Standardizing Integrated Oncology and Palliative Care Across Service Levels: Challenges in Demonstrating Effects in a Prospective Controlled Intervention Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with cancer often want to spend their final days at home. In Norway, most patients with cancer die in institutions. We hypothesized that full integration of oncology and palliative care services would result in more time spent at home during end-of-life. METHODS: A prospective non-randomized intervention trial was conducted in two rural regions of Mid-Norway. The hospitals' oncology and palliative care outpatient clinics and surrounding communities participated. An intervention including information, education, and a standardized care pathway was developed and implemented. Adult non-curative patients with cancer were eligible. Proportion of last 90 days of life spent at home was the primary outcome. RESULTS: We included 129 patients in the intervention group (I) and 76 patients in the comparison group (C), of whom 82% of patients in I and 78% of patients in C died during follow-up. The mean proportion of last 90 days of life spent at home was 0.62 in I and 0.72 in C (p = 0.044), with 23% and 36% (p = 0.073), respectively, dying at home. A higher proportion died at home in both groups compared to pre-study level (12%). During the observation period the comparison region developed and implemented an alternative intervention to the study intervention, with the former more focused on end-of-life care. CONCLUSION: A higher proportion of patients with cancer died at home in both groups compared to pre-study level. Patients with cancer in I did not spend more time at home during end-of-life compared to those in C. The study intervention focused on the whole disease trajectory, while the alternative intervention was more directed towards end-of-life care. "Simpler" and more focused interventions on end-of-life care may be relevant for future studies on integration of palliative care into oncology. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02170168.

Palliative care is an important part of cancer care to improve patients' quality of life. To be cared for and die in the preferred place are quality markers in palliative care. Patients with cancer often want to spend their final days at home. In Norway, most patients with cancer die in institutions. We hypothesized that full integration of cancer and palliative care would result in more time spent at home during end-of-life. An intervention that included information, education, and a standardized care pathway was developed and implemented in a region of Mid-Norway (the intervention region, I). A similar region served as comparison region (C). Adult patients with cancer treated with non-curative intent were eligible. Altogether, 129 patients in I and 76 patients in C were included in the study, of whom 82% in I and 78% in C died during follow-up. The mean proportion of time spent at home last 90 days of life was 0.62 in I and 0.72 in C (p = 0.044), and 22.6% and 35.6% (p = 0.073) died at home, respectively. A higher proportion died at home in both groups compared to pre-study national levels (12%). During the study period, C developed and implemented an alternative intervention to the study intervention, with the former placing more focus on end-of-life care compared to the she study intervention that focused on the whole disease trajectory. This may explain why the intervention did not result in more time spent at home during end-of-life as compared to C. "Simpler" interventions directed towards the study's primary outcome may be relevant for future studies on integration of palliative care into oncology.

PALLiative care in ONcology (PALLiON): A cluster-randomised trial investigating the effect of palliative care on the use of anticancer treatment at the end of life.

BACKGROUND: Effects on anticancer therapy following the integration of palliative care and oncology are rarely investigated. Thus, its potential effect is unknown. AIM: To investigate the effects of the complex intervention PALLiON versus usual care on end-of-life anticancer therapy. DESIGN: Cluster-randomised controlled trial (RCT), registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (No. NCT01362816). The complex intervention consisted of a physician education program enhancing theoretical, clinical and communication skills, a patient-centred care pathway and patient symptom reporting prior to all consultations. Primary outcome was overall use, start and cessation of anticancer therapy in the last 3 months before death. Secondary outcomes were patient-reported outcomes. Mixed effects logistic regression models and Cox proportional hazard were used. SETTING: A total of 12 Norwegian hospitals (03/2017-02/2021). PARTICIPANTS: Patients ⩾18 years, advanced stage solid tumour, starting last line of anticancer therapy, estimated life expectancy ⩽12 months. RESULTS: A total of 616 (93%) patients were included (intervention: 309/control:307); 63% males, median age 69, 77% had gastrointestinal cancers. Median survival time from inclusion was 8 (IQR 3-14) and 7 months (IQR 3-12), and days between anticancer therapy start and death were 204 (90-378) and 168 (69-351) (intervention/control). Overall, 78 patients (13%) received anticancer therapy in the last month (intervention: 33 [11%]/control: 45 [15%]). No differences were found in patient-reported outcomes. CONCLUSION: We found no significant differences in the probability of receiving end-of-life anticancer therapy. The intervention did not have the desired effect. It was probably too general and too focussed on communication skills to exert a substantial influence on conventional clinical practice.

