Effectiveness of fentanyl buccal soluble film in cancer patients with inadequate breakthrough pain control.

BACKGROUND: Clinical evidence for the rapidity and effectiveness of fentanyl buccal soluble film (FBSF) in reducing pain intensity of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) remains inadequate. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of FBSF proportional to the around-the-clock (ATC) opioid regimens in rapidly relieving the intensity of BTcP episodes by determining the percentage of patients requiring further dose titration. METHODS: The study procedure included a dose-finding period followed by a 14-day observation period. Pain intensity was recorded with a Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at onset and 5, 10, 15, and 30 min after FBSF self-administration. Meaningful pain relief was defined as the final NRS score ≤ 3. Satisfaction survey was conducted for each patient after treatment using the Global Satisfaction Scale. RESULTS: A total of 63 BTcP episodes occurred in 30 cancer patients. Only one patient required rescue medication at first BTcP episode and then achieved meaningful pain relief after titrating FBSF by 200 µg. Most BTcP episodes relieved within 10 min. Of 63 BTcP episodes, 30 (47.6%), 46 (73.0%), and 53 (84.1%) relieved within 5, 10, and 15 min after FBSF administration. Only grade 1/2 adverse events were reported, including somnolence, malaise, and dizziness. Of the 63 BTcP episodes, 82.6% were rated as excellent/good satisfaction with FBSF. CONCLUSION: FBSF can be administrated "on demand" by cancer patients at the onset of BTcP, providing rapid analgesia by achieving meaningful pain relief within 10 min. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was retrospectively registered 24 December, 2021 at Clinicaltrial.gov (NCT05209906): https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05209906 .

The influence of ambient environmental factors on breakthrough Cancer pain: insights from remote health home monitoring and a proposed data analytic approach.

BACKGROUND: Breakthrough cancer pain (BTCP) is primarily managed at home and can stem from physical exertion and emotional distress triggers. Beyond these triggers, the impact of ambient environment on pain occurrence and intensity has not been investigated. This study explores the impact of environmental factors on the frequency and severity of breakthrough cancer pain (BTCP) in the home context from the perspective of patients with advanced cancer and their primary family caregiver. METHODS: A health monitoring system was deployed in the homes of patient and family caregiver dyads to collect self-reported pain events and contextual environmental data (light, temperature, humidity, barometric pressure, ambient noise.) Correlation analysis examined the relationship between environmental factors with: 1) individually reported pain episodes and 2) overall pain trends in a 24-hour time window. Machine learning models were developed to explore how environmental factors may predict BTCP episodes. RESULTS: Variability in correlation strength between environmental variables and pain reports among dyads was found. Light and noise show moderate association (r = 0.50-0.70) in 66% of total deployments. The strongest correlation for individual pain events involved barometric pressure (r = 0.90); for pain trends over 24-hours the strongest correlations involved humidity (r = 0.84) and barometric pressure (r = 0.83). Machine learning achieved 70% BTCP prediction accuracy. CONCLUSION: Our study provides insights into the role of ambient environmental factors in BTCP and offers novel opportunities to inform personalized pain management strategies, remotely support patients and their caregivers in self-symptom management. This research provides preliminary evidence of the impact of ambient environmental factors on BTCP in the home setting. We utilized real-world data and correlation analysis to provide an understanding of the relationship between environmental factors and cancer pain which may be helpful to others engaged in similar work.

A systematic review of qualitative research exploring patient and health professional perspectives of breakthrough cancer pain.

PURPOSE: Breakthrough cancer pain (BtCP) is a prevalent health issue which is difficult to manage. A plethora of quantitative research in this area exists. There is a paucity of research on the perspectives of health professionals and patients surrounding domains impacting effective treatment, including definitions of BtCP, treatment, and education opportunities. This review aims to identify and synthesize the extent of qualitative research exploring health professional and patient perspectives of BtCP. METHODS: A systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) approach was undertaken. The approach was registered with Prospero. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched for peer-reviewed literature published any date prior to May 19, 2022. Eligible sources must have considered health professional and/or patient perspectives of BtCP. A narrative synthesis approach was utilized. RESULTS: Three sources met the review criteria. One source explored nurse perspectives, while two sources explored patient perspectives. Study quality was moderate to high. Overlapping themes across the three studies included communication, defining BtCP, impact of BtCP, management of BtCP, perceptions of BtCP, analgesia and pain relief, and training and professional development. CONCLUSION: Given limited research investigating clinician and patient perspectives of BtCP, a rich understanding informed by exploratory qualitative methods around identification, best management strategies, professional development, and factors promoting and inhibiting best practice remains unclear. Further qualitative inquiry is warranted, and it is expected such research will inform BtCP clinical guidelines.

