Cancer pain: Results of a prospective study on prognostic indicators of pain intensity including pain syndromes assessment.

BACKGROUND: Pain is a prevalent symptom in patients with advanced cancer. Recognition of prognostic factors associated with pain intensity, could help provide better assessment, leading to better pain management. AIM: identifying prognostic factors which could guide improvements on cancer pain classification. DESIGN: a prospective observational study on chronic cancer pain, exploring the association between average mean pain intensity during a 28 days study follow-up and patients' clinical and pain-related characteristics, including pain syndromes. To evaluate these associations, a mixed model was built. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Patients attending a Palliative Care and Pain Outpatient Clinic from May 2015 to June 2019 were screened. Patients with moderate to severe cancer pain who were already receiving or needed treatment with third step WHO ladder opioids were enrolled in the study. Data from 342 patients with at least one follow-up visit were analyzed. RESULTS: Pain intensity decreased significantly for all patients during time (p < 0.001). Age, sex, emotional distress, pain duration and neuropathic pain presence evaluated by the Douleur Neuropathique 4 Questions (DN4) questionnaire were not significantly associated to pain intensity. Breakthrough/episodic pain was associated with higher pain intensity during follow-up (p < 0.001). The diagnosis of pain syndrome was overall significantly associated with mean pain intensity during follow-up (p = 0.016). Particularly, the concurrent presence of visceral and soft (p = 0.026) or soft and nervous tissue pain (p = 0.043) were significantly related to worse outcome, whereas pain due to only soft tissue damage with better outcome (p = 0.032). CONCLUSIONS: The recognition of specific pain syndromes may help to better classify cancer pain.

Development and field testing of a neuro psychomotor multidimensional grid for the assessment of children with cns tumor.

Central Nervous System (CNS) tumors are the most common pediatric solid tumor and development neuro psychomotor (DNPM) therapy can contribute to the rehabilitation of these children. This paper describes the development of a DNPM multidimensional assessment grid for children with CNS tumor (DNPM-CNS grid).The development process included 4 phases: (P1) literature review and grid development (Version 1.0), (P2) two rounds consultations with experts (Version 1.1 and 2.0), (P3) field testing, (P4) final revision (Version 3.0).(P1) The DNPM-CNS grid was developed based on previous tools and manuals and on clinical experience with this patient population. (P2) A total of 52 questionnaires were filled in by experts about relevance of assessment areas, pertinence, comprehensibility and feasibility of the grid. Average scores ranged from 7.6 to 10. (P3) At case level, good inter-rater agreement scores (78%) and limited non-evaluability rates (18%) emerged. At item level, 27% of items reached high disagreement and 26% high not-evaluability rates. The qualitative assessment was judged clinically useful for planning the neuro-oncology rehabilitation treatment and a good feasibility of the DNPM-CNS grid emerged both for preschool and school-age children. (P4) The final version of the grid consists of 8 assessment areas with 133 items.The DNPM-CNS grid is a comprehensive tool that can guide the overall DNPM assessment in a limited amount of time. It can be used as a screening tool to customize more specific assessments. Further research is needed to better characterize grid psychometric properties.Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/08880018.2021.1948648 .

Neuropathic pain: clinical classification and assessment in patients with pain due to cancer.

ABSTRACT: Neuropathic cancer pain (NcP) is associated with worse treatment responses and specific therapy indications, but a standardized clinical diagnosis of NcP is still lacking. This is a prospective observational study on outpatients with cancer, comparing different clinical approaches with NcP evaluation. A three-step assessment of NcP was performed using DN4 (cutoff of 4), palliative care physician Clinical Impression, including etiology and pain syndrome identification, and Retrospective Clinical Classification by a board of specialists with the IASP Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group criteria. Neuropathic cancer pain classification was specifically referred to pain directly due to cancer. Three hundred fifty patients were assessed, and NcP prevalence was 20% (95% confidence interval [CI] 15.9%-24.6%), 36.9%, (95% CI 31.6%-42.1%), and 28.6% (95% CI 23.8%-33.9%) according to DN4, Clinical Impression, and Retrospective Clinical Classification, respectively. Cohen's kappa concordance coefficient between DN4 and Retrospective Clinical Classification was 0.57 (95% CI 0.47-0.67), indicating moderate concordance. Higher percentages of discordance were found for specific pain syndromes such as pain due to deep soft tissue infiltration and pain associated with tenesmus. Disagreement among clinicians accounted also for different NcP diagnoses and highlighted lack of homogeneous clinical criteria. Rigorous application of etiological and syndrome diagnosis to explain pain cause, associated with standardized diagnostic criteria and assessment of pain characteristics, that is also specific for the cancer pain condition could improve clinical classification of NcP.