Breakthrough and Episodic Cancer Pain from a Palliative Care Perspective.

Cancer pain intensity (PI) fluctuates, but the relationship between pain flares and background pain with respect to pain management is not settled. We studied how flare and background PIs corresponded with treatment results for background cancer pain. Patients admitted to an acute palliative care unit with average and/or worst PI ≥ 1 on the 11-point numeric rating scale were included. Average and worst PI at admission and average PI at discharge were collected. We examined how the difference and ratio between worst and average PI and average PI at admission, were associated with average PI development during hospitalization. Positive differences between worst and average PI at admission were defined as pain flares. Ninety out of 131 patients had pain flares. The reduction in average PI for patients with flares was 0.9 and for those without, 1.9 (p = 0.02). Patients with large worst minus average PI differences reported the least improvement, as did those with large worst/average PI ratios. Patients with pain flares and average PI ≤ 4 at admission had unchanged average PI during hospitalization, while those with pain flares and average PI > 4 experienced pain reduction (2.1, p < 0.001). Large pain flares, in absolute values and compared to background PI, were associated with inferior pain relief.

Emergency Palliative Cancer Care: Dexmedetomidine Treatment Experiences-A Retrospective Brief Report on Nine Consecutive Cases.

INTRODUCTION: Dexmedetomidine, an alpha-2 adrenergic receptor agonist with potential opioid sparing properties, is utilized in palliative medicine, but the knowledge base for this practice is limited. We describe concomitant use of dexmedetomidine and opioids in an acute palliative care unit. METHODS: We included all hospitalized palliative cancer care patients treated with dexmedetomidine from January 2019 to January 2021. Demographics, opioid doses, dexmedetomidine indications and dosing, reported effects and adverse responses, as well as treatment lengths were recorded. RESULTS: Three women and six men aged 42-66 years with metastatic cancer and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status I-IV used dexmedetomidine and opioids concomitantly. Indications for dexmedetomidine were pain (n = 7) and anxiety (n = 2). Dexmedetomidine was administered intravenously in two patients and subcutaneously in seven. All administrations were continuous infusions; initial doses ranged from 240 to 1344 µg/24 h with later doses from 240 to 2440 µg/24 h. Physicians reported relief from pain and anxiety, but two patients required neuraxial pain management during admission. At day 2 of dexmedetomidine treatment, the opioid dose was reduced in six out of nine patients. For all patients with available data at day 7, mean opioid dose was reduced to 74% of the initial dose. When excluding the two patients requiring neuraxial pain management, the corresponding number was 80%. Two patients had transient hypotension, but dexmedetomidine was well tolerated and in no cases withdrawn due to adverse effects. Mean dexmedetomidine treatment length was 40 days. CONCLUSIONS: Dexmedetomidine treatment decreased opioid consumption and was well tolerated in a retrospective study of nine palliative cancer care patients. It may represent a treatment option late in the disease trajectory.

Antibiotic Therapy in Integrated Oncology and Palliative Cancer Care: An Observational Study.

Decision-making for antibiotic therapy in palliative cancer care implies avoiding futile interventions and to identify patients who benefit from treatment. We evaluated patient-reported outcome-measures (PROMs), physiological findings, and survival in palliative cancer care patients hospitalized with an infection. All acute admissions during one year, directly to a University Hospital unit that provided integrated services, were included. Serious infection was defined as a need to start intravenous antibiotics. PROMs, clinical and paraclinical variables, and survival were obtained. Sixty-two of 257 patients received intravenous antibiotic treatment. PROMs were generally similar in the infection group and the non-infection group, both in respect to intensities at admission and improvements during the stay. There were more physiological and paraclinical deviations at admission in patients in the infection group. These deviations improved during the stay. Survival was not poorer in the infection group compared to the non-infection group. Patients in integrated cancer care were as likely to be put on intravenous antibiotics but had longer survival. In integrated oncology and palliative cancer services, patients with an infection had similar outcomes as those without an infection. This argues that the use of intravenous antibiotics is appropriate in many patients admitted to palliative care.

