Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 211
Filter
1.
JCO Glob Oncol ; 10: e2300463, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38723216

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: We aimed to assess knowledge, attitudes, and perceived barriers among health care professionals (HCPs), policymakers, and regulators in Vietnam related to opioid therapy for cancer pain. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study in Vietnam from June to August 2022. Participants completed a questionnaire on their demographic characteristics, knowledge and attitudes toward opioid therapy, and barriers to accessing opioids for cancer pain. RESULTS: Two hundred seven HCPs and 15 policymakers/regulators completed the questionnaire. Poor knowledge about opioids in cancer pain was found in 63.3% of HCPs and 80.0% of policymakers/regulators. Poor knowledge was associated with a lack of training in cancer pain management or palliative care (PC; prevalence ratio [PR], 1.14 [95% CI, 1.04 to 1.24]). Negative attitudes toward opioid therapy in cancer pain were held by 64.7% of HCPs and 80.0% of policymakers/regulators. Negative attitudes were associated with the unavailability of oral morphine in the workplace (PR, 1.10 [95% CI, 1.01 to 1.20]). The most common major barriers reported were the absence of national policy on pain management and PC (34.7%), inadequate training in opioid use for cancer pain (33.8%), lockdown of health facilities during the COVID-19 pandemic (32.4%), limited opioid availability in local health facilities (32.4%), and excessively restrictive regulation of opioid dispensing in pharmacies (32.4%). CONCLUSION: This study found a knowledge deficit and negative attitudes toward opioid therapy for cancer pain among HCPs and policymakers/regulators. Improving education and training in opioid therapy is essential. Recognizing major barriers can guide strategies to enhance safe opioid accessibility for cancer pain management in Vietnam.


Subject(s)
Analgesics, Opioid , Cancer Pain , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Health Personnel , Pain Management , Humans , Vietnam , Cross-Sectional Studies , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Cancer Pain/drug therapy , Cancer Pain/psychology , Male , Female , Adult , Health Personnel/psychology , Health Personnel/education , Middle Aged , Pain Management/methods , Surveys and Questionnaires , Attitude of Health Personnel , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Palliative Care/methods
2.
BMC Cancer ; 24(1): 647, 2024 May 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38802773

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Patient satisfaction is an important indicator of the quality of healthcare. Pain is one of the most common symptoms among cancer patients that needs optimal treatment; rather, it compromises the quality of life of patients. OBJECTIVE: To assess the levels and associated factors of satisfaction with cancer pain treatment among adult patients at cancer centers found in Northern Ethiopia in 2023. METHODS: After obtaining ethical approval, a multi-center cross-sectional study was conducted at four cancer care centers in northern Ethiopia. The data were collected using an interviewer-administered structured questionnaire that included the Lubeck Medication Satisfaction Questionnaire (LMSQ). The severity of pain was assessed by a numerical rating scale from 0 to 10 with a pain score of 0 = no pain, 1-3 = mild pain, 4-6 = moderate pain, and 7-10 = severe pain Binary logistic regression analysis was employed, and the strength of association was described in an adjusted odds ratio with a 95% confidence interval. RESULT: A total of 397 cancer patients participated in this study, with a response rate of 98.3%. We found that 70.3% of patients were satisfied with their cancer pain treatment. Being married (AOR = 5.6, CI = 2.6-12, P < 0.001) and being single (never married) (AOR = 3.5, CI = 1.3-9.7, P = 0.017) as compared to divorced, receiving adequate pain management (AOR = 2.4, CI = 1.1-5.3, P = 0.03) as compared to those who didn't receive it, and having lower pain severity (AOR = 2.6, CI = 1.5-4.8, P < 0.001) as compared to those who had higher level of pain severity were found to be associated with satisfaction with cancer pain treatment. CONCLUSION: The majority of cancer patients were satisfied with cancer pain treatment. Being married, being single (never married), lower pain severity, and receiving adequate pain management were found to be associated with satisfaction with cancer pain treatment. It would be better to enhance the use of multimodal analgesia in combination with strong opioids to ensure adequate pain management and lower pain severity scores.


