Pharmacological treatment of cancer pain and opioid induced nausea and vomiting: online survey and comparison with current guidelines.

PURPOSE: We assumed that in Palliative Care, even in common clinical situations, the choice of drugs differs substantially between physicians. Therefore, we assessed the practice of pharmaceutical treatment choices of physicians for cancer pain and opioid-induced nausea and vomiting (OINV) and the rationale for their choices. METHODS: An online survey was conducted with physicians covering the following domains: i) Cancer pain therapy: non-opioids in addition to opioids: choice of drug ii) prevention of OINV: choice of drug and mode of application. Current guidelines concerning cancer pain therapy and prevention of OINV were compared. RESULTS: Two-hundred-forty European physicians responded to our survey. i) Use of non-opioids in addition to opioids for the treatment of cancer pain: Only 1.3% (n = 3) of respondents never used an additional non-opioid. Others mostly used: dipyrone/metamizole (49.2%, n = 118), paracetamol/acetaminophen (34.2%, n = 82), ibuprofen / other NSAIDs (11.3%, n = 27), specific Cox2-inhibitors (2.1%, n = 5), Aspirin (0.4%, n = 1), no answer (2.9%, n = 7). ii) Antiemetics to prevent OINV: The drugs of choice were metoclopramide (58.3%, n = 140), haloperidol (26.3%, n = 63), 5-HT3 antagonists (9.6%, n = 23), antihistamines (1.3%, n = 3) and other (2.9%, n = 7); no answer (1.7%, n = 4). Most respondents prescribed the substances on-demand (59.6%, n = 143) while others (36.3%, n = 87) provided them as around the clock medication. Over both domains, most physicians answered that their choices were not based on solid evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Guidelines were inconsistent regarding if and what non-opioid to use for cancer pain and recommend anti-dopaminergic drugs for prevention or treatment of OINV. CONCLUSIONS: Physician's practice in palliative care for the treatment of cancer pain and OINV differed substantially. Respondents expressed the lack of high-quality evidence- based information from RCTs. We call for evidence from methodologically high-quality RCTs to be available to inform physicians about the benefits and harms of pharmacological treatments for common symptoms in palliative care.

Interventions that may increase control at the end of life in persons with dementia: the cross-cultural CONT-END acceptability study protocol and pilot-testing.

BACKGROUND: Interventions such as advance care planning (ACP), technology, or access to euthanasia may increase the sense of control over the end of life. In people with advanced dementia, the loss of cognitive and physical function limits the ability to control care. To date, little is known about the acceptability of these interventions from the perspective of persons with dementia and others involved. This study will examine the cross-cultural acceptability, and factors associated with acceptability, of four end-of-life interventions in dementia which contain an element of striving for control. Also, we report on the development and pilot testing of animation video vignettes that explain the interventions in a standardized manner. METHODS: Cross-sectional mixed-methods vignette study. We assess acceptability of two ACP approaches, technology use at the end of life and euthanasia in persons with dementia, their family caregivers and physicians in six countries (Netherlands, Japan, Israel, USA, Germany, Switzerland). We aim to include 80 participants per country, 50 physicians, 15 persons with dementia, and 15 family caregivers. After viewing each animation video, participants are interviewed about acceptability of the intervention. We will examine differences in acceptability between group and country and explore other potentially associated factors including variables indicating life view, personality, view on dementia and demographics. In the pilot study, participants commented on the understandability and clarity of the vignettes and instruments. Based on their feedback, the scripts of the animation videos were clarified, simplified and adapted to being less slanted in a specific direction. DISCUSSION: In the pilot study, the persons with dementia, their family caregivers and other older adults found the adapted animation videos and instruments understandable, acceptable, feasible, and not burdensome. The CONT-END acceptability study will provide insight into cross-cultural acceptability of interventions in dementia care from the perspective of important stakeholders. This can help to better align interventions with preferences. The study will also result in a more fundamental understanding as to how and when having control at the end of life in dementia is perceived as beneficial or perhaps harmful. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The CONT-END acceptability study was originally registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NL7985) at 31 August, 2019, and can be found on the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for advanced cancer pain inpatients in specialist palliative care-a blinded, randomized, sham-controlled pilot cross-over trial.

