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

Pharmacological treatment of cancer pain and opioid induced nausea and vomiting: online survey and comparison with current guidelines

PURPOSE

We assumed that in Palliative Care, even in common clinical situations, the choice of drugs differs substantially between physicians. Therefore, we assessed the practice of pharmaceutical treatment choices of physicians for cancer pain and opioid-induced nausea and vomiting (OINV) and the rationale for their choices.

METHODS

An online survey was conducted with physicians covering the following domains: i) Cancer pain therapy: non-opioids in addition to opioids: choice of drug ii) prevention of OINV: choice of drug and mode of application. Current guidelines concerning cancer pain therapy and prevention of OINV were compared.

RESULTS

Two-hundred-forty European physicians responded to our survey. i) Use of non-opioids in addition to opioids for the treatment of cancer pain: Only 1.3% (n = 3) of respondents never used an additional non-opioid. Others mostly used: dipyrone/metamizole (49.2%, n = 118), paracetamol/acetaminophen (34.2%, n = 82), ibuprofen / other NSAIDs (11.3%, n = 27), specific Cox2-inhibitors (2.1%, n = 5), Aspirin (0.4%, n = 1), no answer (2.9%, n = 7). ii) Antiemetics to prevent OINV: The drugs of choice were metoclopramide (58.3%, n = 140), haloperidol (26.3%, n = 63), 5-HT3 antagonists (9.6%, n = 23), antihistamines (1.3%, n = 3) and other (2.9%, n = 7); no answer (1.7%, n = 4). Most respondents prescribed the substances on-demand (59.6%, n = 143) while others (36.3%, n = 87) provided them as around the clock medication. Over both domains, most physicians answered that their choices were not based on solid evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Guidelines were inconsistent regarding if and what non-opioid to use for cancer pain and recommend anti-dopaminergic drugs for prevention or treatment of OINV.

CONCLUSIONS

Physician's practice in palliative care for the treatment of cancer pain and OINV differed substantially. Respondents expressed the lack of high-quality evidence- based information from RCTs. We call for evidence from methodologically high-quality RCTs to be available to inform physicians about the benefits and harms of pharmacological treatments for common symptoms in palliative care.

Effectiveness of fentanyl buccal soluble film in cancer patients with inadequate breakthrough pain control

BACKGROUND

Clinical evidence for the rapidity and effectiveness of fentanyl buccal soluble film (FBSF) in reducing pain intensity of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) remains inadequate. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of FBSF proportional to the around-the-clock (ATC) opioid regimens in rapidly relieving the intensity of BTcP episodes by determining the percentage of patients requiring further dose titration.

METHODS

The study procedure included a dose-finding period followed by a 14-day observation period. Pain intensity was recorded with a Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at onset and 5, 10, 15, and 30 min after FBSF self-administration. Meaningful pain relief was defined as the final NRS score ≤ 3. Satisfaction survey was conducted for each patient after treatment using the Global Satisfaction Scale.

RESULTS

A total of 63 BTcP episodes occurred in 30 cancer patients. Only one patient required rescue medication at first BTcP episode and then achieved meaningful pain relief after titrating FBSF by 200 µg. Most BTcP episodes relieved within 10 min. Of 63 BTcP episodes, 30 (47.6%), 46 (73.0%), and 53 (84.1%) relieved within 5, 10, and 15 min after FBSF administration. Only grade 1/2 adverse events were reported, including somnolence, malaise, and dizziness. Of the 63 BTcP episodes, 82.6% were rated as excellent/good satisfaction with FBSF.

CONCLUSION

FBSF can be administrated "on demand" by cancer patients at the onset of BTcP, providing rapid analgesia by achieving meaningful pain relief within 10 min.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was retrospectively registered 24 December, 2021 at Clinicaltrial.gov (NCT05209906): https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05209906 .

Pain, symptoms and therapy satisfaction in adult oncologic patients at admission to palliative care: An Italian prospective, multicenter, observational study

BACKGROUND

Pain in cancer patients is a complex clinical problem. Pain is systematically assessed and treated during palliative care, but little is known about how it is addressed before starting palliative care.

AIM

This study primarily analyzed pain, symptoms, ongoing therapy at patients' admittance to the palliative care unit, and the relationships between pain and tumor, comorbidities, performance status and quality of life (QoL). Notably, patient satisfaction with the received antalgic therapy was assessed.

METHODS

A multicentric, prospective, observational study was conducted in seven Italian palliative centers. The population consisted of adult cancer patients admitted to specialist palliative care units in hospice and home care.

RESULTS

The sample consisted of 476 patients. Ninety-three patients reported moderate pain of 4.0 and worst pain of 5.9 at the initial medical examination. The pain was high, and QoL was lower in breakthrough pain. The pain was lower in older subjects when it was discontinuous and when it was also treated with corticosteroids. A total of 61% of the patients were unsatisfied with the prescribed pain therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Before the beginning of palliative care, physicians do not manage pain adequately. We support the idea that palliative care is not only intended for the last days of life but must be started early and simultaneously with oncological treatments. All that, in our opinion, is often ignored, and we hope that our study could have a positive influence and that the study results stimulate further research in this area with in-depth studies.

The TREK-1 potassium channel is involved in both the analgesic and anti-proliferative effects of riluzole in bone cancer pain

BACKGROUND

The metastasis of tumors into bone tissue typically leads to intractable pain that is both very disabling and particularly difficult to manage. We investigated here whether riluzole could have beneficial effects for the treatment of prostate cancer-induced bone pain and how it could influence the development of bone metastasis.

METHODS

We used a bone pain model induced by intratibial injection of human PC3 prostate cancer cells into male SCID mice treated or not with riluzole administered in drinking water. We also used riluzole in vitro to assess its possible effect on PC3 cell viability and functionality, using patch-clamp.

RESULTS

Riluzole had a significant preventive effect on both evoked and spontaneous pain involving the TREK-1 potassium channel. Riluzole did not interfere with PC3-induced bone loss or bone remodeling in vivo. It also significantly decreased PC3 cell viability in vitro. The antiproliferative effect of riluzole is correlated with a TREK-1-dependent membrane hyperpolarization in these cells.

CONCLUSION

The present data suggest that riluzole could be very useful to manage evoked and spontaneous hypersensitivity in cancer-induced bone pain and has no significant adverse effect on cancer progression.

Dangerous Variation or Patient-Centered Care? Palliative Care and Pain Providers' Comfort, Experiences, and Approaches when Treating Cancer Pain With Coexisting Aberrant Behaviors

BACKGROUND

Patients with cancer-related pain are at high risk for aberrant drug use behaviors (ADB), including self-escalation, diversion and concurrent illicit substance or opioid misuse; however, limited evidence is available to guide opioid prescribing for patients with life-limiting illness and concurrent or suspected ADB. We sought to characterize how specialists evaluate for and manage these high-risk behaviors in patients with cancer-related pain.

