards and introduced on CSCI, were monitored daily by staff for symptoms (Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale - IPOS), sedation (Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale - RASS), performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group - ECOG) and delirium (Confusion Assessment Method - CAM).

RESULTS

Ninety-three patients with a median survival of 4 days were included. Of the 47 patients who survived ≥3 days, the proportion of patients with severe/overwhelming pain decreased from 45 to 19% (p < 0.001) after starting CSCI, with only a moderate increase in morphine equivalent daily dose of opioids (MEDD). Alertness was marginally decreased (1 point on the 10-point RASS scale, p = 0.001), whereas performance status and prevalence of delirium, regardless of age, remained unchanged. Both patients with methadone as add-on (MET, n = 13) and patients with only other opioids (NMET, n = 34), improved in pain control (p < 0.05 and 0.001, respectively), despite that MET patients had higher pain scores at baseline (p < 0.05) and were on a higher MEDD (240 mg vs.133 mg). No serious adverse effects demanding treatment stop were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

CSCI via AIP is an effective way to reduce pain in dying patients without increased adverse effects. Add-on methadone may be beneficial in patients with severe complex pain.

Evaluation of Inpatient Opioid Prescribing Resulting in Outpatient Opioid Prescriptions for Previously Opioid-Naive Internal Medicine Patients

BACKGROUND

Little data exist regarding inpatient opioid prescriptions as a potential contribution to the current opioid crisis. While pain management is essential to inpatient care, the ease of which opioids may be prescribed for all levels of pain may contribute to unnecessary inpatient exposure and new outpatient prescriptions. The aim of this study was to observe patterns of opioid prescribing potentially leading to new opioid prescriptions at hospital discharge for previously opioid-naive patients.

METHODS

This study was a single-center observational study of opioid-naïve internal medicine patients who were prescribed inpatient opioids. Patient charts were reviewed to assess the patterns of inpatient opioid and non-opioid analgesic use, new opioid prescriptions upon discharge and medical record documentation justifying the need for outpatient therapy.

RESULTS

Among the 101 patients included in this study, 71 were prescribed IV opioids and 45 were prescribed both IV and oral opioids. Non-opioid analgesics were available for 78 patients. Twenty patients were discharged with a new prescription. The mean duration of outpatient prescriptions was 3.85 +/- 1.85 days with mean morphine milligram equivalents (MME) of 44.25 +/- 22.16. Among patients receiving these outpatient prescriptions, 11 had reference to the therapy in the discharge summary.

CONCLUSIONS

This observational study describes an opportunity to improve inpatient opioid prescribing practices which may reduce new prescriptions for continued outpatient therapy. Further work should focus on optimizing use of non-opioid analgesia, minimizing use of IV opioids and requiring prescribers to justify the indication for new opioid prescriptions upon hospital discharge.

A Multimodal Intervention Using Nonopioid Analgesics Is Associated With Reduced Intravenous Opioid Exposure Among Hospitalized Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

INTRODUCTION

Opioid use in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is associated with increased mortality. Previous interventions targeting reduced intravenous opioid (IVOPI) exposure for all patients admitted to a general medical unit have decreased total opioid use without compromising pain control. We therefore performed a prospective evaluation of a multimodal intervention encouraging the use of nonopioid alternatives to reduce IVOPI exposure among patients with IBD hospitalized at our institution.

METHODS

This was a prospective evaluation of a multimodal intervention to reduce IVOPI use among patients with IBD aged ≥18 years admitted to a general medical unit at a large urban academic medical center from January 1, 2019, to June 30, 2019. Intravenous and total (all routes) opioid exposures were measured as proportions and intravenous morphine milligram equivalents/patient day and compared with preintervention (January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2018) data. Hospital length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmission rates (RRs), and pain scores (1-10 scale) were also assessed.

RESULTS

Our study involved 345 patients with IBD with similar baseline characteristics in preintervention (n = 241) and intervention (n = 104) periods. Between study periods, we observed a significant reduction in the proportion of patients receiving IVOPIs (43.6% vs 30.8%, P = 0.03) and total opioid dose exposure (15.6 vs 8.5 intravenous morphine mg equivalents/d, P = 0.02). We observed similar mean pain scores (3.9 vs 3.7, P = 0.55) and significantly reduced mean LOS (7.2 vs 5.3 days, P = 0.03) and 30-day RRs (21.6% vs 11.5%, P = 0.03).

DISCUSSION

A multimodal intervention was associated with reduced opioid exposure, LOS, and 30-day RRs for hospitalized patients with IBD. Additional research is needed to determine long-term benefits of reduced opioid exposure in this population.