Implementing a Standardized Care Pathway Integrating Oncology, Palliative Care and Community Care in a Rural Region of Mid-Norway.

INTRODUCTION: To improve quality across levels of care, we developed a standardized care pathway (SCP) integrating palliative and oncology services for hospitalized and home-dwelling palliative cancer patients in a rural region. METHODS: A multifaceted implementation strategy was directed towards a combination of target groups. The implementation was conducted on a system level, and implementation-related activities were registered prospectively. Adult patients with advanced cancer treated with non-curative intent were included and interviewed. Healthcare leaders (HCLs) and healthcare professionals (HCPs) involved in the development of the SCP or exposed to the implementation strategy were interviewed. In addition, HCLs and HCPs exposed to the implementation strategy answered standardized questionnaires. Hospital admissions were registered prospectively. RESULTS: To assess the use of the SCP, 129 cancer patients were included. Fifteen patients were interviewed about their experiences with the patient-held record (PHR). Sixty interviews were performed among 1320 HCPs exposed to the implementation strategy. Two hundred and eighty-seven HCPs reported on their training in and use of the SCP. Despite organizational cultural differences, developing an SCP integrating palliative and oncology services across levels of care was feasible. Both HCLs and HCPs reported improved quality of care in the wake of the implementation process. Two and a half years after the implementation was launched, 28% of the HCPs used the SCP and 41% had received training in its use. Patients reported limited use and benefit of the PHR. CONCLUSION: An SCP may be a usable tool for integrating palliative and oncology services across care levels in a rural region. An extensive implementation process resulted in improvements of process outcomes, yet still limited use of the SCP in clinical practice. HCLs and HCPs reported improved quality of cancer care following the implementation process. Future research should address mandatory elements for usefulness and successful implementation of SCPs for palliative cancer patients.

When a patient has incurable cancer, it is beneficial to introduce palliative care early in the disease trajectory along with anti-cancer treatment. A standardized care pathway is a method to improve quality and reduce variation in healthcare. It can promote integrated healthcare services in palliative care, e.g. by specifying action points when the patient's situation is changing. In this study, a standardized care pathway for cancer patients with palliative care needs was developed in a rural region of Norway. The pathway focused on patients' needs and symptoms and on smooth transition between levels of care. An educational program and an information strategy were developed to ensure implementation. To evaluate the implementation, all activity regarding the implementation process was registered. Cancer patients and healthcare professionals were interviewed and answered questionnaires. One thousand three hundred and twenty healthcare professionals were exposed to the implementation strategy. One hundred and twenty-nine cancer patients were followed up according to the standardized care pathway. Despite different perspectives of care, it was feasible to develop a standardized care pathway for palliative cancer patients across care settings. A paper-based patient-held record was only found to be useful by a limited number of patients. An extensive implementation process was completed and resulted in improvements regarding healthcare professionals' experience with the quality of cancer care in the region, but limited use of the care pathway in clinical practice. Further research should identify the most important elements for usefulness and successful implementation of the care pathway.

Interventions and symptom relief in hospital palliative cancer care: results from a prospective longitudinal study.