METHODS

We conducted telephonic semi-structured interviews with palliative care and pain medicine providers. Participants discussed their own comfort and experience level with identifying and managing ADB in patients with life-limiting illness. They were subsequently presented with a series of standardized scenarios and asked to describe their concerns and management strategies.

RESULTS

95 interdisciplinary pain and palliative care specialists were contacted; 37 agreed to participate (38.9%). Analysis of interview contents revealed several central themes: (1) widespread discomfort and anxiety regarding safe and compassionate opioid prescribing for high-risk patients, (2) belief that widely used risk-mitigation tools such as opioid contracts and urine drug screens provided inadequate support for decision-making, and (3) lack of institutional and organizational support and guidance for safe prescribing strategies. Most clinicians reported self-education regarding addiction and alternative prescribing/pain management strategies. Providers varied widely in their willingness to discontinue opioid prescribing in a patient with aberrant behavior and pain associated with life-limiting illness.

CONCLUSION

Providers caring for patients demonstrating ADB and cancer-related pain struggle to balance safe prescribing with symptom management. Increased guidance is needed regarding opioid prescribing, monitoring, and discontinuation in high-risk patients.

Shifting views on cancer pain management: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Strong opioids are the cornerstone in the treatment of cancer-related pain.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to compare analgesic effectiveness of different strong opioids for the treatment of cancer-related pain.

METHODS

PubMed and Embase were searched for RCTs that compared strong opioids for treatment of cancer-related pain against one another. A network meta-analysis was conducted and the related Surface Under the Cumulative RAnking (SUCRA)-based treatment ranks were calculated. Primary outcome was pain intensity (numerical rating scale (NRS)) and/or the percentage of patients with ≥50% pain reduction, after 1 and 2-4 weeks.

RESULTS

Sixteen RCTs (1813 patients) were included. Methadone showed, with a high certainty of evidence, increased ORs for treatment success at 1 week, compared with morphine, buprenorphine, fentanyl, and oxycodone, range 3.230-36.833. Methadone had the highest likelihood to be the treatment of preference (ToP) (SUCRA 0.9720). For fentanyl, ORs were lower, however significant and with high certainty. After 2-4 weeks, methadone again showed the highest likelihood for ToP, however, with moderate certainty and non-significant ORs. The combination of morphine/methadone, compared with morphine, buprenorphine, fentanyl, hydromorphone, methadone, and oxycodone achieved a treatment effect of mean NRS difference after 2-4 weeks between -1.100 and -1.528 and had the highest likelihood for ToP.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that methadone possibly deserves further promotion as first-line treatment for the treatment of cancer-related pain.

Why and How to Integrate Early Palliative Care Into Cutting-Edge Personalized Cancer Care

Early palliative care, palliative care integrated with oncology care early in the course of illness, has myriad benefits for patients and their caregivers, including improved quality of life, reduced physical and psychological symptom burden, enhanced prognostic awareness, and reduced health care utilization at the end of life. Although ASCO and others recommend early palliative care for all patients with advanced cancer, widespread implementation of early palliative care has not been realized because of barriers such as insufficient reimbursement and a palliative care workforce shortage. Investigators have recently tested several implementation strategies to overcome these barriers, including triggers for palliative care consultations, telehealth delivery, navigator-delivered interventions, and primary palliative care interventions. More research is needed to identify mechanisms to distribute palliative care optimally and equitably. Simultaneously, the transformation of the oncology treatment landscape has led to shifts in the supportive care needs of patients and caregivers, who may experience longer, uncertain trajectories of cancer. Now, palliative care also plays a clear role in the care of patients with hematologic malignancies and may be beneficial for patients undergoing phase I clinical trials and their caregivers. Further research and clinical guidance regarding how to balance the risks and benefits of opioid therapy and safely manage cancer-related pain across this wide range of settings are urgently needed. The strengths of early palliative care in supporting patients' and caregivers' coping and centering decisions on their goals and values remain valuable in the care of patients receiving cutting-edge personalized cancer care.

Prevention and Management of Osteoradionecrosis in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer Treated With Radiation Therapy: ISOO-MASCC-ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide evidence-based recommendations for prevention and management of osteoradionecrosis (ORN) of the jaw secondary to head and neck radiation therapy in patients with cancer.

METHODS

The International Society of Oral Oncology-Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (ISOO-MASCC) and ASCO convened a multidisciplinary Expert Panel to evaluate the evidence and formulate recommendations. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for randomized controlled trials and observational studies, published between January 1, 2009, and December 1, 2023. The guideline also incorporated systematic reviews conducted by ISOO-MASCC, which included studies published from January 1, 1990, through December 31, 2008.

RESULTS

A total of 1,539 publications were initially identified. There were 487 duplicate publications, resulting in 1,052 studies screened by abstract, 104 screened by full text, and 80 included for systematic review evaluation.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Due to limitations of available evidence, the guideline relied on informal consensus for some recommendations. Recommendations that were deemed evidence-based with strong evidence by the Expert Panel were those pertaining to best practices in prevention of ORN and surgical management. No recommendation was possible for the utilization of leukocyte- and platelet-rich fibrin or photobiomodulation for prevention of ORN. The use of hyperbaric oxygen in prevention and management of ORN remains largely unjustified, with limited evidence to support its practice.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/head-neck-cancer-guidelines.

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.

[Pharmacological pain management in cancer patients]

Pharmacological pain therapy in cancer patients is based on guideline recommendations, which, however, do not fully coincide in all aspects due to varying weighting of evidence. The present article discusses current issues including the decreasing significance of the World Health Organization (WHO) analgesic ladder, with its distinction between step 2 and 3 being increasingly questioned. Risks of nonopioid analgesics such as paracetamol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), particularly in older populations, are discussed. Paracetamol may potentially reduce the effectiveness of immunotherapies. Aspects of administering analgesics via a feeding tube are considered. Recommendations for the treatment of episodic pain, transitioning between different opioids, and some relevant interactions are also discussed.

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.

Association of opioid use with survival in patients with cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: it is time for evidence-based behaviors

Cancer is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, with pain experienced by most patients undergoing cancer treatment. Opioids are the recommended treatment for cancer pain management, but recent studies suggest a negative association between opioid use and survival rates among patients undergoing immunotherapy. However, conclusions cannot be drawn regarding causality from these observational data. Immunotherapy, which boosts the body's immune system to fight cancer cells, has emerged as a promising treatment option for all types of cancer. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) can activate the anticancer function of exhausted T cells and have shown remarkable survival benefits in patients with multiple malignancies. However, a recent systematic review and meta-analysis suggested that the use of opioids during ICI treatment has an adverse effect on patient prognosis, while the use of NSAIDs is not significantly associated with the prognosis in patients treated with ICIs. These reviews have major limitations due to the retrospective nature of the studies and the multiple factors that can influence the phenomenon. Therefore, caution is required when interpreting results from retrospective data on drug interactions. The findings of this study are alarming and potentially harmful to patients with cancer suffering from pain or other symptoms requiring opioid drugs.

Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Pain in Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Transcutaneous Electrical Acupoint Stimulation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective

Moderate-to-severe pain is the most common clinical symptom in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).This trial aimed to analyze the clinical efficacy of Transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation (TEAS) in patients of HCC with severe pain and provide a reliable reference for optimizing the clinical diagnostic and therapeutic strategies of HCC.

Methods

A total of 104 eligible patients were randomly allocated to experimental and control groups in a ratio of 1:1.The treatment was administered for 1 week continuously. Patients in both groups were followed up 1 week after the end of the treatment.The primary outcome measure was the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) score, whereas the secondary outcome measures included Brief Pain Inventory BPI-Q3, Q4, Q5 scores, analgesic dose, frequency of opioid-induced gastrointestinal side effects, Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), Quality of Life Scale - Liver Cancer (QOL-LC), and Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) scores.

Results

The NRS scores of experimental group was significantly lower after treatment and at the follow-up than baseline (average P<0.01), there were also statistical differences between the groups at the above time points (average P<0.01). BPI-Q3, -Q4, and -Q5 scores in the experimental group were decreased after treatment when compared with those before treatment (average P<0.01). Furthermore, there were significant improvements of gastrointestinal side effects, KPS, QOL-LC and BPI in the experimental group after treatment, and the above results were statistically significant compared to the control group.

Conclusion

7-day TEAS treatment can significantly enhance the analgesic effect and maintain for the following week, also reduce the incidence of gastrointestinal side effects caused by opioids, and improve the quality of life of patients with moderate-to-severe HCC-related pain, which has reliable safety and certain clinical promotion value.

The Pendulum: The Need to Develop a Safe, Effective, and Equitable Management Strategy for Opioids in Cancer Patients

The opioid epidemic has caused major morbidity and mortality to Americans. Although there are multiple sources of this staggering issue, one inciting factor has been the use of opioids to manage pain. Although recent efforts have changed care pathways for patients with chronic pain, the first-line management of cancer pain remains opioids. Despite this, there is very little evidence and no guidelines/regulations to assist in the management of these patients. Although the literature suggests a number of current barriers to identifying and managing the challenges (such as the preferred management of patients with opioid use disorder (OUD), the optimal approach to taperering, or approaches to disparities), there are no concrete strategies for providers to manage these circumstances. Investing in further research utilizing the national opioid settlement funding, exploring the equity gaps using community based participatory research and community health worker models, and increasing provider education pathways are all potential approaches to improving this issue. These solutions could help identify and address some of the gaps that affect cancer patients taking opioids for pain.

Review of the Use of Medicinal Cannabis Products in Palliative Care

In this review, we discuss the potential role of cannabis and cannabinoids in the management of cancer-related symptoms. There is limited evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of cannabis-based products in treating cancer-related pain and gastrointestinal symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, and loss of appetite. Regarding the role of cannabis-based products in the treatment of insomnia and mood disorders, most studies looked at these symptoms as secondary outcomes with mixed results. Cannabis-based products have adverse effects, ranging from neuropsychiatric to systemic effects to potential drug interactions.

Identifying provider, patient and practice factors that shape long-term opioid prescribing for cancer pain: a qualitative study of American and Australian providers

INTRODUCTION

Prescribing long-term opioid therapy is a nuanced clinical decision requiring careful consideration of risks versus benefits. Our goal is to understand patient, provider and context factors that impact the decision to prescribe opioids in patients with cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis of the raw semistructured interview data gathered from 42 prescribers who participated in one of two aligned concurrent qualitative studies in the USA and Australia. We conducted a two-part analysis of the interview: first identifying all factors influencing long-term prescribing and second open coding-related content for themes.

RESULTS

Factors that influence long-term opioid prescribing for cancer-related pain clustered under three key domains (patient-related, provider-related and practice-related factors) each with several themes. Domain 1: Patient factors related to provider-patient continuity, patient personality, the patient's social context and patient characteristics including racial/ethnic identity, housing and socioeconomic status. Domain 2: Provider-related factors centred around provider 'personal experience and expertise', training and time availability. Domain 3: Practice-related factors included healthcare interventions to promote safer opioid practices and accessibility of quality alternative pain therapies.

CONCLUSION

Despite the differences in the contexts of the two countries, providers consider similar patient, provider and practice-related factors when long-term prescribing opioids for patients with cancer. Some of these factors may be categorised as cognitive biases that may intersect in an already disadvantaged patient and exacerbate disparities in the treatment of their pain. A more systematic understanding of these factors and how they impact the quality of care can inform appropriate interventions.

Benefits, Harms, and Stakeholder Perspectives Regarding Opioid Therapy for Pain in Individuals With Metastatic Cancer: Protocol for a Descriptive Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Opioids are a key component of pain management among patients with metastatic cancer pain. However, the evidence base available to guide opioid-related decision-making in individuals with advanced cancer is limited. Patients with advanced cancer or cancer that is unlikely to be cured frequently experience pain. Opioids are a key component of pain management among patients with metastatic cancer pain. Many individuals with advanced cancer are now living long enough to experience opioid-related harm. Emerging evidence from chronic noncancer pain literature suggests that longer-term opioid therapy may have limited benefits for pain and function, and opioid-related harms are also a major concern. However, whether these benefits and harms of opioids apply to patients with cancer-related pain is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

This manuscript outlines the protocol for the "Opioid Therapy for Pain in Individuals With Metastatic Cancer: The Benefits, Harms, and Stakeholder Perspectives (BEST) Study." The study aims to better understand opioid decision-making in patients with advanced cancer, along with opioid benefits and harms, through prospective examination of patients' pain experiences and opioid side effects and understanding the decision-making by patients, care partners, and clinicians.

METHODS

This is a multicenter, prospective cohort study that aims to enroll 630 patients with advanced cancer, 20 care partners, and 20 clinicians (670 total participants). Patient participants must have an advanced solid cancer diagnosis, defined by the American Cancer Society as cancer that is unlikely to be cured. We will recruit patient participants within 12 weeks after diagnosis so that we can understand opioid benefits, harms, and perspectives on opioid decision-making throughout the course of their advanced cancer (up to 2 years). We will also specifically elicit information regarding long-term opioid use (ie, opioids for ≥90 consecutive days) and exclude patients on long-term opioid therapy before an advanced cancer diagnosis. Lived-experience perspectives related to opioid use in those with advanced cancer will be captured by qualitative interviews with a subset of patients, clinicians, and care partners. Our data collection will be grounded in a behavioral decision research approach that will allow us to develop future interventions to inform opioid-related decision-making for patients with metastatic cancer.

RESULTS

Data collection began in October 2022 and is anticipated to end by November 2024.

CONCLUSIONS

Upon successful execution of our study protocol, we anticipate the development of a comprehensive evidence base on opioid therapy in individuals with advanced cancer guided by the behavioral decision research framework. The information gained from this study will be used to guide interventions to facilitate opioid decisions among patients, clinicians, and care partners. Given the limited evidence base about opioid therapy in people with cancer, we envision this study will have significant real-world implications for cancer-related pain management and opioid-related clinical decision-making.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/54953.