The Edmonton Classification System for Cancer Pain in Patients with Bone Metastasis: a descriptive cohort study.

PURPOSE: We describe the prevalence of the Edmonton Classification System for Cancer Pain (ECS-CP) features in patients with bone metastasis and cancer-induced bone pain (CIBP) and the relationship between ECS-CP features, pain intensity, and opioid consumption. METHODS: We assessed ECS-CP features and recoded pain mechanisms and opioid use in adult patients with bone metastasis. Validated measures were used to assess pain intensity, incident pain, psychological distress, addictive behavior, and cognition. RESULTS: Among 147 eligible patients, 95.2% completed the assessment. Mean participant age was 73.2 years, the majority female (52.1%) with breast cancer occurring most commonly (25.7%). One or more ECS-CP features were present in 96.4% and CIBP in 75.7% of patients. The median average and worst pain scores were 3 and 6, respectively. Neuropathic pain was the most prevalent pain mechanism (45.0%) and was associated with breakthrough pain frequency (p=0.014). Three-quarters had incident pain, which was strongly associated with a higher average and worst pain scores (3.5 and 7, p<0.001 for both), background oral morphine equivalent daily dose (26.7mg, p=0.005), and frequency of daily breakthrough analgesia (1.7 doses/day, p=0.007). Psychological distress (n=90, 64.3%) was associated with a significantly higher average pain score (4, p=0.009) and a slightly higher worst pain score (7, p=0.054). Addictive behaviour and cognitive dysfunction were relatively uncommon (18.6% and 12.9%, respectively). CONCLUSION: There is a need to promote standardized assessment and classification of pain syndromes such as CIBP. The ECS-CP may allow us to consider CIBP in a systematic manner and develop personalized pain interventions appropriate to the pain profile. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively registered in ANZCTR ACTRN12622000853741 (16/06/2022).

Automated mandatory bolus versus basal infusion for maintenance of epidural analgesia in labour.

BACKGROUND: Epidural analgesia is often used for pain relief during labour and childbirth, and involves administration of local anaesthetics (LA) into the epidural space resulting in sensory blockade of the abdomen, pelvis, and perineum. Epidural opioids are often co-administered to improve analgesia. Administration of epidural medications can be accomplished by basal infusion (BI) or automated mandatory bolus (AMB). With BI, medications are administered continuously, while AMB involves injecting medications at set time intervals. Patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) on top of AMB or BI enables patients to initiate additional boluses of epidural medications.  The superior method of delivering epidural medications would result in lower incidence of pain requiring anaesthesiologist intervention (breakthrough pain). Also, it should be associated with lower incidence of epidural-related adverse effects including caesarean delivery, instrumental delivery (use of forceps or vacuum devices), prolonged duration of labour analgesia, and LA consumption. However, clear evidence of the superiority of one technique over the other is lacking. Also, differences in the initiation of epidural analgesia such as combined spinal-epidural (CSE) (medications given into the intrathecal space in addition to the epidural space) compared to epidural only, and medications used (types and doses of LA or opioids) may not have been accounted for in previous reviews.  Our prior systematic review suggested that AMB reduces the incidence of breakthrough pain compared to BI with no significant difference in the incidence of caesarean delivery or instrumental delivery, duration of labour analgesia, and LA consumption. However, several studies comparing AMB and BI have been performed since then, and inclusion of their data may improve the precision of our effect estimates. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of AMB versus BI for maintaining labour epidural analgesia in women at term. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, Wiley Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, (National Library of Medicine), Embase(Elseiver), Web of Science (Clarivate), the WHO-ICTRP (World Health Organization) and ClinicalTrials.gov (National Library of Medicine) on 31 December 2022. Additionally, we screened the reference lists of relevant trials and reviews for eligible citations, and we contacted authors of included studies to identify unpublished research and ongoing trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled studies that compared bolus dosing AMB with continuous BI during epidural analgesia. We excluded studies of women in preterm labour, with multiple pregnancies, with fetal malposition, intrathecal catheters, those that did not use automated delivery of medications, and those where AMB and BI were combined. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodology for systematic review and meta-analysis described by Cochrane. Primary outcomes included: incidence of breakthrough pain requiring anaesthesiologist intervention; incidence of caesarean delivery; and incidence of instrumental delivery. Secondly, we assessed the duration of labour; hourly LA consumption in bupivacaine equivalents, maternal satisfaction after fetal delivery, and neonatal Apgar scores.  The following subgroup analyses were chosen a priori: epidural alone versus CSE technique; regimens that used PCEA versus those that did not; and nulliparous versus combination of nulli- and multi-parous women. We used the GRADE system to assess the certainty of evidence associated with our outcome measures. MAIN RESULTS: We included 18 studies of 4590 women, of which 13 enrolled healthy nulliparous women and five included healthy nulli- and multiparous women. All studies excluded women with preterm or complicated pregnancies. Techniques used to initiate epidural analgesia differed between the studies: seven used combined spinal epidural, 10 used epidural, and one used dural puncture epidural (DPE). There was also variation in analgesics used. Eight studies utilised ropivacaine with fentanyl, three used ropivacaine with sufentanil, two utilised levobupivacaine with sufentanil, one used levobupivacaine with fentanyl, and four utilised bupivacaine with fentanyl. Most of the studies were assessed to have low risk of randomisation, blinding, attrition, and reporting biases, except for allocation concealment where eight studies were assessed to have uncertain risk and three with high risk. Our results showed that AMB was associated with lower incidence of breakthrough pain compared to BI (risk ratio (RR) 0.71; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 0.91; I2 = 57%) (16 studies, 1528 participants), and lower hourly LA consumption in bupivacaine equivalents (mean difference (MD) -0.84 mg/h; 95% CI -1.29 to -0.38, I2 = 87%) (16 studies, 1642 participants), both with moderate certainty. AMB was associated with an estimated reduction in breakthrough pain incidence of 29.1% (incidence 202 per 1000, 95% CI 157 to 259), and was therefore considered clinically significant. The incidence of caesarean delivery (RR 0.85; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.06; I2 = 0%) (16 studies, 1735 participants) and instrumental delivery (RR 0.85; 95% CI 0.71 to 1.01; I2 = 0%) (17 studies, 4550 participants) were not significantly, both with moderate certainty. There was no significant difference in duration of labour analgesia (MD -8.81 min; 95% CI -19.38 to 1.77; I2 = 50%) (17 studies, 4544 participants) with moderate certainty. Due to differences in the methods and timing of outcome measurements, we did not pool data for maternal satisfaction and Apgar scores. Results reported narratively suggest AMB may be associated with increased maternal satisfaction (eight studies reported increased satisfaction and six reported no difference), and all studies showed no difference in Apgar scores. WIth the exception of epidural alone versus CSE which found significant subgroup differences in LA consumption between AMB and BI, no significant differences were detected in the remaining subgroup analyses. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, AMB is associated with lower incidence of breakthrough pain, reduced LA consumption, and may improve maternal satisfaction. There were no significant differences between AMB and BI in the incidence of caesarean delivery, instrumental delivery, duration of labour analgesia, and Apgar scores. Larger studies assessing the incidence of caesarean and instrumental delivery are required.