PURPOSE: To study the use of interventions and symptom relief for adult patients with incurable cancer admitted to an acute palliative care unit providing integrated oncology and palliative care services. METHODS: All admissions during 1 year were assessed. The use of interventions was evaluated for all hospitalizations. Patients with assessments for worst and average pain intensity, tiredness, drowsiness, nausea, appetite, dyspnea, depression, anxiety, well-being, constipation, and sleep were evaluated for symptom development during hospitalization. Descriptive statistics was applied for the use of interventions and the paired sample t-test to compare symptom intensities (SIs). RESULTS: For 451 admissions, mean hospital length of stay was 7.0 days and mean patient age 69 years. More than one-third received systemic cancer therapy. Diagnostic imaging was performed in 66% of the hospitalizations, intravenous rehydration in 45%, 37% received antibiotics, and 39% were attended by the multidisciplinary team. At admission and at discharge, respectively, 55% and 44% received oral opioids and 27% and 45% subcutaneous opioids. For the majority, opioid dose was adjusted during hospitalization. Symptom registrations were available for 180 patients. Tiredness yielded the highest mean SI score (5.6, NRS 0-10) at admission and nausea the lowest (2.2). Significant reductions during hospitalization were reported for all assessed SIs (p ≤ 0.01). Patients receiving systemic cancer therapy reported symptom relief similar to those not on systemic cancer therapy. CONCLUSION: Clinical practice and symptom relief during hospitalization were described. Symptom improvements were similar for oncological and palliative care patients.

Fully Integrated Oncology and Palliative Care Services at a Local Hospital in Mid-Norway: Development and Operation of an Innovative Care Delivery Model.

INTRODUCTION: Early access to cancer palliative care is recommended. Descriptions of structures and processes of outpatient palliative care clinics operated within smaller hospitals are scarce. This paper presents the development and operation of a fully integrated cancer and palliative care outpatient clinic at a local hospital in a rural region of Mid-Norway offering palliative care concurrent with cancer treatment. A standardized care pathway was applied. METHODS: Palliative care is in Norway part of the public healthcare system. Official recommendations recent years point out action points to improve delivery of palliative care. An integrated cancer and palliative care outpatient clinic at a local hospital and an innovative care delivery model was developed and operated in this setting. Patients were recruited for a descriptive study of the patient population. Clinical data were collected by clinical staff and 13 symptom intensities were reported by the patients. RESULTS: Cancer and palliative care were provided by one team of healthcare professionals trained in both fields. There was a close collaboration with the other departments at the hospital, with its affiliated tertiary hospital, and with community health and care services to provide timely referral, enhanced continuity, and improved coordination of care. Eighty-eight patients were included. Mean age was 65.6 years, the most common cancer diagnoses were digestive organs (22.7%), male genital organs (20.5%) or breast (25.0%), 75.0% had metastatic or locally advanced cancer, 59.1% were treated with non-curative intention and 93.1% had Karnofsky Performance Status ≥ 80%. Median scores of individual symptoms ranged from 0 to 3 (numerical rating scale, 0-10) and 61.0% reported at least one clinically significant symptom rating (≥ 4). CONCLUSION: This delivery model of integrated outpatient cancer and palliative care is particularly relevant in rural regions allowing cancer patients access to palliative care earlier in the disease trajectory and closer to home.

Palliative care is an important part of cancer care which aims at improving cancer patients' symptom burden and quality of life and support their carers. Palliative care has traditionally been separated from cancer care. During the last decade, one has become aware of the benefits of introducing palliative care early and concurrent with cancer treatment. Most cancer patients are nowadays treated as outpatients. Availability of palliative care as a routine part of outpatient cancer clinics is therefore important. Most of the described models of early palliative care in cancer care are within large tertiary hospitals. Here it is described how early palliative care was delivered to cancer patients in an outpatient clinic in a smaller hospital in a rural region of Mid-Norway. In this integrated cancer and palliative care outpatient clinic, cancer and palliative care were provided by one team of healthcare professionals trained in both fields. The integrated outpatient clinic collaborated closely with the other hospital departments and with community health and care services. This was needed to be able to offer palliative care to all cancer patients in need of it, and closer to their home. Many of the patients attending the integrated outpatient clinic could not be cured for their cancer. They did not have many symptoms of their cancer, and they had a high functional status. This demonstrated that the integrated outpatient clinic in this local hospital was a relevant place to offer palliative care early and concurrent with cancer treatment before symptoms became severe.

PALLiON - PALLiative care Integrated in ONcology: study protocol for a Norwegian national cluster-randomized control trial with a complex intervention of early integration of palliative care.