Switching Ratio from Parenteral to Oral Methadone 1:1.2 Is Safer Compared with Ratio 1:2 in Patients with Controlled Cancer Pain: A Multicenter Randomized-Controlled Trial (RATIOMTD-010810)

Background: The most commonly used switching ratio from parenteral to oral methadone is 1:2. Methadone is highly bioavailable and a lower ratio might result in similar analgesia with less toxicity. Objective: To compare success and side effects with two ratios from parenteral to oral methadone: 1:2 versus 1:1.2 in hospitalized patients with cancer pain. Design: A multicenter double-blind randomized clinical trial. Settings/Particiants: Inpatients with well-controlled cancer pain with parenteral methadone requiring rotation to the oral route. Measurements: Outcomes included pain intensity (Brief Inventory Pain), opioid toxicity (Common Toxicology Criteria for Adverse Events), and methadone dose. Success was defined as no toxicity with good pain control at 72 hours. Results: Thirty-nine of forty-four randomized patients were evaluable: 21 in ratio 1:2 and 18 in ratio 1:1.2. Seventy-one percent male. Median age 65 years. No significant differences in basal clinical characteristics between both groups. Median methadone dose pre/post switching was 24.5 mg ±13.5 and 49 mg ±27.3 for ratio 1:2, versus 23.3 mg ±9.4 (p: not significant) and 28 mg ±11.3 (p < 0.01) for ratio 1:1.2. Pain was well controlled without differences between both ratios. Drowsiness at day +1 (p < 0.017) and myoclonus at day +3 (p < 0.019) were more prevalent in group 1:2. Success was observed in 12 patients in ratio 1:2 versus 18 in ratio 1:1.2 (p < 0.001). Methadone side effects were observed in 12 patients in ratio 1:2 (mainly neurotoxicity symptoms) versus 2 in ratio 1:1.2 (p < 0.005). Conclusion: Ratio 1:1.2 when changing from parenteral to oral methadone resulted in lower toxicity and no difference in analgesia. More conservative dose adjustment during methadone route change should be considered. European Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT No. 2010-024092-39).

Pharmacokinetics of Subcutaneous Levetiracetam in Palliative Care Patients

Background: Seizure control is challenging in the palliative care setting. Subcutaneous (SC) levetiracetam (LEV) is currently an off-label route of administration and effectiveness, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics studies for this route are scarce. Objectives: This prospective study aimed at evaluating effectiveness and tolerability of SC LEV as well as characterizing its pharmacokinetics. Subjects: Patients (n = 7) who attended the palliative care clinic between September 2018 and January 2019 with diagnosis of seizures, ≥18 years, and in need of SC route of administration were included in the study. Measurements: LEV plasma levels were determined using high-performance liquid chromatography and pharmacokinetic analysis were performed using Monolix 2018R2 (France). pH and osmolality of the three SC infusion solutions were also determined. Results: Seven patients took part in the study. Seizures were controlled in six out of seven patients with doses of 1000 and 3000 mg/day. Adverse effects were mild. pH and osmolality of the SC infusion solutions were within the accepted values reported in the literature. Mean plasma LEV concentrations were 14.4 mg/L (1000 mg/day) and 27.7 mg/L (2000 mg/day). The population clearance (2.5 L/h) and the elimination half-life (10.4 hours) were successfully estimated. Conclusions: Based on this data, SC LEV was effective and well tolerated. Pharmacokinetic parameters for the SC route were successfully determined.

Indian Society for Study of Pain, Cancer Pain Special Interest Group Guidelines on Pharmacological Management of Cancer Pain (Part II)

The Indian Society for Study of Pain (ISSP), Cancer Pain Special Interest Group (SIG) guidelines on pharmacological management of cancer pain in adults provide a structured, stepwise approach, which will help to improve the management of cancer pain and to provide the patients with a minimally acceptable quality of life. The guidelines have been developed based on the available literature and evidence, to suit the needs, patient population, and situations in India. A questionnaire, based on the key elements of each sub draft addressing certain inconclusive areas where evidence was lacking, was made available on the ISSP website and circulated by e-mail to all the ISSP and Indian Association of Palliative Care members. We recommend that analgesics for cancer pain management should follow the World Health Organization 3-step analgesic ladder appropriate for the severity of pain. The use of paracetamol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs alone or in combination with opioids for mild-to-moderate pain should be used. For mild-to-moderate pain, weak opioids such as tramadol, tapentadol, and codeine can be given in combination with nonopioid analgesics. We recommend morphine as the opioid of the first choice for moderate-to-severe cancer pain. Sustained-release formulations can be started 12 hourly, once the effective 24 h dose with immediate-release morphine is established. Opioid switch or rotation should be considered if there is inadequate analgesia or intolerable side effects. For opioid-induced respiratory depression, μ receptor antagonists (e.g. naloxone) must be used promptly. Antidepressants and/or anticonvulsants should be used to treat neuropathic cancer pain, and the dose should be titrated according to the clinical response and side effects. External beam radiotherapy should be offered to all patients with painful metastatic bone pain. There is evidence on use of ketamine in cancer neuropathic pain, but with no beneficial effect, thus, it is not recommended.