Subject(s)
Cancer Pain , Patient Satisfaction , Humans , Cross-Sectional Studies , Male , Female , Ethiopia/epidemiology , Cancer Pain/drug therapy , Cancer Pain/psychology , Middle Aged , Adult , Patient Satisfaction/statistics & numerical data , Pain Management/methods , Surveys and Questionnaires , Quality of Life , Aged , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Neoplasms/psychology , Young Adult , Pain Measurement , Cancer Care Facilities/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent
3.
Scand J Pain ; 24(1)2024 Jan 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38776518

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to gain qualitative insight into cancer patients' experiences, explanations, and management strategies regarding their cancer-related pain (CP). METHODS: Seventeen patients with CP were interviewed using a semi-structured interview approach. Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis method was used to analyze the transcribed interviews. The patients all participated in cancer rehabilitation courses arranged by the research clinic at The Danish Knowledge Centre for Rehabilitation and Palliative Care. RESULTS: Three themes were identified: (1) Explaining CP: Patients found it difficult to explain how they experienced their pain. They lacked words, and they frequently used invasive metaphors such as "Pain feels like a heart attack" (2). Strategies and barriers to the management of CP: Initiatives provided by healthcare professionals (HCPs) were perceived as insufficient, and the patients missed guidance in both pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches to pain management. Several saw medicine as unnatural for their body, and they focused on side effects and the medicine affecting their quality of life. (3) Responsibility for managing CP: A lack of responsiveness from the HCPs and taking on responsibility for pain management were experienced by several of the patients. The patients expressed uncertainty about whom to contact for help with the management of their CP. CONCLUSION: The patients' difficulties in explaining, understanding, and communicating their pain and pain management contributed to insufficient pain management. They were also uncertain about who had the responsibility to help them to achieve pain relief. These results share the evidence drawn from studies on patients with chronic non-cancer pain. This qualitative study highlights the need for having more focus on a common language and shared understanding between patients and HCPs. It also underpins the importance of HCPs to assume their responsibility to help patients manage their pain conditions.


Subject(s)
Cancer Pain , Pain Management , Qualitative Research , Humans , Female , Male , Cancer Pain/therapy , Cancer Pain/psychology , Middle Aged , Pain Management/methods , Aged , Adult , Communication , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/psychology , Denmark , Professional-Patient Relations
4.
Support Care Cancer ; 32(6): 334, 2024 May 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38722345

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To describe the characteristics of and the associations between health-related quality of life, pain, craniomandibular function, and psychosocial factors related to pain and fear of movement in patients with head and neck cancer. METHODS: Seventy-eight patients diagnosed with HNC were recruited. Measurements of the maximum mouth opening range and pressure pain thresholds on the masseter muscle and the distal phalanx of the thumb were conducted, as well as a battery of self-report questionnaires were administrated, including the QoL Questionnaire (EORT QLQ-H&N35), Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), the Spanish translation of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia for Temporomandibular Disorders (TSK-TMD), and the short version of the Craniofacial Pain and Disability Inventory (CF-PDI-11). RESULTS: The study sample (66.7% men, mean age 60.12 [11.95] years) experienced a moderate impact on their QoL levels (57.68 [18.25] EORT QLQ-H&N35) and high kinesiophobia values (20.49 [9.11] TSK-TMD). Pain was present in 41% of the patients, but only 3.8% reported severe pain. 26.4% had a restricted mouth opening range, and 34.62% showed significant catastrophism levels. There were strong positive correlations between EORT QLQ-H&N35 and CF-PDI-11 (r = 0.81), between NRS and CF-PDI-11 (r = 0.74), and between PCS and CF-PDI-11 (r = 0.66). CONCLUSION: Patients with HNC experience negative effects in their QoL, related to their impairment in craniomandibular function. Fear of movement, pain intensity, and catastrophism are associated with poorer functionality; relationships that should be considered when attempting to improve health care.


Subject(s)
Head and Neck Neoplasms , Quality of Life , Humans , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Head and Neck Neoplasms/psychology , Head and Neck Neoplasms/complications , Aged , Surveys and Questionnaires , Pain Measurement , Movement , Temporomandibular Joint Disorders/psychology , Temporomandibular Joint Disorders/physiopathology , Fear/psychology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Cancer Pain/psychology , Adult , Pain Threshold/psychology
5.
Pain Manag Nurs ; 25(3): 294-299, 2024 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38453586

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Pain is the most common symptom experienced by both cancer and non-cancer patients. A wide variety of barriers may hinder the optimal treatment of cancer and noncancer pain that are related to the health care system, health care providers, and patients. PURPOSE: To explore the barriers to pain management as perceived by patients with cancer and noncancer chronic diseases. METHOD: A descriptive, cross-sectional correlational design was employed to recruit a sample of 200 patients (n = 100 patients with cancer, n= 100 patients with noncancer) from two hospitals in Jordan. Patients filled out an Arabic version of Barriers Questionnaire II (ABQ-II). RESULTS: Harmful effects of medications were the greatest barrier to effective pain management, while fatalism had the lowest mean scores. Age was negatively correlated with physiological effects (r = -0.287, p < .01), communication (r = -0.263, p < .01), harmful effects (r = -0.284, p < .01), and the overall barrier score (r = -0.326, p < .01) among noncancer patients with chronic disease and (p > .05) for patients with cancer. Patients with cancer had higher mean scores (M = 2.12, SD = 0.78) in the fatalism subscale than those with noncancer chronic disease (M = 1.91, SD = 0.68), while patients with noncancer chronic disease had significantly higher mean scores (M = 2.78, SD = 0.78) in the communication subscale than patients with cancer (M = 2.49, SD = 0.65), (t = -2.899, p = .005). CONCLUSION: To improve the quality of care for patients who are in pain, it is recommended to address pain management barriers as they arise.


