Pain Management for Patients With Advanced Cancer in the Opioid Epidemic Era

Opioid Access among Advanced Cancer Patients in Low- and Middle-Income Countries in Asia

CONTEXT

Most cancer-associated pain is experienced in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) due to inequitable access to opioids.

OBJECTIVE

To determine opioid access as estimated by both patients and providers and to understand patient and facility-level factors influencing access among patients with advanced cancer in LMICs in Asia using the Behavioral Model of Health Services Use.

METHODS

The APPROACH cross-sectional study was conducted in seven LMICs in Asia, involving in-depth surveys with providers and advanced cancer patients. A hierarchical logistic regression model was used to assess predisposing (i.e. individual factors), enabling (i.e. health care system and facility-level resources) and need (i.e. pain severity) factors predicting opioid access.

RESULTS

Among patient participants (n=1,933), approximately 40% reported opioid use. Meanwhile 80% of facilities, as reported by providers, indicated at least half of their advanced cancer patients receive oral morphine prescriptions. Predisposing characteristics factored in the least in the model, with patient education positively associated with access (Odds ratio (OR): 1.01; 95% CI=1.00, 1.03). Facility-level enabling resources, factoring the most, included oral morphine prescription duration >14 days (OR: 1.27; 95% CI=1.05, 1.53) and the extent of physician palliative care training (extensive (>160 hours) OR: 3.95; CI=3.19, 4.88; basic (up to 40 hours) OR: 1.03; CI=1.03, 1.04). Patient need as indicated by greater pain severity predicted access (OR: 1.55; CI=1.47, 1.64).

CONCLUSION

Study findings emphasize the importance of palliative care training-even a minimal amount-in supporting access to opioids for advanced cancer patients. This study also highlights pragmatic site-level policies, such as extended morphine prescription durations, enabling access.

Opioid initiation timing and palliative care referrals in advanced cancer: retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

Early opioid initiation is recommended for advanced cancer pain, however the timing of opioid commencement in relation to diagnosis has not been described, and the role of palliative care prescribers is unclear. This study aims to determine the timing of opioid initiation by prescriber and cancer type in relation to key timepoints in the cancer illness course (diagnosis, palliative care referral and death).

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included patients at a quaternary cancer centre with incurable advanced cancer of five different subtype groups. Demographics, clinical characteristics, health service use and details of first slow and immediate release opioid prescription are reported.

RESULTS

Among 200 patients, median time to first immediate release opioid prescription was 23 days (IQR 1-82) and to slow release opioid prescription was 47 days (IQR 14-155). Most patients (95%, (n=190) were referred to palliative care (median time to referral 54 days (IQR 18-190)). Non-palliative care prescribers initiated slow release opioids for half the cohort (49%, n=97) prior to referral. Patients with pancreatic cancer had the shortest time to slow/immediate release opioid prescription (median 10 days (IQR 0-39) and 26 days (IQR 1-43) respectively) and shortest survival (median 136 days (IQR 82-214)).

CONCLUSIONS

Median time to opioid commencement was approximately 3 weeks after diagnosis. Despite early palliative care involvement, opioid initiation by non-palliative care clinicians was common and remains important. Timely palliative care referral for those with pancreatic cancer may include consideration of earlier complex pain presentations and shorter prognosis.

Prevalence of Reluctance to Prescribe Opioids Among Physicians in Oncology Departments: A Descriptive Cross-Sectional Study From Turkey

Cancer-related pain (CrP) is a significant public health problem, and opioids are the mainstay of CrP treatment. Considering the persistent problem of inadequate treatment of cancer pain in Turkey, the study was conducted to determine the prevalence of reluctance to prescribe opioids among physicians in oncology departments. The descriptive cross-sectional study included oncology residents and residents without oncology specialization in oncology departments. One thousand physicians were invited by e-mail to the Google Forms survey platform. Two hundred and seventy-eight physicians completed the survey and were included, of which 50% (n: 139) were female. More than half (n: 166; 59.7%) of them were oncology subspecialists. The prevalence of reluctance to prescribe opioids was calculated to be 38.1% (n: 106). A significant positive association was found between the factor associated with reluctance to prescribe opioids and fear of opioid use disorder (β = 0.964; 95% CI = 0.362-1.566; p = .002). Reluctance to prescribe opioids was inversely related to the oncology subspecialty (β = -0.878; 95% CI = -1.54 to -0.213; p = 0.010) and education about CrP and opioid management (β = -1.707; 95% CI = -2.404 to -1.009; p = 0.01). Reluctance to prescribe opioids appears to be associated with a lack of knowledge and fear of opioid use disorder.

Opioid analgesics for nociceptive cancer pain: A comprehensive review

Pain is one of the most burdensome symptoms in people with cancer, and opioid analgesics are considered the mainstay of cancer pain management. For this review, the authors evaluated the efficacy and toxicities of opioid analgesics compared with placebo, other opioids, nonopioid analgesics, and nonpharmacologic treatments for background cancer pain (continuous and relatively constant pain present at rest), and breakthrough cancer pain (transient exacerbation of pain despite stable and adequately controlled background pain). They found a paucity of placebo-controlled trials for background cancer pain, although tapentadol or codeine may be more efficacious than placebo (moderate-certainty to low-certainty evidence). Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs including aspirin, piroxicam, diclofenac, ketorolac, and the antidepressant medicine imipramine, may be at least as efficacious as opioids for moderate-to-severe background cancer pain. For breakthrough cancer pain, oral transmucosal, buccal, sublingual, or intranasal fentanyl preparations were identified as more efficacious than placebo but were more commonly associated with toxicities, including constipation and nausea. Despite being recommended worldwide for the treatment of cancer pain, morphine was generally not superior to other opioids, nor did it have a more favorable toxicity profile. The interpretation of study results, however, was complicated by the heterogeneity in the study populations evaluated. Given the limited quality and quantity of research, there is a need to reappraise the clinical utility of opioids in people with cancer pain, particularly those who are not at the end of life, and to further explore the effects of opioids on immune system function and quality of life in these individuals.

American Society for Pain Management Nursing and Hospice and Palliative Nurses Association Position Statement: Pain Management at the End of Life

Fundamental to the quality of life is assisting patients in relieving pain including at the end of life. Compassionate, effective, evidence-based pain care for the dying improves the quality of life for patients and may reduce distress and complicated bereavement in the loved ones witnessing this death. However, efforts designed to mitigate the consequences of the opioid epidemic have seriously compromised pain care at the end of life. This has created an urgent need to focus on the barriers to relief, and solutions necessary to provide safe and effective pain and symptom management in this population. To that end, a committee of experts was convened by the American Society for Pain Management Nursing and the Hospice and Palliative Nursing Association. These experts reviewed the current literature, developed a draft position statement which underwent consecutive revisions. This statement was then endorsed by the respective organizations. Elucidation of barriers to effective pain control in advanced disease allows targeted interventions; including those related to clinical care, education, accessibility, and research. As nurses, we must continuously advocate for humane and dignified care, promoting ethical, effective pain and symptom management at the end of life for all.

Neuropsychiatric Effects Associated with Opioid-Based Management for Palliative Care Patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The abundance of opioids administered in the palliative care setting that was once considered a standard of care is at present necessitating that providers evaluate patients for unintentional and deleterious symptomology related to aberrant opioid use and addiction. Polypharmacy with opioids is dynamic in affecting patients neurologically, and increased amounts of prescriptions have had inimical effects, not only for the individual, but also for their families and healthcare providers. The purpose of this review is to widen the perspective of opioid consequences and bring awareness to the numerous neuropsychiatric effects associated with the most commonly prescribed opioids for patients receiving palliative care.