Advances in Pain Management: Palliative Care Applications

One of the most important goals of palliative medicine and hospice care is pain relief. Although great strides have been made in veterinary analgesia, severe pain, especially at home, is still difficult to control. Pain control in the context of palliative medicine and hospice care is far more advanced in human medicine. Many modalities used in chronically or terminally ill humans might be adapted to animals to better manage severe pain. This article discusses drugs and procedures used to control pain in humans that are relatively nascent or unavailable in veterinary medicine and deserve further attention.

Association of an Opioid Standard of Practice Intervention With Intravenous Opioid Exposure in Hospitalized Patients

IMPORTANCE

Opioids are commonly used to treat pain in hospitalized patients; however, intravenous administration carries an increased risk of adverse effects compared with oral administration. The subcutaneous route is an effective method of opioid delivery with favorable pharmacokinetics.

OBJECTIVE

To assess an intervention to reduce intravenous opioid use, total parenteral opioid exposure, and the rate of patients administered parenteral opioids.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A pilot study was conducted in an adult general medical unit in an urban academic medical center. Attending physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants who prescribed drugs were the participants. Use of opioids was compared between a 6-month control period and 3 months following education for the prescribers on opioid routes of administration.

INTERVENTIONS

Adoption of a local opioid standard of practice, preferring the oral and subcutaneous routes over intravenous administration, and education for prescribers and nursing staff on awareness of the subcutaneous route was implemented.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was a reduction in intravenous doses administered per patient-day. Secondary measures included total parenteral and overall opioid doses per patient-day, parenteral and overall opioid exposure per patient-day, and daily rate of patients receiving parenteral opioids. Pain scores were measured on a standard 0- to 10-point Likert scale over the first 5 days of hospitalization.

RESULTS

The control period included 4500 patient-days, and the intervention period included 2459 patient-days. Of 127 patients in the intervention group, 59 (46.5%) were men; mean (SD) age was 57.6 (18.5) years. Intravenous opioid doses were reduced by 84% (0.06 vs 0.39 doses per patient-day, P < .001), and doses of all parenteral opioids were reduced by 55% (0.18 vs 0.39 doses per patient-day, P < .001). In addition, mean (SD) daily parenteral opioid exposure decreased by 49% (2.88 [0.72] vs 5.67 [1.14] morphine-milligram equivalents [MMEs] per patient-day). The daily rate of patients administered any parenteral opioid decreased by 57% (6% vs 14%; P < .001). Doses of opioids given by oral or parenteral route were reduced by 23% (0.73 vs 0.95 doses per patient-day, P = .02), and mean daily overall opioid exposure decreased by 31% (6.30 [4.12] vs 9.11 [7.34] MMEs per patient-day). For hospital days 1 through 3, there were no significant postintervention vs preintervention differences in mean reported pain score for patients receiving opioid therapy: day 1, -0.19 (95% CI, -0.94 to 0.56); day 2, -0.49 (95% CI, -1.01 to 0.03); and day 3, -0.54 (95% CI, -1.18 to 0.09). However, significant improvement was seen in the intervention group on days 4 (-1.07; 95% CI, -1.80 to -0.34) and 5 (-1.06; 95% CI, -1.84 to -0.27).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

An intervention targeting the use of intravenous opioids may be associated with reduced opioid exposure while providing effective pain control to hospitalized adults.

Intravenous Oxycodone versus Intravenous Morphine in Cancer Pain: A Randomized, Open-Label, Parallel-Group, Active-Control Study

Objective

To compare efficacy and safety of intravenous continuous infusion of oxycodone with morphine in patients with cancer pain.

Methods

A 5-day, randomized, open-label, exploratory study at 6 sites in the Republic of Korea. Sixty-six adults aged ≥19 years with moderate-to-severe cancer pain (Numeric Rating Scale [NRS] ≥ 4) were enrolled. The study group received intravenous (IV) oxycodone, and the comparator group received IV morphine which were titrated depending on pain intensity. The efficacy endpoint is change in average NRS score from baseline to Day 5. Other assessments included worst, current, and average pain intensity; patient satisfaction; medication dose; and adverse events.

