Relationship between dyspnoea and related factors in patients with cancer: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: Dyspnoea is a common and distressing symptom in patients with cancer. We aimed to analyse the association between dyspnoea and related factors and to estimate their causal relationship. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted. Patients with cancer with dyspnoea and a mean Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) of ≥3 over 24 hours were enrolled at 10 institutions in Japan from December 2019 to February 2021. The outcomes included dyspnoea, cough and pain NRS over 24 hours, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Somatosensory Amplification Scale, opioids for dyspnoea and respiratory failure. Path analyses were conducted to estimate the direct and indirect paths with reference to dyspnoea and related factors. RESULTS: A total of 209 patients were enrolled and 208 patients were included in the analysis. Cough worsened dyspnoea (ß=0.136), dyspnoea increased emotional distress (ß=1.104), emotional distress increased somatosensory amplification (ß=0.249) and somatosensory amplification worsened cough (ß=0.053) according to path analysis. CONCLUSION: There may be a vicious circle among dyspnoea and related factors: cough worsened dyspnoea, dyspnoea increased emotional distress, emotional distress increased somatosensory amplification and somatosensory amplification worsened cough. When treating dyspnoea in patients with cancer, managing these factors aimed at interrupting this vicious circle may be useful. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000038820).

Cancer Pain Management in Patients Receiving Inpatient Specialized Palliative Care Services.

CONTEXT: Cancer pain is a common complication that is frequently undertreated in patients with cancer. OBJECTIVES: This study is aimed at assessing the time needed to achieve cancer pain management goals through specialized palliative care (SPC). METHODS: This was a multicenter, prospective, longitudinal study of inpatients with cancer pain who received SPC. Patients were continuously followed up until they considered cancer pain management successful, and we estimated this duration using the Kaplan-Meier method. We investigated the effectiveness of pain management using multiple patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and quantitative measures, including pain intensity change in the Brief Pain Inventory. A paired-sample t-test was used to compare the pain intensity at the beginning and end of the observation period. RESULTS: Cancer pain management based on the PROs was achieved in 87.9% (385/438) of all cases. In 94.5% (364/385) of these cases, cancer pain management was achieved within 1 week, and the median time to pain management was 3 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 2-3). The mean worst pain intensity in the last 24 h at the start and end of observation were 6.9 ± 2.2 and 4.0 ± 2.3, respectively, with a difference of -2.9 (95% CI, -3.2 to -2.6; p < 0.01). Overall, 81.6% of the patients reported satisfaction with cancer pain management, and 62 adverse events occurred. CONCLUSION: SPC achieved cancer pain management over a short period with a high level of patient satisfaction resulting in significant pain reduction and few documented adverse events.

Current Management Options for Dyspnea in Cancer Patients.

OPINION STATEMENT: Dyspnea is one of the most frequent and distressing symptoms in patients with advanced cancer. As dyspnea deteriorates patients' quality of life markedly and tends to worsen as the disease progresses, comprehensive assessment and timely treatment of the underlying etiologies are essential. International guidelines recommend various non-pharmacological and pharmacological management options. However, there is a scarcity of confirmatory clinical trials on cancer dyspnea, and the overall level of evidence is weak. Recently, observational and survey studies indicated a wide range of practice patterns of palliative care specialists, providing important insight into the real-world management of dyspnea. In this paper, we summarize current management options for dyspnea in cancer patients, highlight major controversies in the literature, and propose future research directions toward quality care for patients with dyspnea and their families.

Do Types of Opioids Matter for Terminal Cancer Dyspnea? A Preliminary Multicenter Cohort Study.