Subject(s)
Neoplasms , Pain Management , Humans , Female , Male , Cross-Sectional Studies , Middle Aged , Pain Management/methods , Pain Management/standards , Pain Management/statistics & numerical data , Jordan , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/psychology , Adult , Surveys and Questionnaires , Aged , Chronic Disease , Chronic Pain/psychology , Chronic Pain/drug therapy , Cancer Pain/psychology , Cancer Pain/drug therapy
6.
Psychooncology ; 33(2): e6308, 2024 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38366975

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Pain is common among people with advanced cancer. While opioids provide significant relief, incorporating psycho-behavioral treatments may improve pain outcomes. We examined patients' experiences with pain self-management and how their self-management of chronic, cancer-related pain may be complemented by behavioral mobile health (mHealth) interventions. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with patients with advanced cancer and pain. Each participant reviewed content from our behavioral mHealth application for cancer pain management and early images of its interface. Participants reflected on their experiences self-managing cancer pain and on app content. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using a combination of inductive and deductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Patients (n = 28; 54% female; mean age = 53) across two geographic regions reported using psychological strategies (e.g., reframing negative thoughts, distraction, pain acceptance, social support) to manage chronic cancer-related pain. Patients shared their perspectives on the integration of psycho-behavioral pain treatments into their existing medical care and their experiences with opioid hesitancy. Patient recommendations for how mHealth interventions could best support them coalesced around two topics: 1.) convenience in accessing integrated pharmacological and psycho-behavioral pain education and communication tools and 2.) relevance of the specific content to their clinical situation. CONCLUSIONS: Integrated pharmacological and psycho-behavioral pain treatments were important to participants. This underscores a need to coordinate complimentary approaches when developing cancer pain management interventions. Participant feedback suggests that an mHealth intervention that integrates pain treatments may have the capacity to increase advanced cancer patients' access to destigmatizing, accessible care while improving pain self-management.


Subject(s)
Cancer Pain , Neoplasms , Telemedicine , Humans , Female , Middle Aged , Male , Pain Management/methods , Cancer Pain/therapy , Cancer Pain/psychology , Pain , Coping Skills , Telemedicine/methods , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/therapy , Neoplasms/psychology
7.
J Pain Symptom Manage ; 66(3): e431-e435, 2023 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37356595

ABSTRACT

Pain is one of the most common symptoms experienced by patients living with cancer. Guidelines recommend opioids as the mainstay in the management of cancer-related pain. However, the opioid epidemic has resulted in policymakers recommending limitations on opioid prescribing which led to community pharmacies implementing various parameters. These restrictions have created barriers for patients with cancer-related pain attempting to fill opioid prescriptions from their community pharmacies. Additionally, in the setting of the opioid epidemic, there have been reports of systemic bias within community pharmacies, leading to experiences with embarrassment and shame for patients with cancer-related pain. This case series presents specific examples of community pharmacies declining to fill opioid prescriptions for patients with cancer-related pain and associated patient suffering.


Subject(s)
Analgesics, Opioid , Cancer Pain , Drug Prescriptions , Pharmacies , Pharmacy , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Analgesics, Opioid/administration & dosage , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Bias , Cancer Pain/drug therapy , Cancer Pain/psychology , Drug Prescriptions/standards , Drug Prescriptions/statistics & numerical data , Embarrassment , Opioid Epidemic/prevention & control , Pain , Pharmacists , Shame , Pharmacy/methods
8.
Am J Ther ; 29(5): e512-e519, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36049186

