Randomized Trial of Low-Dose Morphine Versus Weak Opioids in Moderate Cancer Pain

[Pharmacological pain management in cancer patients]

Pharmacological pain therapy in cancer patients is based on guideline recommendations, which, however, do not fully coincide in all aspects due to varying weighting of evidence. The present article discusses current issues including the decreasing significance of the World Health Organization (WHO) analgesic ladder, with its distinction between step 2 and 3 being increasingly questioned. Risks of nonopioid analgesics such as paracetamol and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), particularly in older populations, are discussed. Paracetamol may potentially reduce the effectiveness of immunotherapies. Aspects of administering analgesics via a feeding tube are considered. Recommendations for the treatment of episodic pain, transitioning between different opioids, and some relevant interactions are also discussed.

Opioid analgesics for nociceptive cancer pain: A comprehensive review

Pain is one of the most burdensome symptoms in people with cancer, and opioid analgesics are considered the mainstay of cancer pain management. For this review, the authors evaluated the efficacy and toxicities of opioid analgesics compared with placebo, other opioids, nonopioid analgesics, and nonpharmacologic treatments for background cancer pain (continuous and relatively constant pain present at rest), and breakthrough cancer pain (transient exacerbation of pain despite stable and adequately controlled background pain). They found a paucity of placebo-controlled trials for background cancer pain, although tapentadol or codeine may be more efficacious than placebo (moderate-certainty to low-certainty evidence). Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs including aspirin, piroxicam, diclofenac, ketorolac, and the antidepressant medicine imipramine, may be at least as efficacious as opioids for moderate-to-severe background cancer pain. For breakthrough cancer pain, oral transmucosal, buccal, sublingual, or intranasal fentanyl preparations were identified as more efficacious than placebo but were more commonly associated with toxicities, including constipation and nausea. Despite being recommended worldwide for the treatment of cancer pain, morphine was generally not superior to other opioids, nor did it have a more favorable toxicity profile. The interpretation of study results, however, was complicated by the heterogeneity in the study populations evaluated. Given the limited quality and quantity of research, there is a need to reappraise the clinical utility of opioids in people with cancer pain, particularly those who are not at the end of life, and to further explore the effects of opioids on immune system function and quality of life in these individuals.

Determination of trace morphine and its metabolites in mouse urine using a TpBD functionalized bivalve magnetic nano-adsorbent

In this study, a new type of covalent organic framework (TpBD) functionalized bivalved magnetic microsphere (TpBD-DS MNS) adsorbent was applied for the enrichment and detection of trace morphine and its metabolites in mouse urine. The main factors affecting the efficiency of magnetic solid phase extraction were optimized, and the optimal MSPE conditions were obtained. Combined with the UPLC-MS/MS technique, a new method for determining trace morphine and its metabolites in urine was established. The detection (LOD) and quantification (LOQ) limits for morphine and its metabolites ranged from 0.16 pg mL-1 to 0.53 pg mL-1 and 0.26 pg mL-1 to 1.25 pg mL-1, respectively. The recovery of the methods ranged from 87.4-97.3%, and the RSD was less than 5%. By employing this methodology, we successfully obtained the temporal change curve of morphine and its metabolites in mouse urine through collection and measurement post intravenous administration of morphine. This approach not only presents a novel means for investigating pharmacokinetics and drug monitoring but also demonstrates significant potential in the fields of forensic toxicology and drug abuse surveillance.

Opioid dose titration for cancer pain

BACKGROUND

Opioid dose titration is a fundamental process of opioid therapy in cancer pain.

AIMS

To assess data opioid dose titration.

METHODS

The principal opioid dose titration methods, outcomes, and modalities of administration regarding the different opioid preparations were examined in different clinical contexts.

RESULTS

Most studies suggested that opioid-naive patients should be started at doses of 15-30 mg/day of oral morphine equivalents. Opioid-tolerant patients may receive low or higher doses of oral morphine equivalents, depending on the level of opioid tolerance. Generally, dose increments of 30%-50% seem to be indicated to start dose titration. Some patients with severe excruciating cancer pain may present as an emergency requiring a rapid application of powerful analgesic strategies. The intravenous use of opioids may circumvent this problem providing a faster pain relief, due to the large availability and rapid achievement of effective plasma concentrations.

DISCUSSION

Opioid dose titration is a delicate passage in patients with cancer pain. This approach may be different according to different clinical conditions. Opioid dose titration requires expertise to optimize cancer pain management while minimizing the development of adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

While most approaches are meaningful and partially supported by existing literature, more studies are necessary to establish advantages and disadvantages in different clinical conditions. Optimization of opioid dose titration is of paramount importance.

SIGNIFICANCE

This review provides the most recent insights on the different modalities of opioid dose titration in cancer pain management.

An overview of the current drug treatment strategies for moderate to severe, chronic malignant tumor-related pain

INTRODUCTION

The pharmacological management of cancer pain is a complex issue that requires knowledge and experience in the use of analgesics. The aim of this expert review is to provide a panorama of the pharmacological strategies in cancer pain management.

AREAS COVERED

Opioid dose titration is a delicate process regarding the start of opioid treatment in different clinical conditions. How to improve the opioid response is a fundamental step, which includes different strategies when an initial treatment with opioids fails. The use of adjuvants is another relevant issue that should be considered in some specific circumstances to optimize the management of cancer pain management. Some clinical conditions, such as neuropathic pain and breakthrough pain, deserve a special attention. Relevant literature was selected to provide an overview of cancer pain management strategies.

EXPERT OPINION

Opioid therapy still remains the cornerstone of pharmacological management of cancer pain. Opioids should be used according to the level of tolerance, also personalizing the treatment (route, drug, and dosing). Adjuvant drugs may help in specific conditions, although their use should be balanced with the adverse effects. Breakthrough pain requires expertise in tailoring a treatment according to patient's profile and characteristics of episodes.

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.

Predictors for the Clinical Efficacy of Tramadol for Cancer Pain

CONTEXT

Tramadol is conditionally recommended for cancer pain and is a less expensive drug compared to strong opioids. Thus, tramadol may help reduce health care costs.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate factors that predict the clinical efficacy of tramadol for cancer pain.

METHODS

A retrospective study using electronic medical records was conducted on patients who received tramadol for cancer pain from January 2016 to December 2020. Patients who continued tramadol for >28 days or discontinued tramadol before 28 days owing to pain improvement were considered as clinical efficacy cases.

RESULTS

We identified 183 eligible patients; 104 cases had clinical efficacy. The median starting tramadol daily dose was 100 mg, and the median administration duration was 22 days. Overall, 169 patients (92.3%) discontinued tramadol; pain improvement was the most common reason (34.9%). Age (>70 years), a performance status of 0-1, and an albumin-bilirubin grade of 1 were independent predictors for the clinical efficacy of tramadol. Patients with multiple predictors had significantly higher achievement rates than those without.

CONCLUSION

Tramadol could have greater clinical efficacy for cancer pain in patients who are elderly, have good performance status, and have good liver function.

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.

