Managing Opioid Use Disorder in the Setting of a Terminal Disease: Opportunities and Challenges

Creating a Palliative Care Clinic for Patients with Cancer Pain and Substance Use Disorder

BACKGROUND

Opioids are a first-line treatment for severe cancer pain. However, clinicians may be reluctant to prescribe opioids for patients with concurrent substance use disorders (SUD) or clinical concerns about non-prescribed substance use.

MEASURES

Patient volume, 60-day retention rate, and use of sublingual buprenorphine to treat opioid use disorder.

INTERVENTION

We created the Palliative Harm Reduction and Resiliency Clinic, a palliative care clinic founded on harm reduction principles and including formal collaboration with addiction psychiatry.

OUTCOMES

During the first 18 months, patient volume increased steadily; 70% of patients had at least one subsequent visit within 60 days of the initial appointment; and buprenorphine was prescribed for 55% of patients with opioid use disorder.

CONCLUSIONS/LESSONS LEARNED

The formal collaboration with addiction psychiatry and the integration of harm reduction principles and practices into ambulatory palliative care improved our ability to provide treatment to a previously underserved patient population with high symptom burden.

Caring for Patients With Opioid Misuse or Substance Use Disorders in Hospice: A National Survey

Background: Opioid misuse and substance use disorders (SUDs) including opioid use disorder (OUD) are common and negatively impact quality of life. Hospice clinicians' experiences with these conditions have not been well described. Objectives: We sought to explore hospice clinicians' knowledge, practices, and comfort caring for patients with opioid misuse (e.g., a pattern of unsanctioned opioid use escalation, or concurrent illicit substance use) and SUDs. Design: We recruited hospice clinicians in the United States via national hospice and palliative care organizations to complete an online survey designed by the study authors and pilot tested with an interdisciplinary group of current/former hospice clinicians. Results: One hundred seventy-five clinicians (40% nurses, 40% physicians, 16% nurse practitioners) responded to the survey; most had cared for two or more hospice patients with opioid misuse or SUD in the past month. The majority felt confident identifying opioid misuse (94%) and taking SUD histories (79%). Most (62%) felt it is their role to treat hospice patients for SUD, though 56% lacked comfort in using buprenorphine for OUD treatment. While the majority felt it is their role to treat pain in hospice patients with SUDs (94%) and that hospice can help patients with SUDs (94%), many were not comfortable managing pain in patients taking buprenorphine (45%) or naltrexone (49%) for SUDs. Most felt comfortable managing pain in patients taking methadone for SUD (73%). Conclusions: Opioid misuse and SUD are common in hospice. Though clinicians are comfortable taking relevant histories, they feel less comfortable managing patients' opioid misuse or SUD, or these patients' pain.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Novel Formulation of Ketorolac Tromethamine for Continuous Infusion (NTM-001) in Healthy Volunteers

INTRODUCTION

There is an urgent unmet medical need for a safe, effective, nonopioid analgesic agent for postoperative pain control.

METHODS

This first-in-man study was designed to explore a data-informed, model-based candidate dosage regimen and safety of a novel formulation of ketorolac tromethamine (NTM-001) delivered as a 12.5-mg intravenous (IV) bolus followed immediately by 3.5 mg/h continuous infusion over 24 h compared versus IV bolus dosing of 30 mg generic ketorolac every 6 h. The study evaluated pharmacokinetic parameters and safety profiles based on a targeted product profile. A graphical overlay method and model-based comparisons were used to assess the concentration-time curve.

RESULTS

Healthy adults (n = 28, 50% men) received NTM-001 and bolus dosing in an open-label crossover design. Observed plasma concentrations were tightly aligned with predicted values with no outliers. Graphical overlay comparisons showed low between-subject variability and agreed with forecasted concentration-time targets. The pharmacokinetic (PK) base models fit with preliminary PK data from both the NTM-001 and bolus groups with model fit median profiles within 95% prediction limits and no updating of the models. Consistent with serum concentration-time profiles, pain relief scores fell within predicted limits, with initial pain relief scores of NTM-001 slightly above the target profile, likely because the initial serum ketorolac concentrations were somewhat higher than predicted. The 24-h pain relief predicted for NTM-001 based on the area under the median ketorolac pain relief versus time curve was about 6% below that of the pain relief target. Both treatments were well tolerated and no subject withdrew because of adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

The PK parameters for NTM-001 and comparator bolus were similar to the modeling targets with no updating of the base model. There were no outliers and little intersubject variability. NTM-001 delivered as a bolus of 12.5 mg IV followed immediately by continuous infusion of 3.5 mg/h using a standard hospital infusion pump may offer an alternative to opioids for acute postoperative pain control.

