Patients' satisfaction with cancer pain treatment at adult oncologic centers in Northern Ethiopia; a multi-center cross-sectional study.

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.

Virtual Reality for advanced cancer patients assisted at home: A randomized controlled interventional study.

OBJECTIVE: Virtual Reality (VR) has been demonstrated to be an effective option for integrating psychological interventions in different therapeutic settings. This randomized controlled interventional study aims to assess the effects of VR, compared to tablet controlled intervention, on anxiety, depression, pain, and short-term psychophysical symptoms in advanced cancer patients assisted at home. METHODS: Participants were provided with a VR headset or a tablet (TAB) for 4 days. On the first and last day, anxiety and depression were measured by Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and pain by Brief Pain Inventory. Before and after each VR and tablet session, symptoms were collected by the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS). RESULTS: Fifty-three patients (27 VR vs. 26 TAB) completed the study. Anxiety significantly decreased in the VR group after the 4-day intervention. The analysis of ESAS showed a significant improvement in pain (p = 0.013), tiredness (p < 0.001), and anxiety (p = 0.013) for TAB group, and a significant reduction in tiredness (p < 0.001) in the VR group. CONCLUSIONS: Technological and user-friendly tools, such as VR and tablets, might be integrated with traditional psychological interventions to improve anxiety and cancer-related short-term symptoms. Further studies are needed to better consolidate the possible beneficial effects of VR.

Pain coping, multidisciplinary care, and mHealth: Patients' views on managing advanced cancer pain.

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.

Quality of life, craniomandibular function, and psychosocial factors related to pain and movement in patients with head and neck cancer.

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.

Barriers to Pain Management as Perceived by Cancer and Noncancer Patients With Chronic Disease.

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.

Legumain Induces Oral Cancer Pain by Biased Agonism of Protease-Activated Receptor-2.

Oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) is one of the most painful cancers, which interferes with orofacial function including talking and eating. We report that legumain (Lgmn) cleaves protease-activated receptor-2 (PAR2) in the acidic OSCC microenvironment to cause pain. Lgmn is a cysteine protease of late endosomes and lysosomes that can be secreted; it exhibits maximal activity in acidic environments. The role of Lgmn in PAR2-dependent cancer pain is unknown. We studied Lgmn activation in human oral cancers and oral cancer mouse models. Lgmn was activated in OSCC patient tumors, compared with matched normal oral tissue. After intraplantar, facial or lingual injection, Lgmn evoked nociception in wild-type (WT) female mice but not in female mice lacking PAR2 in NaV1.8-positive neurons (Par2Nav1.8), nor in female mice treated with a Lgmn inhibitor, LI-1. Inoculation of an OSCC cell line caused mechanical and thermal hyperalgesia that was reversed by LI-1. Par2Nav1.8 and Lgmn deletion attenuated mechanical allodynia in female mice with carcinogen-induced OSCC. Lgmn caused PAR2-dependent hyperexcitability of trigeminal neurons from WT female mice. Par2 deletion, LI-1, and inhibitors of adenylyl cyclase or protein kinase A (PKA) prevented the effects of Lgmn. Under acidified conditions, Lgmn cleaved within the extracellular N terminus of PAR2 at Asn30↓Arg31, proximal to the canonical trypsin activation site. Lgmn activated PAR2 by biased mechanisms in HEK293 cells to induce Ca2+ mobilization, cAMP formation, and PKA/protein kinase D (PKD) activation, but not ß-arrestin recruitment or PAR2 endocytosis. Thus, in the acidified OSCC microenvironment, Lgmn activates PAR2 by biased mechanisms that evoke cancer pain.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) is one of the most painful cancers. We report that legumain (Lgmn), which exhibits maximal activity in acidic environments, cleaves protease-activated receptor-2 (PAR2) on neurons to produce OSCC pain. Active Lgmn was elevated in OSCC patient tumors, compared with matched normal oral tissue. Lgmn evokes pain-like behavior through PAR2 Exposure of pain-sensing neurons to Lgmn decreased the current required to generate an action potential through PAR2 Inhibitors of adenylyl cyclase and protein kinase A (PKA) prevented the effects of Lgmn. Lgmn activated PAR2 to induce calcium mobilization, cAMP formation, and activation of protein kinase D (PKD) and PKA, but not ß-arrestin recruitment or PAR2 endocytosis. Thus, Lgmn is a biased agonist of PAR2 that evokes cancer pain.

Comprehensive Targeted Treatment for Neuropathic and Nociceptive Pain in Palliative Care Patients.