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.

Trends in pain undertreatment among lung cancer patients at the EOL: Analysis of urban city medical insurance data in China

BACKGROUND

Cancer-related pain is one of the common priority symptoms in advanced lung cancer patients at the end-of-life (EOL). Alleviating pain is undoubtedly a critical component of palliative care in lung cancer. Our study was initiated to examined trends in opioid prescription-level outcomes as potential indicators of undertreated pain in China.

METHODS

This study used data on 1330 patients diagnosed with lung cancer of urban city medical insurance in China who died between 2014 and 2017. Opioid prescription-level outcomes were determined by annual trends of the proportion of patients filling an opioid prescription, the total dose of opioids filled by decedents, and morphine milligram equivalents per day (MMED) at the EOL (defined as the 60 days before death). We further analyzed monthly changes in the number of opioid prescriptions filled, MMED, and mean daily dose of opioids per prescription (MDDP) of the last 60 days of life by year at death and age, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 959 patients with exact dates of death were included, with 432 cases (45.06%; 95% CI: 44.36%-45.77%) receiving at least one opioid prescription at the EOL. The declining trends were shown in the proportion of patients filling any opioid prescription, the total dose of opioids filled by decedents and MMED, with an annual decrease of 0.341% (p = 0.01), 104.23 mg (p = 0.011) and 2.84 mg (p = 0.014), respectively. Within the 31-60 days to the 0-30 days of life, the MMED declined 6.08 mg (95% CI: -7.14 to -5.03; p = 0.000351), while the number of opioid prescriptions rose 0.66 (95% CI: 0.160-1.16; p = 0.025). Like the MMED, the MDDP fell 4.11 mg (95% CI: -5.86 to -2.37; p = 0.005) within the last month before death compared to the previous month.

CONCLUSION

Terminal lung cancer populations in urban China have experienced reduced access to opioids at the EOL. The clinicians did not prescribe a satisfactory dose of opioids per prescription, while the patients suffered increasing pain in the last 30 days of life. Sufficient opioid analgesic administration should be advocated for lung cancer patients during the EOL period.

Opioid dose titration for cancer pain

BACKGROUND

Opioid dose titration is a fundamental process of opioid therapy in cancer pain.

AIMS

To assess data opioid dose titration.

METHODS

The principal opioid dose titration methods, outcomes, and modalities of administration regarding the different opioid preparations were examined in different clinical contexts.

RESULTS

Most studies suggested that opioid-naive patients should be started at doses of 15-30 mg/day of oral morphine equivalents. Opioid-tolerant patients may receive low or higher doses of oral morphine equivalents, depending on the level of opioid tolerance. Generally, dose increments of 30%-50% seem to be indicated to start dose titration. Some patients with severe excruciating cancer pain may present as an emergency requiring a rapid application of powerful analgesic strategies. The intravenous use of opioids may circumvent this problem providing a faster pain relief, due to the large availability and rapid achievement of effective plasma concentrations.

DISCUSSION

Opioid dose titration is a delicate passage in patients with cancer pain. This approach may be different according to different clinical conditions. Opioid dose titration requires expertise to optimize cancer pain management while minimizing the development of adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

While most approaches are meaningful and partially supported by existing literature, more studies are necessary to establish advantages and disadvantages in different clinical conditions. Optimization of opioid dose titration is of paramount importance.

SIGNIFICANCE

This review provides the most recent insights on the different modalities of opioid dose titration in cancer pain management.

Prevalence of abnormal urine drug tests during COVID-19 pandemic in the cancer patient population: retrospective study

Background: Opioid misuse is a persistent concern, heightened by the COVID-19 pandemic. This study examines the risk factors contributing to elevated rates of abnormal urine drug tests (UDTs) in the cancer pain patient population during COVID-19. Materials & methods: A retrospective chart review of 500 patient encounters involving UDTs at a comprehensive cancer center. Results: Medication adherence rates increase when UDTs are incorporated into a chronic cancer pain management protocol. Higher positive tests for illicit or nonprescribed substances in patients with specific risk factors: current smokers (tobacco), no active cancer and concurrent benzodiazepine use. Conclusion: This research emphasizes the increased risk of opioid misuse during COVID-19 among cancer pain patients with specific risk factors outlined in the results.

From pain to tumor immunity: influence of peripheral sensory neurons in cancer

The nervous and immune systems are the primary sensory interfaces of the body, allowing it to recognize, process, and respond to various stimuli from both the external and internal environment. These systems work in concert through various mechanisms of neuro-immune crosstalk to detect threats, provide defense against pathogens, and maintain or restore homeostasis, but can also contribute to the development of diseases. Among peripheral sensory neurons (PSNs), nociceptive PSNs are of particular interest. They possess a remarkable capability to detect noxious stimuli in the periphery and transmit this information to the brain, resulting in the perception of pain and the activation of adaptive responses. Pain is an early symptom of cancer, often leading to its diagnosis, but it is also a major source of distress for patients as the disease progresses. In this review, we aim to provide an overview of the mechanisms within tumors that are likely to induce cancer pain, exploring a range of factors from etiological elements to cellular and molecular mediators. In addition to transmitting sensory information to the central nervous system, PSNs are also capable, when activated, to produce and release neuropeptides (e.g., CGRP and SP) from their peripheral terminals. These neuropeptides have been shown to modulate immunity in cases of inflammation, infection, and cancer. PSNs, often found within solid tumors, are likely to play a significant role in the tumor microenvironment, potentially influencing both tumor growth and anti-tumor immune responses. In this review, we discuss the current state of knowledge about the degree of sensory innervation in tumors. We also seek to understand whether and how PSNs may influence the tumor growth and associated anti-tumor immunity in different mouse models of cancer. Finally, we discuss the extent to which the tumor is able to influence the development and functions of the PSNs that innervate it.

Pain management for post-treatment survivors of complex cancers: a qualitative study of opioids and cannabis

Aim: We aimed to understand experiences with opioids and cannabis for post-treatment cancer survivors. Patients & methods: We conducted seven focus groups among head and neck and lung cancer survivors, using standard qualitative methodology to explore themes around 1) post-treatment pain and 2) utilization, perceived benefits and perceived harms of cannabis and opioids. Results & conclusion: Survivors (N = 25) experienced addiction fears, stigma and access challenges for both products. Opioids were often perceived as critical for severe pain. Cannabis reduced pain and anxiety for many survivors, suggesting that anxiety screening, as recommended in guidelines, would improve traditional pain assessment. Opioids and cannabis present complex harms and benefits for post-treatment survivors who must balance pain management and minimizing side effects.

Common and distinct risk factors that influence more severe and distressing shortness of breath profiles in oncology outpatients

BACKGROUND

Shortness of breath occurs in 10%-70% of oncology patients. Very little is known about interindividual variability in its severity and distress and associated risk factors. Using latent profile analyses (LPAs), purpose was to identify subgroups of patients with distinct severity and distress profiles for shortness of breath as single symptom dimensions. In addition, a joint LPA was done using patients' severity AND distress ratings. For each of the three LPAs, differences among the shortness of breath classes in demographic, clinical, symptom, stress, and resilience characteristics were evaluated.

