This Is a Different Patient Population: Opioid Prescribing Challenges for Patients With Cancer-Related Pain

Patterns and predictors of opioid dispensing among older cancer patients from 2008 to 2015

BACKGROUND

Understanding factors associated with opioid dispensing in cancer patients is important for developing tailored guidelines and ensuring equitable access to pain management. We examined patterns and predictors of opioid dispensing among older cancer patients from 2008 to 2015.

METHODS

We analyzed data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database linked to Medicare claims. We included the most common cancer types among patients aged 66-95 years. Opioids dispensed within 30 days before and 120 days after cancer diagnosis were assessed. We used logistic regression models to examine trends, adjusted odds ratios (aORs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for opioid dispensing, considering patient demographics, geography, cancer stage, comorbidities, and treatment options. Models were stratified by sex.

RESULTS

A total of 211,759 cancer patients aged 66-95 years were included in the study. For cancers combined, non-Hispanic Black men had a significantly lower odds of receiving opioids during the 120 days post-diagnosis (aOR = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.84-0.94) compared to non-Hispanic White men. Factors such as pre-diagnosis opioid dispensing, age, geography, cancer stage, comorbidities, and type of cancer treatment were associated with opioid dispensing during the 120 days post-diagnosis. Surgery had the strongest association, with men undergoing surgery being 4.4 times more likely to receive opioids within 120 days post-diagnosis (aOR = 4.41, 95% CI = 4.23-4.60), while women had an odds ratio of 2.72 (95% CI = 2.62-2.83). Chemotherapy and radiotherapy were also positively associated with opioid dispensing, with less pronounced estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed significant variations in opioid dispensing among cancer patients aged 66-95 years across cancer types and demographic and clinical factors.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

"I Refused to Get Addicted to Opioids": Exploring Attitudes About Opioid Use Disorder in Patients With Advanced Cancer Pain and Their Support People

Patients with advanced cancer are commonly prescribed opioids, yet patient attitudes about opioid risks (eg, opioid use disorder, or OUD) are understudied. Our objective was to use in-depth qualitative interviews to understand perceptions of opioid prescribing and OUD in patients with advanced, solid-tumor cancers and their support people. We conducted a qualitative study using a rigorous inductive, qualitative descriptive approach to examine attitudes about OUD in patients with advanced cancer (n = 20) and support providers (n = 11). Patients with cancer hold 2 seemingly distinct views: prescription opioids are addictive, yet OUD cannot happen to me or my loved one. Participants described general concerns about the addictive nature of prescription opioids ("My biggest concern… would just be the risk of getting addicted to the medication or even like, overdosing it"), while separating cancer pain management from OUD when considering prescription opioid risks and benefits ("They need to make sure they get the right ones, when they're taking it away from you."). Finally, participants identified personal characteristics and behaviors that they felt were protective against developing OUD (commonly control, willpower, and responsibility). This rigorous qualitative study demonstrates that patients with advanced cancer and their support people simultaneously hold concerns about the addictive nature of prescription opioids, while distancing from perceptions of OUD risks when using opioids for cancer pain management. Given high rates of opioid exposure during advanced cancer treatment, it is important to explore opportunities to promote a balanced understanding of prescription opioid use and OUD risks in this population. PERSPECTIVE: Though prescription opioids carry risk of OUD, there is little data to help guide patients with advanced cancer. Findings suggest that there is a need to develop new, innovative strategies to promote effective pain management and minimize opioid risks in this complex population.

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.

Manifestations of Opioid Stigma in Patients With Advanced Cancer: Perspectives From Patients and Their Support Providers

PURPOSE

Stigma surrounding prescription opioids, or opioid stigma, is increasingly recognized as a barrier to effective and guideline-concordant cancer pain management. Patients with advanced cancer report high rates of pain and prescription opioid exposure, yet little is known about how opioid stigma may manifest in this population.

METHODS

We conducted in-depth qualitative interviews with 20 patients with advanced cancer and 11 support providers between March 2020, and May 2021. We took a rigorous inductive, qualitative descriptive approach to characterize how opioid stigma manifests in the lives of patients with advanced cancer.

RESULTS

Patients and their support providers described three primary manifestations of opioid stigma: (1) direct experiences with opioid stigma and discrimination in health care settings (eg, negative, stigmatizing interactions in pharmacies or a pain clinic); (2) concerns about opioid stigma affecting patient care in the future, or anticipated stigma; and (3) opioid-restricting attitudes and behaviors that may reflect internalized stigma and fear of addiction (eg, feelings of guilt).