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Pain is a common symptom in patients with advanced, metastatic, or terminal cancer. Neuropathic pain and psycho-emotional suffering are factors that increase the difficulty of pain management. Pain control in patients with cancer remains a challenge for medical professionals. STUDY QUESTION: What is the evolution of neuropathic/mixed pain compared with nociceptive pain under standardized treatment in patients with cancer? STUDY DESIGN: A prospective, longitudinal, open-label, nonrandomized study was conducted on patients with cancer pain. MEASURES AND OUTCOMES: Pain type was assessed at admission using the modified Brief Pain Inventory, and pain intensity was assessed daily using the Numerical Rating Scale for 14 days and on days 21 and 28. Screening of depression was performed on days 1, 7, 14, 21, and 28 using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Patients with pain and depression received analgesics with antidepressants, while patients without depression received analgesics or analgesics with an anticonvulsant depending on the pain subtype. RESULTS: Of 72 patients, 23 had nociceptive pain and 49 had neuropathic/mixed pain. At admission, pain intensity was higher for patients with neuropathic/mixed pain compared with nociceptive pain (mean values: 7.06 vs. 5.82) with statistical significance ( P = 0.001) and remained as such at the end of this study (mean values: 3.77 vs. 2.73). A decrease in the mean pain intensity was observed in all types of pain, but without statistical significance regardless of pain type and treatment protocol used ( P = 0.77). If depression was present, antidepressants combined with analgesics decreased pain and depression scores significantly ( P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with neuropathic/mixed pain have higher levels of pain and lower response to treatment. Identifying psycho-emotional suffering can improve pain control by intervening in the physical and psycho-emotional components of pain.


Subject(s)
Cancer Pain , Neuralgia , Nociceptive Pain , Palliative Care , Analgesics/therapeutic use , Cancer Pain/drug therapy , Cancer Pain/psychology , Depression/diagnosis , Depression/drug therapy , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Neuralgia/drug therapy , Neuralgia/psychology , Nociceptive Pain/drug therapy , Nociceptive Pain/psychology , Palliative Care/methods , Prospective Studies
9.
Cancer Rep (Hoboken) ; 5(1): e1429, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34110106

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The association between patient self-reported pain severity and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) is poorly understood. AIMS: This real-world study of symptomatic multiple myeloma (MM) patients sought to determine how pain severity from a single question asked during routine clinical consultation was associated with HRQoL. METHODS AND RESULTS: Point-in-time data on HRQoL of 330 patients with MM (median age 70 years) receiving anti-myeloma therapy in Germany and Italy from November 2017 through February 2018 were analyzed. HRQoL was assessed using validated questionnaires (Work Productivity and Activity Impairment [WPAI], European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire -C30 and -MY20). Physical pain severity was assessed during clinical consultation by a single question, asking patients to describe their pain as "no pain," "mild," "moderate," or "severe." Associations between patient-reported pain severity and HRQoL scores were assessed by analysis of variance or χ2 tests. Ninety-six of the 330 patients (29.1%) reported moderate to severe pain. Increase in pain severity, from "no" to "severe" pain, was associated with significantly decreased overall HRQoL (mean score 70.2 to 33.3); significant decreases in levels of physical (82.7 to 35.1), social (81.1 to 44.4), emotional (78.1 to 48.3), and role functioning (79.5 to 38.9); and increased levels of WPAI usual activity impairment (35.4 to 71.4), and fatigue burden (26.0 to 68.9) (all p < .001). CONCLUSION: Higher pain severity, based on a single self-report question, was associated with poorer HRQoL in patients with MM, thereby supporting the clinical relevance of directly asking patients to self-evaluate their pain severity.


Subject(s)
Cancer Pain/psychology , Multiple Myeloma/psychology , Pain Measurement/methods , Quality of Life , Adult , Aged , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Severity of Illness Index , Surveys and Questionnaires
10.
Future Oncol ; 18(3): 311-321, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34761681

ABSTRACT

Background: We used the Therapy Preference Scale, a 30-item questionnaire, to determine cancer treatment preferences of adults with cancer. Methods: We used Wilcoxon's rank sum test and Fisher's exact test to compare the preferences of younger (<60 years) versus older adults (≥60 years). Results: While 56% of patients would accept treatment offering increased life expectancy at an expense of short-term side effects, 75% preferred maintenance of cognition, functional ability and quality of life to quantity of days. Oral instead of intravenous treatment (p = 0.003), shorter hospital stay (p = 0.03), preservation of cognitive function (p = 0.01) and avoidance of pain (p = 0.02) were more important to older patients compared with younger patients. Conclusion: Many patients prioritized maintenance of cognition, functional ability and quality of life; older patients valued oral treatment, shorter hospital stay, preservation of cognitive function and avoidance of pain.