PURPOSE: Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a treatment option for cancer pain, but the evidence is inconclusive. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TENS. METHODS: A blinded, randomized, sham-controlled pilot cross-over trial (NCT02655289) was conducted on an inpatient specialist palliative care ward. We included adult inpatients with cancer pain ≥ 3 on an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS). Intensity-modulated high TENS (IMT) was compared with placebo TENS (PBT). Patients used both modes according to their preferred application scheme during 24 h with a 24-h washout phase. The primary outcome was change in average pain intensity on the NRS during the preceding 24 h. Responders were patients with at least a "slight improvement." RESULTS: Of 632 patients screened, 25 were randomized (sequence IMT-PBT = 13 and PBT-IMT = 12). Finally, 11 patients in IMT-PBT and 9 in PBT-IMT completed the study (N = 20). The primary outcome did not differ between groups (IMT minus PBT: - 0.2, 95% confidence interval - 0.9 to 0.6). However, responder rates were higher in IMT (17/20 [85%] vs. 10/20 [50%], p = 0.0428). Two patients experienced an uncomfortable feeling caused by the current, one after IMT and one after PBT. Seven patients (35%) desired a TENS prescription. Women and patients with incident pain were most likely to benefit from TENS. CONCLUSION: TENS was safe, but IMT was unlikely to offer more analgesic effects than PBT. Even though many patients desired a TENS prescription, 50% still reported at least "slight pain relief" from PBT. Differences for gender and incident pain aspects demand future trials.

Severe symptoms and very low quality-of-life among outpatients newly diagnosed with advanced cancer: data from a multicenter cohort study.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to identify symptoms of severe intensity or very low scores for quality of life (QoL) domains in newly diagnosed outpatients with advanced cancer. METHODS: This multicenter cohort study from a state-wide palliative care network included adult outpatients with advanced cancer diagnosed within the preceding 8 weeks from four comprehensive cancer centers (DRKS00006162, registered on 19 May 2014). We used the Palliative Outcome Scale (POS), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL Questionnaire-C30. For each questionnaire, cut-off scores defined symptoms and QoL domains that were considered "severe" or "very low." RESULTS: Of 3155 patients screened, 481/592 (81.3%) were analyzed (mean age 62.4; women n = 245, 50.9%). We identified 324/481 (67.4%) patients experiencing at least one severe symptom or a very low QoL domain (median 2; range 0 to 16). Role functioning (n = 180, 37.4%), fatigue (n = 162, 33.7%), and social functioning (n = 126, 26.2%) were most commonly affected. QoL was very low in 89 patients (18.5%). Women experienced more anxiety symptoms, fatigue, and had lower POS scores. Patients often mentioned physical symptoms and fears of adverse events resulting from disease-modifying therapies (e.g., chemotherapy) as most relevant problems. CONCLUSIONS: Already within the first 8 weeks after diagnosis, the majority of patients reported at least one severe symptom or a very low QoL domain. Gender differences were evident. The findings illustrate the value of early routine assessment of patient burden and the development of multi-professional and interdisciplinary palliative care.