Efficacy of Continuous Intrathecal Infusion Trialing with a Mixture of Fentanyl and Bupivacaine in Chronic Low Back Pain Patients

Intrathecal trialing is used as a screening prognostic measure prior to intrathecal drug delivery system implant. The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of a continuous intrathecal infusion of an admixture of bupivacaine and fentanyl in patients with chronic low back pain. Patients with refractory chronic low back pain in the setting of previous lumbar spine surgery and/or chronic vertebral compression fracture(s) were enrolled in a randomized double blind cross-over study comparing saline infusion to infusion of a solution containing bupivacaine combined with low-dose fentanyl over a 14-18 hour period. The primary outcome measure was the change in pain intensity at the end of the screening trial. Patients who experienced significant pain reduction from either infusion relative to baseline pain were offered a permanent implant. In total, 36 patients were enrolled, with 31 patients trialed and 25 implanted. At the end of the screening trial, pain scores, at rest or with activity, decreased appreciably in both groups; however, significantly better improvements occurred in the fentanyl/bupivacaine group compared to saline both with activity and at rest (P = .016 and .006, respectively). Treatment order appeared to affect outcome with saline demonstrating a placebo response. At 12 months following implant, primary and secondary outcome measures continued to be significantly reduced from baseline. Continuous intrathecal delivery of a combination of zlow-dose fentanyl with bupivacaine is superior to saline in screening intrathecal trialing for back pain reduction. With longer term delivery, a sustained reduction of chronic low back pain was also observed.

Considerations for Pain Assessments in Cancer Patients: A Narrative Review of the Latin American Perspective

Cancer incidence in Latin America is lower than in Europe or the United States but morbidity and mortality rates are disproportionately high. A barrier to adequate pain control is inadequate pain assessment, which is a relatively easy and inexpensive metric. The objective of this narrative review is to describe pain assessment for cancer patients in Latin America. Cultural factors may influence pain perception, including contextualizing pain as noble or natural suffering and aspects of what is now called "spiritual pain." Unlike other painful conditions, cancer pain may be strongly associated with existential fear, psychosocial distress, anxiety, and spiritual concerns. Pain assessment allows not just quantification of pain intensity but may elucidate pain mechanisms involved or psychosocial aspects that may color the pain. Many current pain assessment instruments capture only pain intensity, which is but one aspect of the pain experience; some have expanded to include functional assessments, mental health status evaluations, and quality of life metrics. A quality-of-life assessment may be appropriate for cancer patients since chronic pain can severely impact function, which can in turn create a vicious cycle by exacerbating pain. The incidence of cancer in Latin America is expected to increase in the ensuing years. Better pain assessment and clinician education are needed to help manage pain in this large and growing patient population.

Coordinated activity of a central pathway drives associative opioid analgesic tolerance

Opioid analgesic tolerance, a root cause of opioid overdose and misuse, can develop through an associative learning. Despite intensive research, the locus and central pathway subserving the associative opioid analgesic tolerance (AOAT) remains unclear. Using a combination of chemo/optogenetic manipulation with calcium imaging and slice physiology, here we identify neuronal ensembles in a hierarchically organized pathway essential for AOAT. The association of morphine-induced analgesia with an environmental condition drives glutamatergic signaling from ventral hippocampus (vHPC) to dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (dmPFC) cholecystokininergic (CCKergic) neurons. Excitation of CCKergic neurons, which project and release CCK to basolateral amygdala (BLA) glutamatergic neurons, relays AOAT signal through inhibition of BLA μ-opioid receptor function, thereby leading to further loss of morphine analgesic efficacy. This work provides evidence for a circuit across different brain regions distinct for opioid analgesic tolerance. The components of this pathway are potential targets to treat opioid overdose and abuse.

Use of Opioids for Adults With Pain From Cancer or Cancer Treatment: ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide guidance on the use of opioids to manage pain from cancer or cancer treatment in adults.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature identified systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials of the efficacy and safety of opioid analgesics in people with cancer, approaches to opioid initiation and titration, and the prevention and management of opioid adverse events. PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 1, 2010, to February 17, 2022. American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an Expert Panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations.

RESULTS

The evidence base consisted of 31 systematic reviews and 16 randomized controlled trials. Opioids have primarily been evaluated in patients with moderate-to-severe cancer pain, and they effectively reduce pain in this population, with well-characterized adverse effects. Evidence was limited for several of the questions of interest, and the Expert Panel relied on consensus for these recommendations or noted that no recommendation could be made at this time.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Opioids should be offered to patients with moderate-to-severe pain related to cancer or active cancer treatment unless contraindicated. Opioids should be initiated PRN (as needed) at the lowest possible dose to achieve acceptable analgesia and patient goals, with early assessment and frequent titration. For patients with a substance use disorder, clinicians should collaborate with a palliative care, pain, and/or substance use disorder specialist to determine the optimal approach to pain management. Opioid adverse effects should be monitored, and strategies are provided for prevention and management.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

Mechanisms of cancer pain

Personalised and targeted interventions have revolutionised cancer treatment and dramatically improved survival rates in recent decades. Nonetheless, effective pain management remains a problem for patients diagnosed with cancer, who continue to suffer from the painful side effects of cancer itself, as well as treatments for the disease. This problem of cancer pain will continue to grow with an ageing population and the rapid advent of more effective therapeutics to treat the disease. Current pain management guidelines from the World Health Organisation are generalised for different pain severities, but fail to address the heterogeneity of mechanisms in patients with varying cancer types, stages of disease and treatment plans. Pain is the most common complaint leading to emergency unit visits by patients with cancer and over one-third of patients that have been diagnosed with cancer will experience under-treated pain. This review summarises preclinical models of cancer pain states, with a particular focus on cancer-induced bone pain and chemotherapy-associated pain. We provide an overview of how preclinical models can recapitulate aspects of pain and sensory dysfunction that is observed in patients with persistent cancer-induced bone pain or neuropathic pain following chemotherapy. Peripheral and central nervous system mechanisms of cancer pain are discussed, along with key cellular and molecular mediators that have been highlighted in animal models of cancer pain. These include interactions between neuronal cells, cancer cells and non-neuronal cells in the tumour microenvironment. Therapeutic targets beyond opioid-based management are reviewed for the treatment of cancer pain.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Opioids in Patients with Solid Tumours: Is Their Association Safe? A Systematic Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) represent one of the most effective treatments for patients with cancer. As their activity relies on host immune system reactivity, the role of concomitant medications such as corticosteroids and antibiotics has been extensively evaluated. Preclinical data suggest that opioids may influence the immune system.

METHODS

a systematic literature revision was performed using specific keywords on the major search engines. Two authors analysed all the studies and provided a selection of the following inclusion and exclusion criteria, respectively: 1. data collection of patients older than 18 years old affected by solid tumours; 2. description of ICIs efficacy in terms of PFS, OS, TTF, and ORR; 3. concomitant ICIs-opioids treatment and 1. language different from English; 2. not pertinent analyses.

RESULTS

523 studies were analysed, and 13 were selected and included in our series. A possible negative interaction between oral opioids and ICIs efficacy was observed. Most evidence was retrospective, and studies were heterogeneous.

CONCLUSIONS

Even if oral opioids seem to impact negatively on ICIs efficacy in cancer patients, to date there is not sufficient evidence to avoid their prescription in this population.

Cancer Pain Treatment Strategies in Patients with Cancer

Management of cancer pain is challenging. Despite the poor evidence, opioid therapy still remains the cornerstone for the management of cancer-related pain. Opioids should be given according to the clinical presentation in the different stages of disease. There is no drug of choice, as most opioids are effective. Thus, the choice should be based on the individual characteristics of patients. Optimization of opioid therapy may allow individual treatment according to the patient's characteristics and pain syndromes, providing timely alternatives in the different stages of disease. While most patients respond to an appropriate treatment associated with a comprehensive assessment and symptom control, a high level of experience and knowledge is necessary in determining conditions to maximize the analgesic response, eventually adding adjuvants in some specific circumstances. Alternative opioids may improve the balance between analgesia and adverse effects in the presence of a poor response to the first opioid in a large number of patients. Finally, a selected population can benefit from some interventional procedures.