CONTEXT: Dyspnea is among the most distressing symptoms in the last weeks to days of life (terminal dyspnea). While physicians frequently use parenteral opioids other than morphine for terminal dyspnea, little is known about their effects in cancer patients. OBJECTIVES: To explore the effectiveness and safety of parenteral morphine, oxycodone, and hydromorphone for cancer patients with terminal dyspnea. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a multicenter cohort study that consecutively enrolled advanced cancer patients with moderate/severe terminal dyspnea. Participating palliative care physicians initiated parenteral opioids (morphine/oxycodone/hydromorphone), utilizing a standardized treatment algorithm. We examined the dyspnea intensity (Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale [IPOS]) at 24 and 48 hours. RESULTS: Of 108 patients (mean age = 72), 66 (61%), 34 (32%), and 8 (7.4%) received morphine, oxycodone, and hydromorphone, respectively. At 24 hours, mean dyspnea IPOS scores significantly decreased from 3.0 (standard error (SE) = 0.1) at the baseline to 1.6 (0.1), 2.9 (0.1) to 2.0 (0.2), and 3.5 (0.2) to 1.2 (0.4) in the morphine (P < 0.001), oxycodone (P < 0.001), and hydromorphone (P = 0.011) groups, respectively. At 48 hours, the IPOS scores significantly reduced from 2.9 (0.1) at the baseline to 1.4 (0.1), 2.9 (0.1) to 1.6 (0.2), and 3.5 (0.2) to 1.2 (0.2) in the morphine (P < 0.001), oxycodone (P < 0.001), and hydromorphone (P = 0.004) groups, respectively. No significant differences in mean scores were found among the three groups at 24 (P = 0.080) and 48 hours (P = 0.322). Adverse events were rare. CONCLUSION: Parenteral morphine, oxycodone, and hydromorphone may be similarly effective and safe for cancer patients with terminal dyspnea.

Systemic Opioids for Dyspnea in Cancer Patients: A Real-world Observational Study.

CONTEXT: Although Systemic opioids are recommended as a pharmacological treatment for cancer-related dyspnea, their effectiveness and safety needs to be investigated in a real-world context OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of systemic regular opioids for dyspnea in cancer patients, in the real-world palliative care practice. METHODS: This was a multicenter prospective observational study. We consecutively enrolled adult cancer patients starting regular opioids (morphine, oxycodone, hydromorphone, or fentanyl) for dyspnea from 12 palliative care services across Japan. We evaluated dyspnea intensity using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) and Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale (IPOS) every 24 hours until 72 hours after starting opioids (T1-T3). We also evaluated common opioid-related adverse events (AEs) and other severe AEs. RESULTS: We enrolled 402 cancer patients. The proportion of responders was 68.8% (95%confidence intervals (CI): 0.63-0.74) at T1, 75.7% (95%CI: 0.70-0.81) at T2, and 82.1% (95%CI: 0.76-0.87) at T3. The mean differences in dyspnea NRS from baseline were 1.73 (95%CI: 1.46-1.99) at T1, 1.99 (95%CI: 1.71-2.28) at T2, and 2.47 (95%CI:2.13-2.82) at T3. The most common treatment-emergent AE was somnolence with an incidence of the severe form of approximately 10% throughout the study period. In the multivariate analysis, baseline dyspnea NRS ≥6 had a positive correlation with dyspnea relief by systemic regular opioids, while liver metastasis, clinician-predicted survival days, and opioid tolerance had a negative correlation. CONCLUSION: Regular systemic opioids were effective for dyspnea in real-world cancer patients.