Metamizole/dipyrone for the relief of cancer pain: A systematic review and evidence-based recommendations for clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Dipyrone (metamizole) is one of the most widely used non-opioid analgesics for the treatment of cancer pain. AIM: Because evidence-based recommendations are not yet available, a systematic review was conducted for the German Guideline Program in Oncology to provide recommendations for the use of dipyrone in cancer pain. DESIGN: First, a systematic review for clinical trials assessing dipyrone in adult patients with cancer pain was conducted. Endpoints were pain intensity, opioid-sparing effects, safety, and quality of life. DATA SOURCES: The search was performed in MedLine, Embase (via Ovid), and the Cochrane Library (1948-2013) and additional hand search was conducted. Finally, recommendations were developed and agreed in a formal structured consensus process by 53 representatives of scientific medical societies and 49 experts. RESULTS: Of 177 retrieved studies, 4 could be included (3 randomized controlled trials and 1 cohort study, n = 252 patients): dipyrone significantly decreased pain intensity compared to placebo, even if low doses (1.5-2 g/day) were used. Higher doses (3 × 2 g/day) were more effective than low doses (3 × 1 g/day), but equally effective as 60 mg oral morphine/day. Pain reduction of dipyrone and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs did not differ significantly. Compared to placebo, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and morphine, the incidence of adverse effects was not increased. CONCLUSION: Dipyrone can be recommended for the treatment of cancer pain as an alternative to other non-opioids either alone or in combination with opioids. It can be preferred over non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs due to the presumably favorable side effect profile in long-term use, but comparative studies are not available for long-term use.

Of apples and oranges: Lessons learned from the preparation of research protocols for systematic reviews exploring the effectiveness of Specialist Palliative Care.

BACKGROUND: Agreed terminology used in systematic reviews of the effectiveness of specialist palliative care ((S)PC)) is required to ensure consistency and usability and to help guide future similar reviews and the design of clinical trials. During the preparation of protocols for two separate systematic reviews that aimed to assess the effectiveness of SPC, two international research groups collaborated to ensure a high degree of methodological consensus and clarity between reviews. During the collaboration, it became evident that close attention is needed to (i) avoid ambiguity in the definition of advanced illness, (ii) capture the specialist expertise and prerequisites for SPC interventions, and (iii) the multi-professional and multi-dimensional nature of PC. Also, (iv) the exclusion of relevant studies or (v) impracticality of meta-analyses of the obtained data must be avoided. The aim of this article is to present the core issues of the discussion to help future research groups to easily identify potential pitfalls and methodologic necessities. CORE ISSUE DISCUSSION: Core issues that arose from the discussion are presented along the research questions according to the PICO process: Population (P): Authors should refer to existing definitions of PC to ensure that, even if the review aims to investigate specific patients (e.g. cancer patients), it is important to make clear that PC is applicable for all life-limiting diseases and not limited to end-of-life or cancer. Intervention (I): PC is a core responsibility of all disciplines (general PC). In contrast, SPC demands further training and expertise. Therefore, core tenets of SPC interventions are that they are (i) multi-professional and (ii) aim at the multi-dimensional nature of suffering. Outcome (O): The main goal of PC is multi-dimensional (quality of life, suffering or distress). Yet, meta-analysis may be complex to conduct due to the heterogeneity of the multi-dimensional outcomes. Therefore, the assessment of uni-dimensional measures such as pain can also provide clinically relevant information that is easier to obtain. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Recommendations for future systematic reviews and clinical trials include: (i) Appraise the experience of other research groups who have produced similar systematic reviews or clinical trials. (ii) Include studies that meet the multi-professional and multi-dimensional nature of PC and the specialization requirements for SPC. (iii) Thoroughly weigh relevance and practicability of the primary outcome. Multi-dimensional tools such as quality-of-life questionnaires assess the different dimensions of suffering (the true scope of PC), but uni-dimensional measures such as pain are easier to assess in meta-analyses.

Early Palliative Care-Health services research and implementation of sustainable changes: the study protocol of the EVI project.