High-volume patient-controlled epidural vs. programmed intermittent epidural bolus for labour analgesia: a randomised controlled study.

The aim of neuraxial analgesia is to achieve excellent pain relief with the fewest adverse effects. The most recently introduced technique for epidural analgesia maintenance is the programmed intermittent epidural bolus. In a recent study, we compared this with patient-controlled epidural analgesia without a background infusion and found that a programmed intermittent epidural bolus was associated with less breakthrough pain, lower pain scores, higher local anaesthetic consumption and comparable motor block. However, we had compared 10 ml programmed intermittent epidural boluses with 5 ml patient-controlled epidural analgesia boluses. To overcome this potential limitation, we designed a randomised, multicentre non-inferiority trial using 10 ml boluses in each group. The primary outcome was the incidence of breakthrough pain and total analgesic intake. Secondary outcomes included motor block; pain scores; patient satisfaction; and obstetric and neonatal outcomes. The trial was considered positive if two endpoints were met: non-inferiority of patient-controlled epidural analgesia with respect to breakthrough pain; and superiority of patient-controlled epidural analgesia with respect to local anaesthetic consumption. A total of 360 nulliparous women were allocated randomly to patient-controlled epidural analgesia-only or programmed intermittent epidural bolus groups. The patient-controlled group received 10 ml boluses of ropivacaine 0.12% with sufentanil 0.75 µg.ml-1 ; the programmed intermittent group received 10 ml boluses supplemented by 5 ml patient-controlled boluses. The lockout period was 30 min in each group and the maximum allowed hourly local anaesthetic/opioid consumption was identical between the groups. Breakthrough pain was similar between groups (11.2% patient controlled vs. 10.8% programmed intermittent, p = 0.003 for non-inferiority). Total ropivacaine consumption was lower in the PCEA-group (mean difference 15.3 mg, p < 0.001). Motor block, patient satisfaction scores and maternal and neonatal outcomes were similar across both groups. In conclusion, patient-controlled epidural analgesia is non-inferior to programmed intermittent epidural bolus if equal volumes of patient-controlled epidural analgesia are used to maintain labour analgesia and superior with respect to local anaesthetic consumption.