Lay abstract Understanding the preferences of adults with cancer is important for physicians to develop personalized cancer treatment plans. We used a self-reported 30-item questionnaire, the Therapy Preference Scale, to help patients express their preferences with regard to safety, efficacy and other aspects of therapy. While 56% of the patients in our study would accept treatment offering increased life expectancy at an expense of short-term side effects, 75% preferred maintenance of cognition, functional ability and quality of life to quantity of days. Compared with younger patients, older patients preferred oral instead of intravenous treatment, shorter hospital stay, preservation of cognitive function and avoidance of pain.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents/administration & dosage , Cancer Pain/drug therapy , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Patient Preference/statistics & numerical data , Administration, Intravenous , Administration, Oral , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Cancer Pain/etiology , Cancer Pain/psychology , Cognition/drug effects , Decision Making , Humans , Life Expectancy , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/psychology , Patient Preference/psychology , Quality of Life , Surveys and Questionnaires/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult
11.
Curr Med Sci ; 41(5): 996-1003, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34661813

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Lung cancer has the highest incidence and mortality of all malignant tumors in China. Cancer pain dramatically affects patients' comfort level, causing insomnia, anorexia, anxiety, fear, depression, and a decline in the quality of life (QOL). The literature suggests a shortage of adequate cancer pain management for 59.1% of patients in China. The quality control circle (QCC) activity reflects the people-oriented core idea of management. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of QCC in enhancing the effectiveness of drug interventions in lung cancer patients with moderate to severe pain. METHODS: From January 2019 to July 2019, lung cancer patients with moderate to severe pain were treated with drugs. The total number of drug interventions was 3072. A QCC activity was performed following the ten steps of the plan-docheck- act (PDCA) model. The reasons for the poor effectiveness of drug intervention in lung cancer patients with moderate to severe pain were analyzed. Countermeasures were designed to improve the effectiveness of drug intervention, including setting up a pain college, writing a medication education manual, and formulating operational rules for the administration of narcotic drugs. The effectiveness of drug intervention in lung cancer patients with moderate to severe pain and activity ability scores of QCC members were analyzed statistically before and after QCC activity. The effectiveness of drug intervention was investigated and compared before and after establishing the QCC. RESULTS: After establishing the PDCA model, the effectiveness of drug intervention for moderate to severe pain in lung cancer patients increased from 56.28% to 85.29%. Members had significant improvement in problem-solving ability, responsibility, communication, coordination, self-confidence, team cohesion, enthusiasm, QCC skills, and harmony. CONCLUSION: QCC activity can significantly improve the efficiency of drug intervention in lung cancer patients with moderate to severe pain and their quality of life.


Subject(s)
Cancer Pain/drug therapy , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , Narcotics/therapeutic use , Quality Improvement/organization & administration , Cancer Pain/psychology , China , Clinical Decision-Making , Female , Humans , Lung Neoplasms/psychology , Male , Patient Education as Topic , Problem Solving , Quality Control , Quality of Life/psychology
12.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 20196, 2021 10 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34642416

ABSTRACT

This pilot study aimed to determine if a biophilic Green Therapy or Virtual Reality environment can decrease an oncology patient's pain and distress while receiving chemotherapy. A case-crossover pilot study was conducted in a comprehensive cancer infusion center. 33 participants with breast, gynecologic, gastrointestinal, pancreatic and prostate cancers were all included in three rooms in a random order at different cycles: control room, Green Therapy room, and Virtual Reality room to receive chemotherapy, respectively. Participants' pain, distress, heart rate, blood pressure, and saliva cortisol were measured before and after infusion in each room. No statistical significance differences were shown in the changes of heart rate, systolic, or diastolic blood pressure, saliva cortisol, pain, or distress before and after infusion between the control, Green Therapy, and Virtual Reality rooms. However, more patients reported the experience as "fun" and "enjoyable" when they were in Green Therapy or Virtual reality room as compared to in the control room. Additionally, since participating in the study, 14 patients reported spending at least 30 min or more outside in nature. In this study, we found that patients' heart rate, blood pressure, and self-reported distress levels were reduced after each biophilic intervention although results are not statistically significant. The study also suggested that biophilic interventions are safe and feasible and may complement the standard of care for oncology patients.


Subject(s)
Anxiety/therapy , Cancer Pain/therapy , Facility Design and Construction/methods , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Anxiety/etiology , Cancer Pain/psychology , Cross-Over Studies , Drug Therapy , Feasibility Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Staging , Neoplasms/psychology , Pain Measurement , Pilot Projects , Virtual Reality
13.
Med Oncol ; 38(11): 134, 2021 Sep 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34581894

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Bone Neoplasms/secondary , Cancer Pain/etiology , Pain Management/methods , Cancer Pain/psychology , Cancer Pain/therapy , Humans , Osteoclasts/drug effects , Pain Measurement , Quality of Life , Radiopharmaceuticals/therapeutic use
14.
Anesthesiology ; 135(4): 686-698, 2021 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34398950