RECENT FINDINGS

Numerous clinical and research studies have found evidence in support for increased incidence of opioid usage and abuse as well as undesirable neurological outcomes. The most common and concerning effects of opioid usage in this setting are delirium and problematic drug-related behavioral changes such as deceitful behavior towards family and physicians, anger outbursts, overtaking of medications, and early prescription refill requests. Other neuropsychiatric effects detailed by recent studies include drug-seeking behavior, tolerance, dependence, addictive disorder, anxiety, substance use disorder, emotional distress, continuation of opioids to avoid opioid withdrawal syndrome, depression, and suicidal ideation. Opioid usage has detrimental and confounding effects that have been overlooked for many years by palliative care providers and patients receiving palliative care. It is necessary, even lifesaving, to be cognizant of potential neuropsychiatric effects that opioids can have on an individual, especially for those under palliative care. By having an increased understanding and awareness of potential opioid neuropsychiatric effects, patient quality of life can be improved, healthcare system costs can be decreased, and patient outcomes can be met and exceeded.

Scheduled and Breakthrough Opioid Use for Cancer Pain in an Inpatient Setting at a Tertiary Cancer Hospital

Background: Our aim was to examine the frequency and prescription pattern of breakthrough (BTO) and scheduled (SCH) opioids and their ratio (BTO/SCH ratio) of use, prior to and after referral to an inpatient supportive care consult (SCC) for cancer pain management (CPM). Methods and Materials: Patients admitted at the MD Anderson Cancer Center and referred to a SCC were retrospectively reviewed. Cancer patients receiving SCH and BTO opioids for ≥24 h were eligible for inclusion. Patient demographics and clinical characteristics, including the type and route of SCH and BTO opioids, daily opioid doses (MEDDs) of SCH and BTO, and BTO/SCH ratios were reviewed in patients seen prior to a SCC (pre-SCC) and during a SCC. A normal BTO ratio was defined as 0.5-0.2. Results: A total of 665/728 (91%) patients were evaluable. Median pain scores (p < 0.001), BTO MEDDs (p < 0.001), scheduled opioid MEDDs (p < 0.0001), and total MEDDs (p < 0.0001) were higher, but the median number of BTO doses was fewer (2 vs. 4, p < 0.001), among patients seen at SCC compared to pre-SCC. A BTO/SCH ratio over the recommended ratio (>0.2) was seen in 37.5% of patients. The BTO/SCH ratios in the pre-SCC and SCC groups were 0.10 (0.04, 0.21) and 0.17 (0.10, 0.30), respectively, p < 0.001. Hydromorphone and Morphine were the most common BTO and SCH opioids prescribed, respectively. Patients in the early supportive care group had higher pain scores and MEDDs. Conclusions: BTO/SCH ratios are frequently prescribed higher than the recommended dose. Daily pain scores, BTO MEDDs, scheduled opioid MEDDs, and total MEDDs were higher among the SCC group than the pre-SCC group, but the number of BTO doses/day was lower.

Substance use disorders in hospice palliative care: A narrative review of challenges and a case for physician intervention

OBJECTIVES

Substance use disorders (SUDs) are frequently encountered in hospice palliative care (HPC) and pose substantial quality-of-life issues for patients. However, most HPC physicians do not directly treat their patients' SUDs due to several institutional and personal barriers. This review will expand upon arguments for the integration of SUD treatment into HPC, will elucidate challenges for HPC providers, and will provide recommendations that address these challenges.

METHODS

A thorough review of the literature was conducted. Arguments for the treatment of SUDs and recommendations for physicians have been synthesized and expanded upon.

RESULTS

Treating SUD in HPC has the potential to improve adherence to care, access to social support, and outcomes for pain, mental health, and physical health. Barriers to SUD treatment in HPC include difficulties with accurate assessment, insufficient training, attitudes and stigma, and compromised pain management regimens. Recommendations for physicians and training environments to address these challenges include developing familiarity with standardized SUD assessment tools and pain management practice guidelines, creating and disseminating visual campaigns to combat stigma, including SUD assessment and intervention as fellowship competencies, and obtaining additional training in psychosocial interventions.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

By following these recommendations, HPC physicians can improve their competence and confidence in working with individuals with SUDs, which will help meet the pressing needs of this population.

Research hotspots and trends in postlaparoscopic shoulder pain from 2003 to 2023: A bibliometric analysis

The incidence of postlaparoscopic shoulder pain has recently increased and has attracted increasing attention from clinical workers, but no study has performed bibliometric and visual analysis of the relevant literature. This study used bibliometric and visual analysis to conduct a comprehensive and systematic evaluation of postlaparoscopic shoulder pain to help researchers understand the latest global trends and hotspots and provide a reference for caregivers to carry out PLSP care interventions and research. Related studies on postlaparoscopic shoulder pain from 2003 to 2023 were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection. We analysed current research trends and hotspots in this field using VOSviewer and CiteSpace. A total of 2451 authors from 352 institutions in 50 countries published 464 studies related to postlaparoscopic shoulder pain. The United States was the country with the most publications and worked closely with other countries. Donmez Turgut was the researcher with the most published articles, while Bisgaard T had the most citations per article. The Journal of Surgical Endoscopy was cited most frequently, totalling 356 times. Through keyword significance analysis, we found that relieving postlaparoscopic shoulder pain in patients through integrated care interventions was an emerging research hotspot. This bibliometric and visual analysis provides a comprehensive review of studies related to postlaparoscopic shoulder pain. The current global research trend and hotspot is to alleviate postlaparoscopic shoulder pain through integrated care interventions, but the advantages of this approach are not outstanding. However, further research and global collaboration are still needed. Our findings can help researchers understand the current status of postlaparoscopic shoulder pain research and identify new directions for future research.

Increasing Provider Self-Efficacy to Manage Chronic Cancer Pain

BACKGROUND

Aims: Pain is a significant problem for those with a cancer diagnosis. Oncology providers often use opioid therapy to manage cancer-related pain. Accessing opioid therapy has grown increasingly difficult because of the opioid epidemic. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) released guidelines to optimize pain management for patients with oncologic diagnoses. The goal of this quality improvement project was to create an educational session and evaluate self-efficacy in providers who manage chronic cancer pain.

DESIGN

The Plan-Do-Study-Act was used as the framework for this quasi-experimental study with a pre/post education survey design.

SETTINGS

Level 1 Trauma Center in Upstate, NY.

PARTICIPANTS/SUBJECTS

Family Nurse Practitioners and Physicians Assistants in a local cancer institute.

METHODS

There was a voice over PowerPoint educational intervention used to discuss key points of the guidelines, which included addressing aberrant behaviors, safe opioid prescribing, and interdisciplinary pain management. A convenience sample size of 18 advanced practice providers (APP) were recruited from a level 1-trauma center in Upstate, New York. Participants reviewed the educational intervention and completed a series of surveys to assess tool satisfaction and self-efficacy scores.

RESULTS

Data analysis revealed a significant increase in the mean self-efficacy scores on the post-education Jackson Opioid Therapy Self-Efficacy tool. The educational intervention was associated with improved perceptions of self-efficacy when managing chronic cancer pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the study's results, the guidelines released by ASCO should be reviewed and used to optimize pain management and self-efficacy in providers who work with oncologic patients. Furthermore, future research is recommended to evaluate the effect of evidence-based guidelines on patient outcomes and morbidity.