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.

Preferences of adults with cancer for systemic cancer treatment: do preferences differ based on age?

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.

Apalutamide plus Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Metastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: Analysis of Pain and Fatigue in the Phase 3 TITAN Study.

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.

Neurolytic Splanchnic Nerve Block and Pain Relief, Survival, and Quality of Life in Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

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.

Health-related quality of life and pain with selinexor in patients with advanced dedifferentiated liposarcoma.

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.

Symptoms and their implications on quality of life and psychological distress in sarcoma patients.

The aim of this study was to investigate symptoms, their variation over time and their relationship with quality of life (QoL)/psychological distress in sarcoma patients, as few data regarding QoL and psychological distress in this set of patients are currently available. A total of 188 sarcoma patients from an Italian referral center were involved. Symptoms and financial difficulties were evaluated with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire from the first treatment and over the follow-up period, up to 6 years. The authors found that patients with sarcoma experience several symptoms, especially fatigue and pain, which may dramatically worsen QoL and psychological distress. In conclusion, patients with sarcoma often experience fatigue, pain and financial difficulties, which negatively impacts QoL and psychological distress. To ameliorate overall QoL, proper control of symptoms is necessary.

Patient-centered outcomes in non-small-cell lung cancer: a real-world perspective.

Aims: To assess non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patient-centered outcomes in the real world. Methods: This is a prospective study of NSCLC patients treated at a private cancer care institution in Brazil between 2014 and 2019. Results: The report comprises 337 patients. Advanced stage was associated with higher symptom burden - fatigue (p = 0.03), pain (p < 0.001) and arm pain (p = 0.022) - and worse global, social and physical functioning (all p < 0.001). In the first 2 years, most factors evolved to either improvement or stability: cough (p = 0.02), pain (p = 0.002), global functioning (p < 0.001) and emotional functioning (p < 0.001). Staging (p < 0.001), fatigue (p = 0.001) and gender (p = 0.004) were independently associated with overall survival. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate the feasibility of conducting real-world prospective analysis of patient-centered outcomes.

Lay abstract This study looked at patient-centered outcomes in lung cancer in a real-world setting. Standardized quality-of-life questionnaires were used to actively measure patients' perception of their functional well-being and health in a clinical setting. Three hundred thirty-seven patients were enrolled in a private cancer center in Brazil between 2014 and 2019. We demonstrated that patients diagnosed at advanced stages presented with more symptoms and lower capacity to perform daily activities. However, symptoms and functioning tended to improve during treatment. Our results show that it is possible to put patients at the heart of cancer care and use their experience to guide clinical approach.

Quality of life in patients with breakthrough cancer pain in radiation oncology departments in Spain: the CAVIDIOR study.

Aim: The CAVIDIOR study evaluated quality of life (QoL) in patients with breakthrough cancer pain receiving palliative radiation therapy in radiation oncology departments (RODs) in Spain. Patients & methods: Prospective observational study at 11 Spanish RODs (July 2016-November 2017). QoL was assessed using Short Form Health Survey 12. Secondary end points were sleep quality, caregiver burden and patient/perception of improvement. Results: QoL improved according to the Short Form Health Survey 12 mental component. Sleep quality and caregivers' burden improved significantly. Conclusion: Breakthrough cancer pain is highly prevalent and can be substantially reduced with appropriate diagnosis and management in RODs. Along with the QoL questionnaire, sleep quality and caregiver burden provide a more comprehensive assessment of overall health status in patients receiving radiation therapy in RODs. Clinical trial registration: NCT02836379 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Pain or fatigue: which correlates more with suffering in hospitalized cancer patients?

BACKGROUND: The association of pain and suffering seems intuitive, but evidence substantiating this association is lacking. In studies of cancer patients, fatigue, rather than pain, is the most prevalent and debilitating symptom. This study aimed to compare the correlation of pain and fatigue to suffering, and identify other potential sources of suffering in cancer patients treated in a palliative care unit. METHODS: One hundred fifty cancer patients were surveyed. Fifteen variables were measured on a 0- to 10-point scale: suffering, pain, level of acceptable pain, effect of pain on quality of life, fatigue, level of acceptable fatigue, effect of fatigue on quality of life, and specific types of suffering. Univariable associations with suffering were made with Pearson correlation (continuous variables) or t test (binary predictors). Multivariable associations with suffering were assessed with linear regression analysis and bootstrapping. RESULTS: In multivariable analysis, highest pain (parameter estimate 0.38) had a greater impact on suffering than highest fatigue (parameter estimate 0.21). When other variables were assessed, 38% of the variability in suffering was accounted for by pain "now", fatigue in the past 24 hours, and age. CONCLUSION: The most important predictors of greater suffering in hospitalized cancer patients are pain, younger age, and fatigue. Despite their significant effect on suffering, other underlying contributors to suffering have yet to be identified. Designing interventions to reduce fatigue, in addition to pain management, may help in alleviating overall suffering.