BACKGROUND: Several publications have addressed the need for a systematic integration of oncological care focused on the tumor and palliative care (PC) focused on the patient with cancer. The exponential increase in anticancer treatments and the high number of patients living longer with advanced disease have accentuated this. Internationally, there is now a persuasive argument that introducing PC early during anticancer treatment in patients with advanced disease has beneficial effects on symptoms, psychological distress, and survival. METHODS: This is a national cluster-randomized trial (C-RCT) in 12 Norwegian hospitals. The trial investigates effects of early, systematic integration of oncology and specialized PC in patients with advanced cancer in six intervention hospitals compared with conventional care in six. Hospitals are stratified on the size of local catchment areas before randomization. In the intervention hospitals, a three-part complex intervention will be implemented. The backbone of the intervention is the development and implementation of patient-centered care pathways that contain early, compulsory referral to PC and regular and systematic registrations of symptoms. An educational program must be completed before patient inclusion. A total of 680 patients with advanced cancer and one caregiver per patient are included when patients come for start of last line of chemotherapy, defined according to national treatment guidelines. Data registration, clinical variables, and patient- and caregiver-reported outcomes take place every 2 months for 1 year or until death. The primary outcome is use of chemotherapy in the last 3 months of life by comparing the proportion of patients who receive this in the intervention and control groups. Primary outcome is use of chemotherapy in the last 3 months before death, i.e. number of patients. Secondary outcomes are initiation, discontinuation and number of cycles, last 3 months of life, administration of other medical interventions in the last month of life, symptom burden, quality of life (QoL), satisfaction with information and follow-up, and caregiver health, QoL, and satisfaction with care. DISCUSSION: Results from this C-RCT will be used to raise the awareness about the positive outcomes of early provision of specialized palliative care using pathways for patients with advanced cancer receiving medical anticancer treatment. The long-term clinical objective is to integrate these patient-centered pathways in Norwegian cancer care. The specific focus on the patient and family and the organization of a predictable care trajectory is consistent with current Norwegian strategies for cancer care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03088202. Registered on 23 March 2017.

Pain management index (PMI)-does it reflect cancer patients' wish for focus on pain?

BACKGROUND: The pain management index (PMI) was developed to combine information about the prescribed analgesics and the self-reported pain intensity in order to assess physicians' response to patients' pain. However, PMI has been used to explore undertreatment of cancer pain. The present study explores prevalence of negative PMI and its associations to clinical variables, including the patient-perceived wish for more attention to pain. METHODS: A single-center, cross-sectional, observational study of cancer patients was conducted. Data on demographics and clinical variables, as well as patient-perceived wish for more attention to pain, were registered. PMI was calculated. Negative PMI indicates that the analgesics prescribed might not be appropriate to the pain intensity reported by the patient, and associations to negative PMI were explored by logistic regression models. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-seven patients were included, 53% had a negative PMI score. Negative PMI scores were more frequent among patients with breast cancer (OR 4.2, 95% CI 1.3, 13.5), in a follow-up setting (OR 12.1, 95% CI 1.4, 101.4), and were inversely associated to low performance status (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.03, 0.65). Twenty-two percent of patients with negative PMI scores reported that they wanted more focus on pain management, versus 13% among patients with a non-negative PMI score; the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: A high prevalence of negative PMI was observed, but only 1/5 of patients with a negative PMI wanted more attention to pain by their physician. Our findings challenge the use of PMI as a measure of undertreatment of cancer pain.

An in-hospital clinical care pathway with integrated decision support for cancer pain management reduced pain intensity and needs for hospital stay.

PURPOSE: A clinical care pathway for pain management in a palliative care unit was studied with outcomes related to patients, physicians, and health care service. Mandatory use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and physician-directed decision support (DS) were integrated parts of the pathway. METHODS: Adult cancer patients with pain intensity (PI) ≥ 5 (NRS 0-10) at admission were eligible. The patients reported average and worst PI at admission, day four, and discharge. The physicians completed the DS at admission and day four. The DS presented potential needs for treatment changes based on pain severity and pathophysiology. The physicians reported treatment changes due to input from the DS system. The two primary outcomes were average and worst PI changes from admission to discharge. Hospital length of stay (LOS) was registered. RESULTS: Of 52 included patients, 41 were discharged alive. For those, the mean average PI at admission and at discharge was 5.8 and 2.4, respectively, a reduction of 3.4 points (CI 95% 2.7-4.1). The corresponding worst pain intensities were 7.9 and 3.8, a reduction of 4.1 points (CI 95% 3.4-4.8). The physicians completed DS forms for all patients. Fifty-five percent (CI 95% 41-69) of the patients had pain intervention changes based on the DS. A significant reduction in LOS (4.4 days, CI 95% 0.5-8.3) was observed during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: The interventions were implemented according to the intentions and PI was reduced as hypothesized. For evaluation of generalizability, the interventions should be studied in other settings and with a controlled design.