Race, Ethnicity, and Sustained Opioid Use After Major Abdominal Surgery for Cancer

Purpose

Sustained opioid use is a well-known complication after surgery. Our objective was to determine whether there is any association between a patient's race or ethnicity and the sustained use of opioids in the year following surgery. Opioid use over the initial 3, 6, and 12 postoperative months was categorized as "sustained early", persistent, and chronic, respectively.

Patients and Methods

Single-institution retrospective study of adults (≥18 years) who had undergone open abdominal surgery for cancer. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between race/ethnicity and opioid use.

Results

Of the 3523 patients included in the study, 2543 (72.2%) were non-Hispanic (NH) White, 476 (13.5%) were Hispanic or Latino, 262 (7.4%) were NH-Black, 186 (5.3%) were Asian, and 56 (1.6%) belonged to other racial or ethnic groups. The overall rates of sustained early, persistent, and chronic opioid use were 15.9%, 7.1%, and 2.6%, respectively. In the multivariable analysis, patient race/ethnicity was associated with sustained early postoperative opioid use (p-value=0.037), with Hispanics/Latinos having significantly higher odds than NH-Whites (OR = 1.382 [95% CI: 1.057-1.808]; p = 0.018). However, neither persistent nor chronic opioid use was associated with race/ethnicity (p = 0.697 and p = 0.443, respectively).

Conclusion

In this retrospective study of adults who had undergone open abdominal surgery, patient race/ethnicity was not consistently associated with the development of sustained opioid use over the first 12 postoperative months.

The Stigma Surrounding Opioid Use as a Barrier to Cancer-Pain Management: An Overview of Experiences with Fear, Shame, and Poorly Controlled Pain in the Context of Advanced Cancer

Cancer-related pain affects a majority of patients with advanced cancer and is often undertreated. The treatment of this pain is largely reliant on the use of opioids, which are essential medicines for symptom management and the maintenance of quality of life (QoL) for patients with advanced cancer. While there are cancer-specific guidelines for the treatment of pain, widespread publication and policy changes in response to the opioid epidemic have drastically impacted perceptions of opioid use. This overview therefore aims to investigate how manifestations of opioid stigma impact pain management in cancer settings, with an emphasis on the experiences of patients with advanced cancer. Opioid use has been widely stigmatized in multiple domains, including public, healthcare, and patient populations. Physician hesitancy in prescribing and pharmacist vigilance in dispensing were identified as barriers to optimal pain management, and may contribute to stigma in the context of advanced cancer. Evidence in the literature suggests that opioid stigma may result in patient deviations from prescription instructions, which generally leads to pain undertreatment. Patients reflected on experiencing shame and fear surrounding their prescription opioid use and feeling uncomfortable communicating with their healthcare providers on these topics. Our findings indicate that future work is required to educate patients and providers in order to de-stigmatize opioid use. Through alleviating stigma, patients may be better able to make decisions regarding their pain management which lead to freedom from cancer-related pain and improved QoL.

Nonmedical opioid use at the end of life: A tale of addiction and a last wish

BACKGROUND

Nonmedical opioid use (NMOU) has been associated with opioid overdose deaths. This pattern of misuse can be seen in those using opioids for cancer-associated pain. We present a case that highlights the complexities associated with NMOU and a patient's care at the end of life.

CASES DESCRIPTION

A patient with a metastatic solid tumor malignancy along with co-occurring history of polysubstance abuse was admitted to an acute palliative and supportive care unit (APSCU). The patient demonstrated behaviors concerning for NMOU during her hospital stay but had increased symptom expression concerning for worsening dyspnea while in the APSCU. Unfortunately, she used home opioids, which was unknown to the team at the time along with requesting for higher doses of opioids that were being prescribed. This caused a worsening respiratory status and affected her care. Using an interdisciplinary approach, the providers managed her symptoms and discharged her safely to see her child.

CONCLUSION

This highlights the complexities of the alleviation of suffering in those with NMOU. It is important to continue to manage NMOU at the end of life due to its effects on quality of life. A multimodal approach is recommended to identify and care for these patients.

Cannabinoids as a Potential Alternative to Opioids in the Management of Various Pain Subtypes: Benefits, Limitations, and Risks

INTRODUCTION

Pain is a global phenomenon encompassing many subtypes that include neuropathic, musculoskeletal, acute postoperative, cancer, and geriatric pain. Traditionally, opioids have been a mainstay pharmacological agent for managing many types of pain. However, opioids have been a subject of controversy with increased addiction, fatality rates, and cost burden on the US healthcare system. Cannabinoids have emerged as a potentially favorable alternative or adjunctive treatment for various types of acute and chronic pain. This narrative review seeks to describe the efficacy, risks, and benefits of cannabinoids as an adjunct or even potential replacement for opioids in the treatment of various subtypes of pain.

METHODS

In June of 2022, we performed a comprehensive search across multiple databases for English-language studies related to the use of cannabinoids in the treatment of various types pain: neuropathic pain, musculoskeletal pain, acute postoperative pain, cancer pain, and geriatric pain. Data from meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and randomized control trials (RCTs) were prioritized for reporting. We sought to focus our reported analysis on more recent literature as well as include older relevant studies with particularly notable findings.

RESULTS

There is conflicting evidence for the use of cannabinoids in the management of pain. While cannabinoids have shown efficacy in treating specific chronic pain subtypes such as neuropathic pain, fibromyalgia pain, and geriatric pain, they do not show as clear benefit in acute postoperative and the majority of musculoskeletal pain syndromes. Data trends towards cannabinoids having a positive effect in treating cancer pain, but results are not as conclusive. To date, there is a paucity of data comparing cannabinoids directly to opioids for pain relief. Overall, the side effects of cannabinoids appear to be relatively mild. However, there is still potential for addiction, altered brain development, psychiatric comorbidities, and drug-drug interactions.

CONCLUSION

Cannabinoids may be effective in specific subtypes of pain, but current evidence and guidelines do not yet support its use as the first-line treatment for any type of acute or chronic pain. Rather, it may be considered a good adjunct or alternative for patients who have failed more typical or conservative measures. Additional studies are needed with standardized forms of cannabinoids, route of delivery, and dosing for greater-powered analysis. Providers must weigh the individualized patient risks, benefits, and concurrent medication list in order to determine whether cannabinoids are appropriate for a patient's pain treatment plan.

Lidocaine for Neuropathic Cancer Pain (LiCPain): study protocol for a mixed-methods pilot study

INTRODUCTION

Many patients experience unrelieved neuropathic cancer-related pain. Most current analgesic therapies have psychoactive side effects, lack efficacy data for this indication and have potential medication-related harms. The local anaesthetic lidocaine (lignocaine) has the potential to help manage neuropathic cancer-related pain when administered as an extended, continuous subcutaneous infusion. Data support lidocaine as a promising, safe agent in this setting, warranting further evaluation in robust, randomised controlled trials. This protocol describes the design of a pilot study to evaluate this intervention and explains the pharmacokinetic, efficacy and adverse effects evidence informing the design.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A mixed-methods pilot study will determine the feasibility of an international first, definitive phase III trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of an extended continuous subcutaneous infusion of lidocaine for neuropathic cancer-related pain. This study will comprise: a phase II double-blind randomised controlled parallel-group pilot of subcutaneous infusion of lidocaine hydrochloride 10% w/v (3000 mg/30 mL) or placebo (sodium chloride 0.9%) over 72 hours for neuropathic cancer-related pain, a pharmacokinetic substudy and a qualitative substudy of patients' and carers' experiences. The pilot study will provide important safety data and help inform the methodology of a definitive trial, including testing proposed recruitment strategy, randomisation, outcome measures and patients' acceptability of the methodology, as well as providing a signal of whether this area should be further investigated.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Participant safety is paramount and standardised assessments for adverse effects are built into the trial protocol. Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conferences. This study will be considered suitable to progress to a phase III study if there is a completion rate where the CI includes 80% and excludes 60%. The protocol and Patient Information and Consent Form have been approved by Sydney Local Health District (Concord) Human Research Ethics Committee 2019/ETH07984 and University of Technology Sydney ETH17-1820.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ANZCTR ACTRN12617000747325.