The feasibility and effects of a pharmacological treatment algorithm for cancer patients with terminal dyspnea: A multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: How clinicians treat patients with terminal dyspnea widely varies, which could hamper quality care. We visualized comprehensive pharmacological treatment delivered by palliative care physicians. AIM: To examine adherence to a comprehensive pharmacological treatment algorithm for patients with terminal dyspnea, and to explore its outcomes during 48 h. DESIGN: A multicenter cohort study at five sites (February 2020 to June 2021). SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: We prospectively enrolled consecutive patients with advanced cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 3-4, and moderate/severe dyspnea. Participating palliative care physicians initiated algorithm-based treatment. The primary outcome was the proportion of adherence to the treatment algorithm over 24 h (predefined goal, 70%). We evaluated the adherence, goal achievement, and dyspnea level with a numerical rating scale (NRS), as well as adverse events over 48 h. RESULTS: All 108 patients received algorithm-based pharmacological treatment. Among 96 and 87 patients who were alive at 24 and 48 h, respectively, 96 (100%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 96%-100%) and 82 (94%; 95%CI = 87%-98%) continued to receive the algorithm treatment, respectively, and 66 (69%; 95%CI = 59%-77%) and 64 (74%; 95%CI = 63%-82%) achieved the treatment goals, respectively. Using a complete case analysis with paired t-tests, mean dyspnea NRS scores significantly reduced from 7.3 (standard error, 0.2) at the baseline to 4.9 (0.3) at 24 h (n = 72; p < 0.001), and 7.2 (0.3) at the baseline to 4.6 (0.4) at 48 h (n = 55; p < 0.001). Most adverse events were mild to moderate. CONCLUSIONS: The comprehensive pharmacological treatment algorithm was feasible, and the study data supports its preliminary efficacy and safety. The use of this algorithm may help clinicians improve care for patients with terminal dyspnea.

Factors associated with good death of patients with advanced cancer: a prospective study in Japan.

PURPOSE: It is important for palliative care providers to identify what factors are associated with a "good death" for patients with advanced cancer. We aimed to identify factors associated with a "good death" evaluated by the Good Death Scale (GDS) score among inpatients with advanced cancer in palliative care units (PCUs) in Japan. METHODS: The study is a sub-analysis of a multicenter prospective cohort study conducted in Japan. All variables were recorded on a structured data collecting sheet designed for the study. We classified each patient into better GDS group or worse GDS group, and examined factors associated with better GDS using multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Between January and December 2017, 1896 patients were enrolled across 22 PCUs in Japan. Among them, a total of 1157 patients were evaluated. Five variables were significantly associated with a better GDS score in multivariate analysis: preferred place of death at PCU (odds ratio [OR] 2.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.72-4.71; p < 0.01), longer survival time (OR 1.02; 95% CI 1.00-1.03; p < 0.01), not sudden death (OR 1.96; 95% CI 1.27-3.04; p < 0.01), better spiritual well-being in the last 3 days in life (OR 0.53; 95% CI 0.42-0.68; p < 0.01), and better communication between patient and family (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.66-0.98; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: We identified factors associated with a "good death" using GDS among advanced cancer patients in Japanese PCUs. Recognition of factors associated with GDS could help to improve the quality of end-of-life care.

Predictive Factors for the Development of Dyspnea Within 7 Days After Admission Among Terminally Ill Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: Predictive factors for the development of dyspnea have not been reported among terminally ill cancer patients. OBJECTIVE: This current study aimed to identify the predictive factors attributed to the development of dyspnea within 7 days after admission among patients with cancer. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a multicenter prospective observational study on the dying process among patients admitted in inpatient hospices/palliative care units. Patients were divided into 2 groups: those who developed dyspnea (development group) and those who did not (non-development group). To determine independent predictive factors, univariate and multivariate analyses using the logistic regression model were performed. RESULTS: From January 2017 to December 2017, 1159 patients were included in this analysis. Univariate analysis showed that male participants, those with primary lung cancer, ascites, and Karnofsky Performance Status score (KPS) of ≤40, smokers, and benzodiazepine users were significantly higher in the development group. Multivariate analysis revealed that primary lung cancer (odds ratio [OR]: 2.80, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.47-5.31; p = 0.002), KPS score (≤40) (OR: 1.84, 95% CI: 1.02-3.31; p = 0.044), and presence of ascites (OR: 2.34, 95% CI: 1.36-4.02; p = 0.002) were independent predictive factors for the development of dyspnea. CONCLUSIONS: Lung cancer, poor performance status, and ascites may be predictive factors for the development of dyspnea among terminally ill cancer patients. However, further studies should be performed to validate these findings.