Methadone rotation versus other opioid rotation for refractory cancer induced bone pain: protocol of an exploratory randomised controlled open-label study.

BACKGROUND: A third of patients with advanced cancer and bone metastasis suffer from cancer induced bone pain (CIBP), impeding quality of life, psychological distress, depression and anxiety. This study will evaluate the impact of an opioid rotation, comparing methadone rotation with other opioid rotation in patients with refractory CIBP. METHODS: This open-label randomised controlled trial will recruit cancer patients with CIBP and inadequate pain control despite established baseline opioid and/or intolerable opioid side effects from cancer and palliative care services. Participants will be at least 18 years old, with a predicted prognosis of greater than 8 weeks, meet the core diagnostic criteria for CIBP, have a worst pain score of ≥ 4 of 10 from CIBP and/ or have opioid toxicity (graded ≥ 2 on Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events). Participants will have sufficiently proficient English to complete questionnaires and provide informed consent. Participants will be randomised 1:1 to be rotated to methadone to another opioid. The primary objective is to examine the impact of opioid rotation in improving CIBP by comparing analgesic efficacy, safety and tolerability in the two arms. Secondary objectives will assess changes in the intensity, duration and frequency of breakthrough pain, requirement of breakthrough analgesia, overall opioid escalation index, and time taken to observe improvement in pain reduction, pain interference and quality of life. DISCUSSION: Laboratory studies suggest the involvement of neuropathic involvement in the mechanism of CIBP, though there remains no clear evidence of the routine use of neuropathic agents. Methadone as an analgesic agent may have a role to play in this cohort of patients, thus warranting further exploratory studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry No: ACTRN12621000141842. Registered 11 February 2021.

Efficacy of reconstituted intravenous fentanyl to sublingual solution versus oral morphine syrup for breakthrough pain among patients with chronic gynecologic cancer pain: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Rapid-acting fentanyl formulations are superior to oral morphine (OM) syrup in controlling breakthrough pain among patients with cancer, but they are expensive and unavailable in many countries. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of reconstituted intravenous fentanyl to sublingual solution (IFS) in relieving breakthrough pain as compared with OM. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled trial, patients with gynecologic cancer aged ≥18 years experiencing chronic cancer pain with breakthrough pain were enrolled. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either 50 µg IFS or 5 mg OM. Pain intensity level was assessed at 5, 15, 30, 45, 60, and 120 min after treatment. The primary outcome was the reduction in pain intensity at 15 min in the intention-to-treat population (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05037539). RESULTS: Between June 15, 2021 and December 30, 2021, 40 participants were equally and randomly assigned to receive IFS or OM. The primary outcome was significantly higher in the IFS group (4.25 vs. 1.05, p < 0.0001). The secondary outcomes also showed higher reduction in pain intensity at 5 min in the IFS group. Subsequent breakthrough pain did not differ between the two groups. However, the reduction in pain was lower in the IFS group at 45, 60, and 120 min, where pain was classified as mild. No severe adverse effects were observed in both groups. Burning sensation without noticeable lesion was found in 20% of the IFS group. CONCLUSION: IFS can reduce early breakthrough pain. IFS may be considered for breakthrough pain when rapid-acting fentanyl formulations are unavailable.

[Prevalence and clinical characteristics of pain in patients with advanced chronic disease]. / Prevalencia y características clínicas del dolor en pacientes con enfermedad crónica avanzada.

OBJECTIVES: Determine pain prevalence and clinical characteristics in patients with advanced chronic disease and identify breakthrough pain frequency. DESIGN: Observational, descriptive, cross-sectional study. LOCATION: Three primary care teams and one intermediate care hospital. PARTICIPANTS: All patients with advanced chronic disease. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: A semi-structured interview was performed to collect demographic, clinical, and specific variables of pain using validated scales. Patient location (home, nursing home or hospital) and advanced chronicity trajectory (organ failure, oncological disease, dementia, or multimorbidity) were recorded. Pain was assessed based on the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and, in cases of disabling dementia, using the Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia (PAINAD). A statistical descriptive, comparative analysis between variables was performed using the R software. RESULTS: Of all patients selected, 223 (60.4%) were included. Prevalence of pain: 83.9% (n=187), with no differences based on location or trajectory. Significant differences in pain intensity based on location (P=.0046) (moderate-severe in patients at home, moderate in hospital patients, and mild in nursing home patients) and on trajectory (P<.0001) (moderate-severe in patients with organ failure and multimorbidity, moderate in patients with cancer, and mild in patients with dementia). Global functional impact of pain was mild-moderate, emotional impact was severe in 41.5% of patients (n=51), and breakthrough pain was observed in 8.6% (n=13). CONCLUSIONS: Pain must always be explored and assessed in patients with advanced chronicity, since it was highly prevalent in all locations and trajectories, being particularly intense in patients at home with organ failure and multimorbidity. Breakthrough pain was found in non-oncological trajectories.