The Impact of Bevacizumab and Chemotherapy on Quality of Life in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients

Health-related quality is of life of great importance in cancer care. This prospective study aimed to evaluate the impact of chemotherapy and bevacizumab on the activities of daily living, cancer symptoms, and general well-being in 59 metastatic colorectal cancer patients. We gathered information using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29 questionnaires. The paired sample t-test, MANOVA test, and Pearson's correlation test were used to analyze the presence of significant differences in mean scores before and after 6 months of treatment. The results revealed significant differences in the functioning and symptoms that influence patients' quality of life after 6 months of treatment: increased pain (p = 0.003), nausea and vomiting (p = 0.003), diarrhea (p = 0.021) and decreased appetite (p = 0.003). At the same time, there were several aspects that improved the quality of life. Increases in emotional function (p = 0.009), cognitive function (p = 0.033), and perception of body image (p = 0.026) were observed after 6 months of treatment. Elderly patients reported a higher frequency of stools (p = 0.028), and young patients had increased concerns about body perception (p = 0.047). Assessing the quality of life of metastatic colorectal cancer patients is an important way to identify and treat symptoms related to both cancer and therapy by establishing a holistic care plan and implementing measures to increase the quality of life.

Biological Correlates of the Effects of Auricular Point Acupressure on Pain

BACKGROUND

To identify candidate inflammatory biomarkers for the underlying mechanism of auricular point acupressure (APA) on pain relief and examine the correlations among pain intensity, interference, and inflammatory biomarkers.

DESIGN

This is a secondary data analysis.

METHODS

Data on inflammatory biomarkers collected via blood samples and patient self-reported pain intensity and interference from three pilot studies (chronic low back pain, n = 61; arthralgia related to aromatase inhibitors, n = 20; and chemotherapy-induced neuropathy, n = 15) were integrated and analyzed. This paper reports the results based on within-subject treatment effects (change in scores from pre- to post-APA intervention) for each study group (chronic low back pain, cancer pain), between-group differences (changes in scores from pre- to post-intervention between targeted-point APA [T-APA] and non-targeted-point APA [NT-APA]), and correlations among pain intensity, interference, and biomarkers.

RESULTS

Within-group analysis (the change score from pre- to post-APA) revealed statistically significant changes in three biomarkers: TNF-α (cancer pain in the APA group, p = .03), β-endorphin (back pain in the APA group, p = .04), and IL-2 (back pain in the NT-APA group, p = .002). Based on between-group analysis in patients with chronic low back pain (T-APA vs NT-APA), IL-4 had the largest effect size (0.35), followed by TNF-α (0.29). A strong positive monotonic relationship between IL-1β and IL-2 was detected.

CONCLUSIONS

The current findings further support the potential role of inflammatory biomarkers in the analgesic effects of APA. More work is needed to gain a comprehensive understanding of the underlying mechanisms of APA on chronic pain. Because it is simple, inexpensive, and has no negative side effects, APA can be widely disseminated as an alternative to opioids.

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.

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.

Buprenorphine-Naloxone in the Setting of Kratom Withdrawal, Opioid Use Disorder, and Stage IV Lung Adenocarcinoma

Management of cancer-associated pain warrants consideration of many factors, including characterization and etiology of the pain, socioeconomic factors, medication tolerance, and substance use history. Kratom (Mitragyna speciosa) is an herbal substance with stimulant and analgesic properties that is becoming a popular drug in the United States. In this report, we present a patient with a history of opioid use disorder (OUD) who had been using high doses of kratom to alleviate progressive chest pain and dyspnea secondary to newly diagnosed stage IV lung adenocarcinoma. He underwent kratom withdrawal shortly after his index admission and was reluctant to continue full opioid agonists given his history of OUD and complex living situation. His kratom withdrawal and cancer-associated symptoms were successfully managed with buprenorphine-naloxone. Providers should obtain a careful history of novel substance use such as kratom. Furthermore, buprenorphine-naloxone is a safe and effective option to simultaneously manage kratom withdrawal and cancer-associated pain.

[Efficacy Survey of Naldemedine in the Poor-performance Status Group]

Naldemedine (Nal) is widely used as a therapeutic drug against opioid-induced constipation. However, patients in phase III trials are limited to those with good performance status (PS). Cancer patients may have inferior PS owing to progression of symptoms and adverse events from chemotherapy. Therefore, it is important to survey the efficacy of Nal in patients with poor PS. This study aimed to evaluate Nal efficacy in patients with poor PS. We retrospectively investigated patients from July 2017 to June 2019 and compared Nal efficacy between patients with good and poor PS. The efficacy of Nal was evaluated using changes in the number of spontaneous bowel movements 7 days before and after the introduction of Nal with reference to previous reports. Multivariate analysis was performed to reveal whether poor PS affects Nal efficacy. In total, 141 patients at the Hokkaido University Hospital were analyzed. The effective rate of Nal from day 1 to day 7 of administration was 71.7% and 71.4% in the patients with good and poor PS, respectively, that from day 1 to day 2 of administration was 61.1% and 57.1%, respectively, and that from day 3 to day 7 of administration was 60.2% and 71.4%, respectively, suggesting an absence of significant differences. Furthermore, results of multivariate analysis showed that "best supportive care" and "body weight (55 kg and above)" reduced Nal efficacy. In conclusion, Nal showed similar effectiveness in patients with poor PS as that in those with good PS.

Approach to Cancer Pain Management in Emergency Departments: Comparison of General and Oncology Based Settings

Cancer-related pain constitutes a dominant reason for admission to emergency services, and a significant patient and healthcare challenge. Evidence points to the rising prevalence of opioid misuse in this patient group. We sought to compare drug delivery in an oncology-dedicated emergency department (OED) and a general emergency department (GED) within the same hospital. As such, we obtained patient and drug-related data for OED and GED during a designated three-month period, and compared them using Fisher’s exact test, chi-square tests and the Mann-Whitney test. In total, 584 patients had 922 visits to emergency services (OED n = 479; GED n = 443), and were given 1478 drugs (OED n = 557; GED n = 921). Pain was a prominent chief complaint among visitors to the OED (17%) and GED (21%). Approximately a fifth of all drugs used were analgesics (OED—18.5%; GED—20.4%), however, in the GED, 51.6% (n = 97) were used for non-pain-related admissions, compared with 33.0% (n = 34) in OED. Opioid usage significantly differed between emergency settings. The GED administered three times as many intravenous opioids (p <0.001), a narrower spectrum of oral and intravenous drugs (p = 0.003) and no rapid-acting opioids, significantly fewer pain adjuvants (10.9% versus 18.7%, p < 0.001), and, finally, non-guideline-recommended drugs for pain, such as meperidine and benzodiazepines. Taken together, compared with the GED, the management of cancer-related pain in the OED was more personalized, and characterized by fewer intravenous opioids, enhanced diversity in drug type, route and method of delivery. Efforts should be directed toward reduction of disparities in the treatment of cancer pain in emergency settings.