Effectiveness and safety of opioids for dyspnea in patients with lung cancer: secondary analysis of multicenter prospective observational study.

Background: Patients with lung cancer are more likely to have comorbidities [e.g., interstitial lung disease (ILD)], chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) and metastases that may affect dyspnea and the effectiveness and safety of opioids for dyspnea than other cancer types. Therefore, this study examined the effectiveness and safety of opioids for dyspnea, among the patients with lung cancer. Methods: The present study is a secondary analysis of a multicenter prospective observational study examining the effectiveness and safety of opioids for dyspnea in patients with cancer in Japan. For this secondary analysis, patients with lung cancer with a documented dyspnea Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) at baseline were included. The primary outcome was dyspnea NRS, and Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale/Support Team Assessment Schedule (IPOS/STAS) scores change between baseline and 24 hours after baseline. As secondary outcomes, we investigated the predictors of opioid effectiveness for dyspnea improvement and adverse events (nausea, somnolence, and delirium). Results: This study analyzed 124 patients with lung cancer with known dyspnea NRS at baseline. The median age was 74, and the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 107 patients were 3-4. Both NRS and IPOS/STAS score of dyspnea significantly improved 24 hours after opioid initiation [-1.64, 95% confidence interval (CI): -2.12 to -1.17, P<0.001; -1.03; 95% CI: -1.21 to -0.85, P<0.001; respectively]. Moreover, the improvement of NRS score was greater than the minimal clinically important difference of 1 point. In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, ILD was significantly associated with a better improvement [(hazard ratio (HR): 3.39, 95% CI: 1.34-11.09, P=0.043]. Somnolence was the most common grade 3-4 adverse event (n=16), followed by delirium (n=9). Conclusions: Opioids were effective and safe for treating dyspnea in patients with lung cancer. Furthermore, lung cancer patients with ILD may benefit more from opioids.

Is the 1-day surprise question a useful screening tool for predicting prognosis in patients with advanced cancer?-a multicenter prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: For cancer patients nearing death, the prediction of their prognosis by physicians is crucial. This study examined the usefulness of the 1-Day Surprise Question (1DSQ). METHODS: This study was conducted as part of a multicenter prospective observational study. The physicians answered the 1DSQ "Would I be surprised if this patient died in the next 1 day?" when patients have palliative performance scale (PPS) ≤20. We calculated the sensitivity and specificity of the 1DSQ. Moreover, using multivariate analysis, we evaluated the characteristics of patients who died among those whose physicians answered the 1DSQ as "not surprised". RESULTS: Overall, 1,896 patients were enrolled, and 1,411 (74.4%) were analyzed between January and December 2017. Among these, 847 (60.0%) patients were placed in the "not surprised" group. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the 1DSQ were 82.0% [95% confidence interval (CI): 77.5-85.8%], 45.5% (95% CI: 44.4-46.4%), 27.4% (95% CI: 25.9-28.7%), and 91.0% (95% CI: 88.9-92.9%), respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that urine output over last 12 hours <100 mL, decreased response to visual stimuli, respiration with mandibular movement, pulselessness of radial artery, and saturation of percutaneous oxygen <90% were characteristics of patients who died as predicted by the physicians. CONCLUSIONS: The 1DSQ is a helpful screening tool for identifying cancer patients with impending death.

The Possibility of Conducting a Clinical Trial on Palliative Care: A Survey of Whether a Clinical Study on Cancer Dyspnea Is Acceptable to Cancer Patients and Their Relatives.