Intravenous Patient-Controlled Analgesia Versus Oral Opioid to Maintain Analgesia for Severe Cancer Pain: A Randomized Phase II Trial.

BACKGROUND: Optimal analgesic maintenance for severe cancer pain is unknown. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IPCA) with continuous infusion plus rescue dose or bolus-only dose versus conventional oral extended-release morphine as a background dose with normal-release morphine as a rescue dose to maintain analgesia in patients with severe cancer pain after successful opioid titration. METHODS: Patients with persistent severe cancer pain (≥7 at rest on the 11-point numeric rating scale [NRS]) were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 treatment arms: (A1) IPCA hydromorphone with bolus-only dose where dosage was 10% to 20% of the total equianalgesic over the previous 24 hours (TEOP24H) administered as needed, (A2) IPCA hydromorphone with continuous infusion where dose per hour was the TEOP24H divided by 24 and bolus dosage for breakthrough pain was 10% to 20% of the TEOP24H, and (B) oral extended-release morphine based on TEOP24H/2 × 75% (because of incomplete cross-tolerance) every 12 hours plus normal-release morphine based on TEOP24H × 10% to 20% for breakthrough pain. After randomization, patients underwent IPCA hydromorphone titration for 24 hours to achieve pain control before beginning their assigned treatment. The primary endpoint was NRS over days 1 to 3. RESULTS: A total of 95 patients from 9 oncology study sites underwent randomization: 30 into arm A1, 32 into arm A2, and 33 into arm B. Arm B produced a significantly higher NRS over days 1 to 3 compared with arm A1 or A2 (P<.001). Daily NRS from day 1 to day 6 and patient satisfaction scores on day 3 and day 6 were worse in arm B. Median equivalent-morphine consumption increase was significantly lower in A1 (P=.024) among the 3 arms. No severe adverse event occurred in any arm. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with oral morphine maintenance, IPCA hydromorphone for analgesia maintenance improves control of severe cancer pain after successful titration. Furthermore, IPCA hydromorphone without continuous infusion may consume less opioid.

Low-dose sublingual fentanyl improves quality of life in patients with breakthrough cancer pain in palliative care.

Aim: This subanalysis of the CAVIDIOPAL study evaluated the impact of individualized management of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) with fentanyl on the quality of life (QoL) of advanced cancer patients in Spanish palliative care units. Patients & methods: This was a prospective, observational, multicenter study. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer's QLQ-C30 questionnaire was used at baseline (V0) and visit 28 (V28). Results: Ninety-five patients were mainly treated with 67-133 µg fentanyl, showing a notable reduction in intensity (visual analog scale: 8.0 [V0] to 4.6 [V28]), frequency and duration of BTcP episodes shortly after the first 1-2 weeks of treatment, with significantly improved QoL (global health status: 31.1 [V0] to 53.1 [V28]). Conclusion: Low-dose sublingual fentanyl effectively reduced BTcP in advanced cancer patients in palliative care units, significantly improving QoL. Clinical trial registration: NCT02840500 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

After the CAVIDIOPAL study, we carried out an additional analysis to evaluate the impact of individualized management of breakthrough cancer pain, using the analgesic drug fentanyl, on quality of life (QoL) of advanced cancer patients receiving palliative care in Spain. We performed a prospective, observational, multicenter study, in which patients' QoL was assessed using a validated questionnaire at baseline (day 0) and after 28 days of fentanyl treatment. Of the 95 patients included in the study, the majority were treated with low doses of fentanyl and showed significant pain relief. The intensity, frequency and duration of breakthrough cancer pain episodes were notably reduced shortly after the first 1­2 weeks of treatment. Moreover, patients' QoL significantly improved during fentanyl treatment from baseline to day 28. A global impression of improvement was reported by both patients and clinicians.

Increased quality of life in patients with breakthrough cancer pain after individualized therapy: the CAVIDIOM study.