CONCLUSION

This qualitative study advances our understanding of opioid stigma manifestations in patients with advanced cancer, as well as coping strategies that patients may use to alleviate their unease (eg, minimizing prescription opioid use, changing clinicians, and distancing from perceptions of addiction). In recognition of the costs of undermanaged cancer pain, it is important to consider innovative treatment strategies to address opioid stigma and improve pain management for patients with advanced cancer. Future research should examine opportunities to build an effective, multilevel opioid stigma intervention targeting patients, clinicians, and health care systems.

Consensus-Based Guidance on Opioid Management in Individuals With Advanced Cancer-Related Pain and Opioid Misuse or Use Disorder

Importance

Opioid misuse and opioid use disorder (OUD) are important comorbidities in people with advanced cancer and cancer-related pain, but there is a lack of consensus on treatment.

Objective

To develop consensus among palliative care and addiction specialists on the appropriateness of various opioid management strategies in individuals with advanced cancer-related pain and opioid misuse or OUD.

Design, Setting, and Participants

For this qualitative study, using ExpertLens, an online platform and methodology for conducting modified Delphi panels, between August and October 2020, we conducted 2 modified Delphi panels to understand the perspectives of palliative and addiction clinicians on 3 common clinical scenarios varying by prognosis (weeks to months vs months to years). Of the 129 invited palliative or addiction medicine specialists, 120 participated in at least 1 round. A total of 84 participated in all 3 rounds.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Consensus was investigated for 3 clinical scenarios: (1) a patient with a history of an untreated opioid use disorder, (2) a patient taking more opioid than prescribed, and (3) a patient using nonprescribed benzodiazepines.

Results

Participants were mostly women (47 [62%]), White (94 (78 [65%]), and held MD/DO degrees (115 [96%]). For a patient with untreated OUD, regardless of prognosis, it was deemed appropriate to begin treatment with buprenorphine/naloxone and inappropriate to refer to a methadone clinic. Beginning split-dose methadone was deemed appropriate for patients with shorter prognoses and of uncertain appropriateness for those with longer prognoses. Beginning a full opioid agonist was deemed of uncertain appropriateness for those with a short prognosis and inappropriate for those with a longer prognosis. Regardless of prognosis, for a patient with no medical history of OUD taking more opioids than prescribed, it was deemed appropriate to increase monitoring, inappropriate to taper opioids, and of uncertain appropriateness to increase the patient's opioids or transition to buprenorphine/naloxone. For a patient with a urine drug test positive for non-prescribed benzodiazepines, regardless of prognosis, it was deemed appropriate to increase monitoring, inappropriate to taper opioids and prescribe buprenorphine/naloxone.

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this qualitative study provide urgently needed consensus-based guidance for clinicians and highlight critical research and policy gaps.

Patterns and Trends in Receipt of Opioids Among Patients Receiving Treatment for Cancer in a Large Health System

BACKGROUND

Given limited evidence on opioid prescribing among patients receiving treatment for cancer during the ongoing opioid epidemic, our objective was to assess predictors of and trends in opioid receipt during cancer treatment, including how patterns differ by type of cancer.

METHODS

Using cancer registry data, we identified patients with a first lifetime primary diagnosis of breast, colorectal, or lung cancer from 2013 to 2017 who underwent treatment within a large cancer center network. Cancer registry data were linked to electronic health record information on opioid prescriptions. We examined predictors of and trends in receipt of any opioid prescription within 12 months of cancer diagnosis.

RESULTS

The percentage of patients receiving opioids varied by cancer type: breast cancer, 35% (1,996/5,649); colorectal, 37% (776/2,083); lung, 47% (1,259/2,654). In multivariable analysis, opioid use in the year before cancer diagnosis was the factor most strongly associated with receipt of opioids after cancer diagnosis, with 4.90 (95% CI, 4.10-5.86), 5.09 (95% CI, 3.88-6.69), and 3.31 (95% CI, 2.68-4.10) higher odds for breast, colorectal, and lung cancers, respectively. We did not observe a consistent decline in opioid prescribing over time, and trends differed by cancer type.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that prescription of opioids to patients with cancer varies by cancer type and other factors. In particular, patients are more likely to receive opioids after cancer diagnosis if they were previously exposed before diagnosis, suggesting that pain among patients with cancer may commonly include non-cancer-related pain. Heterogeneity and complexity among patients with cancer must be accounted for in developing policies and guidelines aimed at addressing pain management while minimizing the risk of opioid misuse.