Coping Strategies and Associated Symptom Burden Among Patients With Advanced Cancer

BACKGROUND

Few studies examine how patients with advanced cancer cope with stress. The objective of our study was to evaluate coping strategies adopted by patients with cancer and their relationship with symptom burden.

METHODS

A secondary data analysis of a prospective cross-sectional survey of patients with cancer and tobacco use was conducted, which examined demographics, symptom burden (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System), and coping strategies (the Brief COPE Questionnaire). Demographic characteristics were summarized by standard summary statistics; we also examined associations between patient characteristics and coping strategies using t-test, rank-sum test, chi-squared test, or Fisher's exact test depending on the distribution of data.

RESULTS

Among 399 patients, the majority were female (60%), Caucasian (70%), the mean age was 56.5 (±12.0) years, and the most common malignancies were gastrointestinal (21%) and breast (19%). Patients with cancer adopted multiple adaptive coping strategies, most frequently acceptance (86.7%) and emotional support (79.9%), with humor (18.5%) being the least. Common maladaptive strategies included venting (14.5%) and self-distraction (36.6%), while substance use (1.0%) was infrequently reported. Of the adaptive strategies, female gender was significantly associated with higher engagement with emotional and instrumental support, positive reframing, religious coping, and acceptance (P < .05 for all). College educated patients reported significantly higher implementation of humor, planning, and acceptance. Maladaptive coping strategies such as denial were associated with increased pain and depression, while patients adopting emotional-focused strategies rated decreased emotional distress.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of patients with advanced cancer reported adopting multiple, adaptive coping strategies, and a minority utilized maladaptive or avoidant strategies, rarely substance use, and may need additional psychological support.

Healthcare provider perceptions and reported practices regarding opioid prescription for patients with chronic cancer pain

PURPOSE

Data indicates that clinicians might be under-prescribing opioids for patients with chronic cancer pain, and this could impact adequate pain management. Few studies have sought to understand healthcare provider (HCP) perceptions and practices regarding the prescription of opioids for chronic cancer pain. We assessed HCP perceptions and practices regarding opioid prescription for patients with chronic cancer pain since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

An anonymous cross-sectional survey was conducted among 186 HCPs who attended an opioid educational event in April 2021 and 2022.

RESULTS

Sixty-one out of 143 (44%) opioid prescribers reported reluctance to prescribe opioids for chronic cancer pain. In a multivariate logistic model, younger participants (log OR - 0.04, 95% CI - 0.085, - 0.004; p = 0.033) and pain medicine clinicians (log OR - 1.89, CI - 3.931, - 0.286; p = 0.034) were less reluctant, whereas providers who worry about non-medical opioid use were more reluctant to prescribe opioids (log OR 1.58 95% CI 0.77-2.43; p < 0.001). Fifty-three out of 143 (37%) prescribers had experienced increased challenges regarding opioid dispensing at pharmacies, and 84/179 (47%) of all respondents reported similar experience by their patients. Fifty-four out of 178(30%) were aware of opioid-related harmful incidents to patients or their families, including incidents attributed to opioid misuse by a household or family member.

CONCLUSION

A considerable number of opioid prescribers were reluctant to prescribe opioids for patients with chronic cancer pain. Many reported challenges regarding dispensing of opioids at the pharmacies. These may be unintended consequences of policies to address the opioid crisis. Future measures should focus on addressing regulatory barriers without undermining the gains already made to combat the opioid crisis.

Should Urine Drug Screen be Done Universally or Selectively in Palliative Care Patients on Opioids?

Urine drug screen (UDS) is a useful test conducted in patients receiving opioids for chronic pain to aid in validating patient adherence to opioid treatment and to detect any nonmedical opioid use (NMOU). One controversial topic regarding its use in palliative care is whether to conduct the test universally and randomly in all patients who are receiving opioids for chronic pain irrespective of their level of risk for NMOU, or to conduct the test selectively in only those with a high risk for engaging in NMOU behaviors. In this "Controversies in Palliative Care" article, 3 expert clinicians independently answer this question. Specifically, each expert provides a synopsis of the key studies that inform their thought processes, share practical advice on their clinical approach, and highlight the opportunities for future research. They all agreed that UDS has some utility in routine palliative care practice but acknowledged the insufficient existing evidence supporting its efficacy. They also underscored the need to improve clinician proficiency in UDS interpretation to enhance its utility. Two experts endorsed random UDS in all patients receiving opioids regardless of their risk profile while the other expert recommended targeted UDS until there is more clinical evidence to support universal, random testing. Use of more methodologically robust study designs in UDS research, examination of the cost-effectiveness of UDS tests, development of innovative programs to manage NMOU behaviors, and investigation of the impact of improved clinician proficiency in UDS interpretation on clinical outcomes, were important areas of future research that the experts identified.

Healthcare provider perceptions and reported practices regarding opioid prescription for patients with chronic pain

PURPOSE

Data indicates that clinicians might be under-prescribing opioids for patients with chronic cancer pain, and this could impact adequate chronic pain management. Few studies have sought to understand healthcare provider (HCP) perceptions and practices regarding the prescription of opioids for chronic pain. We assessed HCP perceptions and practices regarding opioid prescription for patients with chronic pain since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

An anonymous cross-sectional survey was conducted among 186 HCPs who attended an opioid educational event in April 2021 and 2022.

RESULTS

61/143(44%) opioid prescribers reported reluctance to prescribe opioids for chronic pain. In a multivariate logistic model, younger participants (log OR -0.04, 95% CI: -0.085, -0.004; p = 0.033) and pain medicine clinicians (log OR -1.89, CI: -3.931, -0.286; p = 0.034) were less reluctant, whereas providers who worry about non-medical opioid use (NMOU) were more reluctant to prescribe opioids (log OR 1.58 95% CI: 0.77-2.43; p < 0.001). 53/143(37%) respondents had experienced increased challenges regarding opioid dispensing at pharmacies, and 84/179(47%) reported similar experience by their patients. 54/178(30%) HCPs were aware of opioid-related harmful incidents to patients or their families, including incidents attributed to opioid misuse by a household or family member.

CONCLUSION

A significant number of opioid prescribers were reluctant to prescribe opioids for patients with chronic pain. Many reported challenges regarding dispensing of opioids at the pharmacies. These may be unintended consequences of policies to address the opioid crisis. Future measures should focus on addressing regulatory barriers without undermining the gains already made to combat the opioid crisis.

Deficiencies with CAGE-AID questionnaire in identifying nonmedical opioid use-a report of two cases

BACKGROUND

The CAGE-AID questionnaire (Cut-down, Annoyed, Guilty, Eye-opener scale Adapted to Include Drugs) is used to screen patients for substance use disorder and nonmedical opioid use (NMOU). Major pain guidelines encourage using such screening tools for all patients including cancer patients before initiating opioids. We present two cases where the CAGE-AID results did not accurately identify the risk for NMOU.

CASE DESCRIPTION

Patient 1 is a male in his 60s with metastatic prostate cancer was admitted for uncontrolled pain. Imaging revealed extensive spinal metastasis, needing initiation of methadone and hydromorphone. The CAGE-AID score was positive, placing him at risk for NMOU. This likely biased the providers, delaying opioid titration. Subsequently, doses were adjusted, and he was discharged with adequate pain control and no evidence of NMOU. Patient 2 is a male in his 40s with metastatic cholangiocarcinoma admitted for uncontrolled abdominal pain. The patient had multiple hospitalizations at different facilities with similar symptoms. The CAGE-AID score was negative. Despite this, the patient demonstrated behaviors such as demanding intravenous opioids, dose escalation, or interventions such as nerve blocks. The workup did not identify any etiology for the increased pain. The patient left the hospital against medical advice when his demands for intravenous opioids were not met.