Results

Both groups achieved >50% reduction in average pain intensity: from “moderate” at baseline (oxycodone versus morphine: 6.0 ± 1.8 versus 5.9 ± 1.4) to “mild” at Day 5 (2.5 ± 1.8 versus 2.8 ± 1.6). While this reduction was similar between groups (3.5 ± 2.2 versus 3.1 ± 1.8, P value = 0.562), oxycodone achieved faster pain relief (average pain: 3.0 ± 1.6 versus 3.9 ± 1.6, P value = 0.020) on Day 2 and significant NRS reductions for worst pain on Day 2 (P value = 0.045) and current pain on Day 2 (P value = 0.035) and Day 5 (P value = 0.020) compared to morphine. Patient satisfaction, adverse events, and adverse drug reactions were similar for both groups.

Conclusions

For Asian patients with cancer pain, IV oxycodone is faster acting and showed similar analgesic efficacy and safety profiles as IV morphine. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02660229.

Options for Treating Pain in Cancer Patients with Dysphagia

Patients with chronic pain often develop dysphagia during the course of an advanced disease such as cancer. Opioids are the cornerstone of the management of cancer pain and are commonly administered orally. However, the oral route does not suit patients with dysphagia, who require alternative methods to administer analgesic drugs. Opioids given by parenteral or transdermal routes provide adequate pain control, being at least as efficacious as the oral route, but knowledge and experience in conversion ratios are mandatory when using these routes of administration. For breakthrough pain, transmucosal fentanyl preparations should be the preferred option and these can be given as needed due to the route of absorption. In addition, a new class of opioid formulations has been developed for use in dysphagic patients that are administered via nasogastric or enteral tubes while maintaining their sustained-release properties.

[Incidence of constipation in patients with outpatient opioid therapy]

BACKGROUND

Constipation is a common complication in patients with opioid therapy. Additionally, patient-related risk factors also contribute to the development of constipation and these factors have to be integrated into an individualized treatment plan.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the incidence of constipation in patients with opioid therapy in an outpatient setting and to analyze the risk factors that contribute to the development of constipation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted in two university affiliated outpatient departments at the Charité hospital in Berlin. The trial included all consecutively treated patients with opioid therapy of at least 4 weeks duration. The study was conducted from January 2013 to August 2013. Constipation was defined according to the Rome III criteria.

RESULTS

Out of 1166 screened patients, altogether 171 patients were included with a median duration of opioid therapy of 5 years. The most common diagnoses were back pain, musculoskeletal pain and neuropathic pain. In 14% of the treated patients symptoms of constipation were detected and another 35% needed laxatives for symptom control resulting in an overall incidence of constipation of 49%. The remaining 51% of the patients did not use any laxatives and did not experience symptoms of constipation. Age and dosing of opioid therapy significantly increased the risk of consipation but duration of opioid therapy was not related to the incidence of constipation.

DISCUSSION

The incidence of constipation in this population remains high although a relevant number of patients were intermittently free of symptoms without using laxatives. An individualized therapy plan and patient education seem to be important elements to control opioid-associated constipation.

Fentanyl Sublingual Tablets Versus Subcutaneous Morphine for the Management of Severe Cancer Pain Episodes in Patients Receiving Opioid Treatment: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Noninferiority Trial

Purpose

Fentanyl sublingual tablets (FST) are a potentially useful alternative to parenteral opioids such as subcutaneous morphine (SCM) to treat severe cancer pain episodes. No direct comparison between FST and SCM is available. The aim of this study was to test noninferiority of FST versus SCM during the first 30 min postadministration.

Methods

Patients receiving stable opioid therapy and experiencing a severe pain episode were randomly assigned to either 100 µg FST or 5 mg SCM in a double-blind, double-dummy trial. Average pain intensity (PI) assessed on a 0 to 10 numerical rating scale at 10, 20, and 30 min postadministration was the main end point. Analysis of covariance, adjusted by baseline PI, was the main analysis. The noninferiority margin (NIm) for the between-group difference was set at −0.6, that is, equal to one third of the minimum clinically important PI difference of two points.

Results

A total of 114 patients were randomly assigned to either FST (n = 58) or SCM (n = 56). One patient (in the FST group) withdrew consent before drug administration and was excluded from analysis. Baseline mean PIs were 7.5 in both groups; mean average PIs assessed at 10, 20, and 30 min postadministration were 5.0 and 4.5 for FST and SCM, respectively, with the 95% CI of the between-group difference including the NIm (−0.49; 95% CI, −1.10 to 0.09). Patients taking FST received a second drug dose after 30 min more frequently than did patients taking SCM (51% v 37%, respectively; risk difference, −13%; 95% CI, −30% to 3%). Both treatments were well tolerated, with average follow-up adverse event scores below the response of “A Little.” Ninety-three percent of patients preferred the sublingual administration.