Intravenous Patient-Controlled Analgesia Versus Oral Opioid to Maintain Analgesia for Severe Cancer Pain: A Randomized Phase II Trial

BACKGROUND

Optimal analgesic maintenance for severe cancer pain is unknown. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IPCA) with continuous infusion plus rescue dose or bolus-only dose versus conventional oral extended-release morphine as a background dose with normal-release morphine as a rescue dose to maintain analgesia in patients with severe cancer pain after successful opioid titration.

METHODS

Patients with persistent severe cancer pain (≥7 at rest on the 11-point numeric rating scale [NRS]) were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 treatment arms: (A1) IPCA hydromorphone with bolus-only dose where dosage was 10% to 20% of the total equianalgesic over the previous 24 hours (TEOP24H) administered as needed, (A2) IPCA hydromorphone with continuous infusion where dose per hour was the TEOP24H divided by 24 and bolus dosage for breakthrough pain was 10% to 20% of the TEOP24H, and (B) oral extended-release morphine based on TEOP24H/2 × 75% (because of incomplete cross-tolerance) every 12 hours plus normal-release morphine based on TEOP24H × 10% to 20% for breakthrough pain. After randomization, patients underwent IPCA hydromorphone titration for 24 hours to achieve pain control before beginning their assigned treatment. The primary endpoint was NRS over days 1 to 3.

RESULTS

A total of 95 patients from 9 oncology study sites underwent randomization: 30 into arm A1, 32 into arm A2, and 33 into arm B. Arm B produced a significantly higher NRS over days 1 to 3 compared with arm A1 or A2 (P<.001). Daily NRS from day 1 to day 6 and patient satisfaction scores on day 3 and day 6 were worse in arm B. Median equivalent-morphine consumption increase was significantly lower in A1 (P=.024) among the 3 arms. No severe adverse event occurred in any arm.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with oral morphine maintenance, IPCA hydromorphone for analgesia maintenance improves control of severe cancer pain after successful titration. Furthermore, IPCA hydromorphone without continuous infusion may consume less opioid.

Evaluating Cancer Pain Characteristics and Treatment Factors in the Emergency Department: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Objectives: To identify patient characteristics and treatment factors of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with cancer-related pain that may affect patient outcomes. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study to evaluate adult patients with active cancer, who presented to the ED with a chief complaint of pain between June first, 2012 and January first, 2016. We utilized multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the association of several exposure variables, including disease and demographic characteristics, primary pain site, and treatment methods, on ED disposition and revisit rate. Results: We included 483 patients with active cancer with a chief complaint of pain. Patients with severe pain on arrival tended to be younger than those who did not present with severe pain (median: 58 vs 62 respectively, OR 8.0 p < 0.01). Patients with high ECOG scores (3-4) with severe pain on arrival (≥7 out of 10) had less improvement in their pain than the rest of our cohort (OR 8.4, p < 0.01). Also, those with musculoskeletal pain had significantly less improvement in reported pain than all other pain types (delta pain −2.1 vs −3.4, OR 2.3, p = 0.025) Long delays in initial analgesic administration were associated with increased rates of subsequent admission (OR 3.4) [p = 0.014]. Although opioid analgesics led to greater decreases in pain than non-opioid analgesics, patients treated with opioids were more likely to be admitted (43% vs 34.5% AOR 1.51, p = 0.048). Conclusion: Our study showed that delays in analgesic administration, poor functional status, and the presence of musculoskeletal (MSK) pain significantly influenced outcomes for this patient cohort. These findings suggest the development of specific protocols and tools to address cancer-related pain in the ED may be necessary.

Community prescribing trends and prevalence in the last year of life, for people who die from cancer

Background

People who die from cancer (‘cancer decedents’) may latterly experience unpleasant and distressing symptoms. Prescribing medication for pain and symptom control is essential for good-quality palliative care; however, such provision is variable, difficult to quantify and poorly characterised in current literature. This study aims to characterise trends in prescribing analgesia, non-analgesic palliative care medication and non-palliative medications, to cancer decedents, in their last year of life, and to assess any associations with demographic or clinical factors.

Methods

This descriptive study, analysed all 181,247 prescriptions issued to a study population of 2443 cancer decedents in Tayside, Scotland (2013–2015), in the last year of life, linking prescribing data to demographic, and cancer registry datasets using the unique patient-identifying Community Health Index (CHI) number. Anonymised linked data were analysed in Safe Haven using chi-squared test for trend, binary logistic regression and Poisson regression in SPSSv25.

Results

In their last year of life, three in four cancer decedents were prescribed strong opioids. Two-thirds of those prescribed opioids were also prescribed laxatives and/or anti-emetics. Only four in ten cancer decedents were prescribed all medications in the ‘Just in Case’ medication categories and only one in ten was prescribed breakthrough analgesia in the last year of life. The number of prescriptions for analgesia and palliative care drugs increased in the last 12 weeks of life. The number of prescriptions for non-palliative care medications, including anti-hypertensives, statins and bone protection, decreased over the last year, but was still substantial. Cancer decedents who were female, younger, or had lung cancer were more likely to be prescribed strong opioids; however, male cancer decedents had higher odds of being prescribed breakthrough analgesia. Cancer decedents who had late diagnoses had lower odds of being prescribed strong opioids.

Conclusions

A substantial proportion of cancer decedents were not prescribed strong opioids, breakthrough medication, or medication to alleviate common palliative care symptoms (including ‘Just in Case’ medication). Many patients continued to be prescribed non-palliative care medications in their last days and weeks of life. Age, gender, cancer type and timing of diagnosis affected patients’ odds of being prescribed analgesic and non-analgesic palliative care medication.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12904-022-00996-3.

Evaluation of Clinical and Genetic Determinants of Treatment OutCome In EGFR Mutation Positive Advanced Lung Adenocarcinoma

Background

The aim of this research was to evaluate clinical and low-cost genetic determinants of treatment outcome in EGFR mutation positive advanced lung adenocarcinoma patients.

Material and Methods

EGFR mutation testing and EGFR 181946C>T genotyping were performed in 101 advanced lung adenocarcinoma patients using qRT-PCR and PCR-RFLP, respectively. Progression-free survival was defined as the time from the start of TKI therapy to date of progression, and overall survival as the time from diagnosis to death from any cause. Pain level was evaluated using a Numerical Rating Scale and the Verbal Descriptor Scale. Statistical significance was considered for P < .05.

Results

Patients were treated with EGFR-TKIs for a period of 1–39months (median 9), with a median PFS of 12.0 months (10.4-13.6, CI 95%), and a median OS of 19.0 months (15.1-22.7, CI 95%). The presence of pain was significantly correlated with the existence of bone (P < .001) and adrenal glands metastases (P = .029). Genetic factors did not have a direct impact on pain management but had a significant effect on the response to TKIs leading to pain alleviation.

Conclusions

EGFR mutation subtype and the EGFR 181946 C>T SNP had a significant effect on the response to TKI inducing an indirect anti-dolorous effect.

Analgesic Effects of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Patients With Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized, Sham-Controlled, Pilot Study

Objective

Current pharmacological intervention for the cancer-related pain is still limited. The aim of this study was to explore whether repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) could be an effective adjuvant therapy to reduce pain in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Methods

This was a randomized, sham–controlled study. A total of 41 advanced NSCLC patients with uncontrolled pain (score≥4 on pain intensity assessed with an 11-point numeric rating scale) were randomized to receive active (10 Hz, 2000 stimuli) (n = 20) or sham rTMS (n = 20) for 3 weeks. Pain was the primary outcome and was assessed with the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). Secondary outcomes were oral morphine equivalent (OME) daily dose, quality of life (WHO Quality of Life-BREF), and psychological distress (the Hospital Depression and Anxiety Scale). All outcomes were measured at baseline, 3 days, 1 week, 2 weeks, and 3 weeks.

