Episodic Breathlessness in Patients with Advanced Cancer: Characteristics and Management

Recent advances in understanding the role of antidepressants to manage breathlessness in supportive and palliative care

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Breathlessness is a prevalent and distressing symptom in palliative and supportive care, with limited licensed pharmacological options once disease-directed therapies are no longer effective. Antidepressants have been proposed as a potential treatment, even in the absence of comorbid mood disorders, due to their modulation of neural circuits and serotonin pathways involved in breathlessness perception. Despite their off-label use in clinical practice for managing refractory or chronic breathlessness, robust evidence supporting their efficacy is needed. This review critically evaluates the latest evidence on their potential benefits and safety in breathlessness management.

RECENT FINDINGS

Breathlessness is influenced by at least three interrelated axes: lung-brain, behavioural-functional, and psycho-social-spiritual. These mechanisms operate across diseases, making them relevant in palliative and supportive care. Despite promise from early case reports and small trials, two recent large, randomised studies of mirtazapine and sertraline found no benefit in alleviating breathlessness or improving other outcomes. The mirtazapine trial also reported more adverse events than placebo. Earlier trials were small with design limitations, reducing reliability. A 2016 trial of sertraline found benefits for depression in stable COPD. Recent concerns over increased morbidity associated with antidepressant use in respiratory disease highlight the need for early detection of people at risk of worsening breathlessness or depression and a holistic, individualised approach.

SUMMARY

Current evidence does not support antidepressants for breathlessness in respiratory disease. Non-pharmacological approaches should be first line, given their proven benefits and low risk. Off-label medicine use requires caution and should ideally be offered within a trial or evaluation. Given the complex nature of breathlessness, future research should focus on innovating and then testing treatments and therapies in well-designed trials with appropriate outcome measures and reporting of adverse events, health care use and informal carer effects.

Emergency palliative cancer care: anxiety and midazolam

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Cancer patients treated with palliative intent often report anxiety. Anxiety is associated with dyspnoea, cancer pain, and reduced quality of life. Limited knowledge on variability and treatment effects warranted exploring factors associated with improvement in anxiety for hospitalised palliative cancer patients.

METHODS

This study is a cross-sectional secondary analysis. All patients admitted to an acute palliative care unit for one year were assessed and 164 patients satisfied the study inclusion criteria. The patients reported self-registered symptom intensities using the 11-point numeric rating scale. Demographic variables, patient reports, and medical management were analysed for associations with anxiety.

RESULTS

At admission, 37.8% of the patients reported moderate or severe anxiety, and of these 43.6% used benzodiazepines. The corresponding numbers for benzodiazepine use were 35.1% and 24.4% for patients with mild and no anxiety, respectively. Of all patients, 26.8% reported improved anxiety during their hospital stay. More patients with moderate or severe anxiety at admission reported improved anxiety during hospitalisation (50.0%) compared to the corresponding patients with mild anxiety (22.8%). Patients with moderate or severe anxiety reported less improvement in pain compared to patients with mild anxiety. Improved dyspnoea was the only factor statistically associated with improvement in anxiety, both for patients reporting mild anxiety and moderate and severe anxiety. Thirty-seven-point-1% of patients with moderate or severe anxiety at admission received no benzodiazepine treatment during the hospital stay. Patients receiving midazolam had more anxiety at admission, were younger, and had poorer performance status. Median dose and interquartile range [IQR] of midazolam in these patients were 2 mg/24 h [IQR: 2.0-6.0].

CONCLUSION

Improved dyspnoea was associated with reduced anxiety; however, the use of benzodiazepines was not.

Episodic breathlessness in patients with cancer: definition, terminology, clinical features - integrative systematic review

PURPOSE

Breatlessness flares directly impair quality of life of patients with cancer. The aim of this review was to analyse and synthesise the available information related to its terminology, definition and clinical features in patients with cancer.

METHODS

Integrative systematic review according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Literature search was conducted in MEDLINE PubMed, CINAHLPlus, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register Controlled Trials CENTRAL, Scopus and OpenAire.