Sleep quality in hospitalized patients with advanced cancer: an observational study using self-reports of sleep and actigraphy.

PURPOSE: Although patients with advanced cancer report poor sleep quality, few studies have assessed sleep quality with a combination of subjective and objective measures. We aimed to examine sleep quality in hospitalized patients with advanced cancer by combining patient-reported outcome-measures (PROMs) and polysomnography (PSG) or actigraphy. METHODS: A one-night prospective observational study of sleep in hospitalized patients with metastatic cancer using WHO step III opioids was conducted. Total sleep time, sleep onset latency, number of awakenings, and wake after sleep onset were assessed by PROMs and actigraphy. Sleep quality was assessed by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) (range; 0-21), where higher scores indicate worse sleep quality. RESULTS: Forty patients were monitored. Median age was 70, median oral morphine equivalent dose was 80 mg/24 h (10-1725), median Karnofsky Performance Score was 50 (20-90), and median time to death from inclusion was 38 days (4-319). Mean PSQI score was 6.5 (SD ± 3.4). PROMs and actigraphy of mean (SD) sleep onset latency were 46 (± 64) and 35 min (± 61), respectively, while mean time awake at night was 37 (± 35) and 40 min (± 21). PROMs and actigraphy differed on number of awakenings (mean 2 (± 1) vs. 24 (± 15), p Ë‚ 0.001). Bland-Altman plots showed large individual differences between PROMs and actigraphy. PSG was not feasible. CONCLUSIONS: PROMs and actigraphy documented poor sleep quality, but a lack of agreement across methods. The study demonstrates a need to improve assessment of sleep quality and treatment of sleep disturbance in hospitalized patients with advanced cancer near end of life.

Pain Intensity Factors Changing Breakthrough Pain Prevalence in Patients with Advanced Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of a Cross-Sectional Observational International Study.

INTRODUCTION: Different definitions of breakthrough pain (BTP) influence the observed BTP prevalence. This study examined BTP prevalence variability due to use of different cutoffs for controlled background pain, different assessment periods for background pain, and difference between worst and average pain intensity (PI). METHODS: Cancer patients from the EPCRC-CSA study who reported flare-ups of pain past 24 h were potential BTP cases. BTP prevalence was calculated for different cutoffs for background PI on numeric rating scales (NRS 0-10) for the past week, past 48 and past 24 h period. Furthermore, BTP cases were categorized based on the difference between maximum and average PI past 24 h (range, 0 to > 2 points, NRS 0-10). RESULTS: Of 696 respondents, 302 patients (43.4%) reported pain flares the past 24 h. The BTP prevalence when using a defined background PI ≤ 4 for the past week was 19.8%. This number varied for different defined cutoffs for background PI. Actual background PI and BTP prevalence also varied between the assessment periods "past week", "past 48 h", and "past 24 h" (PI 4.0, 3.6, and 3.4; BTP prevalence 19.8, 22.7, and 24.9% for background PI ≤ 4). For patients with background PI ≤ 4 past week, 105 had a difference between maximum and average PI ≥ one point and 48 had a difference > two points. CONCLUSIONS: The reported BTP prevalence is dependent on the cutoff for background PI in the BTP definition, population background PI during the assessment period, and defined cutoff for the difference between worst and average PI. FUNDING: NTNU, Norwegian University of Science and Technology.

Development of EirV3: A Computer-Based Tool for Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Cancer.