METHODS

Patients completed ratings of severity and distress from shortness of breath a total of six times over two cycles of chemotherapy. All of the other measures were completed at enrollment (i.e., prior to the second or third cycle of chemotherapy). Separate LPAs were done using ratings of severity and distress, as well as a joint analysis using severity AND distress ratings. Differences among the latent classes were evaluated using parametric and nonparametric tests.

RESULTS

For severity, two classes were identified (Slight to Moderate [91.6%] and Moderate to Severe [8.4%]). For distress, two classes were identified (A Little Bit to Somewhat [83.9%] and Somewhat to Quite a Bit [16.1%]). For the joint LPA, two classes were identified (Lower Severity and Distress [79.9%] and Higher Severity and Distress [20.1%]). While distinct risk factors were associated with each of the LPAs, across the three LPAs, the common risk factors associated with membership in the worse class included: a past or current history of smoking, poorer functional status, and higher comorbidity burden. In addition, these patients had a higher symptom burden and higher levels of cancer-specific stress.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians can use the information provided in this study to identify high-risk patients and develop individualized interventions.

Trajectories and predictors of high-occurrence pain flares in ambulatory cancer patients on opioids

BACKGROUND

Pain flares have a substantive impact on the quality of life and well-being of patients with cancer. We identified longitudinal trajectories (clusters) of cancer pain flares in ambulatory patients and sociodemographic and clinical predictors of these trajectories.

METHODS

In a prospective cohort study using ecological momentary assessment (mEMA), we collected patient-reported daily pain flare ratings data over 5 months and identified predictors and correlates using validated measures.

RESULTS

The mean age of the sample (N = 270) was 60.9 years (SD = 11.2), 64.8% were female, and 32.6% self-identified as African American. Four pain flare clusters were identified. The "high-occurrence" cluster (23% of patients) experienced 5.5 (SD = 5.47) daily flares, whereas low-moderate clusters (77%) reported 2.4 (SD = 2.74) daily flares (P < .000). Those in the high-occurrence cluster reported higher pain scores (P = .000), increased pain-related interference (P = .000), depressive symptoms (P = .023), lower quality of life (P = .001), and reduced pain self-efficacy (P = .006). Notably, 67.2% of those prescribed opioids as needed (PRN only) were in the high-occurrence pain flare cluster, compared with 27.9% with PRN and around-the-clock opioid prescriptions (P = .024). Individual predictors of high-occurrence pain flares were income below $30 000, unemployment, being African American, lower education level, Medicaid insurance, current opioid misuse (COMM), baseline inpatient hospital stay duration, and PRN-only opioid regimen. In the multiple predictor model, lower education level, unemployment, COMM score, extended inpatient duration, and PRN-only opioid regimen remained significant.

CONCLUSION

In ambulatory patients with cancer, high occurrence of pain flares may be mitigated by attention to opioid prescription factors and addressing social determinants of health needs of underserved patients.

Phase III study of bilayer sustained-release tramadol tablets in patients with cancer pain: a double-blind parallel-group, non-inferiority study with immediate-release tramadol capsules as an active comparator

PURPOSE

We investigated whether twice-daily administration of a bilayer tablet formulation of tramadol (35% immediate-release [IR] and 65% sustained-release) is as effective as four-times-daily IR tramadol capsules for managing cancer pain.

METHODS

This randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-comparator, non-inferiority study enrolled opioid-naïve patients using non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or acetaminophen (paracetamol) to manage cancer pain and self-reported pain (mean value over 3 days ≥ 25 mm on a 100-mm visual analog scale [VAS]). Patients were randomized to either bilayer tablets or IR capsules for 14 days. The starting dose was 100 mg/day and could be escalated to 300 mg/day. The primary endpoint was the change in VAS (averaged over 3 days) for pain at rest from baseline to end of treatment/discontinuation.

RESULTS

Overall, 251 patients were randomized. The baseline mean VAS at rest was 47.67 mm (range: 25.6-82.7 mm). In the full analysis set, the adjusted mean change in VAS was - 22.07 and - 19.08 mm in the bilayer tablet (n = 124) and IR capsule (n = 120) groups, respectively. The adjusted mean difference was - 2.99 mm (95% confidence interval [CI] - 7.96 to 1.99 mm). The upper 95% CI was less than the predefined non-inferiority margin of 7.5 mm. Other efficacy outcomes were similar in both groups. Adverse events were reported for 97/126 (77.0%) and 101/125 (80.8%) patients in the bilayer tablet and IR capsule groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Twice-daily administration of bilayer tramadol tablets was as effective as four-times-daily administration of IR capsules regarding the improvement in pain VAS, with comparable safety outcomes.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

JapicCTI-184143/jRCT2080224082 (October 5, 2018).

Expert consensus-based guidance on approaches to opioid management in individuals with advanced cancer-related pain and nonmedical stimulant use

BACKGROUND

Clinicians treating cancer-related pain with opioids regularly encounter nonmedical stimulant use (i.e., methamphetamine, cocaine), yet there is little evidence-based management guidance. The aim of the study is to identify expert consensus on opioid management strategies for an individual with advanced cancer and cancer-related pain with nonmedical stimulant use according to prognosis.

METHODS

The authors conducted two modified Delphi panels with palliative care and addiction experts. In Panel A, the patient's prognosis was weeks to months and in Panel B the prognosis was months to years. Experts reviewed, rated, and commented on the case using a 9-point Likert scale from 1 (very inappropriate) to 9 (very appropriate) and explained their responses. The authors applied the three-step analytical approach outlined in the RAND/UCLA to determine consensus and level of clinical appropriateness of management strategies. To better conceptualize the quantitative results, they thematically analyzed and coded participant comments.

RESULTS

Consensus was achieved for all management strategies. The 120 Experts were mostly women (47 [62%]), White (94 [78%]), and physicians (115 [96%]). For a patient with cancer-related and nonmedical stimulant use, regardless of prognosis, it was deemed appropriate to continue opioids, increase monitoring, and avoid opioid tapering. Buprenorphine/naloxone transition was inappropriate for a patient with a short prognosis and of uncertain appropriateness for a patient with a longer prognosis.

CONCLUSION

Study findings provide urgently needed consensus-based guidance for clinicians managing cancer-related pain in the context of stimulant use and highlight a critical need to develop management strategies to address stimulant use disorder in people with cancer.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Among palliative care and addiction experts, regardless of prognosis, it was deemed appropriate to continue opioids, increase monitoring, and avoid opioid tapering in the context of cancer-related pain and nonmedical stimulant use. Buprenorphine/naloxone transition as a harm reduction measure was inappropriate for a patient with a short prognosis and of uncertain appropriateness for a patient with a longer prognosis.

