Assessing cancer pain-the first step toward improving patients' quality of life.

PURPOSE: Numerous studies on cancer patients have shown that cancer pain still remains underestimated, poorly assessed, and under-treated. Pain relief should be considered as early as possible within personalized care and as an integral part of quality healthcare in many countries. Nevertheless, personalized care is still insufficiently taken into consideration, partly due to improper or incomplete assessment of cancer pain. The objective of this article is to propose a practical approach to this complex assessment, as the first step to improving patients' quality of life. METHODS: Critical reflection based on literature analysis and clinical practice. RESULTS: Assessment of cancer pain means evaluating the pain intensity over time, the dimensions of pain (sensory-discriminative, cognitive, emotional, and behavioral), the pathophysiological nature of pain (neuropathic, nociceptive, and nociplastic), the etiology, and the patient's perception (diffuse, localized, global). Cancer patients may have simple or multiple forms of pain (mixed, overlapped, combined, and associated). Furthermore, with the use of new specific therapies, the symptomatology of pain is also changing, and certain cancers are becoming chronic. Thus, cancer pain is an archetype of multimorphic pain, and its dynamic assessments (regular and repeated) require a multimodal and targeted approach in order to offer personalized pain management. Multimodal pain treatment must be adapted to the elements that disrupt cancer pain, to the patient's cancer and to the specific treatments. CONCLUSIONS: The dynamic assessments of pain demand the simplest, and the most complete possible procedure, to avoid feasibility problems or self-/hetero-assessment excesses that might lead to less precise and less reliable results. Multimodal and interdisciplinary approaches are being developed, making it possible to optimize cancer pain management.

A clinical approach to the management of cancer-related pain in emergency situations.

PURPOSE: Most cancer patients experience many pain episodes depending on disruptive elements, leading them to the emergency room. The objective of the article is to describe common pitfalls that need to be avoided, as well as opportunities to be seized for repositioning patients back on their care pathway. METHODS: Critical reflection based on literature analysis and clinical practice. RESULTS: Most forms of cancer are now chronic, evolving diseases, and patients are treated with high-technology targeted therapies with iatrogenic effects. Moreover, the multimorphic nature of cancer-related pain requires dynamic, interdisciplinary assessments addressing its etiology, its pathophysiology, its dimensions (sensory-discriminatory, cognitive, emotional, and behavioral), and the patient's perception of it, in order to propose the most adapted therapies. However, for most patients, cancer pain remains underestimated, poorly assessed, and under-treated. In this context, the key steps in emergency cancer pain management are as follows: • Quick relief of uncontrolled cancer pain: after eliminating potential medical or surgical emergencies revealed by pain, a brief questioning will make the use of carefully titrated morphine in most situations possible. • Assessment and re-assessment of the pain and the patient, screening specific elements, to better understand the situation and its consequences. • Identification of disruptive elements leading to uncontrolled pain, with an interdisciplinary confrontation to find a mid to long-term approach, involving the appropriate pharmaceutical and/or non-pharmaceutical strategies, possibly including interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Pain emergencies should be part of the cancer care pathway and, through supportive care, provide an opportunity to help cancer patients both maintain their physical, psychological, and social balance and anticipate further painful episodes.

Strategies of complementary and integrative therapies in cancer-related pain-attaining exhaustive cancer pain management.

PURPOSE: Complementary integrative therapies (CITs) correspond to growing demand in patients with cancer-related pain. This demand needs to be considered alongside pharmaceutical and/or interventional therapies. CITs can be used to cover certain specific pain-related characteristics. The objective of this review is to present the options for CITs that could be used within dynamic, multidisciplinary, and personalized management, leading to an integrative oncology approach. METHODS: Critical reflection based on literature analysis and clinical practice. RESULTS: Most CITs only showed trends in efficacy as cancer pain was mainly a secondary endpoint, or populations were restricted. Physical therapy has demonstrated efficacy in motion and pain, in some specific cancers (head and neck or breast cancers) or in treatments sequelae (lymphedema). In cancer survivors, higher levels of physical activity decrease pain intensity. Due to the multimorphism of cancer pain, certain mind-body therapies acting on anxiety, stress, depression, or mood disturbances (such as massage, acupuncture, healing touch, hypnosis, and music therapy) are efficient on cancer pain. Other mind-body therapies have shown trends in reducing the severity of cancer pain and improving other parameters, and they include education (with coping skills training), yoga, tai chi/qigong, guided imagery, virtual reality, and cognitive-behavioral therapy alone or combined. The outcome sustainability of most CITs is still questioned. CONCLUSIONS: High-quality clinical trials should be conducted with CITs, as their efficacy on pain is mainly based on efficacy trends in pain severity, professional judgment, and patient preferences. Finally, the implementation of CITs requires an interdisciplinary team approach to offer optimal, personalized, cancer pain management.