Results

The pain intensity in both groups decreased gradually from day 3 and decreased to the lowest at the week 3, with a decrease rate of 41.09% in the rTMS group and 23.23% in the sham group. The NRS score of the rTMS group was significantly lower than that of the sham group on the week 2 (p < 0.001, Cohen’s d =1.135) and week 3 (p=0.017, Cohen’s d = -0.822). The OME daily dose, physiology and psychology domains of WHOQOL-BREF scores, as well as the HAM-A and HAM-D scores all were significantly improved at week 3 in rTMS group.

Conclusion

Advanced NSCL patients with cancer pain treated with rTMS showed better greater pain relief, lower dosage of opioid, and better mood states and quality of life. rTMS is expected to be a new effective adjuvant therapy for cancer pain in advanced NSCLC patients.

Psychological barriers to the use of opioid analgesics for treating pain in patients with advanced recurrent cancer (BAROC): protocol for a multicentre cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Opioid analgesics are essential for treating cancer pain. However, patients are sometimes reluctant to use them because of concerns about addiction and dependence. Rapid pain relief following opioid administration may help overcome the psychological barriers to opioid analgesic use. This study aims to determine the relationship between psychological resistance to strong opioid analgesic use and pain amelioration speed in patients with advanced recurrent cancer.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This ongoing, multicentre, observational study enrols patients aged 20 years or older with distant metastasis or advanced recurrent cancer receiving strong opioid analgesics for cancer pain for the first time. All participants, both inpatient and outpatient, were recruited from five Japanese hospitals. We are investigating the relationship between psychological barriers at the start of treatment and pain relief during the first week of treatment in these patients. The primary outcome is the Japanese version of the Barriers Questionnaire-II score at baseline. The secondary outcomes are the relationships between psychological barriers to strong opioid analgesic use and changes in pain over time. The participants are asked to fill out an electronic patient-reported outcome daily during the first week of treatment. The sample size was determined based on the number of patients in the year prior to study commencement who used strong opioid analgesics, met the eligibility criteria and could be expected to consent to participate in the study.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study protocol was approved by the ethics committee (approval ID B200600091) of Yokohama City University on 24 August 2020. The protocol has been reviewed by the institutional review boards at the four participating study sites. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and will be presented at a relevant meeting.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

UMIN000042443.

Revision of Pharmacological Treatment Recommendations for Cancer Pain: Clinical Guidelines from the Japanese Society of Palliative Medicine

Background: Pain is one of the most common symptoms in cancer patients. The Japanese Society for Palliative Medicine (JSPM) first published its clinical guidelines for the management of cancer pain in 2010. Since then, more research on cancer pain management has been reported, and new drugs have become available in Japan. Thus, the JSPM has now revised the clinical guidelines using a validated methodology. Methods: This guideline was developed through a systematic review, discussion, and the Delphi method, following a formal guideline development process. Results: Thirty-five recommendations were created: 19 for the pharmacological management of cancer pain, 6 for the management of opioid-induced adverse effects, and 10 for pharmacological treatment procedures. Due to the lack of evidence that directly addressed our clinical questions, most of the recommendations had to be based on consensus among committee members and other guidelines. Discussion: It is critical to continue to build high-quality evidence in cancer pain management, and revise these guidelines accordingly.

Opioid Use at End-Of-Life Among Nova Scotia Patients With Cancer

Purpose: To determine the factors associated with opioid analgesic prescriptions as measured by community pharmacy dispensations to all Nova Scotia (NS) patients with cancer at end-of-life from 2005 to 2009.

Methods: The NS Cancer Registry and the NS Prescription Monitoring Program (NSPMP) were used to link Nova Scotians who had a cancer diagnosis and received a prescription for opioids in their last year of life (n = 6,186) from 2005 to 2009. The association of factors with opioid dispensations at end-of-life were determined (e.g., patient demographics, type of prescriber, type of cancer, and opioid type, formulation, and dose).

Results: Almost 54% (n = 6,186) of the end-of-life study population with cancer (n = 11,498) was linked to the NSPMP and therefore dispensed opioids. Most prescriptions were written by general practitioners (89%) and were for strong opioids (81%). Immediate-release formulations were more common than modified-release formulations. Although the annual average parenteral morphine equivalents (MEQ) did not change during the study period, the number of opioid prescriptions per patient per year increased from 5.9 in 2006 to 7.0 in 2009 (p < 0.0001). Patients age 80 and over received the fewest prescriptions (mean 3.9/year) and the lowest opioid doses (17.0 MEQ) while patients aged 40–49 received the most prescriptions (mean 14.5/year) and the highest doses of opioid (80.2 MEQ).

Conclusion: Our study examined opioid analgesic use at end-of-life in patients with cancer for a large real-world population and determined factors, trends and patterns associated with type and dose of opioid dispensed. We provide information regarding how general practitioners prescribe opioid therapy to patients at end-of-life. Our data suggest that at the time of this study, there may have been under-prescribing of opioids to patients with cancer at end-of-life. This information can be used to increase awareness among general practitioners, and to inform recommendations from professional regulatory bodies, to aid in managing pain for cancer patients at end-of-life. Future work could address how opioid prescribing has changed over time, and whether efforts to reduce opioid prescribing in response to the opioid crisis have affected patients with cancer at end-of-life in Nova Scotia.

Pharmaceutical intervention for adverse events improves quality of life in patients with cancer undergoing outpatient chemotherapy

Background

The effect of pharmaceutical intervention to treat adverse events on quality of life (QOL) in outpatients receiving cancer chemotherapy is unclear. We investigated whether pharmaceutical intervention provided by pharmacists in collaboration with physicians improves QOL with outpatient cancer chemotherapy.

Methods

We conducted a single-center retrospective descriptive study of pharmaceutical intervention for patients receiving outpatient cancer chemotherapy at Gifu University Hospital between September 2017 and July 2020. We assessed patient QOL using the Japanese version of the EuroQol 5 Dimension5 Level (EQ-5D-5L). Adverse events were graded using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0. We compared the EQ-5D-5L utility value and incidence of grade 2 or higher adverse events before and after pharmaceutical intervention.

Results

Our analysis included 151 patients who underwent 210 chemotherapy cycles. Pharmaceutical intervention significantly improved patients’ EQ-5D-5L utility values from 0.8197 to 0.8603 (P < 0.01). EQ-5D-5L utility values were significantly improved after pharmaceutical intervention for nausea and vomiting (pre-intervention 0.8145, post-intervention 0.8603, P = 0.016), peripheral neuropathy (pre-intervention 0.7798, post-intervention 0.7988, P = 0.032) and pain (pre-intervention 0.7625, post-intervention 0.8197, P = 0.035). Although not statistically significant, the incidence of grade 2 or higher adverse events, including nausea and vomiting, dermopathy, pain, oral mucositis, diarrhea and dysgeusia, tended to be lower post-intervention than pre-intervention.

Conclusions

Pharmaceutical intervention by pharmacists in collaboration with physicians may improve QOL in patients undergoing outpatient cancer chemotherapy.