BACKGROUND: International medical organizations such as the American Society of Medical Oncology recommend early palliative care as the "gold standard" for palliative care in patients with advanced cancer. Nevertheless, even in Comprehensive Cancer Centers, early palliative care is not yet routine practice. The main goal of the EVI project is to evaluate whether early palliative care can be implemented-in the sense of "putting evidence into practice"-into the everyday clinical practice of Comprehensive Cancer Centers. In addition, we are interested in (1) describing the type of support that patients would like from palliative care, (2) gaining information about the effect of palliative care on patients' quality of life, and (3) understanding the economic burden of palliative care on patients and their families. METHODS/DESIGN: The EVI project is a multi-center, prospective cohort study with a sequential control group design. The study is a project of the Palliative Care Center of Excellence (KOMPACT) in Baden-Württemberg, Germany, which was recently established to combine the expertise of five academic, specialist palliative care departments. The study is divided into two phases: preliminary phase (months 1-9) and main study phase (months 10-18). In each of all five participating academic Comprehensive Cancer Centers, an experienced palliative care physician will be hired for 18 months. During the preliminary phase, the physician will be allowed time to establish the necessary structures for early palliative care within the Comprehensive Cancer Center. In the main study phase, patients with metastatic cancer will be offered a consultation with the palliative care physician within eight weeks of diagnosis. After the initial consultation, follow-up consultations will be offered as needed. The study is built upon a convergent parallel design. In the quantitative arm, patients will be surveyed in both the preliminary and main study phase at three points in time (baseline, 12 weeks, 24 weeks). Standardized questionnaires will be used to measure patients' quality of life, symptom burden and mood. Using interviews with palliative care physicians, oncologists, department heads, patients and their caregivers, the qualitative arm will explore (1) what factors encourage and hinder the early integration of palliative care into standard oncology care, (2) what support patients and their caregivers would like from palliative care, and (3) what effect palliative care has on the economic disease burden of patients and their families. DISCUSSION: The study proposed is meant to serve as a catalyzer. Local palliative care teams should be put in position to routinely cooperate with the primary treating department at their respective cancer center. The long-term goal of this project is to create sustainable improvements in the care of patients with incurable cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: DRKS00006162 ; date of registration: 19/05/2014.

Definitions and outcome measures of clinical trials regarding opioid-induced constipation: a systematic review.

Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is a frequent symptom in patients treated with opioids and impacts the patients' quality of life. However, there is no generally accepted definition for OIC. The aims of this study were to identify definitions for OIC in clinical trials and Cochrane Reviews and to compile assessment tools and outcome measures that were used in clinical trials. In a systematic review, 5 databases (MEDLINE, PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and EMBASE) were searched to identify clinical trials assessing OIC in adult patients or healthy volunteers. Studies published between 1993 and August 2013 were included. A total of 1488 studies were retrieved and 47 publications were included in the analysis. A minority of the publications (n=16, 34%) provided a clear definition for OIC. The definitions were highly variable and the present or recent history of opioid therapy was frequently (n=6, 38%) not included in these definitions. Of 46 clinical trials, 17 (37%) relied exclusively on objective measures such as bowel movement frequency, whereas another 17 studies additionally included patient-reported outcome measures such as, "feeling of incomplete bowel evacuation." Few trials (n=7, 15%) assessed the patient-reported global burden of OIC. Standard definitions and outcome measures are necessary (i) for consistency in OIC diagnosis in clinical practice and clinical trials; and (ii) to assure comparability of trial findings (eg, in meta-analyses). An OIC definition and outcome measures are proposed.

Dying in cancer centers: do the circumstances allow for a dignified death?

BACKGROUND: Prior research has shown that hospitals are often ill-prepared to provide care for dying patients. This study assessed whether the circumstances for dying on cancer center wards allow for a dignified death. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, the authors surveyed physicians and nurses in 16 hospitals belonging to 10 cancer centers in Baden-Wuerttemberg, Germany. A revised questionnaire from a previous study was used, addressing the following topics regarding end-of-life care: structural conditions (ie, rooms, staff), education/training, working environment, family/caregivers, medical treatment, communication with patients, and dignified death. RESULTS: In total, 1131 surveys (response rate = 50%) were returned. Half of the participants indicated that they rarely have enough time to care for dying patients, and 55% found the rooms available for dying patients unsatisfactory. Only 19% of respondents felt that they had been well-prepared to care for the dying (physicians = 6%). Palliative care staff reported much better conditions for the dying than staff from other wards (95% of palliative care staff indicated that patients die in dignity on their ward). Generally, physicians perceived the circumstances much more positively than nurses, especially regarding communication and life-prolonging measures. Overall, 57% of respondents believed that patients could die with dignity on their ward. CONCLUSIONS: Only about half of the respondents perceived that a dignified death is possible on their ward. We recommend that cancer centers invest more in staffing, adequate rooms for dying patients, training in end-of-life care, advance-care planning standards, and the early integration of specialist palliative care services.

