Clinical impact of palliative treatment using octreotide for inoperable malignant bowel obstruction caused by advanced urological cancer

Development of a Core Outcome Set for the research and assessment of inoperable malignant bowel obstruction

BACKGROUND

Malignant bowel obstruction is experienced by 15% of people with advanced cancer, preventing them from eating and drinking and causing pain, nausea and vomiting. Surgery is not always appropriate. Management options include tube or stent drainage of intestinal contents and symptom control using medication. Published literature describing palliative interventions uses a broad range of outcome measures, few of which are patient-relevant. This hinders evidence synthesis, and fails to consider the perspectives of people undergoing treatment.

AIMS

To develop a Core Outcome Set for the assessment of inoperable malignant bowel obstruction with clinician, patient and caregiver involvement, using COMET methodology (Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials).

METHODS

A systematic review of clinical trials and observational studies, a rapid review of the qualitative literature and in-depth patient and clinician interviews were conducted to identify a comprehensive list of outcomes. Outcomes were compared and consolidated by the study Steering Group and Patient and Public Involvement contributors, and presented to an international clinical Expert Panel for review. Outcomes from the finalised list were rated for importance in a three-round international Delphi process: results of two survey rounds were circulated to respondents, and two separate consensus meetings were conducted with clinicians and with patients and caregivers via virtual conferencing, using live polling to reach agreement on a Core Outcome Set.

RESULTS

130 unique outcomes were identified. Following the independent Expert Panel review, 82 outcomes were taken into round 1 of the Delphi survey; 24 outcomes reached criteria for critical importance across all stakeholder groups and none reached criteria for dropping. All outcomes rated critically important were taken forward for re-rating in round 2 and all other outcomes dropped. In round 2, all outcomes were voted critically important by at least one stakeholder group. Round 2 outcomes were presented again at online consensus meetings, categorised as high ranking (n = 9), middle ranking (n = 7) or low ranking (n = 8). Stakeholders reached agreement on 16 core outcomes across four key domains: Symptom control, Life impact, Treatment outcomes, and Communication and patient preferences.

CONCLUSION

Use of this Core Outcome Set can help to address current challenges in making sense of the evidence around treatment for inoperable malignant bowel obstruction to date, and underpin a more robust future approach. Clearer communication and an honest understanding between all stakeholders will help to provide a basis for responsible decision-making in this distressing situation in clinical practice.

The range and suitability of outcome measures used in the assessment of palliative treatment for inoperable malignant bowel obstruction: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Malignant bowel obstruction, a complication of certain advanced cancers, causes severe symptoms which profoundly affect quality of life. Clinical management remains complex, and outcome assessment is inconsistent.

AIM

To identify outcomes evaluating palliative treatment for inoperable malignant bowel obstruction, as part of a four-phase study developing a core outcome set.

DESIGN

The review is reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA); PROSPERO (ID: CRD42019150648). Eligible studies included at least one subgroup with obstruction below the ligament of Treitz undergoing palliative treatment for inoperable malignant bowel obstruction. Study quality was not assessed because the review does not evaluate efficacy.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Database, CINAHL, PSYCinfo Caresearch, Open Grey and BASE were searched for trials and observational studies in October 2021.

RESULTS

A total of 4769 studies were screened, 290 full texts retrieved and 80 (13,898 participants) included in a narrative synthesis; 343 outcomes were extracted verbatim and pooled into 90 unique terms across six domains: physiological, nutrition, life impact, resource use, mortality and survival. Prevalent outcomes included adverse events (78% of studies), survival (54%), symptom control (39%) and mortality (31%). Key individual symptoms assessed were vomiting (41% of studies), nausea (34%) and pain (33%); 19% of studies assessed quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

Assessment focuses on survival, complications and overall symptom control. There is a need for definitions of treatment 'success' that are meaningful to patients, a more consistent approach to symptom assessment, and greater consideration of how to measure wellbeing in this population.

Symptom burden and lived experiences of patients, caregivers and healthcare professionals on the management of malignant bowel obstruction: A qualitative systematic review

BACKGROUND

Malignant bowel obstruction occurs in up to 50% of people with advanced ovarian and 15% of people with gastrointestinal cancers. Evaluation and comparison of interventions to manage symptoms are hampered by inconsistent evaluations of efficacy and lack of agreed core outcomes. The patient perspective is rarely incorporated.

AIM

To synthesise the qualitative data regarding patient, caregiver and healthcare professionals' views and experience of malignant bowel obstruction to inform the development of a core outcome set for the evaluation of malignant bowel obstruction.

DESIGN

A qualitative systematic review was conducted, with narrative synthesis. The review protocol was registered prospectively (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero, CRD42020176393).