Safe use of opioids

Background: Opioids are effective analgesics for cancer pain and refractory non-cancer pain. Although they are essential medication, problematic issues on aberrant behavior and adverse events have rapidly emerged as social problems in Korea. This study aimed to describe the mechanisms, efficacy, and adverse events, especially how to deal with opioid dependency.Current Concepts: Opioid-induced aberrant behavior includes physical and psychological dependences (addiction), abuse, and diversion (giving prescribed opioids to another person). Most physicians are unfamiliar with how to handle patients presenting these problematic issues. Physical and psychological dependences develop through different pathophysiologic mechanisms, i.e., noradrenergic and dopaminergic pathways, respectively. Motivational enhancement therapy, psychosocial support, substitution therapy with buprenorphine, and adjunctive medications, including alpha-2 adrenergic agonist, antidepressants, and non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs, are the mainstay of treatment for opioid dependency. Constipation, nausea/vomiting, drowsiness/sedation, delirium, itching sensation, voiding difficulty, dry mouth, opioid-induced hyperalgesia, and respiratory depression are well-known physical side effects of opioid consumption.Discussion and Conclusion: Research on the development history, epidemiology of opioid dependency, and its treatment are warranted to avoid an opioid crisis in Korea. Above all, thorough knowledge for physicians and patients is urgently needed.

Morphine promotes the malignant biological behavior of non-small cell lung cancer cells through the MOR/Src/mTOR pathway

BACKGROUND

Morphine, a µ-opioid receptor (MOR) agonist, has been shown to be related to the activity of cancer cells, and a higher morphine dosage reduces the survival time of patients with lung cancer. However, the effect of morphine on the malignant behavior of lung cancer cells remains unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the specific molecular mechanism by which morphine regulates the malignant biological behavior of non-small cell lung cancer.

METHODS

Immunofluorescence staining and Western blot analyses were performed to detect MOR expression. H460 non-small cell lung cancer cells were used in this study, and cell proliferation, the cell cycle and apoptosis were evaluated using Cell Counting Kit-8 (CCK-8) and flow cytometry assays, respectively. Cell migration and invasion were detected using wound healing and Transwell assays. The effect of morphine on lung cancer development in vivo was examined by performing a xenograft tumor assay following morphine treatment.

RESULTS

Morphine promoted the growth of H460 cells both in vivo and in vitro. Morphine enhanced cell migration and invasion, modified cell cycle progression through the S/G₂ transition and exerted an antiapoptotic effect on H460 cells. Additionally, morphine increased Rous sarcoma oncogene cellular homolog (Src) phosphorylation and activated the phosphoinositide 3 kinase (PI3K)/protein kinase B (AKT)/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway. Treatment with the MOR antagonist methylnaltrexone (MNTX) and the Src inhibitor protein phosphatase 1 (PP1) reduced the phosphorylation induced by morphine. Furthermore, MNTX, PP1, and the PI3K/AKT inhibitor deguelin reversed the antiapoptotic effect of morphine on lung cancer cells.

CONCLUSION

Morphine promotes the malignant biological behavior of H460 cells by activating the MOR and Src/mTOR signaling pathways.

A Comparison of the Clinical Effectiveness Between Low-Dose Strong Opioids and Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs in the Treatment of Mild Cancer Pain: A Randomized Trial

Objective

The present study aims to explore the effectiveness and safety of low-dose strong opioids compared with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in the treatment of mild cancer pain.

Methods

From September 2016 to September 2018, 66 patients with a malignant tumor and mild cancer pain admitted to the Department of Oncology of Dalian Fifth People’s Hospital were divided into the group A (treated with ibuprofen sustained-release tablets for pain relief) and the group B (treated with oxycodone hydrochloride sustained-release tablets for pain relief). After 7 days of treatment, the pain relief (Numeric Rating Scale [NRS]), physical strength, quality of life scores (Zubrod/ECOG/WHO [ZPS]), the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [ESAS], and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core15-Palliative [EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL] scores), and the occurrence of adverse reactions between the two groups were compared. The occurrence of adverse reactions in the mid-term (after one month and three months of treatment) between the two groups were also compared.

Results

Both groups had over 90% analgesic efficiency, but complete pain relief was more likely to be obtained in the group B (41.18%). The total analgesic efficiency in the group B was higher (100%) than in the group A (98.9%), and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The differences in the physical strength and quality of life scores in the two groups before and after treatment were statistically significant (P < 0.05). The differences in the ZPS scores between the two groups were statistically significant (P < 0.05). The differences in ESAS and EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL scores between groups were not statistically significant (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

The application of low-dose oxycodone hydrochloride sustained-release tablets as the initial medication for patients with mild cancer pain was safe and effective, and the adverse reactions were easy to manage.

Impact of expanded strong opioid availability on opioid prescription patterns in patients with cancer: A population-wide cohort study in Taiwan

Background One of the major barriers to adequate cancer pain management in Taiwan is the limited prescription options regarding strong opioids. Internationally recommended strong opioids, including oxycodone and hydromorphone, were not introduced in Taiwan until late 2014. We analysed the patterns in opioid prescription for cancer pain management, after the introduction of new opioid options. Methods All inpatient and outpatient clinical visits from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2017, with the diagnosis of cancer and the analgesic prescriptions were collected from the database of National Health Insurance, Taiwan, and analysed. Opioids were grouped into strong opioids, weak opioids, and guideline non-recommended opioids. Findings A total of 1, 292, 905 patients with cancers were included. Approximately 50% of patients used analgesics, 50% of which were opioids; the proportions were stable during the study period. The annual cumulative opioid use per patient (defined daily dose, DDD) significantly decreased from 36•41±102•59 (Mean±SD) in 2012 to 32•42±100•99 in 2017 (p < •001). The annual cumulative strong opioid use per patient increased significantly from 17•54±89•23 in 2012 to 19•28±94•97 in 2017 (+9•90%, p < •001). In parallel, the annual cumulative weak opioids use per patient decreased from 18•64±40•81 in 2012 to 13•04±26•79 in 2017 (-30•04%, p < •001). Among extended-release strong opioids, the use of transdermal fentanyl significantly decreased after oxycodone and hydromorphone were introduced (p < •001). Interpretation Increased therapeutic options in strong opioid prescriptions led opioid prescription patterns to evolve towards international cancer pain management guidelines. In addition, increased accessibility to a wider range of different strong opioids may facilitate more efficient opioid titration and rotation - and thus decrease, not increase, the opioid usage. Funding This study was supported by Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan (MOST-106-2314-B-002-213 and MOST-108-2314-B-002-072-MY3), Ministry of Health and Welfare, Taiwan (MOHW109-TDU-B-211-114002), National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan (NTUH-103-002314 and NTUH. 105-S2954), and National Center of Excellence for Clinical Trial & Research, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan (NCTRC201208 and NCTRC201603).

Cancer induced bone pain: current management and future perspectives

Recent improvements in the therapeutic armamentarium of oncology by the addition of targeted and immunotherapeutic agents have led to an increase in the life expectancy of advanced-stage cancer patients. This has led to an increased number of patients presenting with bone metastasis and experiencing episodes of cancer-induced bone pain (CIBP). CIBP is a crippling, chronic, morbid state interfering significantly with the functional capacity and the quality of life (QoL). CIBP is characterized by a complex multifactorial pathophysiological mechanism involving tumor cells, bone cells, inflammatory microenvironment, and the neuronal tissue. It may not be possible to mitigate pain completely; therefore, the aim should be to reach the lowest possible level of pain that allows for an acceptable QoL to the patient. Multimodality approach of surgical, radiation, medical and behavioral techniques is thus recommended to manage CIBP. This review discusses the pathogenesis and pathophysiological mechanism accompanying bone metastasis and CIBP, currently approved therapies for the management of CIBP, and the future perspective.

