Pilot study of multi-gene pharmacogenetic testing for pain management in oncology palliative medicine.

Aim: We evaluated the application and clinical impact of multi-gene pharmacogenetic testing in oncology palliative medicine. Patients & methods: In a single-arm pilot trial, cancer patients with uncontrolled pain were assessed in a palliative medicine clinic at baseline and received pharmacogenetic testing. Results were used as applicable up to the final visit (day 30). Pain scores, opioid prescribing, and use of pharmacogenetic test results were collected. Results: In 75 patients, the median baseline pain score was 7/10. Of 54 evaluable at the final visit, 28 required opioid modifications and 19 had actionable genotypes, mostly CYP2D6. Pain improvement (≥2-point reduction) was higher than historical data (56 vs 30%; p < 0.001). There were no differences in pain improvement between those with and without actionable genotypes (61 vs 53%). Conclusion: Multi-gene testing identified actionable genotypes and may improve cancer pain.

Opioid Risk Screening in an Oncology Palliative Medicine Clinic.

PURPOSE: Little information exists on factors that predict opioid misuse in oncology. We adopted the Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients With Pain-Short Form (SOAPP-SF) and toxicology testing to assess for opioid misuse risk. The primary objective was to (1) identify characteristics associated with a high-risk SOAPP-SF score and noncompliant toxicology test, and (2) determine SOAPP-SF utility to predict noncompliant toxicology tests. METHODS: From July 1, 2017, to December 31, 2017, new patients completed the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS), SOAPP-SF, and narcotic use agreement. Toxicology test results were collected at subsequent visits. RESULTS: Of 223 distinct patients, 96% completed SOAPP-SF. Mean age was 61 ± 12.7 years, 58% were female, 68% were White, and 28% were Black. Eighty-three eligible patients (38%) completed toxicology testing. Younger age, male sex, and increased ESAS depression scores were associated with high-risk SOAPP-SF scores. Smoking habit was associated with an aberrant test. An SOAPP-SF score ≥ 3 predicted a noncompliant toxicology test. CONCLUSION: Male sex, young age, and higher ESAS depression score were associated with a high SOAPP-SF score. Smoking habit was associated with an aberrant test. An SOAPP-SF of ≥ 3 (sensitivity, 0.74; specificity, 0.64), not ≥ 4, was predictive of an aberrant test; however, performance characteristics were decreased from those published by Inflexxion, for ≥ 4 (sensitivity, 0.86; specificity, 0.67). The specificity warrants caution in falsely labeling patients. The SOAPP-SF may aid in meeting National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommendations to screen oncology patients for opioid misuse.

Pain Management Using Clinical Pharmacy Assessments With and Without Pharmacogenomics in an Oncology Palliative Medicine Clinic.

PURPOSE: Approximately 30% of patients with cancer who have pain have symptomatic improvement within 1 month using conventional pain management strategies. Engaging clinical pharmacists in palliative medicine (PM) and use of pharmacogenomic testing may improve cancer pain management. METHODS: Adult patients with cancer with uncontrolled pain had baseline assessments performed by PM providers using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale. Pharmacotherapy was initiated or modified accordingly. A subset of patients consented to pharmacogenomic testing. The first pharmacy assessment occurred within 1 week of baseline and a second assessment was done within another week if intervention was required. Each patient's final visit was at 1 month. Pain improvement rate (a reduction of two or more points on a 0-to-10 pain scale) from baseline to final visit was compared applying the Fisher exact test to published historical control data, and between patients with and without pharmacogenomic testing. Multivariate logistic regression identified pain improvement covariates. RESULTS: Of 142 patients undergoing pharmacy assessments, 53% had pain improvement compared with 30% in historical control subjects (P < .001). Pain improvement was not different between those who received (n = 43) and did not receive (n = 99) pharmacogenomics testing (56% v 52%; P = .716). However, of 15 patients with an actionable genotype, 73% had pain improvement. Higher baseline pain (odds ratio [OR], 1.79; 95% CI, 1.43 to 2.24; P < .001), black or other race (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.95; P = .04), and performance status 3 or 4 (OR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.83; P = .03) were associated with odds of pain improvement, but pharmacogenomic testing was not (P = .64). CONCLUSION: Including pharmacists in PM improves pain management effectiveness. Although pharmacogenomics did not statistically improve pain, a subset of patients with actionable genotypes may have benefited, warranting larger and randomized studies.

Acupuncture for Cancer Pain and Symptom Management in a Palliative Medicine Clinic.

OBJECTIVE:: Studies suggest acupuncture improves cancer-related symptoms; however, it is unclear whether patient characteristics predict pain response. This study determined acupuncture's effect on cancer-related pain and identified variables associated with pain response. METHODS:: A retrospective chart review included adult patients with cancer referred to palliative medicine and received acupuncture for pain management. Paired t tests compared differences in pain scores from pre- to postacupuncture. Clinically meaningful pain improvement was defined as ≥2-point reduction in pain score. Logistic regression was used to evaluate associations between patient characteristics and pain improvement. RESULTS:: One hundred seventy acupuncture treatments from 68 individual patients were studied. Significant reductions in mean pain scores were observed after the first treatment (-1.9 ± 1.8; P < .001) and across all treatments (-1.7 ± 1.9; P < .001). Multivariable analysis demonstrated clinically meaningful pain improvement with higher baseline pain scores (odds ratio [OR]: 1.79, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.44-2.22; P < .001) and stage III/IV disease (OR: 3.23, 95% CI: 1.11-9.40; P < .001). There were significant improvements in anxiety, depression, drowsiness, dyspnea, fatigue, nausea, and well-being after the first treatment and across all treatments ( P < .001). CONCLUSIONS:: Acupuncture improved cancer-related pain and other symptoms. Those with higher baseline pain scores and advanced disease were more likely to achieve significant pain reduction. Improved depression and fatigue were closely related to pain reduction. Further studies are needed to confirm pain response variables, establish durability, and develop a personalized approach to acupuncture.