PATIENT VOICES, a project for the integration of the systematic assessment of patient reported outcomes and experiences within a comprehensive cancer center: a protocol for a mixed method feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Listening to "patient voices" in terms of symptoms, emotional status and experiences with care, is crucial for patient empowerment in clinical practice. Despite convincing evidence that routine patient reported outcomes and experience measurements (PRMs) with rapid feed-back to oncologists can improve symptom control, patient well-being and cost effectiveness, PRMs are not commonly used in cancer care, due to barriers at various level. Part of these barriers may be overcome through electronic PRMs collection (ePRMs) integrated with the electronic medical record (EMR). The PATIENT VOICES initiative is aimed at achieving a stepwise integration of ePRMs assessment into routine cancer care. The feasibility project presented here is aimed at assessing the knowledge, use and attitudes toward PRMs in a comprehensive cancer centre; developing and assessing feasibility of a flexible system for ePRM assessment; identifying barriers to and developing strategies for implementation and integration of ePRMs clinical practice. METHODS: The project has been organized into four phases: a) pre-development; b) software development and piloting; c) feasibility assessment; d) post-development. A convergent mixed method design, based on concurrent quantitative and qualitative data collection will be applied. A web-survey on health care providers (HCPs), qualitative studies on patients and HCPs (semi-structured interviews and focus groups) as well as longitudinal and cross-sectional quantitative studies will be carried out. The quantitative studies will enroll 600 patients: 200 attending out-patient clinics (physical symptom assessement), 200 attending inpatient wards (psychological distress assessment) and 200 patients followed by multidisciplinary teams (patient experience with care assessment). The Edmonton symptom assessment scale, the Distress Thermometer, and a tool adapted from existing patient reported experience with cancer care questionnaires, will be used in quantitative studies. A multi-disciplinary stakeholder team including researchers, clinicians, health informatics professionals, health system administrators and patients will be involved in the development of potentially effective implementation strategies in the post development phase. DISCUSSION: The documentation of potential advantages and implementation barriers achieved within this feasibility project, will serve as a starting point for future and more focused interventions aimed at achieving effective ePRMs routine assessment in cancer care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT03968718 ) May 30th, 2019.

Tools for the assessment of neuropsychomotor profile in the rehabilitation of children with central nervous system tumor: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: This study reviews the scientific literature to identify and describe which assessment tools (ATs) are used in pediatric oncology and neuro-oncology rehabilitation and which development neuropsychomotor (DNPM) ATs were built for children with central nervous system (CNS) tumors. METHODS: A systematic review was performed searching PubMed, CINAHL, PEDro, Science Direct, and Catalog of National Institute of Tumors databases and specialized journals. The search covered 7 years (2010-2017) and used relevant keywords in different combinations. A further search was carried out on DNPM rehabilitation manuals and academic thesis. RESULTS: The review retrieved 35 eligible articles containing 63 ATs. The most common ATs were the Behavioral Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) and the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC). Most of the ATs covered a single area of child development among behavioral/psychological, cognitive, and motor areas. A total of 159 ATs were found in manuals and thesis, and only 17 of them were already identified in the journal search. None of the ATs identified in both searches had been specifically developed for children with CNS tumor. CONCLUSION: The results highlight the need to develop and validate a global multidimensional AT for children with CNS tumor, overcoming the fragmentation of the assessment procedures and promoting standardized rehabilitation protocols.