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Scopus databases were searched for studies published between 2010 and 2021. Reference lists were screened for further relevant publications, and citation tracking was performed.

RESULTS

Nine papers were included, reporting on seven studies which described the views and experiences of malignant bowel obstruction through the perspectives of 75 patients, 13 caregivers and 62 healthcare professionals. Themes across the papers included symptom burden, diverse experiences of interventions, impact on patient quality of life, implications and trajectory of malignant bowel obstruction, mixed experience of communication and the importance of realistic goals of care.

CONCLUSION

Some of the most devastating sequelae of malignant bowel obstruction, such as pain and psychological distress, are not included routinely in its clinical or research evaluation. These data will contribute to a wider body of work to ensure the patient and caregiver perspective is recognised in the development of a core outcome set.

Opportunities to Improve Symptom Control with Somatostatin Congeners in GEP-NETs: A Review of Key Issues

Octreotide acetate (octreotide) is the most prescribed and most studied somatostatin congener, or analog, for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP‐NETs) and carcinoid syndrome, the latter of which may be characterized by debilitating diarrhea and flushing. Approved in the U.S. more than 30 years ago, octreotide is widely used to control the symptoms of carcinoid syndrome and has been shown to demonstrate antiproliferative activity. The two formulations available in the U.S. include a subcutaneous immediate‐release (IR) injection introduced in 1989 and a long‐acting repeatable (LAR) intramuscular injection approved in 1999. Lanreotide depot (lanreotide), a more recent somatostatin congener, has been available in the U.S. since 2014.

Despite widespread use of octreotide LAR, several key challenges exist with the current depot‐based treatment paradigm. Studies indicate that LAR formulations are associated with continued unmet patient needs, owing in part to a loss of bioactivity over time that may necessitate progressive supplemental treatment with IR octreotide to adequately control symptoms. Clinicians should understand the key differences in the pharmacokinetic profiles of the LAR and IR formulations that may contribute to bioactivity loss and somatostatin receptor desensitization. In addition, there is a need to re‐evaluate the role of IR octreotide in combination with depot therapy to provide consistent bioavailability and better control of carcinoid syndrome symptoms.

The purpose of this review is to explore all these issues and to re‐establish a rationale for the IR formulation, particularly with respect to novel use cases and its use during the COVID‐19 pandemic.

This review explores key challenges with depot‐based treatment of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors with octreotide and the key differences between the LAR and IR formulations.

Development of a core outcome set to use in the research and assessment of malignant bowel obstruction: protocol for the RAMBO study

INTRODUCTION

Studies regarding the management of malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) report conflicting findings. This is partly due to different outcome measures being used to evaluate severity of MBO and the response to treatments. Furthermore, current outcome measures focus mainly on measurable physiological parameters which may not correlate strongly with patient-defined quality of life. The development of core outcome sets allows a consistent approach to evaluating clinical conditions taking into consideration patient, healthcare professional and researcher viewpoints. It follows an internationally recognised standard methodology. We present a protocol for the development of a core outcome set for Research and Assessment of MBO (RAMBO).

METHODS

RAMBO is a multicentre study, comprising of four phases: a systematic review to examine current scope of outcome measures associated with MBO (phase I). Interviews with patients, companions and healthcare professionals will explore priorities and preferences for care and outcomes (phase II). An expert panel meeting will collate the findings into a set of outcomes (phase III), refined by consensus through a Delphi survey with key stakeholders (phase IV). The final set of outcomes will be ratified at a consensus meeting. Each step will actively include patient partners. Thematic analysis and descriptive statistics will be used to analyse qualitative and quantitative data, respectively.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was obtained (Wales REC 5, REF: 19/LO/1876). Study participants and relevant stakeholders will be updated with newsletters and a lay summary at the end of the study. Abstracts will be submitted to national and international conferences, result papers will be submitted to peer-reviewed, open access journals.

TRIAL AND PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBERS

Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (1402); Systematic Literature Review (CRD42019150648); Rapid Review (CRD42020176393).

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

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

恶性肠梗阻的治疗现状与进展

恶性肠梗阻(malignant bowel obstruction, MBO)是晚期肿瘤常见并发症之一, 严重影响患者的生活质量. 恶性肿瘤本身的复杂性导致肠梗阻治疗的复杂性、难治性. 近年来, 随着腹腔镜、内镜技术及介入技术的发展以及对姑息手术适应证的把握, 肠梗阻患者的生存质量及治疗率得以提高, 但尚存在一定争议, 且在药物治疗方面暂无显著进展. 另外, 中医药在该领域亦有较多研究, 显示出一定的效果, 但尚缺乏前瞻性的随机对照研究. 临床处理要充分考虑治疗可能带来的益处及风险, 慎重选择个性化的治疗方案. 本文对国内外近年来MBO的中西医诊疗进展进行系统综述, 以期对临床诊疗具有一定的指导意义.