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Neurolytic splanchnic nerve block is used to manage pancreatic cancer pain. However, its impact on survival and quality of life remains controversial. The authors' primary hypothesis was that pain relief would be better with a nerve block. Secondarily, they hypothesized that analgesic use, survival, and quality of life might be affected. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, parallel-armed trial was conducted in five Chinese centers. Eligible patients suffering from moderate to severe pain conditions were randomly assigned to receive splanchnic nerve block with either absolute alcohol (neurolysis) or normal saline (control). The primary outcome was pain relief measured on a visual analogue scale. Opioid consumption, survival, quality of life, and adverse effects were also documented. Analgesics were managed using a protocol common to all centers. Patients were followed up for 8 months or until death. RESULTS: Ninety-six patients (48 for each group) were included in the analysis. Pain relief with neurolysis was greater for the first 3 months (largest at the first month; mean difference, 0.7 [95% CI, 0.3 to 1.0]; adjusted P < 0.001) compared with placebo injection. Opioid consumption with neurolysis was lower for the first 5 months (largest at the first month; mean difference, 95.8 [95% CI, 67.4 to 124.1]; adjusted P < 0.001) compared with placebo injection. There was a significant difference in survival (hazard ratio, 1.56 [95% CI, 1.03 to 2.35]; P = 0.036) between groups. A significant reduction in survival in neurolysis was found for stage IV patients (hazard ratio, 1.94 [95% CI, 1.29 to 2.93]; P = 0.001), but not for stage III patients (hazard ratio, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.59 to 1.97]; P = 0.809). No differences in quality of life were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Neurolytic splanchnic nerve block appears to be an effective option for controlling pain and reducing opioid requirements in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer.


Subject(s)
Cancer Pain/therapy , Nerve Block/methods , Pain Management/methods , Pancreatic Neoplasms/therapy , Quality of Life , Splanchnic Nerves/physiology , Aged , Analgesics, Opioid/administration & dosage , Cancer Pain/mortality , Cancer Pain/psychology , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Nerve Block/mortality , Pain Measurement/drug effects , Pain Measurement/methods , Pancreatic Neoplasms/mortality , Pancreatic Neoplasms/psychology , Quality of Life/psychology , Splanchnic Nerves/drug effects , Survival Rate/trends
15.
J Urol ; 206(4): 914-923, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34039013

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: We performed an exploratory analysis of prostate cancer-related pain and fatigue on health-related quality of life in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer receiving apalutamide (240 mg/day) or placebo, with continuous androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), in the phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled TITAN trial (NCT02489318). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patient-reported outcomes for pain and fatigue were evaluated using the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form and Brief Fatigue Inventory. Time to deterioration (TTD) was estimated by Kaplan-Meier method; hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using Cox proportional hazards model. General estimating equations for logistic regression estimated treatment-related differences in the likelihood of worsening pain or fatigue. RESULTS: Compliance for completing the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form and Brief Fatigue Inventory was high (96% to 97%) in the first year. Median followup times were similar between treatments (19 to 22 months). Median pain TTD was longer with apalutamide than placebo for "pain at its least in the last 24 hours" (28.7 vs 21.8 months, respectively; p=0.0146), "pain interfered with mood" (not estimable vs 22.4 months; p=0.0017), "pain interfered with walking ability" (28.7 vs 20.2 months; p=0.0027), "pain interfered with relations" (not estimable vs 23.0 months; p=0.0139) and "pain interfered with sleep" (28.7 vs 20.9 months; p=0.0167). Likelihood for fatigue and worsening fatigue were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer receiving apalutamide plus ADT vs placebo plus ADT reported consistently favorable TTD of pain. No difference for change in fatigue was observed with apalutamide vs placebo.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/administration & dosage , Cancer Pain/drug therapy , Fatigue/drug therapy , Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Quality of Life , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Androgen Antagonists/administration & dosage , Cancer Pain/diagnosis , Cancer Pain/etiology , Cancer Pain/psychology , Clinical Deterioration , Fatigue/diagnosis , Fatigue/etiology , Fatigue/psychology , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pain Measurement/statistics & numerical data , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Progression-Free Survival , Prostatic Neoplasms/complications , Prostatic Neoplasms/mortality , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Severity of Illness Index , Thiohydantoins/administration & dosage
16.
Future Oncol ; 17(22): 2923-2939, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33855868

ABSTRACT

Objective: Compare health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of selinexor versus placebo in patients with dedifferentiated liposarcoma. Materials & methods: HRQoL was assessed at baseline and day 1 of each cycle using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 30-item core quality of life questionnaire. Results were reported from baseline to day 169 (where exposure to treatment was maximized while maintaining adequate sample size). Results: Pain scores worsened for placebo versus selinexor across all postbaseline visits, although differences in HRQoL at some visits were not significant. Other domains did not exhibit significant differences between arms; however, scores in both arms deteriorated over time. Conclusion: Patients treated with selinexor reported lower rates and slower worsening of pain compared with patients who received placebo.