A cross-sectional study examining the prevalence of cachexia and areas of unmet need in patients with cancer.

PURPOSE: The semantics of defining cancer cachexia over the last decade has resulted in uncertainty as to the prevalence. This has further hindered the recognition and subsequent treatment of this condition. Following the consensus definition for cancer cachexia in 2011, there is now a need to establish estimates of prevalence. Therefore, the primary aim of the present study was to assess the prevalence of cachexia in an unselected cancer population. A secondary aim was to assess patient-perceived need of attention to cachexia. METHODS: A cross-sectional study in hospital patients was undertaken. Key inclusion criteria were the following: age > 18 years, cancer diagnosis, and no surgery the preceding 24 h. Data on demographics, disease, performance status, symptoms, cachexia, and patients' perceived need of attention to weight loss and nutrition were registered. RESULTS: Data were available on 386 of 426 eligible patients. Median age (IQR) was 65 years (56-72), 214 (55%) were male and 302 (78%) had a performance status of 0-1 (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group). Prevalence of cachexia (inpatients/outpatients) was 51/22%. Prevalence was highest in patients with gastrointestinal cancer (62/42%) and lung cancer (83/36%). There was no major difference in prevalence between patients with metastatic (55/24%) and localized disease (47/19%). Twenty percent of inpatients and 15% of outpatients wanted more attention to weight loss and nutrition. Cachexia (p < 0.001), symptoms of mood disorder (p < 0.001), and male gender (p < 0.01) were independently associated with increased need of attention. CONCLUSION: Cachexia is a prevalent condition, affecting both patients with localized and metastatic cancer. Clinical attention to the condition is a sizeable unmet need.

COMBAT study - Computer based assessment and treatment - A clinical trial evaluating impact of a computerized clinical decision support tool on pain in cancer patients.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The prevalence of pain in cancer patients are relatively high and indicate inadequate pain management strategies. Therefore, it is necessary to develop new methods and to improve implementation of guidelines to assess and treat pain. The vast improvement in information technology facilitated development of a computerized symptom assessment and decision support system (CCDS) - the Combat system - which was implemented in an outpatient cancer clinic to evaluate improvement in pain management. METHODS: We conducted a controlled before-and-after study between patient cohorts in two consecutive study periods: before (n=80) and after (n=134) implementation of the Combat system. Patients in the first cohort completed questionnaires with the paper-and-pencil method and this data was not shown to physicians. Patients in the latter cohort completed an electronic questionnaire by using an iPad and the data were automatically transferred and presented to physicians at point of care. Additionally, the system provided computerized decision support at point of care for the physician based on the electronic questionnaires completed by the patients, an electronic CRF completed by physicians and clinical guidelines. RESULTS: The Combat system did not improve pain intensity and there were no significant alterations in the prescribed dose of opiates compared to the cohort of patients managed without the Combat system. CONCLUSION: The Combat system did not improve pain management. This may be explained by several factors, however, we consider lack of proper implementation of the CCDS in the clinic to be the most important factor. As a result, we did not manage to change the behaviour of the physicians in the clinic. IMPLICATIONS: There is a need to conduct larger prospective studies to evaluate the efficacy of modern information technology to improve pain management in cancer patients. Before introducing new information technology in the clinics, it is important to have a well thought out implementation strategy. The trial is registered at Clinialtrials.gov, number NCT01795157.

The use of antidepressants in patients with advanced cancer--results from an international multicentre study.