Fentanyl in cancer pain management: avoiding hasty judgments and discerning its potential benefits

Cancer pain is an important challenge in treatment and requires a rapid onset of action for its control. In particular, breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) should be adequately controlled with a stable dose of a short-acting oral opioid. Fentanyl is a synthetic, highly selective opioid with many advantageous chemical properties, including high lipophilicity and distinct pharmacokinetic properties. It is recommended for pain management in a variety of settings, including acute pain, chronic pain and BTcP. To date, its variously designed formulations allow non-invasive administration; amongst others, sublingual fentanyl has proven useful in the management of BTcP and in improving the quality of life of patients with cancer. This review provides an update on the management of BTcP with fentanyl, with consideration of safety, as it remains an important tool in the treatment of cancer pain.

The negative effect of concomitant medications on immunotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer: An umbrella review

BACKGROUND

Conflicting results about the effect of concomitant medications on immunotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were reported by many meta-analyses (MAs), and the certainty of evidence linking concomitant medications with immunotherapy efficacy has not been quantified, which may cause some evidence to be misinterpreted.

METHODS

Four databases including Embase, Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Web of Science were searched from inception to January 2023 in English. Based on prospective or retrospective clinical controlled trials including immunotherapy with concomitant medications or not in NSCLC, quantitative MAs reporting the efficacy of immunotherapy with binary direct comparison and enough extractable data were collected. The methodological quality, reporting quality, and risk of bias of included MAs were evaluated respectively. New meta-analyses were conducted and their evidence certainty was classified as nonsignificant, weak, suggestive, highly suggestive, or convincing.

RESULTS

Fifteen MAs with 5 medications were included. After being assessed by AMSTAR-2, PRISMA, and ROBIS, the major shortcomings were focused on the registration of protocol, literature retrieval or data extraction, implementation of sensitivity analysis or evidence certainty assessment, and incomplete reporting in the section of method and result. New pooled analyses indicated that antibiotics (HR = 1.545[1.318-1.811]), steroids (HR = 1.784[1.520-2.093]), proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) (HR = 1.303[1.048-1.621]) and opioids (HR = 1.910[1.213-3.006]) could shorten overall survival (OS) in patients with NSCLC receiving immunotherapy. Besides, antibiotics (HR = 1.285[1.129-1.462]) and steroids (HR = 1.613[1.315-1.979]) were harmful to progression-free survival (PFS) in these patients significantly. No negative effect was found in nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and the objective response rate of all medications. High-level evidence suggested that using PPIs before or after the initiation of immunotherapy and using steroids during the first-course immunotherapy could weaken the OS of patients with NSCLC. Meanwhile, the negative effects of antibiotics and opioids on OS or PFS were only supported by moderate or low-level evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

The concurrent usage of PPIs or steroids adversely affects the survival of patients with NSCLC receiving immunotherapy. Future investigations are required to ascertain whether these adverse effects are primarily attributed to the comorbidities or the concurrent medications.

Acupuncture vs Massage for Pain in Patients Living With Advanced Cancer: The IMPACT Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Pain is challenging for patients with advanced cancer. While recent guidelines recommend acupuncture and massage for cancer pain, their comparative effectiveness is unknown.

Objective

To compare the effects of acupuncture and massage on musculoskeletal pain among patients with advanced cancer.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A multicenter pragmatic randomized clinical trial was conducted at US cancer care centers consisting of a northeastern comprehensive cancer center and a southeastern cancer institute from September 19, 2019, through February 23, 2022. The principal investigator and study statisticians were blinded to treatment assignments. The duration of follow-up was 26 weeks. Intention-to-treat analyses were performed (linear mixed models). Participants included patients with advanced cancer with moderate to severe pain and clinician-estimated life expectancy of 6 months or more. Patient recruitment strategy was multipronged (eg, patient database queries, mailings, referrals, community outreach). Eligible patients had English or Spanish as their first language, were older than 18 years, and had a Karnofsky score greater than or equal to 60 (range, 0-100; higher scores indicating less functional impairment).

Interventions

Weekly acupuncture or massage for 10 weeks with monthly booster sessions up to 26 weeks.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was the change in worst pain intensity score from baseline to 26 weeks. The secondary outcomes included fatigue, insomnia, and quality of life. The Brief Pain Inventory (range, 0-10; higher numbers indicate worse pain intensity or interference) was used to measure the primary outcome. The secondary outcomes included fatigue, insomnia, and quality of life.

Results

A total of 298 participants were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 58.7 [14.1] years, 200 [67.1%] were women, 33 [11.1%] Black, 220 [74.1%] White, 46 [15.4%] Hispanic, and 78.5% with solid tumors). The mean (SD) baseline worst pain score was 6.9 (1.5). During 26 weeks, acupuncture reduced the worst pain score, with a mean change of -2.53 (95% CI, -2.92 to -2.15) points, and massage reduced the Brief Pain Inventory worst pain score, with a mean change of -3.01 (95% CI, -3.38 to -2.63) points; the between-group difference was not significant (-0.48; 95% CI, -0.98 to 0.03; P = .07). Both treatments also improved fatigue, insomnia, and quality of life without significant between-group differences. Adverse events were mild and included bruising (6.5% of patients receiving acupuncture) and transient soreness (15.1% patients receiving massage).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial among patients with advanced cancer, both acupuncture and massage were associated with pain reduction and improved fatigue, insomnia, and quality of life over 26 weeks; however, there was no significant different between the treatments. More research is needed to evaluate how best to integrate these approaches into pain treatment to optimize symptom management for the growing population of people living with advanced cancer.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04095234.

Strategies to Make Telemedicine a Friend, Not a Foe, in the Provision of Accessible and Equitable Cancer Care

Telemedicine has the potential to improve access to cancer care, particularly for patients with functional limitations, high symptom burdens, or financial or geographic constraints. However, there is also a risk that telemedicine can widen healthcare disparities among patients facing systemic disadvantages like those with technological barriers, poor digital literacy, older age, or non-English language preferences. To optimize telemedicine usage, we must implement practical strategies like video onboarding programs, user-friendly technology platforms, optimizing the clinician's environment, and best practices for using interpreters. Policy changes such as state licensing requirements, controlled substance prescribing requirements, and payment parity are also crucial. This Perspective highlights these practical strategies and policy recommendations to ensure accessible and equitable cancer care augmented by telemedicine.

Methadone dose escalation in patients with opioid use disorder and cancer as a strategy for controlling cancer-related pain: A case series

OBJECTIVES

Opioid use disorder (OUD) and cancer gained attention as co-occurring diseases in the last 2 decades due to the possible relationship between opioid prescriptions for cancer pain and the risk of developing substance use disorder in cancer patients. However, little is known about patients previously diagnosed with OUD who develop cancer and how to manage both OUD symptoms and control pain.

METHODS

The present case series deals with this subpopulation and proposes a dose escalation of methadone to control both the cancer-related pain and drug addiction symptoms.