Conclusion

This trial did not show noninferiority of FST versus SCM within the chosen NIm. Both treatments were safe, and patients preferred the sublingual route of administration. FST provides analgesia with modest to moderate increased risk of lower efficacy compared with SCM.

Associations to pain and analgesics in Indian pain patients and health workers

Aim: This study explores the attitudes toward analgesic therapy among persistent pain patients and health workers in palliative care in India. Methods: Free word association was used and quantitative content analysis was performed. Results: A total of 59 patients and 28 health workers participated. In total, 41% of the patients had <5/10 points on a pain scale. A total of 3733 associations were recovered. Personal associations were majorly coming from patients having negative connotation. Morphine produced few associations, especially among patients. Most of them were about pain relief and for patients about negative emotions. Conclusion: Two types of knowledge were detectable, differing in quality and quantity. One was based on lived experience among patients; the other arose from scientific foundation among health workers.

Medication use during end-of-life care in a palliative care centre

Background In end-of-life care, symptoms of discomfort are mainly managed by drug therapy, the guidelines for which are mainly based on expert opinions. A few papers have inventoried drug prescriptions in palliative care settings, but none has reported the frequency of use in combination with doses and route of administration. Objective To describe doses and routes of administration of the most frequently used drugs at admission and at day of death. Setting Palliative care centre in the Netherlands. Method In this retrospective cohort study, prescription data of deceased patients were extracted from the electronic medical records. Main outcome measure Doses, frequency and route of administration of prescribed drugs Results All regular medication prescriptions of 208 patients, 89 % of whom had advanced cancer, were reviewed. The three most prescribed drugs were morphine, midazolam and haloperidol, to 21, 11 and 23 % of patients at admission, respectively. At the day of death these percentages had increased to 87, 58 and 50 %, respectively. Doses of these three drugs at the day of death were statistically significantly higher than at admission. The oral route of administration was used in 89 % of patients at admission versus subcutaneous in 94 % at the day of death. Conclusions Nearing the end of life, patients in this palliative care centre receive discomfort-relieving drugs mainly via the subcutaneous route. However, most of these drugs are unlicensed for this specific application and guidelines are based on low level of evidence. Thus, there is every reason for more clinical research on drug use in palliative care.

Alternative routes to oral opioid administration in palliative care: a review and clinical summary

OBJECTIVE

A major goal of palliative care is to provide comfort, and pain is one of the most common causes of treatable suffering in patients with advanced disease. Opioids are indispensable for pain management in palliative care and can usually be provided by the oral route, which is safe, effective, and of lowest cost in most cases. As patients near the end of life, however, the need for alternate routes of medication increases with up to 70% of patients requiring a nonoral route for opioid administration. In order to optimize patient care, it is imperative that clinicians understand existing available options of opioid administration and their respective advantages and disadvantages.

METHODS

We performed a literature review to describe the most commonly used and available routes that can substitute for oral opioid therapy and to provide a summary of factors affecting choice of opioid for use in palliative care in terms of benefits, indications, cautions, and general considerations.

RESULTS

Clinical circumstances will largely dictate appropriateness of the route selected. When the oral route is unavailable, subcutaneous, intravenous, and enteral routes are preferred in the palliative care population. The evidence supporting sublingual, buccal, rectal, and transdermal gel routes is mixed.

CONCLUSIONS

This review is not designed to be a critical appraisal of the quality of current evidence; rather, it is a summation of that evidence and of current clinical practices regarding alternate routes of opioid administration. In doing so, the overarching goal of this review is to support more informed clinical decision making.

Use of opioid analgesics in the treatment of cancer pain: evidence-based recommendations from the EAPC

Here we provide the updated version of the guidelines of the European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC) on the use of opioids for the treatment of cancer pain. The update was undertaken by the European Palliative Care Research Collaborative. Previous EAPC guidelines were reviewed and compared with other currently available guidelines, and consensus recommendations were created by formal international expert panel. The content of the guidelines was defined according to several topics, each of which was assigned to collaborators who developed systematic literature reviews with a common methodology. The recommendations were developed by a writing committee that combined the evidence derived from the systematic reviews with the panellists' evaluations in a co-authored process, and were endorsed by the EAPC Board of Directors. The guidelines are presented as a list of 16 evidence-based recommendations developed according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system.