Aim: To evaluate the quality of life (QoL) in patients with breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) in Spanish medical oncology departments. Patients & methods: In a prospective, observational, multicenter study, we assessed QoL using the EQ-5D-5L instrument at baseline and after 15 and 30 days of individualized BTcP therapy, as well as BTcP characteristics and treatment. Results: Patients (n = 118) were mainly women, over 64 years old and with advanced cancer. QoL improved at 15 (p = 0.013) and 30 days (p = 0.011) versus baseline. Individualized BTcP therapy consisted mostly of rapid-onset opioids (transmucosal fentanyl at doses of 67-800 µg) according to the physician evaluation. BTcP improved, including statistically significant reductions in intensity, duration, number of episodes in the last 24 h and time to onset of BTcP relief. Conclusion: QoL increased after individualized pain therapy in patients with advanced cancer and BTcP in medical oncology departments.

Cancer patients can experience flares of pain, called breakthrough pain (BTcP), despite treatment with painkillers. Although BTcP can be excruciating, its intensity and other characteristics depend on several factors, including its treatment. However, even if treated, BTcP can impair quality of life for cancer patients. We assessed quality of life in 118 patients with advanced cancer and BTcP treated in 13 medical oncology departments across Spain. We treated BTcP with individualized therapy, taking into account both pain-related and patient-related factors. We also measured quality of life using a specific, widely-used questionnaire at the study visits: at onset of individualized pain therapy and after 3, 15 and 30 days' treatment. At each visit, flare-up pain therapy was adjusted or maintained as necessary. Throughout the study, quality of life and sleep quality improved for all participants. Furthermore, there was a greater reduction in intensity, duration and frequency of BTcP. The most common treatments for flare-ups were low doses of rapid-onset opioids (fentanyl given by sublingual, buccal or nasal administration), which were much better tolerated than high-dose opioids. Overall, the study showed that quality of life in patients with advanced cancer and BTcP increased after individualized pain therapy, mainly with low doses of rapid-onset opioids.

Carer preferences of route of administration of transmucosal diamorphine and willingness to take part in a randomised controlled trial: an interview study (DIPPER).

BACKGROUND: Children and young people are usually given liquid morphine by mouth for breakthrough pain, which can take thirty minutes to work. A faster-acting, quickly absorbed, needle-free pain medicine, that is easy to administer is needed such as transmucosal (sublingual, buccal, intranasal) diamorphine. Research evidence relating to the administration of medication for breakthrough pain in children and young people is limited. This study aims to describe the experiences and preferences of parents and/or children and young people regarding the route of administration of diamorphine, barriers and facilitators comparative to oral morphine, and participation in a randomised controlled trial. METHODS: In-depth, semi-structured interviews with parents and/or children and young people at home or hospital/hospice. RESULTS: Thirteen interviews with: nine mothers, one father, and three sets of parents jointly. No interviews took place with a child/young person. Most families had experience of the buccal route which was effective in ease of administration and time to control pain. The intranasal route was preferred by parents irrespective of experience. Parents' willingness for their child to take part in a trial depended on the time commitment, their child's pain trajectory and the stability of analgesic requirements. CONCLUSION: A randomised controlled trial of oral morphine versus transmucosal diamorphine would need to consider trial logistics, especially time commitment. Parents felt that the trial should be introduced initially by the clinical team, with written information from the research team, and sufficient time to ask questions. Patients who had discontinued oral morphine because of side effects, or those with gastrointestinal failure, should be excluded. Maintaining stability in pain management was essential to families, so the timing of the trial is a potential issue.

Methadone switching for refractory cancer pain.

BACKGROUND: Methadone is commonly considered an alternative opioid treatment for refractory cancer pain. This study aims to investigate the efficacy, safety, and cost of methadone in the treatment of refractory cancer pain. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted in patients who used methadone for refractory cancer pain from April 2016 to December 2020 at a cancer specialized hospital. Pain control, evaluated via pain score and breakthrough pain frequency, and adverse events of methadone were compared with analgesic regimens prior to methadone administration. The factors potentially affecting the switching outcome were analyzed via multivariate analysis. Moreover, the cost of pain control was estimated. RESULTS: Ninety patients received methadone for poor pain control (74.4%), intolerable adverse events (10.0%), or both (15.6%) after prior opioid treatments. Sixty-four patients (71.1%) were successfully switched to methadone with median pain score significantly decreased from 4.0 to 2.0 (p < 0.001) and median daily frequency of breakthrough pain from 3.0 to 0.0 (p < 0.001) at a maintained median conversion ratio of 6.3 [interquartile range (IQR): 4.0-10.0] to prior opioid treatment. Similar adverse event profiles of constipation, nausea, vomiting, and dizziness were observed between methadone and prior opioid regimens. The median daily cost of analgesic regimens was significantly reduced from $19.5 (IQR: 12.3-46.2) to $10.8 (IQR: 7.1-18.7) (p < 0.01) after switching to methadone. The 3-day switch method significantly improved the rate of successful switching compared with the stop and go method (odds ratio = 3.37, 95% CI: 1.30-8.76, p = 0.013). CONCLUSION: Methadone is an effective, safe, and cost-saving treatment for patients with refractory cancer pain.