RESULTS

This approach is peculiar because methadone is not used as a first-line treatment in cancer pain management and is not often used as a second-line treatment as well. Our 4 patients experienced good clinical control of symptoms and no major adverse reactions.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

The subgroup of patients with OUD who develop cancer could be the perfect population to reconsider the use of methadone as a first-line treatment for cancer pain. Prospective studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of increasing doses of methadone in these patients to validate our clinical approach.

Switching to Intravenous Methadone in Advanced Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Analysis

CONTEXT

Information about opioid switching to intravenous methadone is lacking.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the outcome of opioid switching to intravenous methadone (IV-ME) in patients admitted to an acute supportive/palliative care unit (ASPCU). The secondary outcome was to assess the conversion ratio from IV-ME to oral methadone at time of hospital discharge.

METHODS

We retrieved from the pharmacy registry the list of patients who were prescribed IV-ME during their ASPCU admission for a period of 47 months. Poor analgesia with previous opioids and/or adverse effects were the main indications for opioid switching. IV-ME was titrated until acceptable analgesia was achieved. The effective dose was multiplied by three to establish the intravenous daily dose, given as a continuous infusion. Doses were then changed according to the clinical needs. Once the patient was stabilized, IV-ME dose was converted to oral methadone, by using an initial ratio of 1:1.2. Further dose changes were made according to clinical needs until stabilization, before patients' discharge. Information about patients' characteristics, pain scores on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS), Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS), Cut-down, Annoyed, Guilty, Eye-opener (CAGE) questionnaire, previous opioids and their doses, expressed as oral morphine equivalents (OME), were recorded. The effective bolus of IV-ME, initial daily infusion rate, and oral methadone doses were assessed, and conversion ratios calculated.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients were taken into consideration for the study. The mean effective bolus of IV-ME titrated for achieving acceptable analgesia was 9 mg (range 5-15 mg). The mean daily continuous infusion rate of IV-ME was 27.6 mg/day (SD 21). The mean daily dose of oral methadone at time of discharge was 46.8 mg/day (SD 43). Discharge occurred within a median of seven days (range 6-9) after admission. Previous opioid (OME)/IV-ME, oral-IV-ME, and previous opioid (OME)/oral methadone were 6.25, 1.7, and 3.7, respectively.

CONCLUSION

IV-ME dose titration followed by intravenous infusion allowed a rapid pain control in few minutes in patients with severe pain intensity, not responsive to previous opioids. Conversion to oral route was successful and facilitated home discharge. Further studies should be performed to confirm these preliminary results.

Managing opioids and mitigating opioid risks in patients with cancer: An environmental scan of the attitudes, confidence, and practices of ambulatory, community and hospital pharmacists practicing in Canada

INTRODUCTION

Canada is in the midst of an overdose crisis. The use of prescription opioids in Canada has increased steadily over the past two decades, with stark increases in opioid-induced respiratory depression and related deaths. Opioids are the mainstay of treatment for cancer-related pain. Patients with cancer are not immune to the risks associated with opioid use but are underrepresented in available literature outlining risk mitigation strategies. Pharmacists are ideally placed to employ opioid risk mitigation practices to support safe and effective opioid use for patients with cancer-related pain. However, the current attitudes, confidence, and safety practices of pharmacists around how to best support these patients are not known.

METHODS

This study was a descriptive environmental scan of pharmacists who provide direct patient care in Canada. An electronic questionnaire was built using the web based Opinio software. It was distributed via email by several provincial and national pharmacy organizations and online platforms. The questionnaire consisted of Likert-scale and open-ended questions and was open to participants for a 6-week period from February 12th to March 23rd, 2020. Analysis was conducted using descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Eighty-one responses from pharmacists in nine provinces were included in the analysis. Respondents endorsed limited and varied practices when caring for patients receiving opioids for cancer-related pain. Further, they demonstrated wide ranging confidence and attitudes regarding opioid risk mitigation practices and beliefs. Less than 50% of pharmacists were aware of resources available for their patients with non-medical opioid use, and/or patients at high risk of opioid-induced respiratory depression. Education, resources, and communication were the most commonly reported perceived facilitators and barriers to resource use.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacists in Canada report employing opioid risk mitigation practices with low and varied frequency when caring for patients receiving opioids for cancer-related pain. They endorsed varied confidence and limited awareness of available provider and patient resources. These findings may help inform the development of new education models and evidence-based guidelines. New education models and evidence-based guidelines will support pharmacists in their pharmaceutical care of this vulnerable patient population, ultimately aiming to improve patient outcomes.

Case report: The lesson from opioid withdrawal symptoms mimicking paraganglioma recurrence during opioid deprescribing in cancer pain

Pain is one of the predominant and troublesome symptoms that burden cancer patients during their whole disease trajectory: adequate pain management is a fundamental component of cancer care. Opioid are the cornerstone of cancer pain relief therapy and their skillful management must be owned by physicians approaching cancer pain patients. In light of the increased survival of cancer patients due to advances in therapy, deprescription should be considered as a part of the opioid prescribing regime, from therapy initiation, dose titration, and changing or adding drugs, to switching or ceasing. In clinical practice, opioid tapering after pain remission could be challenging due to withdrawal symptoms' onset. Animal models and observations in patients with opioid addiction suggested that somatic and motivational symptoms accompanying opioid withdrawal are secondary to the activation of stress-related process (mainly cortisol and catecholamines mediated). In this narrative review, we highlight how the lack of validated guidelines and tools for cancer patients can lead to a lower diagnostic awareness of opioid-related disorders, increasing the risk of developing withdrawal symptoms. We also described an experience-based approach to opioid withdrawal, starting from a case-report of a symptomatic patient with a history of metastatic pheochromocytoma-paraganglioma.

Opioids and immune checkpoint inhibitors differentially regulate a common immune network in triple-negative breast cancer

Background

Opioids are the primary analgesics for cancer pain. Recent clinical evidence suggests opioids may counteract the effect of immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) immunotherapy, but the mechanism for this interaction is unknown. The following experiments study how opioids and immunotherapy modulate a common RNA expression pathway in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC), a cancer subtype in which immunotherapy is increasingly used. This study identifies a mechanism by which opioids may decrease ICI efficacy, and compares ketamine, a non-opioid analgesic with emerging use in cancer pain, for potential ICI interaction.

Methods

Tumor RNA expression and clinicopathologic data from a large cohort with TNBC (N=286) was used to identify RNA expression signatures of disease. Various drug-induced RNA expression profiles were extracted from multimodal RNA expression datasets and analyzed to estimate the RNA expression effects of ICI, opioids, and ketamine on TNBC.

Results

We identified a RNA expression network in CD8+ T-cells that was relevant to TNBC pathogenesis and prognosis. Both opioids and anti-PD-L1 ICI regulated RNA expression in this network, suggesting a nexus for opioid-ICI interaction. Morphine and anti-PD-L1 therapy regulated RNA expression in opposing directions. By contrast, there was little overlap between the effect of ketamine and anti-PD-L1 therapy on RNA expression.