CONTEXT: Conducting randomized controlled trials on palliative care is difficult owing to barriers like fragility of the patients' health status and health care providers' concerns for patients. However, quality randomized controlled trials are required for care improvement. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the willingness of cancer patients and their relatives to participate in a clinical study on cancer dyspnea and identify feasible clinical study designs for this condition. METHODS: A nationwide, cross-sectional, web-based survey was conducted with 206 cancer patients and 206 relatives of cancer patients. Their willingness to participate in clinical studies on cancer dyspnea and factors influencing this willingness were assessed in two scenarios: outpatients receiving anticancer treatment and terminally ill inpatients. RESULTS: About 23% patients and 23% relatives were willing to participate in clinical trials while 40% and 32%, respectively, were unwilling. Factors related to patient participation were quick and easy trials (outpatient 57%, terminally ill 53%) and oral medication with minimal potential side effects (outpatient 48%). Factors related to unwillingness to participate were placebo-controlled trials (outpatient 51%, terminally ill 50%), disagreements about participation between patients and families (outpatient 49%, terminally ill 49%), and continuous injections (outpatient 61%, terminally ill 47%). Compared to patients, relatives responded more reluctantly, especially for patients in terminal care. Conversely, patients were less reluctant in the terminal setting than the outpatient setting. CONCLUSION: Some patients and relatives were reluctant to participate in clinical trials on cancer dyspnea. Thus, trials need to be minimally invasive, quick, and fully explained to and understood by patients and families.

"3-Day Surprise Question" to predict prognosis of advanced cancer patients with impending death: Multicenter prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: The study aimed to clarify the efficacy of the "3-Day Surprise Question (3DSQ)" in predicting the prognosis for advanced cancer patients with impending death. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study was a part of multicenter prospective observational study which investigated the dying process in advanced cancer patients in Japan. For patients with a Palliative Performance Scale ≤20, the 3DSQ "Would I be surprised if this patient died in the next 3 days?" was answered by their physicians. In addition to the sensitivity and specificity of the 3DSQ, the characteristics of patients who survived longer than expected were examined via multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Among the 1896 patients enrolled, 1411 were evaluated. Among 1179 (83.6%) patients who were classified into the "Not surprised" group, 636 patients died within 3 days. Among 232 (16.4%) patients of "Yes surprised" group, 194 patients lived longer than 3 days. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the 3DSQ were 94.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 92.7% to 95.8%), 26.3% (95% CI: 24.8% to 27.6%), 53.9% (95% CI: 53.0% to 54.7%), and 83.6% (95% CI: 78.7% to 87.7%), respectively. Multivariate analysis showed palpable radial artery, absent respiration with mandibular movement, SpO2 ≥ 90%, opioid administration, and no continuous deep sedation as characteristics of patients who lived longer than expected. CONCLUSIONS: The 3-Day Surprise Question can be a useful screening tool to identify advanced cancer patients with impending death.

Factors influencing spiritual well-being in terminally ill cancer inpatients in Japan.

PURPOSE: Spiritual well-being is very important in patients undergoing palliative care. Although psychosocial factors have been suggested to be associated with spiritual well-being, the relationship between physical signs and spiritual well-being has not been fully elucidated. The aim of this study was to explore diverse factors associated with spiritual well-being among palliative care patients in Japan. METHODS: This study is a secondary analysis of a multicenter prospective cohort study involving patients admitted to palliative care units in Japan. Physicians recorded all data prospectively on a structured sheet designed for the study. The spiritual well-being score was measured using the Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale after patients' death in regard to symptoms over the previous 3 days. We classified each patient into "better" score (0-1) and "worse" score (2-4) groups and examined diverse factors associated with spiritual well-being. RESULTS: Among the 1896 patients enrolled, 1313 were evaluated. In the multivariate analysis, seven variables were significantly associated with "worse" score: worse spiritual well-being on admission (2-4) (p < 0.0001), younger age (< 80) (p = 0.0001), hyperactive delirium over 3 days before death (mild/moderate/severe) (p = 0.0001), expressed wish for hastened death (yes) (p = 0.0006), worse communication among patients and families (Support Team Assessment Schedule score 2-4) (p = 0.0008), pleural effusion (present) (p = 0.037), and marital status (unmarried) (p = 0.0408). CONCLUSION: Recognizing factors associated with spiritual well-being is potentially useful for identifying high-risk groups with lower spiritual well-being at the end of life. Further study is required to investigate factors associated with patient-reported spiritual well-being.