Clinical Practice Guidelines in the Management of Breakthrough Cancer Pain: A Systematic Review using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) Instrument.

BACKGROUND: Several clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), consensus statements, and recommendations currently exist for the diagnosis and management of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP). These documents have considerable variability amongst them, and to date, their quality and methodologic rigor have not been appraised. AIM: We aim to identify and perform a quality appraisal of CPGs for the diagnosis and management of BTcP using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed in MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, and SCOPUS databases up until January 1, 2021. Four reviewers independently evaluated each guideline using the AGREE II instrument. Scaled domain scores were generated and the threshold used for satisfactory quality was >60%. Additionally, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to determine level of agreement between reviewers. RESULTS: Eleven guidelines were selected for final evaluation based on inclusion/exclusion criteria. Only one guideline was classified of "average" quality while the rest were classified as "low" quality. The "Editorial Independence" (70.46 ± 35.7) and "Scope and Purpose" (64.78 ± 12.5) domains received the highest mean scores, while the "Applicability" (32.58 ± 13.5) and "Rigor of Development" (35.04 ± 9.0) domains received the lowest mean scores. ICC statistical analysis showed high magnitude of agreement between reviewers with a range of (0.790-0.988). CONCLUSIONS: Reflecting upon our quality appraisal, it is evident that the quality and methodologic rigor of BTcP guidelines can be improved upon in the future. Our findings also elucidate the existing variability/discrepancies among guidelines in diagnostic criteria and management of BTcP.

Light-Induced Activation of a Specific Type-5 Metabotropic Glutamate Receptor Antagonist in the Ventrobasal Thalamus Causes Analgesia in a Mouse Model of Breakthrough Cancer Pain.

Breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) refers to a sudden and transient exacerbation of pain, which develops in patients treated with opioid analgesics. Fast-onset analgesia is required for the treatment of BTcP. Light-activated drugs offer a novel potential strategy for the rapid control of pain without the typical adverse effects of systemic analgesic drugs. mGlu5 metabotropic glutamate receptor antagonists display potent analgesic activity, and light-induced activation of one of these compounds (JF-NP-26) in the thalamus was found to induce analgesia in models of inflammatory and neuropathic pain. We used an established mouse model of BTcP based on the injection of cancer cells into the femur, followed, 16 days later, by systemic administration of morphine. BTcP was induced by injection of endothelin-1 (ET-1) into the tumor, 20 min after morphine administration. Mice were implanted with optic fibers delivering light in the visible spectrum (405 nm) in the thalamus or prelimbic cortex to locally activate systemically injected JF-NP-26. Light delivery in the thalamus caused rapid and substantial analgesia, and this effect was specific because light delivery in the prelimbic cortex did not relieve BTcP. This finding lays the groundwork for the use of optopharmacology in the treatment of BTcP.

Postoperative breakthrough pain in paediatric cardiac surgery not reduced by increased morphine concentrations.

BACKGROUND: Morphine is commonly used for postoperative analgesia in children. Here we studied the pharmacodynamics of morphine in children after cardiac surgery receiving protocolized morphine. METHODS: Data on morphine rescue requirements guided by validated pain scores in children (n = 35, 3-36 months) after cardiac surgery receiving morphine as loading dose (100 µg kg-1) with continuous infusion (40 µg kg-1 h-1) from a previous study on morphine pharmacokinetics were analysed using repeated time-to-event (RTTE) modelling. RESULTS: During the postoperative period (38 h (IQR 23-46)), 130 morphine rescue events (4 (IQR 1-5) per patient) mainly occurred in the first 24 h (107/130) at a median morphine concentration of 29.5 ng ml-1 (range 7-180 ng ml-1). In the RTTE model, the hazard of rescue morphine decreased over time (half-life 18 h; P < 0.001), while the hazard for rescue morphine (21.9% at 29.5 ng ml-1) increased at higher morphine concentrations (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this study on protocolized morphine analgesia in children, rescue morphine was required at a wide range of morphine concentrations and further increase of the morphine concentration did not lead to a decrease in hazard. Future studies should focus on a multimodal approach using other opioids or other analgesics to treat breakthrough pain in children. IMPACT: In children receiving continuous morphine infusion, administration of rescue morphine is an indicator for insufficient effect or an event. Morphine rescue events were identified at a wide range of morphine concentrations upon a standardized pain protocol consisting of continuous morphine infusion and morphine as rescue boluses. The expected number of rescue morphine events was found to increase at higher morphine concentrations. Instead of exploring more aggressive morphine dosing, future research should focus on a multimodal approach to treat breakthrough pain in children.