Conclusions

Opioids and ICI may target a common immune network in TNBC and regulate gene expression in opposing fashion. No available evidence supports a similar interaction between ketamine and ICI.

Pain Education and Knowledge (PEAK) Consensus Guidelines for Neuromodulation: A Proposal for Standardization in Fellowship and Training Programs

The need to be competent in neuromodulation is and should be a prerequisite prior to completing a fellowship in interventional pain medicine. Unfortunately, many programs lack acceptable candidates for these advanced therapies, and fellows may not receive adequate exposure to neuromodulation procedures. The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) desires to create a consensus of experts to set a minimum standard of competence for neurostimulation procedures, including spinal cord stimulation (SCS), dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRG-S), and peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS). The executive board of ASPN accepted nominations for colleagues with excellence in the subject matter of neuromodulation and physician education. This diverse group used peer-reviewed literature and, based on grading of evidence and expert opinion, developed critical consensus guides for training that all accredited fellowship programs should adopt. For each consensus point, transparency and recusal were used to eliminate bias, and an author was nominated for evidence grading oversight and bias control. Pain Education and Knowledge (PEAK) Consensus Guidelines for Neuromodulation sets a standard for neuromodulation training in pain fellowship training programs. The consensus panel has determined several recommendations to improve care in the United States for patients undergoing neuromodulation. As neuromodulation training in the United States has evolved dramatically, these therapies have become ubiquitous in pain medicine. Unfortunately, fellowship programs and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) pain program requirements have not progressed training to match the demands of modern advancements. PEAK sets a new standard for fellowship training and presents thirteen practice areas vital for physician competence in neuromodulation.

Opioid Prescription Denials by Community Pharmacies for Cancer-Related Pain: A Case Series

Pain is one of the most common symptoms experienced by patients living with cancer. Guidelines recommend opioids as the mainstay in the management of cancer-related pain. However, the opioid epidemic has resulted in policymakers recommending limitations on opioid prescribing which led to community pharmacies implementing various parameters. These restrictions have created barriers for patients with cancer-related pain attempting to fill opioid prescriptions from their community pharmacies. Additionally, in the setting of the opioid epidemic, there have been reports of systemic bias within community pharmacies, leading to experiences with embarrassment and shame for patients with cancer-related pain. This case series presents specific examples of community pharmacies declining to fill opioid prescriptions for patients with cancer-related pain and associated patient suffering.

Compassionate Care for People with Cancer and Opioid Use Disorder

ABSTRACT

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is an important comorbidity to assess and manage in people with cancer. In this article, the authors discuss strategies for safe opioid management in individuals with OUD and cancer-related pain using a composite case example. They highlight core approaches to pain management, including motivational interviewing, harm reduction, and evidence-based treatments, as well as advocacy for person-centered end-of-life care.

The Use of Parenteral Opioids in Cancer Pain Management

Opioids should be offered to patients with moderate-to-severe pain related to cancer or active cancer treatment unless contraindicated. Although oral administration of opioids is generally preferable, a parenteral route may be advisable and mandatory in some clinical circumstances. Parenteral administration of opioids may accelerate the achievement of analgesia. The intravenous route fits the need of rapid achievement of analgesia in patients poorly responsive to other opioids and provides a fast analgesia in patients with breakthrough pain, that has a specific temporal pattern requiring a rapid analgesic effect. When the oral route is unavailable for the presence of nausea, vomiting, or dysphagia. the parenteral route is one of the principal options. Opioids have different pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics and should be chosen according to the individual needs. Thus, the knowledge and experience with these routes of administration are mandatory for anesthesiologists committed to cancer pain management.

Improvement in patient-reported pain among patients with metastatic cancer and its association with opioid prescribing

PURPOSE

Opioids are a mainstay of cancer pain management; however, patients with metastatic cancer are often excluded from studies, leading to a lack of evidence on whether increased prescribing (dosage and/or duration) results in improved outcomes for this population. This study aimed to investigate whether increased opioid prescribing is associated with an improvement in patient-reported pain among patients with metastatic cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort of all adult patients diagnosed with stage IV cancers, who completed at least two patient-reported outcomes (PROs) within 30 days of each other, was identified from administrative data. Opioid prescriptions were categorized by dosage level and number of prescription days. Multivariable logistic regression was used to investigate the association between opioid prescribing and clinically important improvement in pain score (≥ 1 point change on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System).

RESULTS

A total of 2169 patients were included, 770 (35.5%) of whom had active opioid prescription between PROs, with an average daily dosage of 86.1 mg of oral morphine equivalent. Active prescription was associated with improvement in pain (OR = 2.17, P < 0.001). However, among patients with active prescription, neither dosage nor number of prescription days was significantly associated with pain improvement.

CONCLUSION

Opioid prescription is important for treating cancer-related pain; however, increased dosage or duration may not be leading to greater improvements in pain. Patients with metastatic cancer who are receiving increased opioid prescribing may have difficult-to-treat pain and may benefit from multidisciplinary pain management strategies to supplement opioid prescription and improve outcomes.

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.

Management of Acute Cancer Pain in Asia: An Expert Opinion on the Role of Tramadol/Dexketoprofen Fixed-Dose Combination

Most patients experience acute cancer pain at some stage throughout their cancer journey. When inadequately managed, cancer pain has devastating consequences for the patient's quality of life. The suboptimal management of cancer pain in Asia is mainly driven by over-regulation and limited access to opioids. Concerns about adverse events and addiction have resulted in a negative perception of this group of drugs among physicians, as well as patients. There is a need to optimize the management of cancer pain across the region, through the provision of an alternative treatment option that is simple to prescribe, convenient to administer and well tolerated by patients, which will increase patients' compliance and good results. As recommended in many international guidelines, starting by the WHO analgesic ladder, cancer pain can be effectively managed with multimodal analgesia. Fixed-dose combinations (FDCs), in which two or more analgesic agents act synergistically to deliver a broad spectrum of pain relief, represent an effective and convenient option for delivering multimodal analgesia to patients with cancer pain. This is extremely well accepted by patients for several reasons. Any multimodal pharmacological approach to pain management should be based on the potentiality to block pain at different levels and to reduce the dosages of single analgesics, reducing their side effects. Hence, the use of NSAIDs, combined with other analgesics, is the general basis of multimodal pain management. If NSAIDs are combined with tramadol, a weak opioid that has per se a multimodal analgesic efficacy, it may be ideal. The tramadol/dexketoprofen FDC combines the centrally acting weak opioid with a peripherally acting NSAID to deliver rapid-onset, long-lasting analgesia, which has been proven efficacious and safe in the management of moderate-to-severe acute pain in the postoperative setting. This expert opinion explores the role of tramadol/dexketoprofen FDC in the management of patients with moderate-to-severe acute cancer pain. It is essentially based on the incredibly high amount of existing data on the use of the drug, and on the long-lasting experience of the experts in pain management of cancer patients participating in the advisory panel.