Lay abstract The goal of this study was to compare the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients with advanced unresectable dedifferentiated liposarcoma treated with selinexor compared with those treated with placebo. HRQoL was measured prior to treatment initiation and at the first day of each cycle of their treatment using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 30-item core quality of life questionnaire. Pain scores worsened for placebo compared with selinexor across all visits after treatment, but differences at some visits were not significant. Other domains did not exhibit significant differences between arms; however, scores in both arms worsened over time reflecting the progressive disease burden in this patient population. As pain is one of the most devastating symptoms associated with advanced and progressing cancers, the significant reduction in pain in the selinexor arm, according to patient perception, represent a relevant added value of this drug in dedifferentiated liposarcoma.


Subject(s)
Cancer Pain/diagnosis , Hydrazines/administration & dosage , Liposarcoma/drug therapy , Quality of Life , Triazoles/administration & dosage , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cancer Pain/drug therapy , Cancer Pain/etiology , Cancer Pain/psychology , Cross-Over Studies , Female , Humans , Hydrazines/adverse effects , Liposarcoma/complications , Liposarcoma/diagnosis , Liposarcoma/pathology , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Staging , Placebos/administration & dosage , Placebos/adverse effects , Triazoles/adverse effects
17.
Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol ; 129(1): 36-43, 2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33763950

ABSTRACT

In China, pharmacists have started to manage cancer pain at outpatient clinics. This retrospective study performed at a tertiary teaching hospital was aimed to evaluate the effects of a physician-pharmacist joint clinic for cancer pain management. The study was performed between December 2016 and August 2019 and included 113 outpatients with moderate to severe cancer-related pain. Patients were divided into two groups according to the clinic each patient visited: the physician-pharmacist joint clinic (joint group, n = 59) or physician-only clinic (usual group, n = 54). Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and Morisky Medication Adherence Measure (MMAM) were used to collect data on pain intensity, interference and medication adherence. Pain Management Index (PMI) was also calculated. BPI, MMAM and PMI were assessed at baseline (patients' first visit, week 0) and week 4 follow-up. The Chinese version of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) was used to assess patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at week 4. The primary outcomes were the improvement in pain intensity, adequacy of pain management and medication adherence. The secondary outcome was the improvement in HRQoL. At week 4, compared to the usual group, the BPI pain intensity categories except the pain right now were significantly lower in the joint group: worst pain, 4 (3-7) vs 6 (4-8), P = .020; least pain, 1 (0-2) vs 2 (1-3), P = .010; average pain, 3 (2-4) vs 4 (2-5), P = .023; pain right now, 2 (1-3) vs 2 (0-4), P = .796. For the seven pain interference categories, there were no significant improvements in the joint group (P > .05). Significantly more patients achieved adequate pain control in the joint group than the usual group ((P = .002). There was also a significant difference in medication adherence between the two groups (P = .001). There were no significant differences in HRQoL between the two groups. The study suggests that pharmacist participation in outpatient cancer pain management is associated with improvement of patients' pain control and medication adherence.


Subject(s)
Analgesics/therapeutic use , Cancer Pain/drug therapy , Neoplasms/complications , Outpatient Clinics, Hospital/organization & administration , Pharmacists/organization & administration , Adult , Aged , Cancer Pain/diagnosis , Cancer Pain/etiology , Cancer Pain/psychology , China , Female , Hospitals, Teaching/organization & administration , Humans , Male , Medication Adherence/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/psychology , Neoplasms/therapy , Outpatient Clinics, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Pain Management/methods , Pain Management/statistics & numerical data , Pain Measurement/statistics & numerical data , Physicians/organization & administration , Professional Role , Quality of Life , Retrospective Studies , Tertiary Care Centers/organization & administration
18.
PLoS One ; 16(3): e0248755, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33788893