Evaluating Age as a Predictor of Postoperative Opioid Use and Prescribing Habits in Older Adults With Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To assess the narcotic use of older patients after oncologic resection.

DESIGN

Retrospective review.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Adults with neoplasms undergoing resection at a tertiary academic medical center.

METHODS

Open and minimally invasive resections of the pancreas, bowel, rectum, lung, breast, and skin were included. Emergent procedures, chronic opioid users, and benign pathology were excluded. Narcotic use was measured using morphine equivalents (MEQs, milligrams of morphine) at multiple time points and compared between younger and older (aged ≥65 years) patients. Refill requests were within 30 days of index procedure.

RESULTS

A total of 445 patients were eligible, and 245 were ≥65 years old. Despite longer length of stay (3 vs 2 days, P = .01), older patients used less narcotic medication [39.8 (150) mg vs 84 (229) mg, P = .004], and reported lower pain scores [1.3 (3.3) vs 2.8 (4.5), P = .0001] over the course of their hospitalization. Additionally, older patients had lower normalized narcotic use [15.3 (150) mg vs 77.4 (240) mg, P = .0001] in the last 48 hours of their admission. Following discharge, older patients had a lower median discharge MEQ (DC MEQ) compared with younger patients, 75 (150) mg vs 112.5 (102.5) mg, P = .002. Further stratifying older patients into age cohorts (65-74 years, 75-84 years, ≥85 years) revealed progressively less narcotic use as measured by total inpatient MEQ and final 48 hours. Additionally, progressively older patients were discharged with progressively lower DC MEQ compared with younger patients, 90 (112.5) mg, 50 (131.3) mg, and 0 (60) mg vs 112.5 (102.5) mg, P < .0001, respectively. Finally, older patients requested refills less often than younger counterparts, 6.5% vs 14.5%, P = .006.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Older patients with cancer reported lower pain scores, consumed less narcotics, were discharged with significantly less narcotics, and called for refills less often compared with younger patients after surgery. These data suggest this population may require less opioids for satisfactory pain control, and development of a guideline targeting postoperative multimodal analgesia in older adults is warranted.

Flipping the script: The effects of opioid prescription monitoring on specialty-specific provider behavior

Mandatory access Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs (MA-PDMPs) aim to curb the epidemic at a common point of initiation of use, the prescription. However, there is recent concern about whether opioid policies have been too restrictive and reduced appropriate access to patients with the most need for opioid pharmaceuticals. We assess MA-PDMP's effect on specialty-specific opioid prescribing behavior of Medicare providers. Our findings suggest that requiring providers to query a PDMP differentially affects opioid prescribing across provider specialties. We find a three to four percent decrease in prescribing for Primary Care and Internal Medicine providers. This result is driven by healthcare providers at the lower end of the prescribing distribution. There is also suggestive evidence of an increase in opioid use disorder treatment drugs prescribed by these same providers. We also find no evidence for the hypothesis that MA-PDMPs restrict prescribing by providers who treat patients with potentially high levels of pain, few drug substitutes, or urgency for pain treatment (e.g., Oncology/Palliative care). This result is not dependent on whether a state provides exemptions for these providers. Our results indicate that MA-PDMPs may help close provider-patient informational gaps while retaining a provider's ability to supply these drugs to patients with a need for opioids.

Efficacy and Safety of Transcutaneous Electrical Acupoint Stimulation (TEAS) for Postoperative Pain in Laparoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVES

This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of transcutaneous acupoint electrical stimulation (TEAS) for postoperative pain in laparoscopy. The review has been registered on the "INPLASY" website and the registration number is INPLASY202150101.

METHODS

Relevant randomized controlled trials are selected from seven electronic databases (PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chongqing VIP Information, WanFang Data, and Chinese Biomedical Database) from their inception up to November 30, 2020. Twenty-eight studies were included in this meta-analysis, and the statistical analyses and the exploration of heterogeneity sources were conducted by Stata 15.0 software. Besides, the bias assessment of the included studies was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool.

RESULTS

In total, 28 RCTs covering 2787 participants were included. The meta-analysis suggested that TEAS can effectively relieve pain in the short term after laparoscopy, reduce the postoperative consumption of rescue analgesics, improve the quality of life of patients, and shorten the length of hospitalization. And no serious adverse events are related to TEAS. Therefore, TEAS is relatively safe and efficacy for clinical application. The most used acupoints were Hegu (LI14), Neiguan (PC6), and Zusanli (ST36).

CONCLUSIONS

TEAS can be recommended as a complementary and alternative therapy for the treatment of postoperative pain after laparoscopy. However, the included RCTs had some methodological limitations. Therefore, larger-size, more rigorous, and higher-quality RCTs are needed in the future to further explore the efficacy and safety of TEAS for postoperative pain after laparoscopy.

Predictors of the final place of care of patients with advanced cancer receiving integrated home-based palliative care: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Meeting patients’ preferences for place of care at the end-of-life is an indicator of quality palliative care. Understanding the key elements required for terminal care within an integrated model may inform policy and practice, and consequently increase the likelihood of meeting patients’ preferences. Hence, this study aimed to identify factors associated with the final place of care in patients with advanced cancer receiving integrated, home-based palliative care.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included deceased adult patients with advanced cancer who were enrolled in the home-based palliative care service between January 2016 and December 2018. Patients with < 2 weeks’ enrollment in the home-based service, or ≤ 1-week duration at the final place of care, were excluded. The following information were retrieved from patients’ electronic medical records: patients’ and their families’ characteristics, care preferences, healthcare utilization, functional status (measured by the Palliative Performance Scale (PPSv2)), and symptom severity (measured by the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System). Multivariate logistic regression was employed to identify independent predictors of the final place of care. Kappa value was calculated to estimate the concordance between actual and preferred place of death.

Results

A total of 359 patients were included in the study. Home was the most common (58.2%) final place of care, followed by inpatient hospice (23.7%), and hospital (16.7%). Patients who were single or divorced (OR: 5.5; 95% CI: 1.1–27.8), or had older family caregivers (OR: 3.1; 95% CI: 1.1–8.8), PPSv2 score ≥ 40% (OR: 9.1; 95% CI: 3.3–24.8), pain score ≥ 2 (OR: 3.6; 95% CI: 1.3–9.8), and non-home death preference (OR: 23.8; 95% CI: 5.4–105.1), were more likely to receive terminal care in the inpatient hospice. Patients who were male (OR: 3.2; 95% CI: 1.0–9.9), or had PPSv2 score ≥ 40% (OR: 8.6; 95% CI: 2.9–26.0), pain score ≥ 2 (OR: 3.5; 95% CI: 1.2–10.3), and non-home death preference (OR: 9.8; 95% CI: 2.1–46.3), were more likely to be hospitalized. Goal-concordance was fair (72.6%, kappa = 0.39).

Conclusions

Higher functional status, greater pain intensity, and non-home death preference predicted institutionalization as the final place of care. Additionally, single or divorced patients with older family caregivers were more likely to receive terminal care in the inpatient hospice, while males were more likely to be hospitalized. Despite being part of an integrated care model, goal-concordance was sub-optimal. More comprehensive community networks and resources, enhanced pain control, and personalized care planning discussions, are recommended to better meet patients’ preferences for their final place of care. Future research could similarly examine factors associated with the final place of care in patients with advanced non-cancer conditions.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12904-021-00865-5.

Perioperative pain, analgesics and cancer-related outcomes: where do we stand?