'Curative' treatments and palliative care: the lack of consensus.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: A survey was performed to assess whether authors who report about palliative treatments or palliative care share a common understanding of 'curative' treatments. RECENT FINDINGS: Of 107 authors from publications about cancer who used both 'palliative' and 'curative' in the same abstract, 42 (39%) responded. The majority (n=24; 57%) understood 'curative' treatments as 'aimed at complete absence of disease for the rest of life', but 43% (n=18) did not share this view. For example, 19% (n=7) stated that the term describes cancer-directed therapy for prolongation of life or even regardless of the aspired goal. SUMMARY: In the care for cancer patients, unambiguous terminology is essential for the participatory and interdisciplinary decision-making process. Clinicians, researchers and policy makers should be aware of the difference between curative and disease-modifying therapies. Otherwise, this may be a major source of misunderstandings as disease-modifying therapy may be indicated in the incurable stages of the disease as well. In these palliative situations, it is essential to identify the realistic aim(s) of the therapy: prolongation of life, alleviation of suffering or both.

Palliative sedation - revised recommendations.

Palliative sedation is defined as the monitored use of medications intended to induce a state of decreased or absent awareness (unconsciousness) to relieve the burden of otherwise intractable suffering in a manner ethically acceptable to the patient, their family, and healthcare providers. In Switzerland, the prevalence of continuous deep sedation until death increased from 4.7% in 2001 to 17.5% of all deceased in 2013, depending on the research method used and on regional variations. Yet, these numbers may be overestimated due to a lack of understanding of the term "continuous deep sedation" by for example respondents of the questionnaire-based study. Inadequately trained and inexperienced healthcare professionals may incorrectly or inappropriately perform palliative sedation due to uncertainties regarding its definitions and practice. Therefore, the expert members of the Bigorio group and the authors of this manuscript believe that national recommendations should be published and made available to healthcare professionals to provide practical, terminological, and ethical guidance. The Bigorio group is the working group of the Swiss Palliative Care Society whose task is to publish clinical recommendations at a national level in Switzerland. These recommendations aim to provide guidance on the most critical questions and issues related to palliative sedation. The Swiss Society of Palliative Care (palliative.ch) mandated a writing board comprising four clinical experts (three physicians and one ethicist) and two national academic experts to revise the 2005 Bigorio guidelines. A first draft was created based on a narrative literature review, which was internally reviewed by five academic institutions (Lausanne, Geneva, Bern, Zürich, and Basel) and the heads of all working groups of the Swiss Society of Palliative Care before finalising the guidelines. The following themes are discussed regarding palliative sedation: (a) definitions and clinical aspects, (b) the decision-making process, (c) communication with patients and families, (d) patient monitoring, (e) pharmacological approaches, and (f) ethical and controversial issues. Palliative sedation must be practised with clinical and ethical accuracy and competence to avoid harm and ethically questionable use. Specialist palliative care teams should be consulted before initiating palliative sedation to avoid overlooking other potential treatment options for the patient's symptoms and suffering.