CONCLUSIONS

The CAGE-AID questionnaire alone does not accurately identify risks for NMOU. Screening tools must always be accompanied by a thorough clinical assessment of behaviors and pain mechanism. More research is needed to better characterize CAGE-AID false positives and negatives among patients with cancer pain.

Reliability of urine drug testing among patients on buprenorphine transdermal patch

BACKGROUND

Urine drug testing (UDT) plays a significant role in monitoring patients on chronic opioid therapy (COT) for non-medical opioid use (NMOU). UDT, at times, can be inconsistent and misleading. We present a case where a patient on a buprenorphine patch had false negative results.

CASE DESCRIPTION

A female in her 70s with metastatic breast cancer presented with uncontrolled pain from a T6 compression fracture. She had no relief with tramadol 50 mg every 6 hours as needed. Due to an allergic reaction to hydromorphone, our team prescribed a buprenorphine patch of 5 μg/h. Subsequently, she expressed excellent pain control, and the clinician confirmed the patch placement on examination. She underwent a UDT during the visit. The UDT was negative for both buprenorphine and its metabolites. The literature review showed that false negative UDT results are relatively common among patients with low-dose buprenorphine patches. The combination of a thorough physical examination, a review of the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program, and reassuring scores on screening tools placed her at low risk for NMOU.

DISCUSSION

Buprenorphine has a ceiling effect on respiratory depression and a lower risk for addiction. However, when used in low doses, the drug might not have enough metabolites in the urine, leading to a false negative UDT. Such results might affect patient-physician relationships.

CONCLUSION

In addition to the UDT, a thorough history, screening for NMOU, physical exam, a review of PDMP, and a good understanding of opioid metabolism are necessary to help guide pain management.

Assessing risk for nonmedical opioid use among patients with cancer: Stability of the CAGE-AID questionnaire across clinical care settings

OBJECTIVES

The Cut down, Annoyed, Guilty, and Eye opener- Adapted to Include Drugs (CAGE-AID) questionnaire (CA) is a validated screening tool used to assess risk for nonmedical opioid use (NMOU) in patients receiving opioids for cancer pain. Data on consistencies and variations in responses to the CA between different clinical settings are lacking. We evaluated the frequency and consistency in scoring of the CA among patients seen between the first inpatient consult (T1) and the first outpatient follow-up (T2) visits.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of 333 consecutive patients seen at both T1 and T2 within 3 months between August 2016 and March 2017 was reviewed.

RESULTS

Median age was 58 years (range, 18-87 years); 53% were female. CA was completed for 88% of patients at T1 and 94% at T2. Of these, 10% and 13% were CAGE-AID positive, respectively. CA score changed from negative to positive in 4% and from positive to negative in 1% of patients between T1 and T2. Kappa coefficient for agreement of CA between T1 and T2 was 0.74 (95% CI: 0.62-0.86, p = 0.02).

SIGNIFICANT OF RESULTS

Completion rate and consistency of patient responses to the CA were high irrespective of clinical setting. Of these patients, 10% and 13% were CA positive which is suggestive of high risk for NMOU. Further studies are needed to evaluate ways to ensure more consistency in the completion of the CA and enhance its utilization in routine clinical practice.

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

BACKGROUND

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

CASES DESCRIPTION

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

CONCLUSION

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

Helpfulness of Question Prompt Sheet for Patient-Physician Communication Among Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

There are few robust evaluations of disease-specific question prompt sheets (QPS) in patient-physician communication among patients with advanced cancer.

Objective

To compare the patient perception of helpfulness, global evaluation, and preference for the QPS vs a general information sheet (GIS), and to examine the effect of the QPS on participants' anxiety, participants' speaking time, number of questions asked, and length of the clinical encounter.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This controlled, double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted at an outpatient palliative and supportive care clinic in a cancer center in the US. Eligible patients were 18 years or older, had a cancer diagnosis, and were undergoing their first outpatient consultation visit with a palliative care physician from September 1, 2017, to May 31, 2019. Data analysis used a modified intention-to-treat design. Data were analyzed from May 18 to June 27, 2022.

Intervention

QPS, a 25-item list of questions developed by expert palliative care clinicians using a Delphi process and tested among ambulatory advanced cancer patients. The control was GIS, generic information material given routinely to patients seen at the supportive care clinic.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcome was patient perception of helpfulness. Secondary outcomes included global evaluation and preference of QPS compared with GIS immediately after the encounter.

Results

A total of 130 patients (mean [SD] age, 58.6 [13.3] years; 79 [60.8%] female) were randomized to receive either QPS (67 patients [51.5%]) or GIS (63 patients [48.5%]). Patients considered QPS and GIS equally helpful, with no statistically significant difference (mean [SD] helpfulness score, 7.2 [2.3] points vs 7.1 [2.7] points; P = .79). The QPS group, compared with the GIS group, had a higher global positive view of the material (mean [SD] global perception score, 7.1 [1.3] vs 6.5 [1.7]; P = .03) and felt it prompted them more to generate new questions (mean [SD] rating, 7.0 [2.9] vs 5.3 [3.5]; P = .005). Of 47 patients asked their preference between the items, more participants preferred the QPS to the GIS in communicating with their physicians (24 patients [51.1%] vs 7 patients [14.9%]; P = .01) at the 4-week follow-up. No significant differences between the QPS and GIS groups were observed regarding participant anxiety, speaking time, number of questions asked, or consultation length (eg, mean [SD] anxiety rating, 2.3 [3.7] vs 1.6 [2.7]; P = .19).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial, participants perceived both QPS and GIS as equally helpful, but they had a more positive global view of and preferred the QPS. QPS facilitated generation of new questions without increasing patient anxiety nor prolonging the consultation. The findings provide support for increased adoption and integration of QPS into routine oncologic care.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03287492.

Efforts to Improve Naloxone Co-Prescription for Patients with Cancer Pain at Risk of Opioid Overdose

Importance: Naloxone can be lifesaving in an opioid-related overdose (OD). However, the co-prescription of take-home naloxone (THN) is not widely adopted in routine clinical practice. We implemented a pilot program focused on increasing clinicians' awareness of THN and observed if this impacts THN prescriptions for our patients with cancer pain receiving opioids. Intervention: In January 2020, we initiated an educational program by twice-weekly video presentations and installed pamphlets in all clinic workstations highlighting the risk factors for ODs. We retrospectively reviewed electronic health records (EHR) of randomly selected patient visits, 200 each from eight weeks before intervention (BI) and eight weeks after the intervention (AI). Data on patient characteristics, risk factors for ODs, and THN prescriptions were collected. Results: In all, 380 unique patients were eligible for analysis. The median age was 60, 53% female, and 70% Caucasian. Eighty-two percent (152) BI and 73% (142) AI carried risk factors for ODs (p = 0.13). THN was prescribed to 21% (32/152) BI and 26% (37/142) AI (p = 0.53). Morphine-equivalent daily dose (MEDD) ≥100 mg (30%) and pulmonary disease (25%) were the most prevalent risk factors. The patient's likelihood of receiving a THN prescription increased by 0.9% for every 1-milligram increase in MEDD (p < 0.001, 95% confidence interval: 1.006-1.011). Conclusion: The educational intervention did not significantly increase the frequency of THN prescriptions. More direct interventions, including automatic EHR triggers, may need to be tested in future trials.