OBJECTIVES: Depression is common in patients with advanced cancer; however, it is not often recognized and therefore not treated. The aims of this study were to examine the prevalence of the use of antidepressants (ADs) in an international cross-sectional study sample and to identify sociodemographic and medical variables associated with their use. METHODS: The study was conducted in patients with advanced cancer from 17 centres across eight countries. Healthcare professionals registered patient and disease-related characteristics. A dichotomous score (no/yes) was used to assess the use of ADs other than as adjuvant for pain. Self-report questionnaires from patients were used for the assessment of functioning and symptom intensity. RESULTS: Of 1051 patient records with complete data on ADs, 1048 were included (M:540/F:508, mean age 62 years, standard deviation [SD] 12). The majority were inpatients, and 85% had metastatic disease. The prevalence of AD use was 14%. Multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that younger age (odds ratio [OR] 2.46; confidence interval [CI] 1.32-4.55), female gender (OR 1.59; CI 1.09-2.33), current medication for pain (OR 2.68; CI 1.65-4.33) and presence of three or more co-morbidities (OR 4.74; CI 2.27-9.91) were associated with AD use for reasons other than pain. Disease-related variables (diagnoses, stage, Karnofsky Performance Status and survival) were not associated with the use of ADs. CONCLUSIONS: Female gender, younger age, analgesic use and multiple co-morbidities were associated with the use of ADs. However, information is still limited on which variables guide physicians in prescribing AD medication. Further longitudinal studies including details on psychiatric and medication history are needed to improve the identification of patients in need of ADs.

Comparisons of patient and physician assessment of pain-related domains in cancer pain classification: results from a large international multicenter study.

UNLABELLED: The aim of the present study is to compare physician clinical assessment with patient-rated evaluations in the classification of cancer pain patients into groups with different pain levels, according to the presence of incident/breakthrough pain, neuropathic pain, and psychological distress. Average pain in the previous 24 hours was used as the dependent variable in multivariate linear regression models, and incident/breakthrough pain, neuropathic pain, and psychological distress were tested as regressors; in the assessment of regressors, physicians used the Edmonton Classification System for Cancer Pain, whereas patients used structured self-assessment questionnaires. The amount of variability in pain intensity scores explained by the 2 sets of regressors, physician and patient rated, was compared using R(2) values. When tested in 2 separate models, patient ratings explained 20.3% of variability (95% confidence interval [CI] = 15.2-25.3%), whereas physician ratings explained 6.1% (95% CI = 2.2-9.8%). The higher discriminative capability of patient ratings was still maintained when both regressor sets were introduced in the same model, with R(2) indices of 17.6% (95% CI = 13.0-22.2%) for patient ratings vs 3.4% (95% CI = .9-5.9%) for physician ratings. Patients' self-assessment of subjective symptoms should be integrated in future cancer pain classification systems. PERSPECTIVE: Our results indicate that patient-structured assessment of incident/breakthrough pain, neuropathic pain, and psychological distress significantly contributes to the discrimination of cancer patients with different pain levels. The integration of patient self-assessment tools with more objective clinician assessments can improve the classification of cancer pain.

The validity of average 8-h pain intensity assessment in cancer patients.

Aim of this study was to validate the use of subjective average pain assessment over an 8-h time period to evaluate cancer pain intensity. A sample of 95 consecutive cancer inpatients were asked to score on 0-10 numerical scales the intensity of their pain at hourly intervals, and then, at the 8th hour, to rate their average pain intensity over the last 8h. Agreement between the average of the 8 hourly measures (8hA) and the single patient-rated average (PA8h) was examined with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and the absolute difference (AD) between the two measurements. Associations between AD, gender, age older than 70, somatic pain, visceral pain, neuropathic pain, pain on movement and the presence of pain exacerbations during the 8-h period, were also examined. Average pain intensity scores were very similar with the two measurement schedules: 3.4 for 8hA and 3.7 for PA8h, with a median AD of 0.44 points. Only six patients (6.3%) showed ADs higher than 2 points. Also the ICC (0.85) showed a substantial agreement between the two schedules. Among the examined variables, gender, age over 70years and presence of pain exacerbations showed a significant association with the agreement level. Overall, our results support the validity of a subjective average pain measurement over 8-h period in cancer patients.

Edmonton symptom assessment scale: Italian validation in two palliative care settings.