Opening up disruptive ways of management in cancer pain: the concept of multimorphic pain.

PURPOSE: Following a series of articles reviewing the basics of cancer pain management, in this article, we develop the guiding principle of our philosophy: the concept of multimorphic pain and how to integrate it as the innovative cornerstone of supportive care in cancer. METHOD: Critical reflection based on literature analysis and clinical practice. RESULTS: This model aims to break with standard approaches, offering a more dynamic and exhaustive vision of cancer pain as a singular clinical entity, taking into account its multimorphic characteristics (cancer pain experience can and will change during cancer: aetiology, physiopathology, clinical presentation and consequences of pain) and the disruptive elements that can occur to influence its evolution (cancer evolution, concomitant treatments, pain from associated diseases, comorbidities and complications, or modifications in the environment). Our model establishes the main key stages for interdisciplinary management of cancer pain: Early, personalised management that is targeted and multimodal; Identification, including in advance, of potential disruptive elements throughout the care pathway, using an exhaustive approach to all the factors influencing pain, leading to patient and caregiver education; Optimal analgesic balance throughout the care pathway; Integration of this concept into a systemic early supportive care model from the cancer diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Given the difficulties still present in the management of pain in cancer, and whilst cancer is often considered as a chronic condition, the concept of multimorphic pain proposes a practical, optimised and innovative approach for clinicians and, ultimately, for patients experiencing pain.

Strategies for interventional therapies in cancer-related pain-a crossroad in cancer pain management.

PURPOSE: Interventional therapies are important to consider when facing cancer pain refractory to conventional therapies. The objective of the current review is to introduce these effective strategies into dynamic interdisciplinary pain management, leading to an exhaustive approach to supportive oncology. METHODS: Critical reflection based on literature analysis and clinical practice. RESULTS: Interventional therapies act on the nervous system via neuromodulation or surgical approaches, or on primitive or metastatic lesions via interventional radiotherapy, percutaneous ablation, or surgery. Interventional therapies such as neuromodulations are constantly evolving with new technical works still in development. Nowadays, their usage is better defined, depending on clinical situations, and their impact on quality of life is proven. Nevertheless their availability and acceptability still need to be improved. To start with, a patient's interdisciplinary evaluation should cover a wide range of items such as patient's performance and psychological status, ethical considerations, and physiochemical and pharmacological properties of the cerebrospinal fluid for intrathecal neuromodulation. This will help to define the most appropriate strategy. In addition to determining the pros and cons of highly specialized interventional therapies, their relevance should be debated within interdisciplinary teams in order to select the best strategy for the right patient, at the right time. CONCLUSIONS: Ultimately, the use of the interventional therapies can be limited by the requirement of specific trained healthcare teams and technical support, or the lack of health policies. However, these interventional strategies need to be proposed as soon as possible to each patient requiring them, as they can greatly improve quality of life.

Opioids in cancer-related pain: current situation and outlook.

PURPOSE: Despite progress in treatments, cancer pain remains underestimated, poorly assessed and under-treated. Prescribing strong opioids, because of their specificities, requires precision in management considering their pharmacology but also a clear understanding of recommendations. Some clinicians highlight the risk of addiction, excessive sedation and respiratory depression and their need for information. Our objective in this review is to suggest some clinical guidance for the positioning and daily use of opioids within cancer pain management. METHODS: Critical reflection based on literature analysis and clinical practice. RESULTS: Strong opioids may be initiated as soon as pain diagnosis is defined. Factors to consider are pain aetiology, opioid pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, genetic polymorphism, physiology (age, gender, weight and pregnancy), comorbidities (especially renal, hepatic, cardiovascular diseases), chronobiology, environmental factors, medication interference and treatment adherence. Achieving the best-balanced opioid treatment for background pain is complex, mainly due to the variable benefit/risk ratio between individuals and the experience of breakthrough cancer pain. Opioid initiation alongside a dynamic reassessment of pain should be fully integrated into the patient's management to optimise analgesia. The efficacy and safety of a strong opioid treatment need to be re-evaluated and adapted to individuals constantly as it varies over time. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer pain is multimorphic and permanently changing due to disease evolution, curative treatments and disruptive events (concomitant treatments, pain from associated disease, comorbidities and complications, modifications of the environment). Well-managed opioids are the cornerstone of a complex environment requiring multidisciplinary dynamic assessments integrated into the patient's care pathway.

[Opioid switch and change of route of administration in cancer patients treated by morphine]. / La morphine dans le cadre du changement d'opioïdes ou de voie d'administration, chez l'adulte avec une douleur due au cancer.