RESULTS

Data from 1065 patients with cancer included in 12 studies were analysed. The preferred term for breathlessness flares was episodic dyspnoea (ED). The reported frequency of ED was 20.4% (70.9% in patients reporting background dyspnoea (BD)). ED intensity was moderate to severe with short duration (<10 min) in >80% of patients. The most common trigger was exertion (>90%) followed by emotional or environmental factors. ED management consisted mainly of pharmacological and non-pharmacological measures.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review shows that ED is common in patients with cancer, especially in those with BD. Further studies are urgently needed to better understand this condition and to develop specific therapeutic management.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019126708.

Prevalence, Clinical Characteristics, and Management of Episodic Dyspnea in Advanced Lung Cancer Outpatients: A Multicenter Nationwide Study-The INSPIRA-DOS Study

Background: Episodic dyspnea (ED) is a common problem in patients with advanced lung cancer (LC). However, the prevalence of ED and other related aspects in this patient population is not known. Objectives: To assess and describe the prevalence, clinical features, treatment, and risk factors for ED in outpatients with advanced LC. Design: Multicenter cross-sectional study. Subjects: Consecutive sample of adult outpatients with advanced LC. Measurements: We assessed background dyspnea (BD), the characteristics, triggers, and management of ED. Potential ED risk factors were assessed through multivariate logistic regression. Results: A total of 366 patients were surveyed. Overall, the prevalence of ED was 31.9% (90% in patients reporting BD). Patients reported a median of one episode per day (interquartile range [IQR]: 1-2), with a median intensity of 7/10 (IQR: 5-8.25). ED triggers were identified in 89.9% of patients. ED was significantly associated with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (p = 0.011), pulmonary vascular disease (p = 0.003), cachexia (p = 0.002), and palliative care (p < 0.001). Continuous oxygen use was associated with higher risk of ED (odds ratio: 9.89; p < 0.001). Opioids were used by 44% patients with ED. Conclusions: ED is highly prevalent and severe in outpatients with advanced LC experiencing BD. The association between intrathoracic comorbidities and oxygen therapy points to alveolar oxygen exchange failure having a potential etiopathogenic role in ED in this population. Further studies are needed to better characterize ED in LC to better inform treatments and trial protocols.

Episodic Breathlessness with and without Background Dyspnea in Advanced Cancer Patients Admitted to an Acute Supportive Care Unit

AIM

To characterize episodic breathlessness (EB) in patients with advanced cancer, and to determine factors influencing its clinical appearance.

METHODS

A consecutive sample of advanced cancer patients admitted to an acute palliative care unit was surveyed. Continuous dyspnea and EB were measured by a numerical scale. The use of drugs used for continuous dyspnea and EB was recorded. Patients were asked about the characteristics of EB (frequency, intensity, duration and triggers). The Multidimensional dyspnea profile (MDP), the Brief dyspnea inventory (BDI), the Athens sleep scale (AIS) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) were also administered.

RESULTS

From 439 advanced cancer patients surveyed, 34 and 27 patients had EB, without and with background dyspnea, respectively. The mean intensity and the number of episodes were higher in patients with background dyspnea (p < 0.0005 and p = 0.05, respectively). No differences in duration were observed. Most episodes lasted <10 min. A recognizable cause triggering EB was often found. The presence of both background dyspnea and EB was associated with higher values of MDP and BDI. EB was independently associated with frequency and intensity of background dyspnea (OR = 20.9, 95% CI (Confidence interval) 9.1-48.0; p < 0.0005 and OR = 1.97, 95% CI 1.09-3.58; p = 0.025, respectively) and a lower Karnofsky level (OR = 0.96, 95%CI 0.92-0.98, p = 0.05).

DISCUSSION

EB may occur in patients with and without continuous dyspnea, and is often induced by physical and psychological factors. EB intensity is higher in patients with continuous dyspnea. The duration was often so short that the use of drugs, as needed, may be too late, unless administered pre-emptively when the trigger was predictable.

Acceptability and accuracy of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for surveillance of breathlessness in routine lung cancer care: A mixed-method study

BACKGROUND

Breathlessness in lung cancer negatively impacts on quality of life but often goes undetected and undertreated in clinical practice. There is a need for routine surveillance for early identification and proactive management of breathlessness using patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in clinical care but it is unclear what PROMs should be used or are accurate for use in routine care.