In the palliative care setting, the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) was developed for use in daily symptom assessment of palliative care patients. ESAS considers the presence and severity of nine symptoms common in cancer patients: pain, tiredness, nausea, depression, anxiety, drowsiness, appetite, well-being and shortness of breath plus an optional tenth symptom, which can be added by the patient. The aim of this study was to validate the Italian version of ESAS and to evaluate an easy quality of life monitoring system that uses a patient's self-rating symptom assessment in two different palliative care settings: in-patients and home patients. Eighty-three in-patients and 158 home care patients were enrolled. In the latter group, the Italian validated version of the Symptom Distress Scale (SDS) was also administered at the admission of the patients. The two groups of patients have similar median survival, demographic and clinical characteristics, symptom prevalence and overall distress score at baseline. ESAS shows a good concurrent validity with respect to SDS. The correlation between the physical items of ESAS and SDS was shown to be higher than the correlation between the psychological items. The association of ESAS scores and performance status (PS) showed a trend: the higher the symptom score was, the worse was the PS level. Test-retest evaluation, applied in the in-patient group, showed good agreement for depression, well-being and overall distress and a moderate agreement for all the other items. In conclusion, ESAS can be considered a valid, reliable and feasible instrument for physical symptom assessment in routine "palliative care" clinical practice with a potentially different responsiveness in different situations or care settings.

Opioid purchases and expenditure in nine western European countries: 'are we killing off morphine?'.

BACKGROUND: In clinical practice the major role of opioid drugs is the management of malignant and nonmalignant pain. The primary aim of this study is to evaluate the trend in sales of four opioid analgesic drugs (codeine, tramadol, morphine, fentanyl), from wholesalers to community pharmacies, as an indicator of opioid consumption in nine European countries in 2001, 2002 and 2003. Secondary aims are to compare: (a) the amount of each drug purchased by different countries in 2003; (b) the average price for each drug in the different countries in 2003; and (c) the total expenditure for each opioid from 2001 to 2003. METHODS: Data from the Statistical Report on drugs purchased by pharmacies was supplied by IMS Health, an internationally accepted information provider for the pharmaceutical and health care industries. FINDING: In the period 2001 2003, while the percentage increase of purchases of fentanyl and tramadol was considerable, that of morphine was the lowest in most of the nine countries. The largest consumer of codeine was the UK and of tramadol was Belgium. The consumption of morphine was the lowest reported in all the countries together and was three times lower than that of transdermal fentanyl. There was a high variability in the costs of the opioids among the different countries. In 2003, the total expenditure for fentanyl reached the highest total expenditure [corrected] followed by codeine. Morphine presents the lowest expenditure in all nine countries and over all three years. INTERPRETATION: These results open up many questions. What factors influence opioid purchasing and costs in these European countries? It would be interesting to have the answers from those people who know the actual situation in the individual countries.

Cancer pain assessment in clinical trials. A review of the literature (1999-2002).

The aim of this review was to evaluate the methods of pain measurement in controlled clinical trials in oncology published between 1999 and 2002. An electronic literature search strategy was used according to established criteria applied to the Medline database and PubMed search engine. Articles were selected to include only studies that had chronic cancer pain as the primary or secondary objective of a controlled clinical trial. A specific evaluation scheme was used to examine how pain measurement methods were chosen and implemented in the study procedures. The search strategy identified 613 articles, and 68 were selected for evaluation. Most articles (69%) chose unidimensional pain measurement tools, such as visual analogue scales, numerical rating scales and verbal rating scales, whereas others used questionnaires. The implementation of the pain assessment method was problematic in many studies, especially as far as time frame of pain assessment (70%), administration modalities (46%), and use of non-validated measurement methods (10%). Design of study and data analysis were often unclear about the definition of pain outcome measure (40%), patient compliance with pain assessment (98%), and impact of missing data (56%). Statistical techniques were seldom appropriate to the type of data collected and often inadequate to describe the pain variable under study. It is clear from this review that most authors were aware of the need of valid pain measurement tools to be used in clinical trials. However, too often these tools were not appropriately used in the trial, or at least their use was not described with sufficient accuracy in the trial methods.

A Wireless Health Outcomes Monitoring System (WHOMS): development and field testing with cancer patients using mobile phones.