Health Care Provider Attitudes and Beliefs Toward Nonmedical Opioid Use in Patients with Cancer Pain

Background: Data on health care providers' (HCPs') perceptions about patients with cancer pain and nonmedical opioid use (NMOU) are lacking. We examined the perceptions and attitudes of HCPs and assessed the usefulness of an interdisciplinary opioid stewardship program (OSP) while caring for these patients. Methods: An anonymous cross-sectional survey was conducted among the supportive care HCPs between September and November 2021. Results: Of 85 HCPs, 64 responded (75%) to the survey. Participants perceived that NMOU is underdiagnosed (42/64; 67%), and caring for such patients is difficult (58/64, 91%) and time consuming (54/64, 87%). A majority (50/51, 98%) were aware of the OSP, and (48/51; 94%) found it helpful. Conclusion: HCPs reported that NMOU is underdiagnosed and is challenging to manage. They endorsed the utility of an OSP in managing patients with concurrent cancer pain and NMOU. Future research should identify ways to standardize care and integrate OSP in routine supportive oncology practice.

Levorphanol as a Second Line Opioid in Cancer Patients Presenting to an Outpatient Supportive Care Center: An Open-label Study

CONTEXT

Levorphanol is a potent opioid agonist and NMDA receptor blocker with minimal drug interactions, and there are few reports of its use in cancer patients.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to determine the frequency of successful opioid rotation (OR) to levorphanol and the median opioid rotation ratio (ORR) from Morphine Equivalent Daily Dose (MEDD).

METHODS

This is a prospective, single-group, interventional study. Cancer outpatients requiring an OR and receiving a MEDD of 60-300 mg were rotated to levorphanol using a ratio of 10:1 and assessed daily for 10-day. Successful OR was defined as a 2-point improvement in the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) pain score on day 10 or achieving the personalized pain goal between days 3-10 in patients with uncontrolled pain or resolution of opioid side effects (OSE) in those undergoing OR for OSE alone. The ORR to levorphanol was calculated using net-MEDD (MEDD before OR minus the MEDD of the breakthrough opioid used along with levorphanol after OR).

RESULTS

Forty patients underwent OR to levorphanol, and uncontrolled pain 35/40 (87.5%) was the most common indication. The median net-MEDD and levorphanol doses were 95 and 10 mg, respectively, and 33/40 (82.5%) had a successful OR with a median (IQR) ORR of 8.56 (7.5-10). Successful OR was associated with significant improvement in ESAS and OSE scale scores. There was a strong association between MEDD and levorphanol dose.

CONCLUSION

This study provided preliminary data that cancer patients could be successfully rotated to levorphanol using an ORR of 8.5. Levorphanol was associated with improved pain and symptom control and was well- tolerated.

Opioid Rotation and Conversion Ratios Used by Palliative Care Professionals: An International Survey

Background: The opioid rotation ratios (ORRs) and conversion ratios (CRs) used worldwide among palliative care (PC) professionals to perform opioid rotations (ORs) and route conversions may have a wide variation. Methods: We surveyed PC professionals on opioid ratios used through email to the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer's PC study group and Twitter and Facebook posts between September and November 2020. Results: We received 370 responses from respondents from 53 countries: 276 (76%) were physicians, 46 (13%) advanced practice providers, 39 (11%) pharmacists, and 9 respondents did not report their profession. There were statistically significant variations in median CR from intravenous (IV) to oral morphine (2-3), IV to oral hydromorphone (2-4.5), ORR from IV hydromorphone to oral morphine (10-20), and ORR from transdermal fentanyl mcg/hour to oral morphine (2-3.5) across various groups. Conclusion: This survey highlights the wide variation in ORRs and CRs among PC clinicians worldwide and the need for further research to standardize practice.

Cytokine-induced transient monocyte IL-7Ra expression and the serum milieu in tuberculosis

Bacterial components and cytokines induce Interleukin-7 receptor (IL-7Rα) expression in monocytes. Aberrant low IL-7Rα expression of monocytes has been identified as a feature of tuberculosis immunopathology. Here, we investigated the mechanisms underlying IL-7Rα regulation of monocytes and tuberculosis serum effects IL-7Rα expression. Serum samples from tuberculosis patients and healthy controls, cytokine candidates, and mycobacterial components were analyzed for in vitro effects on IL-7Rα expression of primary monocytes, monocyte-derived macrophages (MDM), and monocyte cell lines. IL-7Rα regulation during culture and the role of FoxO1 was characterized. In vitro activation induced IL-7Rα expression in human monocytes and serum samples from tuberculosis patients boosted IL-7Rα expression. Although pathognomonic tuberculosis cytokines were not associated with serum effects, we identified cytokines (i.e., GM-CSF, IL-1β, TNFα, IFNγ) that induced IL-7Rα expression in monocytes and/or MDM comparable to mycobacterial components. Blocking of cytokine subsets (i.e., IL-1β/TNFα in monocytes, GM-CSF in MDM) largely diminished IL-7Rα expression induced by mycobacterial components. Finally, we showed that in vitro induced IL-7Rα expression was transient and dependent on constitutive FoxO1 expression in primary monocytes and monocyte cell lines. This study demonstrated the crucial roles of cytokines and constitutive FoxO1 expression for transient IL-7Rα expression in monocytes. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

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

Importance

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

Objective

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

Design, Setting, and Participants

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

Results

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

Conclusions and Relevance

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

Rapid Transition to Virtual Care during the COVID-19 Epidemic: Experience of a Supportive Care Clinic at a Tertiary Care Cancer Center

Background: COVID-19 pandemic necessitated rapid adoption of telemedicine at our supportive care center (SCC) to ensure continuity of care while maintaining social distancing. Objective: To document the process of transition from in-person to virtual care. Design: The charts of 1744 consecutive patients in our SCC located in the United States were retrospectively reviewed during the four weeks before transition (February 14-March 12), four weeks after transition (March 20-April 16), and transition week (March 13-March 19). Patient demographics, vital aspects of a supportive care visit such as assessments (Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale-Financial and Spiritual [ESAS-FS], Cut-down, Annoyed, Guilty, Eye-opener Screen-Adapted to Include Drugs [CAGE-AID], and Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale [MDAS]), interdisciplinary team involvement, and visit type were recorded. Results: In total 763 patients were seen before transition, 168 during the transition week, and 813 after transitioning to virtual care. Patient characteristics, ESAS-FS, CAGE-AID, and nurse assessment did not significantly differ among the three groups. The after-transition group had a small reduction in counseling intervention compared with before (20.2% vs. 26.2%; p = 0.0068). MDAS completion was higher after transition (99.6% vs. 98%; p = 0.007). In-person visits decreased from 100% before to 12.7% after transition (p < 0.0001) and virtual visits increased to 49.3% (video) and 38% (telephone). In-person visits decreased to 49% in the week one, 3% in week two, and <2% in week four after transition (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: Our supportive care team transitioned from in-person care to virtual visits within weeks while maintaining a high patient volume, continuity of care, and adherence to social distancing. Our transition can serve as a model for other centers.

The development of a nomogram to determine the frequency of elevated risk for non-medical opioid use in cancer patients

OBJECTIVE

Non-medical opioid use (NMOU) is a growing crisis. Cancer patients at elevated risk of NMOU (+risk) are frequently underdiagnosed. The aim of this paper was to develop a nomogram to predict the probability of +risk among cancer patients receiving outpatient supportive care consultation at a comprehensive cancer center.