This paper reviewed the 2002 guidelines established by the National Federation of Cancer Centres. A group of experts nominated by the 3 French Societies involved in the treatment of cancer pain (AFSOS, SFAP, SFETD), established new guidelines ratios for morphine switching and/or changing of route of administration, in patients for whom either pain was not adequatly managed or adverse effects were unbearable. After a rapid reminder of the pharmacokinetics and metabolism properties of morphine, experts explained why the theory of opioid rotation (oxycodone, hydromorphone, fentanyl, methadone, tapentadol) using fixed equianalgesic ratios is not any more appropriate for a secure clinical practice. In the light of recent publications enhancing our knowledge on the efficacy of new drug switching ratios and for changing the route of administration of morphine, the group of experts recommended to use reconsidered switching ratios favoring security upon efficacy, to minimize overdosing and adverse effects. Consequently, after the new conversion ratio (using slow release opioids) was applied, a second titration should be done by means of normal release rescue formulations for breakthrough pain episodes. A smartphone App. OpioConvert® will be available for rapid and secure dose conversions.

[Standards, options and recommendations for the use of medical analgesics for the treatment of pain arising from excess nociception in adults with cancer (update 2002)]. / Standards, Options et Recommandations 2002 pour les traitements antalgiques médicamenteux des douleurs cancéreuses par excès de nociception chez l'adulte, mise à jour (rapport abrégé).

CONTEXT: The "Standards, Options and Recommendations" (SOR) project, started in 1993, is a collaboration between the Federation of french cancer centers (FNCLCC), the 20 French cancer centers, and specialists from French public universities, general hospitals and private clinics. The main objective is the development of clinical practice guidelines to improve the quality of health care and the outcome of cancer patients. The methodology is based on a literature review and critical appraisal by a multidisciplinary group of experts, with feedback from specialists in cancer care delivery. OBJECTIVES: To develop clinical practice guidelines for the use of medical analgesics for the treatment of pain arising from excess nociception in adults with cancer according to the definitions of the Standards, Options and Recommendations project. METHODS: In 1996, a working group, set up by the FNCLCC published clinical practice guidelines for pain management in adult and paediatric patients with cancer. In the light of the evolution of our knowledge, and practice these guidelines need to be updated. The section on "medical analgesic treatments" in the document published in 1996 was examined by the working group to identify which questions should be updated. These questions and the relevant key words were used to develop a search strategy which was used to search Medline , and for particular questions, Embase , from January 1994 to March 1999, for relevant references, published in English or French. RESULTS: For this update, only a few randomised clinical trials were identified, and their conclusions were generally weak. Thus much of the information in this document is based on the World Health Organisation (WHO) guidelines and represents the "state of the art" on this subject in France and is supported by expert agreement. Some changes to the original SOR are presented, eg. methods of titration, prescription of new opioids, opioid rotation. We also present a synthesis of recent pharmacological and regulatory data. The integral version is available on the FNCLCC web site (http://www.fnclcc.fr/sor.htm).

[Standards, options and recommendations for the use of medical analgesics for the treatment of pain arising from excess nociception in adults with cancer (update 2002): opioid analgesics with the exception of morphine by mouth and the rotation]. / Standards, Options et Recommandations 2002 pour les traitements antalgiques médicamenteux des douleurs cancéreuses par excès de nociception chez l'adulte, mise à jour : place des opioïdes forts (morphine orale exclue) et rotation des opioïdes.

CONTEXT: The "Standards, Options and Recommendations" (SOR) project, started in 1993, is a collaboration between the federation of French Cancer Centers (FNCLCC), the 20 French cancer centers, and specialists from French public universities, general hospitals and private clinics. The main objective is the development of clinical practice guidelines to improve the quality of health care and the outcome of cancer patients. The methodology is based on a literature review and critical appraisal by a multidisciplinary group of experts, with feedback from specialists in cancer care delivery. OBJECTIVES: To develop clinical practice guidelines for the use of opioid analgesics with the exception of oral morphine and for opioid rotation related to the treatment of nociceptive pain in adults with cancer according to the definitions of the Standards, Options and Recommendations project. METHODS: In 1996, a working group, set up by the FNCLCC published clinical practice guidelines for pain management in adult and paediatric patients with cancer: In the light of the evolution of knowledge, and practice these guidelines need to be updated The section on "médical analgesic treatments" in the document published in 1996 was examined by the working group to identify which questions should be updated. These questions and the relevant key words were used to develop a search strategy which was used to search Medline, and for particular questions, Embase, from January 1994 to March 1999, for relevant references, published in English or French. RESULTS: For this update, only a few randomised clinical trials were identified, and their conclusions were generally weak. Thus much of the information in this document is based on the World Health Organisation (WHO) guidelines and represents the "state of the art" on this subject in France and is supported by expert agreement. Some changes to the original SOR are presented, particularly for the prescription of new opioids and opioid rotation. The full text of this SOR is available on the FNCLCC web site (http ://www.fnclcc.fr).