Somatostatin Analogues Compared With Placebo and Other Pharmacologic Agents in the Management of Symptoms of Inoperable Malignant Bowel Obstruction: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Somatostatin analogues are commonly used to relieve symptoms in malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) but are more expensive than other antisecretory agents.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the evidence of effectiveness of somatostatin analogues compared with placebo and/or other pharmacologic agents in relieving vomiting in patients with inoperable MBO.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register databases were systematically searched; reference lists of relevant articles were hand searched. Cochrane risk of bias tool was used.

RESULTS

The search identified 420 unique studies. Seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met the inclusion criteria (six octreotide studies and one lanreotide); 220 people administered somatostatin analogues and 207 placebo or hyoscine butylbromide. Three RCTs compared a somatostatin analogue with placebo and four with hyoscine butylbromide. Two adequately powered multicenter RCTs with a low Cochrane risk of bias reported no significant difference between somatostatin analogues and placebo in their primary end points. Four RCTs with a high/unclear Cochrane risk of bias reported that somatostatin analogues were more effective than hyoscine butylbromide in reducing vomiting.

CONCLUSION

There is low-level evidence of benefit with somatostatin analogues in the symptomatic treatment of MBO. However, high-level evidence from trials with low risk of bias found no benefit of somatostatin analogues for their primary outcome. There is debate regarding the clinically relevant study end point for symptom control in MBO and when it should be measured. The role of somatostatin analogues in this clinical situation requires further adequately powered, well-designed trials with agreed clinically important end points and measures.

Phase II study on EANI combined with hydrochloride palonosetron for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting following highly emetogenic chemotherapy

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the electronic anti-nausea instrument (EANI) combined with hydrochloride palonosetron for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting following highly emetogenic chemotherapy.

METHODS

Patients who received highly emetogenic chemotherapy were randomly assigned to a treatment group (60 patients) treated with EANI combined with hydrochloride palonosetron, and control group (also 60 patients) given only hydrochloride palonosetron. Chemotherapy related nausea and vomiting were observed and recorded in both groups of patients from the start till the end of chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Complete control rates of vomiting in treatment and control group were 40%, and 35%, respectively, without any statistical ly significant difference (p> 0.05); however the response rates are 95.0%, 78.3%, respectively, with statistical difference (p< 0.05). Complete control rates of nausea in treatment and control group were 36.7%, 30%, respectively, without statistical difference (p> 0.05); but the response rates are 90.0%, 76.7%, respectively, with statistical difference (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

EANI combined with hydrochloride palonosetron for prevention of nausea and vomiting induced by chemotherapy could be more effective than hydrochloride palonosetron alone, and can be recommended for use in prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting following highly emetogenic chemotherapy.

Double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial of octreotide in malignant bowel obstruction

CONTEXT

Does octreotide reduce vomiting in cancer-associated bowel obstruction?

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the net effect of adding octreotide or placebo to standardized therapies on the number of days free of vomiting for populations presenting with vomiting and inoperable bowel obstruction secondary to cancer or its treatment.

METHODS

Twelve services enrolled people with advanced cancer presenting with vomiting secondary to bowel obstruction where surgery or anti-cancer therapies were not indicated immediately. In a double-blind study, participants were randomized to placebo or octreotide (600 μg/24 hours by infusion). Both arms received standardized supportive therapy (infusion of ranitidine [200 mg/24 hours], dexamethasone [8 mg/24 hours], and parenteral hydration [10-20 mL/kg/24 hours]). The primary outcome was patient-reported days free of vomiting at 72 hours.

RESULTS

In a study that recruited to the numbers identified in its power calculation, 87 participants provided data at 72 hours (45, octreotide arm). Seventeen people (octreotide) and 14 (placebo) were free of vomiting for 72 hours (P = 0.67). Mean days free of vomiting were 1.87 (SD 1.10; octreotide) and 1.69 (SD 1.15; placebo; P = 0.47). An adjusted multivariate regression of the incidence of vomiting over the study showed a reduced number of episodes of vomiting in the octreotide group (incidence rate ratio = 0.40; 95% CI: 0.19-0.86; P = 0.019); however, people in the octreotide arm were 2.02 times more likely to be administered hyoscine butylbromide (P = 0.004), potentially reflecting increased colicky pain.

CONCLUSION

Although there was no reduction in the number of days free of vomiting, the multivariate analysis suggests that further study of somatostatin analogues in this setting is warranted.