METHOD

3,588 consecutive patients referred to a supportive care clinic were reviewed. All patients had a diagnosis of cancer and were on opioids for pain. All patients were assessed using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS), Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain (SOAPP-14), and CAGE-AID (Cut Down-Annoyed-Guilty-Eye Opener) questionnaires. "+risk" was defined as an SOAPP-14 score of ≥7. A nomogram was devised based on the risk factors determined by the multivariate logistic regression model to estimate the probability of +risk.

RESULTS

731/3,588 consults were +risk. +risk was significantly associated with gender, race, marital status, smoking status, depression, anxiety, financial distress, MEDD (morphine equivalent daily dose), and CAGE-AID score. The C-index was 0.8. A nomogram was developed and can be accessed at https://is.gd/soappnomogram. For example, for a male Hispanic patient, married, never smoked, with ESAS scores for depression = 3, anxiety = 3, financial distress = 7, a CAGE score of 0, and an MEDD score of 20, the total score is 9 + 9+0 + 0+6 + 10 + 23 + 0+1 = 58. A nomogram score of 58 indicates the probability of +risk of 0.1.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

We established a practical nomogram to assess the +risk. The application of a nomogram based on routinely collected clinical data can help clinicians establish patients with +risk and positively impact care planning.

A retrospective review of the use of oxymorphone immediate release for long term pain control in cancer patients with gastrostomy tubes

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients often require feeding or venting gastrostomy-tubes (G-tubes) for enteral nutrition or symptom palliation. The administration of most extended-release (ER) opioids via the G-tube or orally followed by clamping of the venting G-tube is contraindicated. Oxymorphone immediate release (IR) may be useful because of its longer half-life compared to other IR opioids. We examined the use of oxymorphone IR administered every 8 hours in patients with G-tubes.

METHODS

This was a retrospective chart review of 40 consecutive cancer patients with G-tubes who underwent opioid rotation (OR) to oxymorphone. Demographics, symptoms, morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD), and oxymorphone dose were collected. Successful OR was defined as a 2-point or 30% reduction in pain score and continued use of oxymorphone at follow-up in outpatient setting, or discharge in inpatient setting. Opioid rotation ration (ORR) between MEDD and oxymorphone in patients with successful OR was calculated as MEDD before the OR divided by total oxymorphone dose/day at follow-up or discharge.

RESULTS

The median age was 56 years, 57.5% were white, 68% male, 47.5% (n=19) had head and neck cancer, 90% had advanced disease, 67.5% (n=27) were inpatient, and 15% (n=6) had venting G-tubes. 25/40 (62.5%) patients had successful OR to oxymorphone. The median ORR from MEDD to oxymorphone was 3.5 (IQR, 3.1-4). There were no independent predictors for successful OR, and ORR did not significantly differ among various groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Oxymorphone IR can be used successfully in cancer patients with G-tubes using an ORR of 3.5 to calculate dose from MEDD.

Health Care Provider Attitudes, Beliefs, and Perceived Confidence in Managing Patients With Cancer Pain and Nonmedical Opioid Use

CONTEXT

Health care provider education is an effective strategy to improve knowledge and competencies in opioid-prescribing practices. However, there are very few studies regarding this among providers of patients with cancer pain and nonmedical opioid use (NMOU). The aim of our study was to assess participants' attitudes, beliefs, and self-perceived confidence in caring for patients with cancer pain and NMOU before and after attending an opioid educational seminar on the use and nonmedical use of opioids in patients with cancer.

METHODS

An anonymous cross-sectional survey was conducted among health care providers who attended an opioid educational event in April 2018 and May 2019.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 63% (129 of 206). Approximately 72% of participants had concerns about NMOU in patients with cancer, 69% felt that such patients are frequently underdetected, and 63% felt that cancer pain is frequently undertreated. At baseline, only 23% reported adequate knowledge and 35% reported confidence in caring for patients with cancer with NMOU-related issues. Among those who completed both the preseminar and postseminar surveys, these numbers improved significantly at the end of the seminar (26% vs. 71% and 43% vs. 84%, respectively; all P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Most health care providers expressed concerns about underdetection of NMOU and undertreatment of pain among patients with cancer. Many self-reported knowledge and confidence deficits in caring for patients with cancer with NMOU. Seminar participation was associated with an increase in the number of participants with self-perceived knowledge and confidence. Future studies are needed to ascertain the impact of such opioid educational events on patient care practices.

Deficiencies with the Use of Prescription Drug Monitoring Program in Cancer Pain Management: A Report of Two Cases

Background: Prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) help maintain electronic records of controlled substances and are a resource to help direct patient care. As the use of these electronic programs expands, limitations of their use are becoming more apparent. We present two cases that illustrate the effects and the need to interpret the PDMPs with caution. Cases Description: Case 1: A male in his 60s presented with metastatic lung cancer who was being managed by our team for pain management along with oncology for cancer directed care. The PDMP erroneously reported that he had filled methadone, thereby impacting the provider-patient relationship. The second case was a female patient in her 40s who had metastatic lung cancer currently receiving cancer directed therapy and also followed with the Supportive Care Clinic for the management of cancer associated pain. The patient had demonstrated nonmedical opioid use behaviors in past visits so a careful monitoring approach had been implemented by the clinic to help safely prescribe opioids. The patient was wearing a fentanyl patch that was found only on physical examination during a clinic visit, because it was not noted in the PDMP. Conclusion: The PDMP has been found to assist physicians in decision making but there are limitations with its use. Enhanced real-time reporting of opioid prescribing information, increased integration into electronic health systems, and universal interstate sharing of prescribing data are some of the ways to improve their effectiveness. More research is needed to further examine the deficiencies and improve on its utility in routine chronic opioid therapy.

Perioperative intravenous contrast administration and the incidence of acute kidney injury after major gastrointestinal surgery: prospective, multicentre cohort study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to determine the impact of preoperative exposure to intravenous contrast for CT and the risk of developing postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients undergoing major gastrointestinal surgery.

METHODS

This prospective, multicentre cohort study included adults undergoing gastrointestinal resection, stoma reversal or liver resection. Both elective and emergency procedures were included. Preoperative exposure to intravenous contrast was defined as exposure to contrast administered for the purposes of CT up to 7 days before surgery. The primary endpoint was the rate of AKI within 7 days. Propensity score-matched models were adjusted for patient, disease and operative variables. In a sensitivity analysis, a propensity score-matched model explored the association between preoperative exposure to contrast and AKI in the first 48 h after surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 5378 patients were included across 173 centres. Overall, 1249 patients (23·2 per cent) received intravenous contrast. The overall rate of AKI within 7 days of surgery was 13·4 per cent (718 of 5378). In the propensity score-matched model, preoperative exposure to contrast was not associated with AKI within 7 days (odds ratio (OR) 0·95, 95 per cent c.i. 0·73 to 1·21; P = 0·669). The sensitivity analysis showed no association between preoperative contrast administration and AKI within 48 h after operation (OR 1·09, 0·84 to 1·41; P = 0·498).

CONCLUSION

There was no association between preoperative intravenous contrast administered for CT up to 7 days before surgery and postoperative AKI. Risk of contrast-induced nephropathy should not be used as a reason to avoid contrast-enhanced CT.

Neuroleptic strategies for terminal agitation in patients with cancer and delirium at an acute palliative care unit: a single-centre, double-blind, parallel-group, randomised trial

BACKGROUND

The role of neuroleptics for terminal agitated delirium is controversial. We assessed the effect of three neuroleptic strategies on refractory agitation in patients with cancer with terminal delirium.