Assessment tools for problematic opioid use in palliative care: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Screening for problematic opioid use is increasingly recommended in patients receiving palliative care.

AIM

To identify tools used to assess for the presence or risk of problematic opioid use in palliative care.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

DATA SOURCES

Bibliographic databases (inception to January 31, 2020), reference lists, and grey literature were searched to find primary studies reporting on adults receiving palliative care and prescription opioids to manage symptoms from advanced cancer, neurodegenerative diseases, or end-stage organ diseases; and included tools to assess for problematic opioid use. There were no restrictions based on study design, location, or language.

RESULTS

We identified 42 observational studies (total 14,431 participants) published between 2009 and 2020 that used questionnaires (n = 32) and urine drug tests (n = 21) to assess for problematic opioid use in palliative care, primarily in US (n = 38) and outpatient palliative care settings (n = 36). The questionnaires were Cut down, Annoyed, Guilty, and Eye-opener (CAGE, n = 8), CAGE-Adapted to Include Drugs (CAGE-AID, n = 6), Opioid Risk Tool (n = 9), Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain (SOAPP; n = 3), SOAPP-Revised (n = 2), and SOAPP-Short Form (n = 5). Only two studies' primary objectives were to evaluate a questionnaire's psychometric properties in patients receiving palliative care. There was wide variation in how urine drug tests were incorporated into palliative care; frequency of abnormal urine drug test results ranged from 8.6% to 70%.

CONCLUSION

Given the dearth of studies using tools developed or validated specifically for patients receiving palliative care, further research is needed to inform clinical practice and policy regarding problematic opioid use in palliative care.

Adapting Palliative Care Skills to Provide Substance Use Disorder Treatment to Patients With Serious Illness

BACKGROUND

The majority of Palliative Care (PC) clinicians report recently caring for a person with a Substance Use Disorder (SUD). The impact of an untreated SUD is associated with significant suffering but many PC clinicians report a lack of confidence in managing this population.

OBJECTIVE

This paper aims to demonstrate existing PC skills that can be adapted to provide primary SUD treatment.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature review was conducted on quality PC domains and core SUD treatment principles. To demonstrate the shared philosophy and skills of PC clinicians and SUD treatment, the National Consensus Project Clinical Practice Guidelines for Quality Palliative Care and resources outlining core Addiction Medicine and Nursing Competencies were used.

RESULTS

There is an abundance of overlapping domains in PC and SUD treatment. This paper focuses on the domains of communication, team-based care, quality of life considerations, addressing social determinants of health, and adherence to ethical principles. In each section, the shared domain in PC and SUD treatment is discussed and steps to expand PC clinician's skills are provided.

CONCLUSION

PC clinicians may be among the last healthcare touchpoint for persons with SUD, by naming the shared skills required in PC and evidenced-based SUD treatment, we challenge the field to undertake primary SUD treatment as part of its constant pursuit to better serve people living with serious illness.

Top Ten Tips Palliative Care Clinicians Should Know About Opioid Use Disorder

Since the prevalence of substance use disorders, and opioid use disorder (OUD) specifically, remains high and represents a public health crisis, it is critical that palliative care (PC) providers have a broad understanding of this class of chronic, yet treatable, diseases. Conceptualizing stigma associated with OUD, treatment modalities available, and educational opportunities are key factors in providing patient-centered care. A solid foundation of knowledge about OUD in the setting of serious illness is also crucial as PC providers often recommend or prescribe opioids for symptom management in patients who also have OUD. Furthermore, the PC interdisciplinary team is particularly well poised to care for patients suffering from OUD due to the inherently holistic approach already present in the specialty of PC. This article offers PC teams a framework for understanding the diagnosis and treatment of OUD, methods for performing risk stratification and monitoring, and an overview of opportunities to enhance our care of PC patients with OUD.