Diagnosis and management of pancreatic cancer in adults: A summary of guidelines from the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.

To enable standardisation of care of pancreatic cancer patients and facilitate improvement in outcome, the United Kingdom's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) developed a clinical guideline for the diagnosis and management of pancreatic cancer in adults. Systematic literature searches, systematic review and meta-analyses were undertaken. Recommendations were drafted on the basis of the group's interpretation of the best available evidence of clinical and cost effectiveness. There was patient involvement and public consultation. Recommendations were made on: diagnosis; staging; monitoring of inherited high risk; psychological support; pain; nutrition management; and the specific management of people with resectable-, borderline-resectable- and unresectable-pancreatic cancer. The guideline committee also made recommendations for future research into neoadjuvant therapy, cachexia interventions, minimally invasive pancreatectomy, pain management and psychological support needs. These NICE guidelines aim to promote best current practice and support and stimulate research and innovation in pancreatic cancer.

The importance of identifying preferred place of death.

OBJECTIVES: The majority of people would prefer to die at home and the stated intentions of both statutory and voluntary healthcare providers aim to support this. This service evaluation compared the preferred and actual place of death of patients known to a specialist community palliative care service. DESIGN: All deaths of patients (n=2176) known to the specialist palliative care service over a 5-year period were examined through service evaluation to compare the actual place of death with the preferred place of death previously identified by the patient. Triggers for admission were established when the patients did not achieve this preference. RESULTS: Between 2009 and 2013, 73% of patients who expressed a choice about their preferred place of death and 69.3% who wanted to die at home were able to achieve their preferences. During the course of their illness, 9.5% of patients changed their preference for place of death. 30% of patients either refused to discuss or no preference was elicited for place of death. CONCLUSIONS: Direct enquiry and identification of preferences for end-of-life care is associated with patients achieving their preference for place of death. Patients whose preferred place of death was unknown were more likely to be admitted to hospital for end-of-life care.

Overdose profiles of new antipsychotic agents.

Although the more recently introduced antipsychotic drugs are increasing in popularity, the pattern of symptomatology when taken in overdose is not well defined. We monitored all enquiries to the National Poisons Information Service, London (NPIS, London) concerning antipsychotic drugs over a 9-month period in 1997 and report our findings concerning four drugs (olanzapine, clozapine, risperidone and sulpiride). All overdoses involving a single agent were followed up by a letter to the enquirer requesting details and outcome of the case. Although a total of 574 enquiries involving the selected antipsychotic drugs were received, only 45 of these cases involved overdose with a single agent. There were no fatalities or cases of convulsions in the series. Cardiac arrhythmias were only noted with sulpiride. Symptoms were most marked with clozapine, with a majority of patients experiencing agitation, dystonia, central nervous system (CNS) depression and tachycardia. Olanzapine and sulpiride produced a range of different symptoms, while most patients who had taken risperidone were asymptomatic. Monitoring poisons centre enquiries is a useful way of comparing overdose toxicities. We conclude that at least two of the novel antipsychotic agents, olanzapine and risperidone, appear to have a favourable overdose profile, which suggests that they are safer in overdose than the phenothiazines and butyrophenones.

Where do patients known to a community palliative care service die?

OBJECTIVES: The majority of people would prefer to die at home and National Health Service policy aims to support this concept. This service evaluation compared the preferred and actual place of death of patients known to a specialist community palliative care service. DESIGN: All deaths of patients (n=788) known to the specialist palliative care service from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2010 were examined in a service evaluation to compare the actual place of death with the preferred place of death previously identified by the patient. Triggers for admission were established when patients did not achieve this preference. RESULTS: 69% of patients (n=263) who expressed a preference to die at home and 82% of patients (n=93) who expressed a preference to die as inpatients in the hospice fulfilled these preferences. 71% of patients (n=298) who wanted to die in their current place of residence achieved this preference. 54% of patients (n=121) who declined to express a preference for end-of-life care subsequently died in hospital, reflecting the importance of advance care planning. CONCLUSIONS: The perceived lack of social support for patients dying at home is a significant trigger for admission to a hospice. The provision of sitters to support patients dying at home may ensure people achieve their preference. Commissioners consider preferred place of care to be a marker of quality, but clinical events that precipitate admission are often outside the influence of the palliative care team.

Managing hyponatraemia in a patient with malignant melanoma: a case report.

We report the case of a 46-year-old male with a known diagnosis of metastatic malignant melanoma who presented with hyponatraemia. The report details the challenges we faced in identifying the cause of his hyponatraemia and in attempting to reverse his electrolyte disturbance.As his clinical condition deteriorated the focus of our management needed to change; recognising that he was dying we implemented the Mental Capacity Act to make decisions in his best interest and ensure he achieved a symptom controlled and dignified death.