A prospective phase II study of carboplatin and nab-paclitaxel in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer and concomitant interstitial lung disease (HOT1302).

OBJECTIVES: Patients with concomitant advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and interstitial lung disease (ILD) are excluded from most clinical chemotherapy trials because of the high risk of exacerbating the latter condition. This study prospectively investigated the efficacy and safety of albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel) in combination with carboplatin in patients with both advanced NSCLC and ILD. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The enrolled patients had treatment-naïve, advanced NSCLC with ILD. Patients received 100 mg/m2nab-paclitaxel weekly and carboplatin at an area under the concentration-time curve of 6 once every 3 weeks for 4-6 cycles. The primary endpoint was the overall response rate (ORR); secondary endpoints included toxicity, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Thirty-six patients were enrolled between April 2014 and September 2017. Sixteen patients (44.4%) had adenocarcinoma, 15 (41.7%) had squamous cell carcinoma (Sq), and 5 (13.9%) had non-small cell carcinoma. The median number of cycles administered were 4 (range: 1-6). The ORR was 55.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 39.6-70.5). The median PFS and OS were 5.3 months (95% CI: 3.9-8.2) and 15.4 months (95% CI: 9.4-18.7), respectively. A greater proportion of patients with Sq experienced improvements than did those with non-Sq: ORRs, 66.7% (95% CI: 41.7-84.8) vs. 47.6% (95% CI: 28.3-67.6) (P = 0.254); median PFS, 8.2 months (95% CI: 4.0-10.2) vs. 4.1 months (95% CI: 3.3-5.4) (HR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.30-1.20]; P = 0.15); and median OS, 16.8 months (95% CI: 9.8-not reached) vs. 11.9 months (95% CI: 7.3-17.4) (HR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.24-1.28]; P = 0.17). Two patients (5.6%) experienced grade ≥2 pneumonitis and 1 patient (2.8%) died. CONCLUSION: Weekly nab-paclitaxel combined with carboplatin showed favorable efficacy with acceptable toxicity in patients with both advanced NSCLC and ILD.

Rikkunshito for Preventing Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting in Lung Cancer Patients: Results from 2 Prospective, Randomized Phase 2 Trials.

The herbal medicine rikkunshito has the potential to improve chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) by stimulating ghrelin secretion. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rikkunshito in preventing CINV for patients with lung cancer. Two separate prospective, randomized, phase II parallel design studies were conducted in patients with lung cancer. Fifty-eight and sixty-two patients scheduled to receive highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC), respectively, were randomized 1:1 to receive either standard antiemetic therapy in accordance with international guidelines (S group) or standard antiemetic therapy plus oral rikkunshito (R group). The primary endpoint was overall complete response (CR)-that is, no emesis and rescue medication in the first 120 h post-chemotherapy. Secondary endpoints included CR in the acute (0-24 h) and delayed (>24-120 h) phases and safety. Fifty-seven patients (S group, 28; R group, 29) receiving HEC and sixty-two patients (S group, 30; R group, 32) receiving MEC with comparable characteristics were evaluated. The CR rates were similar across the S and R groups for the HEC study in the overall (67.9% vs. 62.1%), acute (96.4% vs. 89.6%), and delayed (67.9% vs. 62.1%) phases, respectively, and for the MEC study in the overall (83.3% vs. 84.4%), acute (100% vs. 100%), and delayed (83.3% vs. 84.4%) phases, respectively. No severe adverse events were observed. Although rikkunshito was well tolerated, it did not demonstrate an additional preventative effect against CINV in lung cancer patients receiving HEC or MEC. Clinical Trial Registry Information: This study is registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Clinical Trial Registry, identification numbers UMIN 000014239 and UMIN 000014240.