Do Cohabitants Reliably Complete Questionnaires for Patients in a Terminal Cancer Stage when Assessing Quality of Life, Pain, Depression, and Anxiety?

BACKGROUND: Patients with bone metastases often are unable to complete quality of life (QoL) questionnaires, and cohabitants (such as spouses, domestic partners, offspring older than 18 years, or other people who live with the patient) could be a reliable alternative. However, the extent of reliability in this complicated patient population remains undefined, and the influence of the cohabitant's condition on their assessment of the patient's QoL is unknown. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Do QoL scores, measured by the 5-level EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D-5L) version and the Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) version 1.0 in three domains (anxiety, pain interference, and depression), reported by patients differ markedly from scores as assessed by their cohabitants? (2) Do cohabitants' PROMIS-Depression scores correlate with differences in measured QoL results? METHODS: This cross-sectional study included patients and cohabitants older than 18 years of age. Patients included those with presence of histologically confirmed bone metastases (including lymphoma and multiple myeloma), and cohabitants must have been present at the clinic visit. Patients were eligible for inclusion in the study regardless of comorbidities, prognosis, prior surgery, or current treatment. Between June 1, 2016 and March 1, 2017 and between October 1, 2017 and February 26, 2018, all 96 eligible patients were approached, of whom 49% (47) met the selection criteria and were willing to participate. The included 47 patient-cohabitant pairs independently completed the EQ-5D-5L and the eight-item PROMIS for three domains (anxiety, pain, and depression) with respect to the patients' symptoms. The cohabitants also completed the four-item PROMIS-Depression survey with respect to their own symptoms. RESULTS: There were no clinically important differences between the scores of patients and their cohabitants for all questionnaires, and the agreement between patient and cohabitant scores was moderate to strong (Spearman correlation coefficients ranging from 0.52 to 0.72 on the four questionnaires; all p values < 0.05). However, despite the good agreement in QoL scores, an increased cohabitant's depression score was correlated with an overestimation of the patient's symptom burden for the anxiety and depression domains (weak Spearman correlation coefficient of 0.33 [95% confidence interval 0.08 to 0.58]; p = 0.01 and moderate Spearman correlation coefficient of 0.52 [95% CI 0.29 to 0.74]; p < 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSION: The present findings support that cohabitants might be reliable raters of the QoL of patients with bone metastases. However, if a patient's cohabitant has depression, the cohabitant may overestimate a patient's symptoms in emotional domains such as anxiety and depression, warranting further research that includes cohabitants with and without depression to elucidate the effect of depression on the level of agreement. For now, clinicians may want to reconsider using the cohabitant's judgement if depression is suspected. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: These findings suggest that a cohabitant's impressions of a patient's quality of life are, in most instances, accurate; this is potentially helpful in situations where the patient cannot weigh in. Future studies should employ longitudinal designs to see how or whether our findings change over time and with disease progression, and how specific interventions-like different chemotherapeutic regimens or surgery-may factor in.

The efficacy of a technology-based information and coaching/support program on pain and symptoms in Asian American survivors of breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pain is a common problem, especially in the first few years of breast cancer survivorship. Asian American survivors of breast cancer reportedly have inadequate cancer pain management, and subsequently report a lower quality of life compared with other racial/ethnic groups. Technology-based programs could improve the cancer pain management process. The purpose of the current study was to examine the efficacy of a technology-based information and coaching/support program on cancer pain and its accompanying symptoms among Asian American survivors of breast cancer. METHODS: The current study adopted a randomized pretest/posttest group design. The sample included 115 Asian American survivors of breast cancer (49 in the control group and 66 in the intervention group). The participants' background features, pain (frequency and distress), accompanying symptom distress (global, physical, and psychological), and 4 theory-based mediators (attitude, self-efficacy, perceived barriers, and social influence) were measured using multiple instruments at 3 time points (pretest, after 1 month, and after 3 months). The current study used an intent-to-treat approach and conducted linear mixed model growth curve analyses. RESULTS: There were significant decreases noted in all outcome variables, including pain and symptoms over time in both groups. There were greater decreases in physical symptom distress scores among the intervention group compared with the control group (P = .0229). The mediators as a whole significantly explained overall decreases in general, physical, and psychological symptom distress scores after 3 months in both groups and the intervention group's greater decreases in general, physical, and psychological symptom distress scores after 1 month. CONCLUSIONS: The technology-based program described herein could help to reduce cancer pain and its accompanying symptoms among Asian American survivors of breast cancer.