Use of metamizole and other non-opioid analgesics in Switzerland between 2014 and 2019: an observational study using a large health insurance claims database.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate claims patterns for metamizole and other non-opioid analgesics in Switzerland. To characterise users of these non-opioid analgesics regarding sex, age, comedications and canton of residence. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective descriptive study using administrative claims data of outpatient prescribed non-opioid analgesics of the Swiss health insurance company Helsana between January 2014 and December 2019. First, we evaluated the number of claims and defined daily doses  per year of metamizole, ibuprofen, diclofenac and paracetamol in adults aged 18 years or over. Second, we characterised new users of these non-opioid analgesics in terms of sex, age, claimed comedications and canton of residence. RESULTS: From 2014 to 2019, among the investigated non-opioid analgesics, metamizole showed the highest increase in claims (+9545 claims, +50%) and defined daily doses (+86,869 defined daily doses, +84%) per 100,000 adults. Metamizole users had the highest median age (62 years [IQR: 44-77]) compared to ibuprofen (47 years [IQR: 33-62]), diclofenac (57 years [IQR: 43-71]) and paracetamol (58 years [IQR: 39-75]) users. Metamizole users also more frequently claimed proton pump inhibitors, anticoagulants, platelet aggregation inhibitors and antihypertensive drugs than users of other non-opioid analgesics. While metamizole was most frequently claimed in German-speaking regions of Switzerland, ibuprofen and paracetamol were most frequently claimed in the French-speaking regions and diclofenac in German- and Italian-speaking regions. CONCLUSION: In Switzerland, metamizole was increasingly claimed between 2014 and 2019. Metamizole was most frequently claimed by older adults and patients with comedications suggestive of underlying conditions, which can be worsened or caused by use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. The lack of studies regarding the effectiveness and safety of metamizole in this population warrants further investigation.

Early palliative care for patients with advanced cancer: how to make it work?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: As the benefit of early palliative care for the quality of life of patients with advanced cancer is currently receiving widespread recognition, cancer specialists increasingly inquire about the practical implications of this concept. This publication presents the available information about how to provide early palliative care for patients with advanced cancer. RECENT FINDINGS: Oncologists and other cancer specialists provide general palliative care from the time of diagnosis of incurable cancer together with the patients' family doctors. This includes basic assessment of symptoms and distress, their initial management as well as sensitive communication with the patient, including advance care planning and end-of-life issues and hope. The additional integration of a specialized palliative care team early in the care trajectory has been found to be beneficial for quality of life and survival. This concept is known as 'early palliative care' or 'early integration' and has become recommended by institutions such as the American Society of Clinical Oncology. SUMMARY: Palliative care is warranted from the time of diagnosis of incurable cancer. From this early stage, palliative care consists of general palliative care provided by cancer specialists and family doctors and additional support of a specialized palliative care program. Guidance from different guidelines is presented alongside practical recommendations derived from our experience with an early palliative care program for comprehensive cancer care over the last 7 years.

Cancer pain management: what's new?

Decades after the publication of the World Health Organization's analgesic ladder, cancer pain is still a major cause of suffering for patients with cancer and affects millions of people worldwide. Owing to the increasing incidence of cancer, cancer-related pain is a major public health problem worldwide. Unfortunately, current research revealed that available options for the successful treatment of cancer pain is still massively underutilized by physicians, and many patients suffer from insufficiently controlled pain despite available treatment options. This review aims to present a concise update about new data or treatment recommendations from the field of cancer pain management. Therefore, information from guidelines, systematic reviews, and original articles that were published in the year 2012 are presented. Specifically, the publication covers information on tapentadol, fixed oxycodone/naloxone combinations, rapid onset fentanyl, nabiximols, ketamine, denusomab, and specialized psychosocial interventions including early palliative care.