METHODS

In this single-centre, double-blind, parallel-group, randomised trial, patients with advanced cancer, aged at least 18 years, admitted to the palliative and supportive care unit at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (Houston, TX, USA), with refractory agitation, despite low-dose haloperidol, were randomly assigned to receive intravenous haloperidol dose escalation at 2 mg every 4 h, neuroleptic rotation with chlorpromazine at 25 mg every 4 h, or combined haloperidol at 1 mg and chlorpromazine at 12·5 mg every 4 h, until death or discharge. Rescue doses identical to the scheduled doses were administered at inception, and then hourly as needed. Permuted block randomisation (block size six; 1:1:1) was done, stratified by baseline Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) scores. Research staff, clinicians, patients, and caregivers were masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was change in RASS score from time 0 to 24 h. Comparisons among group were done by modified intention-to-treat analysis. This completed study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03021486.

FINDINGS

Between July 5, 2017, and July 1, 2019, 998 patients were screened for eligibility, with 68 being enrolled and randomly assigned to treatment; 45 received the masked study interventions (escalation n=15, rotation n=16, combination n=14). RASS score decreased significantly within 30 min and remained low at 24 h in the escalation group (n=10, mean RASS score change between 0 h and 24 h -3·6 [95% CI -5·0 to -2·2]), rotation group (n=11, -3·3 [-4·4 to -2·2]), and combination group (n=10, -3·0 [-4·6 to -1·4]), with no difference among groups (p=0·71). The most common serious toxicity was hypotension (escalation n=6 [40%], rotation n=5 [31%], combination n=3 [21%]); there were no treatment-related deaths.

INTERPRETATION

Our data provide preliminary evidence that the three strategies of neuroleptics might reduce agitation in patients with terminal agitation. These findings are in the context of the single-centre design, small sample size, and lack of a placebo-only group.

FUNDING

National Institute of Nursing Research.

Implications of the Parenteral Opioid Shortage for Prescription Patterns and Pain Control Among Hospitalized Patients With Cancer Referred to Palliative Care

Importance

The recent parenteral opioid shortage (POS) has potential implications for cancer-related pain management in hospitalized patients.

Objective

This study compared changes in opioid prescriptions and clinically improved pain (CIP) among patients treated by an inpatient palliative care (PC) team before and after our institution first reported the POS.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A cohort study of 386 eligible patients with cancer treated at a comprehensive cancer center 1 month before and after the announcement of the POS. We reviewed data from electronic health records, including patient demographics, opioid type, route of administration, and dose. Board-certified palliative care specialists assessed CIP at follow-up day 1.

Exposures

The announcement of the POS by the institution's pharmacy and therapeutics committee on February 8, 2018.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was to measure the change in opioid prescription patterns of physicians, and the secondary outcome was to measure the proportion of patients who achieved CIP before and after announcement of the POS.

Results

Of 386 eligible patients, 196 were men (51%), 270 were white (70%), and the median age was 58 years (interquartile range, 46-67 years). Parenteral opioids were prescribed less frequently by the referring oncology teams after the POS (56 of 314 [18%]) vs before the POS (109 of 311 [35%]) (P < .001). The PC team also prescribed fewer parenteral opioids after the POS (96 of 336 [29%]) vs before the POS (159 of 338 [47%]) (P < .001). After the POS (vs before the POS), significantly fewer patients achieved CIP on follow-up day 1 (119 [62%] vs 144 [75%] of 193; P = .01). Multivariate analysis showed that before the POS, patients had an 89% higher chance of achieving CIP on follow-up day 1 (odds ratio, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.22-2.94; P = .005).

Conclusions and Relevance

There was a significant change in opioid prescription patterns associated with the POS. Furthermore, after the POS, fewer patients achieved CIP. These factors have potential implications for patient satisfaction and hospital length of stay.

Chronic Non-Malignant Pain in Patients with Cancer Seen at a Timely Outpatient Palliative Care Clinic

Palliative care is seeing cancer patients earlier in the disease trajectory with a multitude of chronic issues. Chronic non-malignant pain (CNMP) in cancer patients is under-studied. In this prospective study, we examined the prevalence and management of CNMP in cancer patients seen at our supportive care clinic for consultation. We systematically characterized each pain type with the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and documented current treatments. The attending physician made the pain diagnoses according to the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) task force classification. Among 200 patients (mean age 60 years, 69% metastatic disease, 1-year survival of 77%), the median number of pain diagnosis was 2 (IQR 1–2); 67 (34%, 95% CI 28–41%) had a diagnosis of CNMP; 133 (67%) had cancer-related pain; and 52 (26%) had treatment-related pain. In total, 12/31 (39%) patients with only CNMP and 21/36 (58%) patients with CNMP and other pain diagnoses were on opioids. There was a total of 94 CNMP diagnoses among 67 patients, including 37 (39%) osteoarthritis and 20 (21%) lower back pain; 30 (32%) were treated with opioids. In summary, CNMP was common in the timely palliative care setting and many patients were on opioids. Our findings highlight the need to develop clinical guidelines for CNMP in cancer patients to standardize its management.

Concurrent use of opioids with benzodiazepines or nonbenzodiazepine sedatives among patients with cancer referred to an outpatient palliative care clinic

BACKGROUND

The concurrent use of opioids with benzodiazepines (BZD) or nonbenzodiazepine sedatives (S) recently was found to be associated with an increased risk of overdose death compared with the use of opioids alone. In the current study, the authors examined the frequency and trend of concurrent opioid/BZD-S use and its associated risk factors among patients with cancer.

METHODS

Data regarding the frequency and trend of concurrent opioid/BZD-S use were extracted for 1500 randomly selected patients referred to the outpatient palliative care clinic at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center between the calendar years of 2011 and 2016. To explore associated risk factors, the authors compared the demographic and clinical predictors of 418 patients each in the concurrent opioid/BZD-S group and opioids-only group.

RESULTS

In 2011, at the time of referral to the palliative care clinic, 96 of 221 patients with cancer (43%) were prescribed concurrent opioids/BZD-S. This rate progressively declined to 67 of 217 patients (31%) by 2016 (P = .0008). Patients in the concurrent opioid/BZD-S group had a higher percentage of females (233 individuals; 55% [P = .007]) and whites (323 individuals; 77% [P = .002]), and patients reported higher scores regarding depression (P = .0001), anxiety (P ≤ .0001), drowsiness (P = .048), and worst feeling of well-being (P = .001). The morphine equivalent daily dose was significantly higher in concurrent opioid/BZD-S group (median of 67.5 mg/day [interquartile range (IQR), 30-135 mg/day] vs 60 mg/day [IQR, 30-105 mg/day]; P = .034). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that anxiety (P ≤ .0001), white race (P = .0092), and poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (P = .0017) were significantly associated with concurrent use.

CONCLUSIONS

The concurrent use of opioids with BZD-S has declined but continues to be frequent among patients with cancer. Anxiety, white race, and poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status were associated with its use. More research is needed to explore which medications can replace these agents.