Physical problem list accompanying the distress thermometer: Its associations with psychological symptoms and survival in patients with metastatic lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: The distress thermometer and problem list (DT&PL) is a recommended screening measure but the utility of the physical problem list (PPL) has not been evaluated in patients with metastatic lung cancer who typically have high rates of both physical and psychological symptoms. We hypothesized that the PPL will provide an accurate representation of lung cancer symptoms and be associated with concomitant distress, anxiety, depression, and worsened survival. METHODS: Stage IV lung cancer patients (n = 116) reported physical symptoms from 22 PPL variables and completed the DT&PL for distress, general anxiety disorder-7 for anxiety, and Patient Health Questionnaire 9 for depression. Inferential analyses were controlled for demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: The average number of physical problems was 4.7 (SD = 3.8) while the median was 3.0. Fatigue, sleep, pain, and breathing problems were most common. Physical symptom burden was associated with nonmarried/partnered status (P = .003) and depression (P < .001) on multivariate analysis accounting for 43% of physical symptom burden variance. Greater number of physical symptoms and lower BMI were associated with worsened survival. Individual physical symptoms were most often associated with depression. CONCLUSION: The PPL of the DT&PL appears to have clinical utility given its associations with the most common lung cancer symptoms, depression, and worsened survival. In addition to its potential role in clinics worldwide already using the DT&PL, physical symptom burden on the DT&PL should trigger a concomitant psychological assessment.

A pilot study of the preliminary efficacy of Pain Buddy: A novel intervention for the management of children's cancer-related pain.

OBJECTIVES: Cancer-related pain in children is prevalent and undermanaged. Mobile health (mHealth) applications provide a promising avenue to address the gap in pain management in children with cancer. Pain Buddy is a multicomponent mHealth application developed to manage cancer-related pain in children. The goal of this paper is to present preliminary efficacy data of the impact of Pain Buddy on children's pain severity and frequency. METHODS: In a randomized controlled trial over 60 days, children (N = 48) reported daily pain on a tablet while receiving usual care. Those in the intervention group (N = 20) received remote symptom monitoring and skills training for pain management. Children in the attention control group (N = 28) only reported on their pain. RESULTS: Both groups experienced significant reductions in average daily pain over the study period (B = -0.10, z = -3.40, P = 0.001), with no group differences evident (z = -0.83, P = 0.40). However, the intervention group reported significantly fewer instances of moderate to severe pain compared with the control group, t(4125) = 2.67, P = 0.007. In addition, the intervention group reported no instances of moderate to severe pain toward the end of the study period. CONCLUSION: Pain Buddy is an innovative and interactive mHealth application that aims to improve pain and symptom management among children with cancer. The findings from this pilot study suggest that Pain Buddy may aid in the reduction of pain severity in children during cancer treatment.

The Critical Role of Parents in Pediatric Cancer-Related Pain Management: a Review and Call to Action.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Even with optimized medical management, pain remains an inevitable part of pediatric cancer care. The most effective interventions for nonpharmacologic pain management within pediatric psychology include parent skills training. This review specifically explored the role of parents in cancer-related pain management with the goal of defining a set of evidence-based skills that could translate to improved pediatric cancer pain management. RECENT FINDINGS: Pain is now widely understood to be both a sensory and emotional experience. As a result, within pediatric non-cancer pain management there is increasing application of the biopsychosocial model for pain management, inclusive of evidence-based psychological intervention. This review, specifically focusing on the role of parent training in cancer-related pain management, finds few interventions that systematically included parents. There is a need for continued evidence-based innovation and knowledge dissemination in this area of care. This paper highlights a critical gap in translational science within pediatric cancer pain management, namely, that parents who have a child with cancer are not reliably gaining access to well-established, evidence-based psychological skills training that can help to mitigate pain and pain-related stress. Based on the literature, the authors provide recommendations for generating adaptable, evidence-informed interventions that support and empower parents to help their child with pain management through all phases of cancer treatment.