Cancer-related pain is one of the most common and debilitating symptoms among cancer patients. Undertreated cancer-related pain interferes with daily activities and increases morbidity and mortality. While opioids continue to play an essential role in treating moderate to severe cancer-related pain, they are associated with many adverse effects including misuse. While preclinical and retrospective studies have shown a negative association between opioid use and cancer outcomes, randomized control trials demonstrate that opioid use does not influence cancer recurrence. Additionally, analgesics and adjuvants used for perioperatively or chronic pain control are unlikely to improve oncological outcomes. This article focuses on the pharmacological management of cancer-related pain and offers an overview regarding the use of these medications perioperatively and the cancer outcomes.

Clinical Implications of Opioid Therapy

Although opioids are potent central acting broad-spectrum analgesics, their effectiveness is diminished by various factors pertaining to their metabolism, drug interactions, genetic issues, adverse/side effects, and potential for abuse. All these factors present potential barriers to effective analgesia requiring specific considerations in clinical practice, which include monitoring and case-based intervention.

Evaluation of Extended-Release Oxycodone Administered through Enteral Tubes for the Management of Pain in Patients with Head and Neck Cancer: A Case Series

An abuse-deterrent, microsphere-in-capsule extended-release formulation of oxycodone myristate (Xtampza® ER, Collegium Pharmaceutical Inc, Canton, Massachusetts), was approved by the FDA in 2016 for the management of pain. The advantage of this formulation of oxycodone is that the microspheres can be administered via enteral tubes without compromising the long-acting formulation. This case series characterizes the experiences of five head and neck cancer patients initiated on oxycodone myristate through enteral tube administration for control of cancer-related pain. The primary outcome of patient reported subjective improvement in pain within one week occurred in all five patients. The median time to pain control was 4 days. The safety profile of oxycodone myristate was consistent with the package insert with no new findings reported. Oxycodone myristate can be an appropriate long-acting opioid analgesic option for patients requiring enteral tube administration of medications to achieve adequate cancer-related pain control.

Exemptions to state laws regulating opioid prescribing for patients with cancer-related pain: A summary

BACKGROUND

Cancer-related pain is highly prevalent and is commonly treated with prescription opioids. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) now encourages conservative opioid prescribing in recognition of potential opioid-related risks. However, CDC guidelines have been misapplied to patients with cancer. Recent laws at the state level reflect the CDC's guidance by limiting opioid prescribing. It is unclear whether states exempt cancer-related pain, which may affect cancer pain management. Thus, the objective of this study was to summarize current state-level opioid prescribing laws and exemptions for patients with cancer.

METHODS

Two study authors reviewed publicly available state records to identify the most recent opioid prescribing laws and cancer-related exemptions. Documents were required to have the force of law and be enacted at the time of the search (November 2020).

RESULTS

Results indicated that 36 states had enacted formal legislation limiting the duration and/or dosage of opioid prescriptions, and this was largely focused on acute pain and/or initial prescriptions. Of these states, 32 (89%) explicitly exempted patients with cancer-related pain from opioid prescribing laws. Exemptions were broadly applied, with few states providing specific guidance for cancer-related pain prescribing.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study indicate that most states recognize the importance of prescription opioids in cancer-related pain management. However, drafting nuanced and clinically relevant opioid legislation is challenging for a heterogenous population. Additionally, current attempts to regulate opioid prescribing by state law may unintentionally undermine patient-centered approaches to pain management. Additional resources are needed to facilitate clarity at the intersection of opioid-related legislation and clinical management for cancer-related pain.

LAY SUMMARY

In this review of state-level legislation, current limitations on opioid prescribing are summarized and detailed information is provided on exemptions for patients with cancer. The majority of states have enacted specific dosage and/or duration limitations on opioid prescribing while including broad exemptions for cancer-related pain. Cancer-related pain exemptions are important to include, as is consistent with national and professional guidelines (eg, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). However, these exemptions may also unintentionally undermine patient-centered approaches to pain management. Additional resources, including specific guidance for patients with cancer, are needed to facilitate clarity at the intersection of opioid-related legislation and clinical pain management. ​.

Pancreas Cancer-Associated Pain Management

Pain is highly prevalent in patients with pancreas cancer and contributes to the morbidity of the disease. Pain may be due to pancreatic enzyme insufficiency, obstruction, and/or a direct mass effect on nerves in the celiac plexus. Proper supportive care to decrease pain is an important aspect of the overall management of these patients. There are limited data specific to the management of pain caused by pancreatic cancer. Here we review the literature and offer recommendations regarding multiple modalities available to treat pain in these patients. The dissemination and adoption of these best supportive care practices can improve quantity and quality of life for patients with pancreatic cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Pain management is important to improve the quality of life and survival of a patient with cancer. The pathophysiology of pain in pancreas cancer is complex and multifactorial. Despite tumor response to chemotherapy, a sizeable percentage of patients are at risk for ongoing cancer-related pain and its comorbid consequences. Accordingly, the management of pain in patients with pancreas cancer can be challenging and often requires a multifaceted approach.

Regular dosing compared with as-needed dosing of opioids for management of chronic cancer pain: systematic review and meta-analysis

Opioids are the recommended form of analgesia for patients with persistent cancer pain, and regular dosing "by the clock" is advocated in many international guidelines on cancer pain management. The development of sustained-release opioid preparations has made regular dosing easier for patients. However, patients report that the intensity and impact of their cancer pain varies considerably day to day, and many try to find a trade-off between acceptable pain control and impact of cognitive (and other) adverse effects on daily activities. In acute care settings, (eg, postoperative) as-needed dosing and other opioid-sparing approaches have resulted in better patient outcomes compared with regular dosing. The aim of this study was to determine whether regular dosing of opioids was superior to as-needed dosing for persistent cancer pain. We systematically searched for randomised controlled trials that directly compared pain outcomes from regular dosing of opioids with as-needed dosing in adult cancer patients. We identified 4347 records, 25 randomised controlled trials meet the inclusion criteria, 9 were included in the review, and 7 of these included in meta-analysis. We found no clear evidence demonstrating superiority of regular dosing of opioids compared with as-needed dosing in persistent cancer pain, and regular dosing was associated with significantly higher total opioid doses. There was, however, a paucity of trials directly answering this question, and low-quality evidence limits the conclusions that can be drawn. It is clear that further high-quality clinical trials are needed to answer this question and to guide clinical practice.

Frequency of and Factors Associated With Nonmedical Opioid Use Behavior Among Patients With Cancer Receiving Opioids for Cancer Pain

Importance

One of the main aims of research on nonmedical opioid use (NMOU) is to reduce the frequency of NMOU behaviors through interventions such as universal screening, reduced opioid exposure, and more intense follow-up of patients with elevated risk. The absence of data on the frequency of NMOU behavior is the major barrier to conducting research on NMOU.

Objective

To determine the overall frequency of and the independent predictors for NMOU behavior.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this prognostic study, 3615 patients with cancer were referred to the supportive care center at MD Anderson Cancer Center from March 18, 2016, to June 6, 2018. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they had cancer and were taking opioids for cancer pain for at least 1 week. Patients were excluded if they had no follow-up within 3 months of initial consultation, did not complete the appropriate questionnaire, or did not have scheduled opioid treatments. After exclusion, a total of 1554 consecutive patients were assessed for NMOU behavior using established diagnostic criteria. All patients were assessed using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale, the Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain (SOAPP), and the Cut Down, Annoyed, Guilty, Eye Opener-Adapted to Include Drugs (CAGE-AID) survey. Data were analyzed from January 6 to September 25, 2020.