Factors Associated with Improvement in Uncontrolled Cancer Pain without Increasing the Opioid Daily Dose among Patients Seen by an Inpatient Palliative Care Team

Background: Increasing the total opioid dose is the standard approach for managing uncontrolled cancer pain. Other than simply increasing the opioid dose, palliative care interventions are multidimensional and may improve pain control in the absence of opioid dose increase. Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the proportion of patients referred to our inpatient palliative care (IPC) team who achieved clinically improved pain (CIP) without opioid dose increase. Design: We reviewed consecutive patients referred to our IPC team. Setting/Subjects: Eligibility criteria included (1) taking opioid medication; (2) having ≥2 consecutive visits with the IPC team; and (3) an Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) pain score ≥4 at consultation. Measurements: We assessed patient demographics and clinical variables, including cancer type, opioid prescription data (type, route, and oral morphine equivalent daily dose [MEDD]), presence of opioid rotation, psychological consultation, changes in adjuvant medications (e.g., corticosteroids; antiepileptics-gabapentin and pregabalin; benzodiazepines; and neuroleptics), and achievement of CIP. Results: Of the 300 patients enrolled, CIP was achieved in 196 (65%) patients. Of CIP patients, 85 (43%) achieved CIP without an increase in MEDD. CIP without MEDD increase was associated with more adjuvant medication changes (p = 0.003), less opioid rotation (p = 0.005), and lower symptom distress scale of ESAS (p = 0.04). Conclusions: Nearly half of the patients achieved CIP without MEDD increase, suggesting that the multidimensional palliative care intervention is effective in improving pain control in many opioid-tolerant patients without the need to increase the opioid dose.

Balancing opioid analgesia with the risk of nonmedical opioid use in patients with cancer

The current opioid crisis has brought renewed attention and scrutiny to opioid prescriptions. When patients receiving opioid therapy for pain engage in nonmedical opioid use (NMOU) or diversion, untoward consequences can occur. New evidence suggests that patients with cancer might be at a higher risk of NMOU than was previously thought, but clinical evidence still supports the use of opioid analgesics as the gold standard to treat cancer-related pain, creating a dilemma in patient management. Clinicians are encouraged to adopt a universal precautions approach to patients with cancer receiving opioids, which includes screening all patients; discussing the risks, benefits, adverse effects and alternatives of opioid therapy; and providing education on safe use, storage and disposal. Use of urine drug tests, prescription drug monitoring programmes and close observation of behaviours related to opioid use help to ensure treatment adherence, detect NMOU and support therapeutic decision-making. These measures can optimize the risk-benefit ratio while supporting safe opioid use. In this Review, we examine the role of opioids in cancer pain, the risk of substance use disorder and methods to achieve the right balance between the two in order to ensure safe opioid use.

Opioid Prescribing in an Opioid Crisis: What Basic Skills Should an Oncologist Have Regarding Opioid Therapy?

OPINION STATEMENT

Although clinical evidence supports the use of opioids for cancer-related pain, doing so amidst the current opioid crisis remains a challenge. A proportion of opioid-related deaths in the USA are attributable to prescription opioids, which implicates health care providers as one of the major contributors. It is therefore even more important now for all clinicians to follow safe and effective opioid prescribing practices. Oncologists are often in the frontline of cancer pain management. They are encouraged to use validated tools to screen all patients receiving opioids for high risk behaviors. Those identified as high risk for potential abuse of opioids should be monitored closely. When aberrant behavior is detected, the clinician will need to openly discuss the issue and its possible implications. Oncologists may then implement measures such as limiting the dose and quantity of opioids prescribed, shortening interval between follow-ups for refills to allow for increased monitoring, setting boundaries/limitations, weaning off opioid analgesics, or/and referring to a pain or palliative medicine or drug addiction expert for co-management when necessary. These efforts may aid oncologists in safely managing cancer pain in the environment of national opioid crisis.

The utility of the Sports Concussion Assessment Tool in hospitalized traumatic brain injury patients

The Sports Concussion Assessment Tool 3rd version is a sports screening tool that is often used to support return to play decisions following a head injury. The Sports Concussion Assessment Tool 3rd version is presumed to identify brain dysfunction (implying a degree of brain injury); however, the Sports Concussion Assessment Tool has never been validated with patients with definite acute brain injury. In this study, we found that all three Sports Concussion Assessment Tool 3rd version domains – symptoms, cognitive and balance assessments – were sensitive in discriminating traumatic brain injury patients (all with abnormal acute neuroimaging) from healthy controls. Through a correlation matrix (Bonferroni corrected), we found no correlation between the subjective (symptoms) and objective (examination) Sports Concussion Assessment Tool 3rd version assessments, e.g. complaints of imbalance and memory dysfunction were not correlated, respectively, with performance on testing balance and memory function. When relaxing the correction for multiple comparisons we found that of all Sports Concussion Assessment Tool 3rd version symptoms, a feeling of ‘pressure in the head’ had the largest number of co-correlations (including affective symptoms) and overwhelmingly in a pattern indicative of migraine. Taken together, that objective and subjective assessments in the Sports Concussion Assessment Tool 3rd version are poorly correlated, could suggest that symptoms in the Sports Concussion Assessment Tool 3rd version poorly reflect brain injury but rather indicate non-brain injury processes such as migraine. It follows that the current prominent orthodoxy of resting athletes following a head injury until their symptoms settle for fear of exacerbating brain injury may be unfavourable for their recovery – at least in some cases. Prospective clinical studies would be required to assess patient recovery from concussion with early active investigation and treatment versus rest – a notion supported by recent international consensus.

Personalized Pain Goal as an Outcome Measure in Routine Cancer Pain Assessment

BACKGROUND

There is currently no universally accepted outcome measure in cancer pain management. The personalized pain goal (PPG) has been shown to be a relevant outcome measure. We examined its use in routine outpatient practice and compared it with the clinically important difference (CID, ≥2 points or 30%), a pain outcome measure frequently used in several clinical studies.

MEASURES

Initial and follow-up clinical information of outpatients with advanced cancer pain were retrospectively reviewed. PPG response was defined as pain ≤ PPG and CID response as ≥30% or ≥2-point decrease in pain intensity at follow-up.

OUTCOMES

PPG was successfully completed in 375 of 387 eligible patients (97%) with cancer pain. The median baseline PPG was three for all patients and remained unchanged at follow-up. One hundred thirty-two of 375 (35%) had a PPG response and 243 of 375 (65%) were non-responders. The odds ratio for PPG non-response was 1.01 for each milligram increase in morphine equivalent daily dose (P = 0.001), 1.46 for each point increase in the number of adjuvant analgesics (P = 0.006), 2.63 for severe pain (P = 0.002), and 2.55 for moderate depression (P = 0.006). Using PPG response as the gold standard for pain relief, the overall sensitivity and specificity of CID response were 83% and 77%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

PPG was successfully completed in the vast majority of patients, suggesting its feasibility as a pain outcome measure in routine clinical practice. Higher baseline pain intensity, depression, opioid dose, and number of adjuvant analgesics were independent predictors of poor pain relief. Further research is needed to further evaluate its clinical importance in cancer pain management.

Safe Opioid Use: Management of Opioid-Related Adverse Effects and Aberrant Behaviors

Opioids are highly effective for cancer pain but are associated with multiple adverse effects and risk of addiction. This article provides a synopsis on the management of various opioid-related adverse effects and strategies to minimize aberrant opioid use in patients who have cancer. Many adverse effects can be effectively managed. Some patients on chronic opioid therapy may demonstrate aberrant behaviors suggestive of opioid misuse or diversion. Through intensive education, longitudinal monitoring, early identification, and timely management, clinicians can optimize the risk to benefit ratio to support safe opioid use.