METHODS

We used mixed-methods (quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews) to examine the predictors of breathlessness in 339 lung cancer participants and acceptability of PROMs. In addition to multivariate analysis to examine predictors of dyspnea, participants completed an acceptability survey and themes were derived for the qualitative data (n = 26) to explore patient experience of PROMs. We also tested the accuracy of PROMs using a Receiver Operating Characteristic and Area Under the Curve analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 339 patients completed the breathlessness PROMs and acceptability survey and 26 patients participated in an in-depth interview to investigate their experiences of breathlessness and its PROMs. Prevalence of breathlessness was 51.9 % (n = 176) and 70.5 % of patients preferred the Medical Research Council (MRC) scale followed by the Breathlessness Intensity (BI) scale (63.7 %) among the five measures for breathlessness- Modified Borg Scale (MBS), Cancer Dyspnea Scale (CDS), MRC, BI, and Breathlessness Distress (BD). The finding showed wide variation in the MRC grades across the BI rating even among patients with the same BI score. AUC scores for the Borg scale was 0.71 (using MRC cut-off score of < 2), for CDS, 0.72, for BD, 0.70, and for BI 0.79. For an MRC score of 2, the Borg score cut-off was 0.8 (optimal sensitivity, 50 %; specificity, 93.3 %); the cut-off score of CDS, BD, BI score was 1.4 (optimal sensitivity, 67.1 %; specificity, 70 %), 1.5 (optimal sensitivity, 57.5 %; specificity, 73.3 %), and 1.5 (optimal sensitivity, 72.6 %; specificity, 83.3 %) respectively. AUC by ROC analysis for breathlessness and modest concordance among five PROMs showed important gaps between the individuals' experience and PROMs data. Three main themes from qualitative data included 1) Making sense of symptom reporting, 2) Valuing the reported data, 3) Managing the symptom of breathlessness.

CONCLUSION

This study examined measurement of breathlessness using PROMs for routine clinical care and showed that severity measures alone do not accurately detect this symptomnor the experiential dimensions of breathlessness that are critical to guide appropriate intervention.

Oral morphine drops for prompt relief of breathlessness in patients with advanced cancer-a randomized, double blinded, crossover trial of morphine sulfate oral drops vs. morphine hydrochloride drops with ethanol (red morphine drops)

PURPOSE

Episodic breathlessness is frequent in palliative cancer patients. Opioids are the only pharmacological agents with sufficient evidence in treatment. In Denmark, the main recommendation is red morphine drops (RMD), an off-label solution of morphine, ethanol, and red color (cochenille) described since 1893 (Pharmacopoea Danica). In 2015, the Danish Medicines Agency increased focus on off-label medicines and recommended registered morphine drops without ethanol instead. However, our palliative patients told us that RMD was better. For that reason, we conducted a clinical trial to clarify any perceived difference between the two types of drops.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, double blinded, crossover trial. Patients were asked to perform standardized activity (2-min walk) aiming to provoke breathlessness. Primary endpoint (breathlessness NRS) and secondary endpoints (saturation, pulse, respiratory frequency) were measured before (t = 0) and after test medicine at t = 1, t = 3, t = 5, t = 10, and t = 20 min. After 2-4 days (washout period), the patients repeated the test, receiving the alternative drops in a blinded setup (crossover).

RESULTS

In the first 3 min, the relative drop in breathlessness for morphine drops with ethanol (RMD) was significant more than for morphine drops without ethanol. We found no significant difference in secondary endpoints.

CONCLUSIONS

A conclusion could be that ethanol might facilitate morphine absorption in the mouth. Our results needs further research of opioid absorption in the mouth as well as trials, testing morphine vs. more lipophilic opioids. The RMD drops are cheap, easy to use, and noninvasive and keep the patient independent of health care professionals.

Holistic services for people with advanced disease and chronic or refractory breathlessness: a mixed-methods evidence synthesis

Background

Breathlessness is a common and distressing symptom of many advanced diseases, affecting around 2 million people in the UK. Breathlessness increases with disease progression and often becomes chronic or refractory. Breathlessness-triggered services that integrate holistic assessment and specialist palliative care input as part of a multiprofessional approach have been developed for this group, offering tailored interventions to support self-management and reduce distress.

Objectives

The aim was to synthesise evidence on holistic breathlessness services for people with advanced disease and chronic or refractory breathlessness. The objectives were to describe the structure, organisation and delivery of services, determine clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and acceptability, identify predictors of treatment response, and elicit stakeholders’ evidence-based priorities for clinical practice, policy and research.