Comparing Patient-Controlled Analgesia Versus Non-PCA Hydromorphone Titration for Severe Cancer Pain: A Randomized Phase III Trial

BACKGROUND

Opioid titration is necessary to achieve rapid, safe pain relief. Medication can be administered via patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) or by a healthcare provider (non-PCA). We evaluated the efficacy of intravenous PCA versus non-PCA hydromorphone titration for severe cancer pain (≥7 at rest on the 11-point numeric rating scale [NRS]).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with severe cancer pain were randomized 1:1 to PCA or non-PCA titration, stratified by opioid-tolerant or opioid-naïve status. The PCA pump was set to no continuous dose, with a hydromorphone bolus dose 10% to 20% of the total previous 24-hour equianalgesic (for opioid-tolerant patients) or 0.5 mg (for opioid-naïve patients). For the non-PCA group, the initial hydromorphone bolus dose was identical to that in the PCA group, with the subsequent dose increased by 50% to 100% (for NRS unchanged or increased) or repeated at the current dose (for NRS 4-6). Hydromorphone delivery was initiated every 15 minutes (for NRS ≥4) or as needed (for NRS ≤3). The primary endpoint was time to successful titration (TST; time from first hydromorphone dose to first occurrence of NRS ≤3 in 2 consecutive 15-minute intervals).

RESULTS

Among 214 patients (PCA, n=106; non-PCA, n=108), median TSTs (95% CI) were 0.50 hours (0.25-0.50) and 0.79 hours (0.50-1.42) for the PCA and non-PCA groups, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 1.64; 95% CI, 1.23-2.17; P=.001). TSTs in opioid-tolerant patients were 0.50 hours (0.25-0.75) and 1.00 hours (0.50-2.00) for the PCA and non-PCA groups, respectively (HR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.32-2.78; P=.003); in opioid-naive patients, TST was not significantly different for the PCA versus non-PCA groups (HR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.88-2.04; P=.162). Pain score (median NRS; interquartile range) over 24 hours was significantly lower in the PCA group (2.80; 2.15-3.22) than in the non-PCA group (3.00; 2.47-3.53; P=.020). PCA administration produces significantly higher patient satisfaction with pain control than non-PCA administration (P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous hydromorphone titration for severe cancer pain was achieved more effectively with PCA than with non-PCA administration.

US Trends in Opioid Access Among Patients With Poor Prognosis Cancer Near the End-of-Life

PURPOSE

Heightened regulations have decreased opioid prescribing across the United States, yet little is known about trends in opioid access among patients dying of cancer.

METHODS

Among 270,632 Medicare fee-for-service decedents with poor prognosis cancers, we used part D data to examine trends from 2007 to 2017 in opioid prescription fills and opioid potency (morphine milligram equivalents per day [MMED]) near the end-of-life (EOL), defined as the 30 days before death or hospice enrollment. We used administrative claims to evaluate trends in pain-related emergency department (ED) visits near EOL.

RESULTS

Between 2007 and 2017, the proportion of decedents with poor prognosis cancers receiving ≥ 1 opioid prescription near EOL declined 15.5% (relative percent difference [RPD]), from 42.0% (95% CI, 41.4 to 42.7) to 35.5% (95% CI, 34.9 to 36.0) and the proportion receiving ≥ 1 long-acting opioid prescription declined 36.5% (RPD), from 18.1% (95% CI, 17.6 to 18.6) to 11.5% (95% CI, 11.1 to 11.9). Among decedents receiving opioids near EOL, the mean daily dose fell 24.5%, from 85.6 MMED (95% CI, 82.9 to 88.3) to 64.6 (95% CI, 62.7 to 66.6) MMED. Overall, the total amount of opioids prescribed per decedent near EOL (averaged across those who did and did not receive an opioid) fell 38.0%, from 1,075 morphine milligram equivalents per decedent (95% CI, 1,042 to 1,109) to 666 morphine milligram equivalents per decedent (95% CI, 646 to 686). Simultaneously, the proportion of patients with pain-related ED visits increased 50.8% (RPD), from 13.2% (95% CI, 12.7 to 13.6) to 19.9% (95% CI, 19.4 to 20.4). Sensitivity analyses demonstrated similar declines in opioid utilization in the 60 and 90 days before death or hospice, and suggested that trends in opioid access were not confounded by secular trends in hospice utilization.

CONCLUSION

Opioid use among patients dying of cancer has declined substantially from 2007 to 2017. Rising pain-related ED visits suggests that EOL cancer pain management may be worsening.

Tapentadol Versus Tramadol: A Narrative and Comparative Review of Their Pharmacological, Efficacy and Safety Profiles in Adult Patients

We conducted a narrative review of the literature to compare the pharmacological, efficacy and safety profiles of tapentadol and tramadol, and to assess the clinical interest of tapentadol in adult patients. Tapentadol and tramadol share a mixed mechanism of action, including both mu-agonist and monoaminergic properties. Tapentadol is approximately two to three times more potent than tramadol and two to three times less potent than morphine. It has no identified analgesically active metabolite and is not significantly metabolised by cytochrome P450 enzymes, thus overcoming some limitations of tramadol, including the potential for pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions and interindividual variability due to genetic polymorphisms of cytochrome P450 enzymes. The toxicity profiles of tramadol and tapentadol are similar; however tapentadol is likely to result in less exposure to serotoninergic adverse effects (nausea, vomiting, hypoglycaemia) but cause more opioid adverse effects (constipation, respiratory depression, abuse) than tramadol. The safety of tapentadol in real-world conditions remains poorly documented, particularly in at-risk patient subgroups and also in the ability to assess the risk associated with its residual serotonergic activity (serotonin syndrome, seizures). Because of an earlier market introduction, more real-world safety data are available for tramadol, including data from at-risk patient subgroups. The level of evidence on the efficacy of both tramadol and tapentadol for the treatment of chronic pain is globally low. The trials published to date show overall that tapentadol does not provide a clinically significant analgesic improvement compared to existing treatments, for which the safety profile is much better known. In conclusion, tapentadol is not a first-line opioid but represents an additional analgesic in the therapeutic choices, which some patients may benefit from after careful examination of their clinical situation, co-morbidities and co-medications.

Association among rescue neuroleptic use, agitation, and perceived comfort: secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial on agitated delirium

BACKGROUND

Few studies have examined how the use of rescue medications could be used to inform on the efficacy of interventions in delirium clinical trials. The objective of this study was to determine the association among rescue medication use, Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS), and perceived comfort by the nurses and caregivers.

METHODS

This was a pre-planned secondary analysis of a double-blind, randomized clinical trial comparing the use of a single dose of lorazepam plus haloperidol versus placebo plus haloperidol in patients with agitated delirium. Rescue medications were considered the gold standard for this analysis. The optimal cutoff for RASS analysis was calculated by using general linear regression models and determining the area of the curve and using the top left approach. We used 2 × 2 tables to examine the association between rescue medication use and perceived comfort.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight patients received the study medications and 52 (89%) completed the 8-h observation period. There were 26 (50%) patients in each arm. The lorazepam/haloperidol arm required fewer rescue doses (4/26 (15%)) vs. 16/26 (62%), p = 0.004). Patients with a greater initial RASS reduction required fewer rescue doses. The cutoff value for RASS improvement was 4 points, area under the curve (AUC) 0.64 (95% CI 0.49-0.79) for those who required no rescue doses, and 3 points, AUC 0.74 (95% CI 0.52-0.96) for those who required more than one rescue dose.