A truncating mutation in EPOR leads to hypo-responsiveness to erythropoietin with normal haemoglobin

The cytokine erythropoietin (EPO), signalling through the EPO receptor (EPO-R), is essential for the formation of red blood cells. We performed a genome-wide association study (GWAS) testing 32.5 million sequence variants for association with serum EPO levels in a set of 4187 individuals. We detect an association between a rare and well imputed stop-gained variant rs370865377[A] (p.Gln82Ter) in EPOR, carried by 1 in 550 Icelanders, and increased serum EPO levels (MAF = 0.09%, Effect = 1.47 SD, P = 3.3 × 10-7). We validated these findings by measuring serum EPO levels in 34 additional pairs of carriers and matched controls and found carriers to have 3.23-fold higher EPO levels than controls (P = 1.7 × 10-6; P combined = 1.6 × 10-11). In contrast to previously reported EPOR mutations, p.Gln82Ter does not associate with haemoglobin levels (Effect = -0.045 SD, P = 0.32, N = 273,160), probably due to a compensatory EPO upregulation in response to EPO-R hypo-responsiveness.

The minimal clinically important difference of the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale in patients with cancer with agitated delirium

BACKGROUND

The Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) is commonly used to assess psychomotor activity; however, to the authors' knowledge, its minimal clinically important difference (MCID) has not been determined to date. The objective of the current study was to identify the MCID for RASS using 2 anchor-based approaches.

METHODS

The current study was a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial to compare the effect of lorazepam versus placebo as an adjuvant to haloperidol for persistent agitation in patients with delirium. The primary outcome was change in RASS (10-point numeric rating scale ranging from -5 [unarousable] to +4 [combative]) from baseline to 8 hours after treatment administration. The sensitivity-specificity and within-patient change methods were used to identify the MCID, with the anchor being patient comfort after the study intervention as perceived by caregivers and nurses.

RESULTS

A total of 90 patients were randomized and 58 (64%) received the study medication for restlessness/agitation (mean baseline RASS, 1.6). A total of 23 caregivers (61%) and 23 nurses (55%) perceived that the patient was more comfortable after treatment. Using the sensitivity-specificity method, the optimal RASS reduction was ≥4 points according to both caregivers (sensitivity of 61% and specificity of 80%; area under the curve, 0.71) and nurses (sensitivity of 73% and specificity of 84%; area under the curve, 0.78). The RASS cutoff value based on the within-patient change method was similar (-4.2 for caregivers and -4.0 for nurses).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with persistent restlessness/agitation, a reduction of ≥4 points in RASS was considered to be the MCID for both nurses and caregivers. These preliminary findings may have implications for sample size calculation and the interpretation of treatment effect in future delirium trials. Cancer 2018;124:2246-52. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Outcomes of a Specialized Interdisciplinary Approach for Patients with Cancer with Aberrant Opioid-Related Behavior

BACKGROUND

Data on the development and outcomes of effective interventions to address aberrant opioid-related behavior (AB) in patients with cancer are lacking. Our outpatient supportive care clinic developed and implemented a specialized interdisciplinary team approach to manage patients with AB. The purpose of this study was to report clinical outcomes of this novel intervention.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The medical records of 30 consecutive patients with evidence of AB who received the intervention and a random control group of 70 patients without evidence of AB between January 1, 2015, and August 31, 2016, were reviewed.

RESULTS

At baseline, pain intensity (p = .002) and opioid dose (p = .001) were significantly higher among patients with AB. During the course of the study, the median number of ABs per month significantly decreased from three preintervention to 0.4 postintervention (p < .0001). The median morphine equivalent daily dose decreased from 165 mg/day at the first intervention visit to 112 mg/day at the last follow-up (p = .018), although pain intensity did not significantly change (p = .984). "Request for opioid medication refills in the clinic earlier than the expected time" was the AB with the highest frequency prior to the intervention and the greatest improvement during the study period. Younger age (p < .0001) and higher Edmonton Symptom Assessment System anxiety score (p = .005) were independent predictors of the presence of AB.

CONCLUSION

The intervention was associated with a reduction in the frequency of AB and opioid utilization among patients with cancer receiving chronic opioid therapy. More research is needed to further characterize the clinical effectiveness of this intervention.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

There are currently no well-defined and evidence-based strategies to manage cancer patients on chronic opioid therapy who demonstrate aberrant opioid-related behavior. The findings of this study offer a promising starting point for the creation of a standardized strategy for clinicians and provides valuable information to guide their practice regarding these patients. The study results will also help clinicians to better understand the types and frequencies of the most common aberrant behaviors observed among patients with cancer who are receiving chronic opioid therapy. This will enhance the process of timely patient identification, management, or referral to the appropriate specialist teams.

Perception of Helpfulness of a Question Prompt Sheet Among Cancer Patients Attending Outpatient Palliative Care

BACKGROUND

Data on the use of question prompt sheets (QPSs) in palliative care are limited. Our team previously developed a single-page QPS using a Delphi process. The main objective of this study was to determine the perception of helpfulness of a QPS in patient-physician communication among advanced cancer outpatients.

METHODS

Hundred of 104 (96%) eligible patients and 68/68 (100%) caregivers received the QPS during their first palliative care clinic. Twelve palliative medicine specialists also participated in the study. Patient and physician perceptions about the QPS were assessed at the end of the visit. Patients' anxiety was also measured before and after consultation using the Spielberger State Anxiety Inventory.

RESULTS

Among the responders, most agreed that the material was helpful in communicating with their doctor (77%), clear to understand (90%), had the right amount of information (87%), and they would use a similar material in the future (76%) and recommend it to other patients (70%). Overall, 92% were satisfied with their consultation visit. Physicians perceived that the QPS was helpful in 68% of the encounters and it did not prolong the consultation in 73% of the encounters. Physician agreement on helpfulness of the QPS was not significantly different from that of the patients (P = 0.3). Patient anxiety improved after consultation from a mean (SD) Spielberger State Trait Anxiety Inventory score of 39.2 (12.8) to 33.8 (10.7), P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The QPS was perceived as helpful in patient-physician communication among advanced cancer outpatients and it did not increase patient anxiety. Physicians similarly reported that the QPS was helpful and it did not prolong clinic visits. Further research is needed for its widespread adoption and integration into routine clinical practice.

Development of a Question Prompt Sheet for Cancer Patients Receiving Outpatient Palliative Care

BACKGROUND

A question prompt sheet (QPS) is a structured list of potential questions available for patients to ask their doctor during a clinical encounter. Although it has been shown to improve physician-patient interaction during clinical consultations, there is paucity of data on its use in the palliative care setting. The aim of this study was to develop a single-page consensus list of prompt questions for use by patients attending outpatient palliative care.

METHOD

An expert group of experienced physicians and mid-level providers were invited to participate in the study conducted in three Delphi rounds. A consensus in this study was defined a priori as an agreement (i.e., agree or strongly agree) by a minimum of 80% of the experts.

RESULTS

One hundred percent of the 22 invited experts participated in all the three Delphi rounds of the study. The top 25 questions with the highest level of endorsement were chosen and used toward the development of the QPS. Twenty-eight percent of the questions were about symptoms, treatment, and lifestyle, 24% were about commonly asked questions by caregivers, 20% were regarding end-of-life issues, 16% were regarding the nature of the palliative care service, and 12% were regarding the type of available support.

CONCLUSION

A 25-item, single-page QPS was developed for use by patients attending outpatient palliative care. Further studies are needed to determine its clinical effectiveness in assisting physician-patient communication.

Minimal Clinically Important Difference in the Physical, Emotional, and Total Symptom Distress Scores of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System

CONTEXT

The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) is one of the most commonly used symptom batteries in clinical practice and research.