Quality of life in patients with breakthrough cancer pain in radiation oncology departments in Spain: the CAVIDIOR study.

Aim: The CAVIDIOR study evaluated quality of life (QoL) in patients with breakthrough cancer pain receiving palliative radiation therapy in radiation oncology departments (RODs) in Spain. Patients & methods: Prospective observational study at 11 Spanish RODs (July 2016-November 2017). QoL was assessed using Short Form Health Survey 12. Secondary end points were sleep quality, caregiver burden and patient/perception of improvement. Results: QoL improved according to the Short Form Health Survey 12 mental component. Sleep quality and caregivers' burden improved significantly. Conclusion: Breakthrough cancer pain is highly prevalent and can be substantially reduced with appropriate diagnosis and management in RODs. Along with the QoL questionnaire, sleep quality and caregiver burden provide a more comprehensive assessment of overall health status in patients receiving radiation therapy in RODs. Clinical trial registration: NCT02836379 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

First-line methadone for cancer pain: titration time analysis.

BACKGROUND: Methadone is a low-cost, strong opioid that is increasingly used as a first-line treatment for pain in palliative care (PC). Its long and unpredictable half-life and slow elimination phase can make titration challenging. Evidence for titration modalities is scarce. OBJECTIVE: To describe the titration phase of the treatment with low-dose first-line methadone and the use of methadone for breakthrough pain. METHODS: Prospective study with strong opioid-naïve patients with moderate to severe cancer pain followed at a tertiary PC unit in Argentina. Starting methadone dose was 2.5-5 mg/day every 8, 12, or 24 h. Titration allowed daily dose increases from day 1, and prescription of oral methadone 2.5 mg every 2 h with a maximum of 3 rescue doses/day for breakthrough pain. Pain control, methadone stabilization dose, and adverse effects, among other variables, were daily assessed over the first 7 days (T0-T7). RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were included. Initial median (IQR) methadone dose was 5 (2.5) mg/day. Pain intensity decreased from a median (IQR) of 8 (2.3) at T0 to 4 (2.3) at T1 and remained ≤ 4 until T7 (all p < 0.0001 compared to T0). Similar results were obtained through the categorical and tolerability scales for pain. Fifty patients (81%) reached pain control, 66% in the first 48 h. Methadone daily doses at T2 and T7 were higher than that at T0: 7.5 (3) and 6.7 (5.5) versus 5 (2.5), respectively (all p < 0.05). The opioid escalation index at T7 was 1.7%. The median (IQR) number of rescues, stabilization dose, and time for stabilization was 0 (1), 5(4.5) mg, and 3(2) days, respectively. Two patients were discontinued due to delirium. All other side effects were mild. CONCLUSIONS: First-line, low-dose methadone using rescue methadone resulted in a pronounced and rapid decrease in pain, with minimal need for titration and for breakthrough doses, and no evidence of accumulation or sedation by the end of the week.

Impact of individualized management of breakthrough cancer pain on quality of life in advanced cancer patients: CAVIDIOPAL study.

PURPOSE: The main aim of the study was to assess the impact of individualized management of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) on quality of life (QoL) of patients with advanced cancer in clinical practice. METHODS: A prospective, observational, multicenter study was conducted in patients with advanced cancer that were assisted by palliative care units. QoL was assessed with the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire at baseline (V0) and after 28 days (V28) of individualized BTcP therapy. Data on background pain, BTcP, comorbidities, and frailty were also recorded. RESULTS: Ninety-three patients completed the study. Intensity, duration, and number of BTcP episodes were reduced (p < 0.001) at V28 with individualized therapy. Transmucosal fentanyl was used in 93.8% of patients, mainly by sublingual route. Fentanyl titration was initiated at low doses (78.3% of patients received doses of 67 µg, 100 µg, or 133 µg) according to physician evaluation. At V28, mean perception of global health status had increased from 31.1 to 53.1 (p < 0.001). All scales of EORTC QLQ-C30 significantly improved (p < 0.001) except physical functioning, diarrhea, and financial difficulties. Pain scale improved from 73.6 ± 22.6 to 35.7 ± 22.3 (p < 0.001). Moreover, 85.9% of patients reported pain improvement. Probability of no ≥ 25% improvement in QoL was significantly higher in patients ≥ 65 years old (OR 1.39; 95% CI 1.001-1.079) and patients hospitalized at baseline (OR 4.126; 95% CI 1.227-13.873). CONCLUSION: Individualized BTcP therapy improved QoL of patients with advanced cancer. Transmucosal fentanyl at low doses was the most used drug. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov database (NCT02840500) on July 19, 2016.