Effect of opioids for breathlessness in heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: For the treatment of breathlessness in heart failure (HF), most textbooks advocate the use of opioids. Yet, meta-analyses are lacking. METHODS: A systematic review was performed for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing effects of opioids on breathlessness (primary outcome) in patients with HF. Key secondary outcomes were quality of life (QoL), mortality and adverse effects. Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and Embase were searched in July 2021. Risk of bias (RoB) and certainty of evidence were assessed by the Cochrane RoB 2 Tool and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria, respectively. The random-effects model was used as primary analysis in all meta-analyses. RESULTS: After removal of duplicates, 1180 records were screened. We identified eight RCTs with 271 randomised patients. Seven RCTs could be included in the meta-analysis for the primary endpoint breathlessness with a standardised mean difference of 0.03 (95% CI -0.21 to 0.28). No study found statistically significant differences between the intervention and placebo. Several key secondary outcomes favoured placebo: risk ratio of 3.13 (95% CI 0.70 to 14.07) for nausea, 4.29 (95% CI 1.15 to 16.01) for vomiting, 4.77 (95% CI 1.98 to 11.53) for constipation and 4.42 (95% CI 0.79 to 24.87) for study withdrawal. All meta-analyses revealed low heterogeneity (I2 in all these meta-analyses was <8%). CONCLUSION: Opioids for treating breathlessness in HF are questionable and may only be the very last option if other options have failed or in case of an emergency. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021252201.

Palliative care consultation service and palliative care unit: why do we need both?

BACKGROUND: Palliative care (PC) infrastructure has developed differently around the globe. Whereas some institutions consider the palliative care unit (PCU) a valuable component, others report that the sole provision of a state-of-the art palliative care consultation service (PCCS) suffices to adequately care for the severely ill and dying. OBJECTIVE: To aid institutional planning, this study aimed at gathering patient data to distinguish assignments of a concomitantly run PCU and PCCS at a large hospital and academic medical center. METHODS: Demographics, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, symptom/problem burden, discharge modality, and team satisfaction with care for all 601 PCU and 851 PCCS patients treated in 2009 and 2010 were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: Patients admitted to the PCU versus those consulted by the PCCS: (a) had a significantly worse performance status (odds ratio [OR], 1.48); (b) were significantly more likely to suffer from severe symptoms and psychosocial problems (OR, 2.05), in particular concerning physical suffering and complexity of care; and (c) were significantly much more likely to die during hospital stay (OR, 11.03). For patients who were dying or in other challenging clinical situations (suffering from various severe symptoms), self-rated team satisfaction was significantly higher for the PCU than the PCCS. CONCLUSION: This study presents a direct comparison between patients in a PCU and a PCCS. Results strongly support the hypothesis that the coexistence of both institutions in one hospital contributes to the goal of ensuring optimal high-quality PC for patients in complex and challenging clinical situations.

Early palliative care for patients with metastatic cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: At present, clinicians and healthcare providers are increasingly urged to advance the provision of state-of-the-art palliative care for patients with incurable cancer. This review provides an overview about the recent findings and practical suggestions. RECENT FINDINGS: In the last decade, the awareness about the logistic and personal resources needed to meet the somatic and psychological needs of patients with progressive and life-threatening diseases has increased and in parallel, palliative care concepts and expertise have evolved substantially. Care concepts for patients with metastatic cancer emphasized the potential of interdisciplinary care. For example, in 2010, a randomized trial reported a benefit for patients with lung cancer who received early palliative care in addition to routine care. It is discussed that this was because of increased quality of life and detailed exploration of patient preferences. SUMMARY: Patients, families and physicians benefit from shared care concepts of oncology and specialized palliative care. Although this concept is already becoming increasingly implemented in tertiary (comprehensive cancer-) care settings, the potential of this approach should be explored for other clinical settings such as office-based oncology.

Practicability, safety, and efficacy of a "German model" for opioid conversion to oral levo-methadone.