OBJECTIVES

We used the anchor-based approach to identify the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for improvement and deterioration for ESAS physical, emotional, and total symptom distress scores.

METHODS

In this multicenter prospective study, we asked patients with advanced cancer to complete their ESAS at the first clinic visit and at a second visit three weeks later. The anchor for MCID determination was Patient's Global Impression regarding their physical, emotional, and overall symptom burden ("better," "about the same," or "worse"). We identified the optimal sensitivity/specificity cutoffs for both improvement and deterioration for the three ESAS scores and also determined the within-patient changes.

RESULTS

A total of 796 patients were enrolled from six centers. The ESAS scores had moderate responsiveness, with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve between 0.69 and 0.76. Using the sensitivity-specificity approach, the optimal cutoffs for ESAS physical, emotional, and total symptom distress scores were ≥3/60, ≥2/20, and ≥3/90 for improvement, and ≤-4/60, ≤-1/20, and ≤-4/90 for deterioration, respectively. These cutoffs had moderate sensitivities (59%-68%) and specificities (62%-80%). The within-patient change approach revealed the MCID cutoffs for improvement/deterioration to be 3/-4.3 for the physical score, 2.4/-1.8 for the emotional score, and 5.7/-2.9 for the total symptom distress score.

CONCLUSION

We identified the MCIDs for physical, emotional, and total symptom distress scores, which have implications for interpretation of symptom response in clinical trials.

Demonstration of single-crystal self-seeded two-color x-ray free-electron lasers

A scheme for generating two simultaneous hard-x-ray free-electron laser pulses with a controllable difference in photon energy is described and then demonstrated using the self-seeding setup at the Linac Coherent Light Source (LCLS). The scheme takes advantage of the existing LCLS equipment, which allows two independent rotations of the self-seeding diamond crystal. The two degrees of freedom are used to select two nearby crystal reflections, causing two wavelengths to be present in the forward transmitted seeding x-ray pulse. The free-electron laser system must support amplification at both desired wavelengths.

Association between feeling of well-being and overall survival in advanced lung or non-colonic gastrointestinal patients receiving palliative care

199

Background: The aim of this study was to determine the association between feeling of well-being (FWB, 0= best, 10= worst) and overall survival in advanced lung or non-colonic gastrointestinal patients who were referred to an outpatient palliative care clinic (OPC). We also determined the predictors of severity of moderate or severe - feeling of well-being in advanced lung or non-colonic gastrointestinal patients presenting to palliative care. Methods: We reviewed the records of consecutive patients with incurable advanced lung cancer and non-colonic gastrointestinal cancer presenting to OPC. Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) scores were obtained at the initial visit between from Jan. 1, 2008-Dec. 31, 2013. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize patient characteristics. Clinically significant FWB was defined as ≥4/10. Overall Survival (OS) was calculated from the time of diagnosis of advanced cancer to death or last contact. Univariate analyses were performed and only significant variables were included in multivariate regression analysis to determine factors associated with severity OF FWB. Results: A total of 826 evaluable patients were analyzed (median age, 62 years; 57% male). Median ESAS FWB scores was 5 IQR (3-7). Worse FWB was significantly associated with OS (months) 6.33 (5.03, 8) vs 4.2 (3.37, 4.67) P=0.0003, from the time of diagnosis of advanced cancer. The final model of the Backwards Stepwise regression of factors associated with OS found that FWB (HR 1.09, p=0.3) was not an independent predictor of OS. ESAS FWB was significantly associated with ESAS fatigue (OR 2.31, p<0.001); anxiety (OR 1.98, p<0.001); anorexia (OR 2.31, p<0.001); CAGE positivity [alcoholism] (HR 1.80, p=0.008); and family distress (HR 1.93, p=0.002). Conclusions: Worse ESAS FWB showed univariate association with OS but it does not appear to be an independent predictor of OS when controlling for other known predictors. ESAS FWB was significantly associated with fatigue, anxiety, anorexia, CAGE positivity, and family distress, suggests that ESAS FWB may be a multidimensional screening measure for patient reported health related quality of life.

Patient evaluation of a physician conveying a more optimistic versus a less optimistic message: A randomized controlled trial

88

Background: Information regarding treatment options and prognosis is essential for patient decision making near end of life. However, physicians are frequently reluctant to deliver bad news due to multiple factors, including fear of being perceived as less compassionate. This randomized controlled double blind trial aimed to examine the patient’s perception of physician compassion after being exposed to a more optimistic vs. a less optimistic message. Methods: 100 patients were randomized to observe 2 standardized videos, depicting a physician discussing treatment and prognostic information (more optimistic message and less optimistic message) with a patient with advanced cancer. Both physicians displayed identical number of empathetic statements (5) and posture. Three sets of surveys were completed including the Physician Compassion Questionnaire (0=best, 50=worst). Actors and patients were blinded to the purpose of the study. Investigators were blinded to the video observed by the patient. Results: Patients reported significantly better compassion scores after watching the more optimistic video as compared to the less optimistic video [median (Q1-Q3): 15 (5-23) vs. 23 (10-31), p=0.0002]. Results were equally significant after parallel analysis of first video only and after cross-over analysis. There was also an order effect with compassion scores (p=0.0002) favoring the second video. Univariate analysis showed that degree of trust in the medical profession, ESAS fatigue, ESAS anxiety and ESAS depression had significant association with compassion perception independent of message observed. After applying Bonferonni correction, only degree of trust in the medical profession reached the corrected p value of p=0.0014 (p=0.0002). Conclusions: A more optimistic message resulted in a physician being perceived as more compassionate by the patient. The physician seen in second order is also perceived to be more compassionate. More research is needed to better understand patient perception of compassion in communication with physicians.

The routine use of the Edmonton classification system for cancer pain in an outpatient supportive care center

180

Background: There is no standardized and universally accepted pain classification system for the assessment and management of cancer pain in both clinical practice and in research studies. The Edmonton Classification System for Cancer Pain (ECS-CP) is an assessment tool that has demonstrated value in assessing pain characteristics and response. The purpose of the study was to determine the relationship between the negative ECS-CP features and some pain related variables like pain intensity and opioid use. Also, we explored whether the number of negative ECS-CP features was associated with higher pain intensity. Methods: Electronic charts of 100 patients at the outpatient supportive care clinic in a comprehensive cancer center were reviewed for patient characteristics, initial ECS-CP assessment, the morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD), opioid rotation, the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Score (ESAS), Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS), performance status, and the use of adjuvant analgesics. Results: Ninety one out of the 100 charts were therefore eligible for analysis. The median age was 58.4 years. The most common primary cancer site was gastrointestinal cancer (22.1%). The median pain intensity was 6 and the median MEDD was 45mg. Incident pain was the most common ECS-CP feature (60%) and cognitive dysfunction was the least frequent feature (2%). Neuropathic pain was associated with higher median pain intensity (7 vs. 5, p=0.007) and median MEDD requirement (83 vs. 30, p=0.013). Psychological distress was associated with higher median pain intensity (7 vs. 5, p=0.042). Incident pain was also associated with a trend for higher pain intensity (6 vs 5, p= 0.06). A higher number of negative ECS-CP features was associated with higher pain intensity (p=0.01). Conclusions: The ECS-CP was successfully completed in the majority of patients, demonstrating its utility in routine clinical practice. Neuropathic pain and psychological distress were associated with higher pain intensity. Also, neuropathic pain was associated with higher MEDD. A higher sum of negative ECS-CP features was associated with higher pain intensity. Further studies will be needed to explore this observation.