Results

A total of 1554 patients (median [interquartile range (IQR)] age, 61 [IQR, 52-69] years; 816 women [52.5%]; 1124 White patients [72.3%]) were evaluable for the study, and 299 patients (19.2%) had 1 or more NMOU behaviors. The median (IQR) number of NMOU behaviors per patient was 1 (IQR, 1-3). A total of 576 of 745 NMOU behaviors (77%) occurred by the first 2 follow-up visits. The most frequent NMOU behavior was unscheduled clinic visits for inappropriate refills (218 of 745 [29%]). Eighty-eight of 299 patients (29.4%) scored 7 or higher on SOAPP, and 48 (16.6%) scored at least 2 out of 4 points on the CAGE-AID survey. Results from the multivariate model suggest that marital status (single, hazard ratio [HR], 1.58; 95% CI, 1.15-2.18; P = .005; divorced, HR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.01-2.03; P = .04), SOAPP score (positive vs negative, HR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.04-1.74; P = .02), morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) (HR, 1.003; 95% CI, 1.002-1.004; P < .001), and Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale pain level (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.06-1.16; P < .001) were independently associated with the presence of NMOU behavior. In recursive partition analysis, single marital status, MEDD greater than 50 mg, and SOAPP scores greater than 7 were associated with a higher risk (56%) for the presence of NMOU behavior.

Conclusions and Relevance

This prognostic study of patients with cancer taking opioids for cancer pain found that 19% of patients developed NMOU behavior within a median duration of 8 weeks after initial supportive care clinic consultation. Marital status (single or divorced), SOAPP score greater than 7, higher levels of pain severity, and MEDD level were independently associated with NMOU behavior. This information will assist clinicians and investigators designing clinical and research programs in this important field.

Racial, Ethnic, and Socioeconomic Discrepancies in Opioid Prescriptions Among Older Patients With Cancer

PURPOSE

Minority race and lower socioeconomic status are associated with lower rates of opioid prescription and undertreatment of pain in multiple noncancer healthcare settings. It is not known whether these differences in opioid prescribing exist among patients undergoing cancer treatment.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This observational cohort study involved 33,872 opioid-naive patients of age > 65 years undergoing definitive cancer treatment. We compared rates of new opioid prescriptions by race or ethnicity and socioeconomic status controlling for differences in baseline patient, cancer, and treatment factors. To evaluate downstream impacts of opioid prescribing and pain management, we also compared rates of persistent opioid use and pain-related emergency department (ED) visits.

RESULTS

Compared with non-Hispanic White patients, the covariate-adjusted odds of receiving an opioid prescription were 24.9% (95% CI, 16.0 to 33.9, P < .001) lower for non-Hispanic Blacks, 115.0% (84.7 to 150.3, P < .001) higher for Asian-Pacific Islanders, and not statistically different for Hispanics (-1.0 to 14.0, P = .06). There was no significant association between race or ethnicity and persistent opioid use or pain-related ED visits. Patients living in a high-poverty area had higher odds (53.9% [25.4 to 88.8, P < .001]) of developing persistent use and having a pain-related ED visit (39.4% [16.4 to 66.9, P < .001]).

CONCLUSION

For older patients with cancer, rates of opioid prescriptions and pain-related outcomes significantly differed by race and area-level poverty. Non-Hispanic Black patients were associated with a significantly decreased likelihood of receiving an opioid prescription. Patients from high-poverty areas were more likely to develop persistent opioid use and have a pain-related ED visit.

New Persistent Opioid and Benzodiazepine Use After Curative-Intent Treatment in Patients With Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

Opioid and benzodiazepine use and abuse is a national healthcare crisis to which patients with cancer are particularly vulnerable. Long-term use and risk factors for opioid and benzodiazepine use in patients with breast cancer is poorly characterized.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective population-based study of patients with breast cancer diagnosed between 2008 and 2015 undergoing curative-intent treatment identified through the SEER-Medicare linked database. Primary outcomes were new persistent opioid use and new persistent benzodiazepine use. Factors associated with new opioid and benzodiazepine use were investigated by univariate and multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among opioid-naïve patients, new opioid use was observed in 22,418 (67.4%). Of this group, 611 (2.7%) developed persistent opioid use at 3 months and 157 (0.7%) at 6 months after treatment. Risk factors for persistent use at 3 and 6 months included stage III disease (odds ratio [OR], 2.16; 95% CI, 1.49-3.12, and OR, 3.48; 95% CI, 1.58-7.67), surgery plus chemotherapy (OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.10-1.88, and OR, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.40-3.71), surgery plus chemoradiation therapy (OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.10-1.96, and OR, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.38-3.96), and initial tramadol use (OR, 2.66; 95% CI, 2.05-3.46, and OR, 3.12; 95% CI, 1.93-5.04). Among benzodiazepine-naïve patients, new benzodiazepine use was observed in 955 (10.3%), and 111 (11.6%) developed new persistent use at 3 months. Tamoxifen use was statistically significantly associated with new persistent benzodiazepine use at 3 months.

CONCLUSIONS

A large percentage of patients receiving curative-intent treatment of breast cancer were prescribed new opioids; however, only a small number developed new persistent opioid use. In contrast, a smaller proportion of patients received a new benzodiazepine prescription; however, new persistent use after completion of treatment was more likely and particularly related to concurrent treatment with tamoxifen.

Factors Related to Prescription Drug Monitoring Program Queries for Veterans Receiving Long-Term Opioid Therapy

Objective

State prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) identify controlled medications dispensed across providers and systems. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) policy requires electronic health record documentation of PDMP queries at least annually for VA patients receiving controlled medications; however, queries are not uniformly conducted. We examined factors associated with PDMP queries for veterans receiving long-term opioid therapy.

Methods

Veterans with a VA provider who received long-term opioid therapy between August 2015 and August 2016 within a four-state region were identified; 9,879 were due for a PDMP query between August 2016 and February 2017. Likelihood of veterans’ PDMP queries during this follow-up period was modeled as a function of patient, provider, and facility characteristics of interest in mixed-effects modified Poisson models estimating relative risk and 95% confidence intervals. Multivariable models controlled for potential confounders identified through the use of directed acyclic graphs.

Results

PDMP queries were documented for 62.1% of veterans that were due for a PDMP query. Veterans were more likely to be queried if they were Hispanic or if they received methadone, had average daily milligram morphine equivalents &gt;20, or received urine drug screening during the studied period. Veterans were less likely to be queried if they had a rural address, mail order medication, or cancer diagnosis. Likelihood of PDMP queries was also lower for veterans whose opioid-prescribing provider was an oncologist or working in a low-complexity facility.

Conclusions

Adherence to PDMP query policy within the VA varied by patient, clinician, and facility factors. Mechanisms to standardize the conduct of PDMP queries may be needed.

Palliative Care's Role Managing Cancer Pain During the Opioid Crisis: A Qualitative Study of Patients, Caregivers, and Clinicians

CONTEXT

Patients with cancer face symptoms because of disease and treatment, and pain is common and complex. The opioid crisis may complicate patients' and clinicians' experiences of managing pain in cancer care.

OBJECTIVES

In our study of perceptions and experiences with palliative care (PC) at an outpatient cancer center, we examined communication around symptom management throughout cancer care, and pain and its management emerged as particularly salient. The objective of this article is to describe, from the perspectives of patients, caregivers, and oncology health care professionals, the role of PC in navigating the complicated dynamics of pain management amidst the opioid crisis.