INTRODUCTION: An algorithm to convert from any other opioid to oral levo-methadone was developed in Germany, the German model of levo-methadone conversion (GMLC). According to this GMLC, the pre-existing opioid is stopped, then titration of oral levo-methadone is initiated with a starting dose of 5 mg orally q 4 h (plus prn q 1 h). If necessary, levo-methadone dose is increased (pain) or decreased (side effects) by 30% q 4 h (plus prn q 1 h). After 72 h, the achieved single dose is maintained, but the dosing interval increases twofold to q 8 h (plus prn q 3 h). The aim of this study was to obtain information about the practicability, safety, and efficacy of the GMLC in clinical routine. METHODS: A retrospective, systematic chart review of levo-methadone conversions for the treatment of pain in inpatient palliative care was performed. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients were analyzed. The dosing interval was increased correctly after 72 h as demanded by the GMLC in 60% of patients. In 85% of the patients, opioid medication with levo-methadone could be maintained until the end of the inpatient stay. In three patients (6%), levo-methadone administration had to be stopped due to side effects. No serious adverse events could be detected during opioid rotation. Pain intensity was reduced significantly (p < 0.001) after conversion concerning mean (NRS 0.9; range 0-4) and maximum pain over the day (NRS 3.9; range 0-10). CONCLUSION: The presented study indicates that the GMLC provides a practical and reasonably safe approach to perform opioid rotation to levo-methadone in a palliative care setting.

Recommending early integration of palliative care - does it work?

BACKGROUND: In 2006, our comprehensive cancer center decided to implement early integration (EI) of palliative care (PC) by (a) literally adopting the WHO definition of PC into cancer care guidelines and (b) providing a PC consulting team (PCST) to provide EI on in- and outpatient wards. The experience with this approach was assessed to identify shortcomings. METHODS: A retrospective systematic chart analysis of a 2-year period was performed. RESULTS: A total of 862 patients were treated (May 2006-April 2008). Many patients consulted by the PCST for the first time were already in a reduced performance status (ECOG 3 & 4: 40%) or experiencing burdening symptoms (i.e., dyspnoea 27%). After the first year (period A; "getting started"), the overall prevalence of symptoms identified on first PC contact decreased from seven to three, (p < 0.001) as well as surrogate measures for advanced disease (i.e., frailty: from 63% to 33%; CI: [-36%; -23%], p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Surrogate measures (symptom burden, performance status) indicate that PC was integrated earlier in the course of the disease after a 1-year phase of "getting started" with EI. Yet, the WHO recommendation alone was too vague to successfully trigger EI of PC. Therefore, the authors advocate the provision of disease specific guidelines to institutionalize EI of PC. Such guidelines have been developed for 19 different malignancies and are presented separately.

Drug interactions in palliative care--it's more than cytochrome P450.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify the combination of substances with high potential for drug interactions in a palliative care setting and to provide concise recommendations for physicians. METHODS: We used a retrospective systematic chart analysis of 200 consecutive inpatients. The recently developed and internationally advocated classification system OpeRational ClAssification of Drug Interactions was applied using the national database of the Federal Union of German Associations of Pharmacists. Charts of patients with potential for severe DDIs were examined manually for clinical relevance. RESULTS: In 151 patients (75%) a total of 631 potential drug interactions were identified. Opioids (exception: methadone), non-opioids (exception: non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs), benzodiazepines, proton-pump inhibitors, laxatives, co-analgesics (exception: carbamazepine) and butylscopolamine were generally safe. High potential for drug interactions included combinations of scopolamine, neuroleptics, metoclopramide, antihistamines, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, (levo-) methadone, amitriptyline, carbamazepine and diuretics. The manual analyses of records from eight patients with risk for severe drug interactions provided no indicator for clinical relevance in these specific patients. Drug interactions attributed to the cytochrome pathway played a minor role (exception: carbamazepine). CONCLUSION: Most relevant drug interactions can be expected with: (i) drugs (inter-) acting via histamine, acetylcholine or dopamine receptors; and (ii) Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Even in last hours of life the combination of substances (e.g. anticholinergics) may produce relevant drug interactions (e.g. delirium). PERSPECTIVE: Data on the potential for drug-drug interactions in palliative case is extremely scarce, but drug interactions can be limited if a few facts are considered. A synopsis of the findings of these studies is presented as concise recommendation to minimize drug interactions.