CONCLUSIONS

Rescue medication use was responsive to change and associated with both RASS scores and perceived patient comfort by the nurse and caregiver.

Neuropathic Pain in Pancreatic Cancer: An Update of the Last Five Years

Pain is the main symptom of pancreatic cancer (pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, PDAC). Pain in pancreatic cancer may be visceral, somatic or neuropathic in origin. Pain is produced by tissue damage, inflammation, ductal obstruction and infiltration. Visceral nociceptive signals caused by damage to the upper abdominal viscera are carried along sympathetic fibers, which travel to the celiac plexus nerves and ganglia, which are found at the T12-L2 vertebral levels, anterolateral to the aorta near the celiac trunk. From here, the signals are transmitted through the splanchnic nerves to the T5-T12 dorsal root ganglia and then on to the higher centers of the central nervous system. Somatic and neuropathic pain may arise from tumor extension into the surrounding peritoneum, retroperitoneum and bones and, in the latter case, into the nerves, such as the lumbosacral plexus. It should also be noted that other types of pain might arise because of therapeutic interventions, such as post-chemoradiation syndromes, which cause mucositis and enteritis. Management with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents and narcotics was the mainstay of therapy. In recent years, celiac plexus blocks and neurolysis, as well as intrathecal therapies have been used to control severe pain, at times resulting in a decreased need for drugs, avoiding their unwanted side effects. Pain may impair the patient’s quality of life, negatively affecting patient outcome and resulting in increased psychological stress. Even after recognizing the negative effect of cancer pain on patient overall health, studies have shown that cancer pain is still undertreated. This review focuses on neuropathic pain, which is difficult to handle; thus, the most recent literature was reviewed in order to diagnose neuropathic pain and its management.

[Current status and issues in clinical use of opioids]

In Japan, 14 opioids with a variety of dosage forms, such as oral preparation, injection, transdermal patch, transmucosal and suppository are clinically available as analgesics, and their use properly depends on the type and degree of pain and patient condition. Fundamentally, strong opioids are restricted to only treatment of cancer pain, while the indication of fentanyl transdermal patch and oxycodone tamper resistant tablet has been expanded for the treatment of non-cancer chronic pain. In US, the additional indication of opioids to chronic pain has led to prolongation and generalization of opioid use, which may contribute to "opioid crisis" in which opioid-related death strikingly increased due to opioid abuse and overdose-induced respiratory depression. Currently, opioid-related abuse and death have not been evident in Japan, while abuse of antitussive opioids (codeine and dihydrocodeine) are recently seen as a problem, which may suggest the sense of guilt to abuse legally-uncontrolled drugs (ex. weak opioids, antitussives or hypnotics) may be low in Japanese. In this review, I will summarize current status and issues in clinical use of opioid analgesics, and will talk about the necessity and expectation for development of novel analgesics without serious adverse reactions such as addiction and respiratory depression.

Cancer and stress: NextGen strategies

Chronic stress is well-known to cause physiological distress that leads to body balance perturbations by altering signaling pathways in the neuroendocrine and sympathetic nervous systems. This increases allostatic load, which is the cost of physiological fluctuations that are required to cope with psychological challenges as well as changes in the physical environment. Recent studies have enriched our knowledge about the role of chronic stress in disease development, especially carcinogenesis. Stress stimulates the hypothalamic-pituitaryadrenal (HPA) axis and the sympathetic nervous system (SNS), resulting in an abnormal release of hormones. These activate signaling pathways that elevate expression of downstream oncogenes. This occurs by activation of specific receptors that promote numerous cancer biological processes, including proliferation, genomic instability, angiogenesis, metastasis, immune evasion and metabolic disorders. Moreover, accumulating evidence has revealed that β-adrenergic receptor (ADRB) antagonists and downstream target inhibitors exhibit remarkable anti-tumor effects. Psychosomatic behavioral interventions (PBI) and traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) also effectively relieve the impact of stress in cancer patients. In this review, we discuss recent advances in the underlying mechanisms that are responsible for stress in promoting malignancies. Collectively, these data provide approaches for NextGen pharmacological therapies, PBI and TCM to reduce the burden of tumorigenesis.

Practices and Hindrances in Cancer Pain Management: Results of a National Multi-Cancer Center Survey Among Healthcare Professionals in China

Background

Inadequate control of cancer-related pain in China is an ongoing problem. This study investigated the practices of cancer pain (CP) management at major cancer centers in China and perceived hindrances and knowledge of CP management among health professionals.

Methods

From September to October 2019, a survey was conducted using electronic questionnaires via the internet to investigate the practices, and perceived hindrances and knowledge in managing CP among healthcare professionals from 7 provincial cancer centers in China. The questionnaire included demographic data, the professionals' practices among their own patients, their opinions regarding hindrances to CP management, and knowledge of CP management.

Results

We gathered validated responses from 411 anonymous healthcare professionals, with 82.2% (411/500) of response rate. Based on the analysis of these 411 questionnaires, the results demonstrated that CP was prevalent among patients with cancer, while moderate-to-severe pain took a great proportion. CP management was inadequate for a significant proportion of the patients with CP. Pain assessment, analgesic treatment, attention to adverse effects of analgesic, and multidisciplinary management were usually ineffectual in many cases. The duration of work experience did not significantly affect CP management. The respondents considered that both patients and healthcare professionals were responsible for the undermanagement of CP. Only 26 (6.3%) respondents were able to answer correctly all 10 of the professional questions regarding CP.

Conclusion

CP is commonly undermanaged in China. Effective pain control requires the implementation of standards, and the sufficient attention and training of healthcare professionals.

[New developments in pain management for the elderly]

Pain in old age is still too common. Yet it deserves our interest because it weakens elderly patients who are already very vulnerable. As medical knowledge is constantly evolving, all caregivers are concerned in updating their knowledge in order to control the multiple pains of the elderly. Review of key points relating to the evaluation of pain, but also to today's drug and non-drug treatments, in order to optimise algological management in geriatrics.

Acupuncture for opioid-induced constipation: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is one of the most common complications of analgesic therapy for cancer pain patients who suffer moderate to severe pain. Acupuncture as an effective treatment in constipation has been widely applied. But its efficacy has not been assessed systematically. Thus, the purpose of this study is to provide a protocol to explore the efficacy and safety of acupuncture for OIC.

METHODS

Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) of acupuncture treatment for OIC in 4 Chinese electronic databases (China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Biological and Medical Database, China Scientific Journal Database, Wan-Fang Data) and 3 English electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library) will be searched from their inception to September 31, 2020. RevMan 5.3 software and Stata 14.0 software will be used for meta-analysis, EndNote X9.2 and Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool will be used for literature screening and quality assessment.

RESULTS

This study will present an assessment of the efficacy and safety of acupuncture treatment for OIC patients through summarize high-quality clinical evidence.

CONCLUSION

The conclusion of our systematic review and meta-analysis may provide evidence of whether acupuncture treatment is beneficial to patients with OIC.INPLASY registration number: INPLASY2020100026.

Management of pain in colorectal cancer patients

In this review we focus on the pathophysiology of CRC-related pain and discuss currently applied pain management. Pain is a symptom reported by over 70 % of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. It remains a feared and debilitating consequence of both cancer and cancer-related treatment. There are many options for pain management in CRC, consisting of intravenous, oral or topical medications. In order to address the full spectrum of pain, proper treatment should address the nociceptive, neuropathic and/or psychogenic pain component. Currently available methods do not bring pain relief to satisfying number of patients and, if used improperly, can cause a number of complications. Therefore, future treatments should focus primarily on alleviating pain, but also on reducing possible side effects. In this article we cover recent and promising pharmacological and non- pharmacological developments emerging in the field of CRC treatment.