METHODS

A qualitative descriptive study with grounded theory components was designed to investigate experiences with and perceptions of specialist PC and symptom management, including pain. Interviews were audiorecorded and transcribed, and focused coding identified themes related to pain and pain management from all three perspectives.

RESULTS

About 44 patients, caregivers, and non-PC health care professionals completed interviews. Patients with cancer and their caregivers had many concerns about pain management and were specifically concerned about opioid use and stigma. For patients, PC improved pain management and helped to destigmatize appropriate pain management. Oncology clinicians reported that partnering with PC facilitated complex pain management and also provided moral support around difficult opioid recommendations for patients.

CONCLUSION

PC offers the potential to uniquely support both patients and other oncology professionals in optimally navigating the complexity around pain management for cancer care in the midst of the opioid crisis.

Nonopioid drug combinations for cancer pain: protocol for a systematic review

This protocol will guide a review of clinical trials that evaluate the efficacy and safety of nonopioid analgesic drug combinations for the management of cancer-related pain.

Introduction:

Pain related to cancer, and its treatment, is common, may severely impair quality of life, and imposes a burden on patients, their families and caregivers, and society. Cancer-related pain is often challenging to manage, with limitations of analgesic drugs including incomplete efficacy and dose-related adverse effects.

Objectives:

Given problems with, and limitations of, opioid use for cancer-related pain, the identification of nonopioid treatment strategies that could improve cancer pain care is an attractive concept. The hypothesis that combinations of mechanistically distinct analgesic drugs could provide superior analgesia and/or fewer adverse effects has been tested in several pain conditions, including in cancer-related pain. Here, we propose to review trials of nonopioid analgesic combinations for cancer-related pain.

Methods:

Using a predefined literature search strategy, trials—comparing the combination of 2 or more nonopioid analgesics with at least one of the combination's individual components—will be searched on the PubMed and EMBASE databases from their inception until the date the searches are run. Outcomes will include pain intensity or relief, adverse effects, and concomitant opioid consumption.

Results/Conclusions:

This review is expected to synthesize available evidence describing the efficacy and safety of nonopioid analgesic combinations for cancer-related pain. Furthermore, a review of this literature will serve to identify future research goals that would advance our knowledge in this area.

Median Nerve Stimulation as a Nonpharmacological Approach to Bypass Analgesic Tolerance to Morphine: A Proof-of-Concept Study in Mice

Analgesic tolerance to opioids contributes to the opioid crisis by increasing the quantity of opioids prescribed and consumed. Thus, there is a need to develop non-opioid-based pain-relieving regimens as well as strategies to circumvent opioid tolerance. Previously, we revealed a non-opioid analgesic mechanism induced by median nerve electrostimulation at the overlaying PC6 (Neiguan) acupoint (MNS-PC6). Here, we further examined the efficacy of MNS-PC6 in morphine-tolerant mice with neuropathic pain induced by chronic constriction injury (CCI) of the sciatic nerve. Daily treatments of MNS-PC6 (2 Hz, 2 mA), but not electrostimulation at a nonmedian nerve-innervated location, for a week post-CCI induction significantly suppressed established mechanical allodynia in CCI-mice in an orexin-1 (OX₁) and cannabinoid-1 (CB₁) receptor-dependent fashion. This antiallodynic effect induced by repeated MNS-PC6 was comparable to that induced by repeated gabapentin (50 mg/kg, i.p.) or single morphine (10 mg/kg, i.p.) treatments, but without tolerance, unlike repeated morphine-induced analgesia. Furthermore, single and repeated MNS-PC6 treatments remained fully effective in morphine-tolerant CCI-mice, also in an OX₁ and CB₁ receptor-dependent fashion. In CCI-mice receiving escalating doses of morphine for 21 days (10, 20 and 50 mg/kg), single and repeated MNS-PC6 treatments remained fully effective. Therefore, repeated MNS-PC6 treatments induce analgesia without tolerance, and retain efficacy in opioid-tolerant mice via a mechanism that involves OX₁ and CB₁ receptors. This study suggests that MNS-PC6 is an alternative pain management strategy that maybe useful for combatting the opioid epidemic, and opioid-tolerant patients receiving palliative care. PERSPECTIVE: Median nerve stimulation relieves neuropathic pain in mice without tolerance and retains efficacy even in mice with analgesic tolerance to escalating doses of morphine, via an opioid-independent, orexin-endocannabinoid-mediated mechanism. This study provides a proof of concept for utilizing peripheral nerve stimulating devices for pain management in opioid-tolerant patients.

Patterns of oxycodone controlled release use in older people with cancer following public subsidy of oxycodone/naloxone formulations: An Australian population-based study

AIM

Public subsidy of the oxycodone/naloxone controlled release (CR) combination in December 2011 expanded the overall market for oxycodone CR in the general public in Australia; we evaluate its impact in people with cancer.

METHODS

We used Repatriation Pharmaceutical Benefits dispensing data linked with the NSW Cancer Registry for Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA) healthcare card holders 65 years and older residing in NSW between 2004 and 2013 to identify clients with cancer and their opioid dispensings. We used interrupted time series analysis to model changes in monthly rates of oxycodone CR tablets dispensed and initiations. We performed a retrospective cohort study to examine changes in client characteristics and opioid utilization over time by comparing clients initiating oxycodone CR before and after subsidy.

RESULTS

The rate of oxycodone CR tablets dispensed/month increased by 20% from December 2011, due to uptake of the oxycodone/naloxone CR combination; monthly initiations increased immediately by 17%. Initiations of buprenorphine, fentanyl, and morphine declined from December 2011. DVA healthcare card holders were significantly more likely to initiate the 5 mg oxycodone CR formulation; more likely to use immediate release oxycodone in the 90 days following initiation; and less likely to use a weak opioid in the 90 days preceding oxycodone CR initiation following December 2011 than they were prior to that time.

CONCLUSIONS

The public subsidy of the oxycodone/naloxone CR formulation expanded the overall oxycodone CR market for DVA healthcare card holders with cancer. Our findings highlight the need for updated guidelines around risk management for opioid treatment in patients with cancer.

Emergency Department Visits for Opioid Overdoses Among Patients With Cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients with cancer may be at risk of high opioid use due to physical and psychosocial factors, although little data exist to inform providers and policymakers. Our aim is to examine overdoses from opioids leading to emergency department (ED) visits among patients with cancer in the United States.

METHODS

The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Emergency Department Sample was queried for all adult cancer-related patient visits with a primary diagnosis of opioid overdose between 2006 and 2015. Temporal trends and baseline differences between patients with and without opioid-related ED visits were evaluated. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify risk factors associated with opioid overdose. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

Between 2006 and 2015, there were a weighted total of 35 339 opioid-related ED visits among patients with cancer. During this time frame, the incidence of opioid-related ED visits for overdose increased twofold (P < .001). On multivariable regression (P < .001), comorbid diagnoses of chronic pain (odds ratio [OR] 4.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 4.13 to 4.93), substance use disorder (OR = 3.54, 95% CI = 3.28 to 3.82), and mood disorder (OR = 3.40, 95% CI = 3.16 to 3.65) were strongly associated with an opioid-related visit. Patients with head and neck cancer (OR = 2.04, 95% CI = 1.82 to 2.28) and multiple myeloma (OR = 1.73, 95% CI = 1.32 to 2.26) were also at risk for overdose.

CONCLUSIONS

Over the study period, the incidence of opioid-related ED visits in patients with cancer increased approximately twofold. Comorbid diagnoses and primary disease site may predict risk for opioid overdose.