ABSTRACT

Early palliative/supportive care (ePSC) is a medical intervention focused on patient's needs, that integrates standard oncological treatment, shortly after a diagnosis of advanced/metastatic cancer. ePSC improves the appropriate management of cancer pain. Understanding the semantic and emotional impact of the words used by patients to describe their pain may further improve its assessment in the ePSC setting. Psycholinguistics assumes that the semantic and affective properties of words affect the ease by which they are processed and comprehended. Therefore, in this cross-sectional survey study we collected normative data about the semantic and affective properties of words associated to physical and social pain, in order to investigate how patients with cancer pain on ePSC process them compared to healthy, pain-free individuals. One hundred ninety patients and 124 matched controls rated the Familiarity, Valence, Arousal, Pain-relatedness, Intensity, and Unpleasantness of 94 words expressing physical and social pain. Descriptive and inferential statistics were performed on ratings in order to unveil patients' semantic and affective representation of pain and compare it with those from controls. Possible effects of variables associated to the illness experience were also tested. Both groups perceived the words conveying social pain as more negative and pain-related than those expressing physical pain, confirming previous evidence of social pain described as worse than physical pain. Patients rated pain words as less negative, less pain-related, and conveying a lower intense and unpleasant pain than controls, suggesting either an adaptation to the pain experience or the role played by ePSC in improving patients' ability to cope with it. This exploratory study suggests that a chronic pain experience as the one experienced by cancer patients on ePSC affects the semantic and affective representation of pain words.


Subject(s)
Cancer Pain/psychology , Palliative Care , Semantics , Vocabulary , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Analysis of Variance , Case-Control Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged
19.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 100(12): e24320, 2021 Mar 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33761631

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: Palliative care is a central component of the therapy in terminally ill patients. During treatment in non-palliative departments this can be realized by consultation.To analyze the change in symptom burden during palliative care consultation.In this observational study, we enrolled all cancer cases (n = 163) receiving inpatient treatment for 2015 to 2018 at our institution. We used the MDASI-questionnaire (0 = 'not present' and 10 = "as bad as you can imagine") and the FAMCARE-6 (1 = very satisfied, 5 = very dissatisfied) to analyze the treatment effect and patient satisfaction, respectively.We examined the association of symptom burden and patient satisfaction using Spearman-correlation. Comparing mean values, we applied the Wilcoxon-test and one-way ANOVA.An improvement in MDASI-core-items after treatment completion was significant (P < .05) in 14/18 symptoms. The change in perception of pain showed the strongest improvement (median: 5 to 3). Initially the MDASI-items "activity" (median = 8) and emotional distress (median = 5 and 6) were viewed as especially incriminating. There was no evidence for a correlation between patients' age, the type of diagnosis and time since diagnosis.The analysis of FAMCARE-6 patient contentment was lower or equal to two in all of the six items. There was a weak negative association between the change in symptom burden of psycho-emotional items "distress/feeling upset" (P = .006, rSp = -0,226), "sadness" and patient satisfaction in FAMCARE-6.A considerable improvement of the extensive symptom burden particularly of pain relief was achieved by integrating palliative consultation in clinical practice.


Subject(s)
Cancer Pain/therapy , Neoplasms/therapy , Palliative Care/psychology , Patient Satisfaction/statistics & numerical data , Referral and Consultation/organization & administration , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cancer Pain/diagnosis , Cancer Pain/psychology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/psychology , Pain Measurement/statistics & numerical data , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Program Evaluation , Retrospective Studies , Terminally Ill/psychology , Terminally Ill/statistics & numerical data , Treatment Outcome
20.
Breast Cancer ; 28(4): 937-943, 2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33666840

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The Short-Form Six-Dimension version 2 (SF-6Dv2) is the newest preference-based instrument for estimation of quality adjusted life-years (QALYs). The aim of this study is to evaluate the validity and reliability of the SF-6Dv2 in an Iranian breast cancer population. METHODS: The SF-6Dv2 and FACT-B instruments were completed for 416 patients who were recruited from the largest academic center for cancer patients in Iran. The ceiling effects are computed as the proportion of participants reporting no problems in SF-6Dv2 index. Construct validity was evaluated using convergent validity, discriminant validity, and known-groups validity. Reliability was assessed using intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and Cohen's kappa value. RESULTS: The ceiling effects of the SF-6Dv2 was 2.16%. Higher scores of all subscales of the FACT-B were associated with patients who reported no problems in each of the SF-6Dv2 dimensions. The correlation between SF-6Dv2 dimensions and FACT-B subscales varied from 0.109 between the role limitation of the SF-6Dv2 and the SWB subscale of the FACT-B to 0.665 between the pain dimension of SF-6Dv2 and the PWB of FACT-B. The lower mean score of SF-6Dv2 was associated with patients with older age, higher education level, more severe current treatment status, and more severe cancer stage status. ICC for the SF-6Dv2 index scores was 0.66, and Kappa values varied from 0.33 for mobility to 0.66 for mental health dimensions. CONCLUSIONS: The validity and reliability of the SF-6Dv2 were satisfaction in a breast cancer population and it can be employed in clinical practice or research.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/psychology , Quality of Life , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Surveys and Questionnaires/standards , Adult , Aged , Cancer Pain/psychology , Female , Humans , Iran , Middle Aged , Psychometrics/standards , Reproducibility of Results , Translations
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...