Genetic implications in quality palliative care and preventing opioid crisis in cancer-related pain management

The prevalence of cancer-related pain is 64% among patients with metastatic, advanced, or terminal cancer, 59% among patients undergoing anticancer treatment, and 33% among patients who completed curative treatment. According to the World Health Organization cancer pain relief guidelines, opioid analgesics are the mainstay analgesic therapy in addition to conventional first-step analgesics, such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and acetaminophen. The indications for strong opioids have recently been expanded to include mild-to-moderate pain in addition to moderate-to-severe pain. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines emphasize that realistic expectations should be weighed against potential serious harm from opioids, rather than relying on the unrealized long-term benefits of these drugs. Therefore, treatment strategies for both cancer-related chronic or acute pain have been unfortunately deviated from opioid analgesics. The barriers hindering adequate cancer-related pain management with opioid analgesics are related to the inadequate knowledge of opioid analgesics (e.g., effective dose, adverse effects, and likelihood of addiction or tolerance). To achieve adequate opioid availability, these barriers should be overcome in a clinically suitable manner. Genetic assessments could play an important role in overcoming challenges in opioid management. To balance the improvement in opioid availability and the prevention of opioid misuse and addiction, the following two considerations concerning opioids and genetic polymorphisms warrant attention: (A) pain severity, opioid sensitivity, and opioid tolerance; and (B) vulnerability to opioid dependence and addiction.

Chronic Opioid Use and Risk of Cancer in Patients with Chronic Noncancer Pain: A Nationwide Historical Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

To investigate whether chronic opioid therapy is associated with a higher risk of cancer among noncancer patients with chronic pain.

METHODS

A population-based historical cohort study of the South Korean adult population was conducted using data from the National Health Insurance Service. We included patients registered with a diagnostic code of M00-M99 (musculoskeletal system and connective tissue diseases) according to the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision, in 2010. Patients prescribed a continuous supply of any opioid drug for ≥90 days were defined as chronic opioid users.

RESULTS

A total of 351,701 patients were analyzed. Among them, 25,153 (7.2%) were chronic opioid users. Using a multivariate time-dependent Cox regression model, the risk of cancer in chronic opioid users was 1.20-fold higher than that in controls [HR, 1.20; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.15-1.25; P < 0.001]. On subgroup analysis according to opioid potency, the cancer risk in chronic weak and strong opioid users was 1.18-fold (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.13-1.23; P < 0.001) and 1.32-fold (HR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.10-1.59; P = 0.003) higher than that in controls, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Chronic opioid therapy was associated with an increased risk of cancer among noncancer patients with chronic pain. This association was more evident in chronic strong opioid users. However, as unmeasured and potential confounders may have affected the results, the relationship between chronic opioid use and cancer risk should be evaluated with caution.

IMPACT

Chronic opioid therapy was associated with an increased risk of cancer among noncancer patients.

Independent Research on Cancer Pain Management in the Setting of Early Palliative Care: A Flywheel to Counteract General Opioid Misuse and Abuse

The increased recognition of the high prevalence and important burden of cancer pain and the documentation of a large proportion of patients receiving inadequate analgesic treatment should have reinforced the need for evidence-based recommendations. The World health Organization (WHO) guidelines on cancer pain management—or palliative care—are traditionally based on a sequential, three-step, analgesic ladder according to pain intensity: nonopioids (paracetamol or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) to mild pain in step I; weak opioids (eg, codeine or tramadol) to mild-moderate pain in step II; and strong opioids to moderate-severe pain in step. III. Despite the widespread use of this ladder, unrelieved pain continues to be a substantial concern in one third of patients with either solid or hematologic malignancies. The sequential WHO analgesic ladder, and in particular, the usefulness of step II opioids have been questioned but there are no universally used guidelines for the treatment of pain in patients with advanced cancer and not all guideline recommendations are evidence-based. The American Society of Clinical Oncology and the European Society of Medical Oncology have recommended the implementation of early palliative care (EPC), which is a novel model of care, consisting of delivering dedicated palliative service concurrent with active treatment as early as possible in the cancer disease trajectory. Improvement in cancer pain management is one of the several important positive effects following EPC interventions. Independent well-designed research studies on pharmacological interventions on cancer pain, especially in the EPC setting are warranted and may contribute to spur research initiatives to investigate the poorly addressed issues of pain management in non cancer patients.

Relationship Between Tramadol Response and Cancer Cachexia: A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

It was reported that the administration of tramadol in patients with cancer pain who have a higher interleukin 6 (IL-6) serum level led to insufficient pain relief. Cytokines produced by tumors, including IL-6, are associated with cancer cachexia. However, whether nonresponse to tramadol is related to cancer cachexia is unknown. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between tramadol response and cancer cachexia in patients with cancer pain.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with cancer who received tramadol treatment for mild to moderate pain from January 2016 to June 2019. Patients who experienced <20% pain reduction based on the numeric rating scale from baseline to day 7 after treatment with tramadol were defined as nonresponders. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to examine the relationships between tramadol response and various patient characteristics, including cancer cachexia.

RESULTS

Of 115 patients, 79 were included in the analysis. A total of 24 patients experienced cancer cachexia, and 22 patients were nonresponders. In the univariate logistic analysis, cancer cachexia (odds ratio [OR]: 6.04, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.06-17.7), higher white blood cell counts (× 10³/μL; OR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.04-1.61), and lower body mass index (OR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.66-0.96) were significantly associated with nonresponse to tramadol. The multivariate logistic analysis revealed that cancer cachexia (OR: 5.27, 95% CI: 1.75-15.9) was the only significant factor associated with nonresponse to tramadol.

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer cachexia in patients with cancer pain can be associated with nonresponse to tramadol.

Chronic Pain Management in Head and Neck Oncology

Pain is epidemic in patients with head and neck cancer. Providers involved in the care of patients with head and neck cancer should be able to describe the common pain syndromes experienced by these patients, identify patients at risk of pain, and provide multimodal treatment of chronic pain. Treatment of chronic pain encompasses analgesic medications; adjuvant pharmacotherapy, including antidepressants and anticonvulsants; interventional techniques; as well as integrative medicine.

Changes in Pain Medication Profile among Patients Admitted to Specialized Home Palliative Care in Relation to Referral Source: An Exploratory Study

Pain is a common symptom leading to referrals to specialized home palliative care (SHPC) services and is known to affect patients' quality of life. To date, little is known about the impact of referral source on its management. To assess changes to pain medication profile in the course of SHPC and to identify potential differences in relation to referral source. This exploratory study is a retrospective analysis of 501 electronic medical records of a SHPC team in Germany. This included the assessment of baseline pain medication profiles according to the WHO analgesic ladder and changes to analgesic treatment in the course of SHPC with respect to referral source. At the time of admission, 77.4% of patients referred by a hospital and 78.8% of patients referred by the outpatient sector received a fixed analgesic regimen. In all, 61.9% of the inpatient group versus 62.9% of the outpatient group were treated with opioids, and 79.0% received modifications to pain medication at one point in time following admission. Thereby, patients referred by the outpatient sector received significantly earlier modifications and more supplementations of pain medication. Our study suggests positive development in the prescription of opioid analgesics compared to earlier studies in Germany. On the one hand, it highlights the relevance of thorough assessment and responsive evaluation of pain in SHPC, and on the other hand it reveals possible training needs of referring physicians, particularly those working in the outpatient sector. Our results inspired further research examining more closely the links between referral source and pain management.