Design

The mixed-methods evidence synthesis comprised three components: (1) a systematic review to determine the clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and acceptability of holistic breathlessness services; (2) a secondary analysis of pooled individual data from three trials to determine predictors of clinical response; and (3) a transparent expert consultation (TEC), comprising a stakeholder workshop and an online consensus survey, to identify stakeholders’ priorities.

Results

Thirty-seven papers reporting on 18 holistic breathlessness services were included in the systematic review. Most studies enrolled people with thoracic cancer, were delivered over 4–6 weeks, and included breathing training, relaxation techniques and psychological support. Meta-analysis demonstrated significant reductions in the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) distress due to breathlessness, significant reductions in the Hospital Anxiety and Depressions Scale (HADS) depression scores, and non-significant reductions in the Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire (CRQ) mastery and HADS anxiety, favouring the intervention. Recipients valued education, self-management interventions, and expertise of the staff in breathlessness and person-centred care. Evidence for cost-effectiveness was limited and inconclusive. The responder analysis (n = 259) revealed baseline CRQ mastery and NRS distress to be strong predictors of the response to breathlessness services assessed by these same measures, and no significant influence from baseline breathlessness intensity, patient diagnosis, lung function, health status, anxiety or depression. The TEC elicited 34 priorities from stakeholders. Seven priorities received high agreement and consensus, reflecting stakeholders’ (n = 74) views that services should be person-centred and multiprofessional, share their breathlessness management skills with others, and recognise the roles and support needs of informal carers.

Limitations

The evidence synthesis draws predominantly from UK services and may not be generalisable to other settings. Some meta-analyses were restricted by reporting biases and statistical heterogeneity.

Conclusions

Despite heterogeneity in composition and delivery, holistic breathlessness services are highly valued by recipients and can lead to significant improvements in the distress caused by breathlessness and depression. Outcomes of improved mastery and reduced distress caused by breathlessness are not influenced by patient diagnosis, lung function or health status. Stakeholders highlighted the need for improved access to person-centred, multiprofessional breathlessness services and support for informal carers.

Future work

Our research suggests that key therapeutic components of holistic breathlessness services be considered in clinical practice and models of delivery and educational strategies to address stakeholders’ priorities tested.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017057508.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery programme. Matthew Maddocks, Wei Gao and Irene J Higginson are supported by the NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) South London; Matthew Maddocks is supported by a NIHR Career Development Fellowship (CDF-2017-009), William D-C Man is supported by the NIHR CLAHRC Northwest London and Irene J Higginson holds a NIHR Emeritus Senior Investigator Award.

Definition of Episodic Dyspnea in Cancer Patients: A Delphi-Based Consensus among Spanish Experts: The INSPIRA Study

BACKGROUND

Episodic dyspnea is an increasingly recognized phenomenon that occurs frequently in patients with cancer. Although numerous definitions have been proposed to describe episodic dyspnea, to date, no common widely accepted definition in Spanish has yet emerged. Without a clear well-accepted definition, it is difficult to design rigorous clinical trials to evaluate candidate treatments for this emerging entity and to compare outcomes among studies.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to reach a consensus definition of episodic dyspnea in the Spanish language based on professional criteria in cancer patients.

DESIGN

A two-round Delphi study.

SETTING/SUBJECTS

Sixty-one Spanish specialists in medical oncology, radiation oncology, pneumology, palliative care, and pain management participated in the study.

MEASUREMENTS

Sixteen different questions on dyspnea-related terminology, including the definition of episodic dyspnea, were assessed.

RESULTS

The panel of experts reached a consensus on 75% of the 16 assessments proposed: 56.25% in agreement and 18.75% in disagreement. The term that most panelists considered most appropriate to define dyspnea exacerbation was dyspnea crisis. The panelists disagreed that dyspnea exacerbation is equivalent to dyspnea at effort and that the presence of dyspnea at rest is required for exacerbation to occur. However, there was wide agreement that exacerbation may or may not be predictable and can be triggered by comorbidities as well as emotional, environmental, or effort factors.

CONCLUSIONS

The broad consensus reached in this study is a necessary first step to design high-quality methodological studies to better understand episodic dyspnea and improve treatment.