BACKGROUND: Health-Related Quality of Life assessment is widely used in clinical research, but rarely in clinical practice. Barriers including practical difficulties administering printed questionnaires have limited their use. Telehealth technology could reduce these barriers and encourage better doctor-patient interaction regarding patient symptoms and quality-of-life monitoring. The aim of this study was to develop a new system for transmitting patients' self-reported outcomes using mobile phones or the internet, and to test whether patients can and will use the system via a mobile phone. METHODS: We have developed a prototype of a Wireless Health Outcomes Monitoring System, which allows structured questionnaires to be sent to the patient by their medical management team. The patients' answers are directly sent to an authorised website immediately accessible by the medical team, and are displayed in a graphic format that highlights the patient's state of health. In the present study, 97 cancer inpatients were asked to complete a ten-item questionnaire. The questionnaire was delivered by display on a mobile phone, and was answered by the patients using the mobile phone keypad. RESULTS: Of the 97 patients, 56 (58%) attempted the questionnaire, and all of these 56 completed it. Only 6% of the total number of questions were left unanswered by patients. Forty-one (42%) patients refused to participate, mostly due to their lack of familiarity with mobile phone use. Compared with those who completed the questionnaire, patients who refused to participate were older, had fewer years of education and were less familiar with new communications technology (mobile phone calls, mobile phone SMS, internet, email). CONCLUSION: More than half of the patients self-completed the questionnaire using the mobile phone. This proportion may increase with the use of multichannel communications which can be incorporated into the system. The proportion may also increase if the patient's partner and/or family were able to assist the patient with using the technology. These preliminary results encourage further studies to identify specific diseases or circumstances where this system could be useful in patients' distance monitoring. Such a system is likely to detect patient suffering earlier, and to activate a well-timed intervention.

Cancer patient compliance in the self-administration of a pain assessment tool.

Accurate pain assessment is considered essential for effective management of cancer pain. The aim of this study was to evaluate the compliance of hospitalized patients with chronic cancer pain, referred to an inpatient palliative care consultation service, with self-assessment of pain intensity by means of a daily pain form. The form was distributed daily by the pain consult nurse and required three daily pain intensity measurements on 0 to 10 numerical scales, separately for pain at rest and pain on movement. Of 174 consecutive patients, 106 (61%) participated in the study and were followed up for a median of 10.6 days (range 1-32 days). Compliance was defined as the number of assessment forms completed over the number of evaluation days available for each patient. Mean compliance was 58%. The main reasons for not completing the form were related to subjective psychological variables (44%), physical distress (26%), and absence of pain (16%). Lack of understanding of the method was reported as the main reason for non-compliance by only 1% of patients.

Candidates for liver transplantation for cancer: physical, psychological, and social conditions.

BACKGROUND: There is little knowledge of the psychological and social conditions of candidates for liver transplantation and the meaning that these patients attribute to those conditions. METHODS: The research has been conducted with quantitative and qualitative methods. For the quantitative study, 80 patients were assessed with four evaluation instruments: the Interdisciplinary Group for Cancer Care Evaluation in Italy (GIVIO) questionnaire for quality of life, the Needs Evaluation Questionnaire (NEQ) for psychosocial needs, the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) personality test, and a questionnaire for the family's reactions to the illness. The qualitative evaluation was conducted to better understand the meaning of the transplantation as expressed by the patients, the integration of the new organ, and the symbolic relationship with the donor with particular attention to the different levels of patients' awareness. RESULTS: The quantitative evaluation showed a good level of quality of life assessed by GIVIO and a low prevalence in the personality disorder scales detected by the MMPI. The patients' needs assessed by NEQ showed a high need of information about the future conditions (77%) followed by the need for more explanation of examinations (49%) and treatments (50%). The qualitative study identified and analyzed two opposite groups of five patients each: those who did not recognize and did not express any emotional experience and those who recognized and expressed a particularly intense emotional experience. CONCLUSION: The psychosocial condition of transplant candidates with liver cancer is characterized by an impact that is more psychological than physical. The qualitative analysis performed allows the hypothesis that the patient's level of awareness is an important indicator to predict the type of adaptation after transplantation.