PURPOSE: Immediate transfer of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for use in medical consultations is facilitated by electronic assessments. We aimed to describe the rationale and development of Eir version 3 (EirV3), a computer-based symptom assessment tool for cancer, with emphasis on content and user-friendliness. METHODS: EirV3's specifications and content were developed through multiprofessional, stepwise, and iterative processes (from 2013 to 2016), with literature reviews on traditional and electronic assessment and classification methods, formative iterative usability tests with end-users, and assessment of patient preferences for paper versus electronic assessments. RESULTS: EirV3 has the following two modules: Eir-Patient for PROMs registration on tablets and Eir-Doctor for presentation of PROMs in a user-friendly interface on computers. Eir-Patient starts with 19 common cancer symptoms followed by specific, in-depth questions for endorsed symptoms. The pain section includes a body map for pain location and intensity, whereas physical functioning, nutritional intake, and well-being are standard questions for all. Data are wirelessly transferred to Eir-Doctor. Symptoms with intensity scores ≥ 3 (on a 0 to 10 scale) are marked in red, with brighter colors corresponding to higher intensity, and supplemented with graphs displaying symptom development over time. Usability results showed that patients and health care providers found EirV3 to be intuitive, easy to use, and relevant. When comparing PROM assessments on paper versus tablets (n = 114), 19% of patients preferred paper, 41% preferred tablets, and 40% had no preference. Median intraclass correlation coefficient between paper and tablets (0.815) was excellent. CONCLUSION: Iterative test rounds followed by continuous improvements led to a user-friendly, applicable symptom assessment tool, EirV3, developed for and by end-users. EirV3 is undergoing international testing of clinical and cross-cultural adaptability.

From "Breakthrough" to "Episodic" Cancer Pain? A European Association for Palliative Care Research Network Expert Delphi Survey Toward a Common Terminology and Classification of Transient Cancer Pain Exacerbations.

CONTEXT: Cancer pain can appear with spikes of higher intensity. Breakthrough cancer pain (BTCP) is the most common term for the transient exacerbations of pain, but the ability of the nomenclature to capture relevant pain variations and give treatment guidance is questionable. OBJECTIVES: To reach consensus on definitions, terminology, and subclassification of transient cancer pain exacerbations. METHODS: The most frequent authors on BTCP literature were identified using the same search strategy as in a systematic review and invited to participate in a two-round Delphi survey. Topics with a low degree of consensus on BTCP classification were refined into 20 statements. The participants rated their degree of agreement with the statements on a numeric rating scale (0-10). Consensus was defined as a median numeric rating scale score of ≥7 and an interquartile range of ≤3. RESULTS: Fifty-two authors had published three or more articles on BTCP over the past 10 years. Twenty-seven responded in the first round and 24 in the second round. Consensus was reached for 13 of 20 statements. Transient cancer pain exacerbations can occur without background pain, when background pain is uncontrolled, and regardless of opioid treatment. There exist cancer pain exacerbations other than BTCP, and the phenomenon could be named "episodic pain." Patient-reported treatment satisfaction is important with respect to assessment. Subclassification according to pain pathophysiology can provide treatment guidance. CONCLUSION: Significant transient cancer pain exacerbations include more than just BTCP. Patient input and pain classification are important factors for tailoring treatment.

How are patient populations characterized in studies investigating depression in advanced cancer? Results from a systematic literature review.

CONTEXT: Prevalence rates of depression in patients with advanced cancer vary considerably. This may be because of heterogeneous samples and use of different assessment methods. Adequate sample descriptions and consistent use of measures are needed to be able to generalize research findings and apply them to clinical practice. OBJECTIVES: Our objective was twofold: First, to investigate which clinically important variables were used to describe the samples in studies of depression in patients with advanced cancer; and second, to examine the methods used for assessing and classifying depression in these studies. METHODS: PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, and CINAHL were searched combining search term groups representing "depression," "palliative care," and "advanced cancer" covering 2007-2011. Titles and abstracts were screened, and relevant full-text articles were evaluated independently by two authors. Information on 32 predefined variables on cancer disease, treatment, sociodemographics, depression-related factors, and assessment methods was extracted from the articles. RESULTS: After removing duplicates, 916 citations were screened of which 59 articles were retained. Age, gender, and stage of the cancer disease were the most frequently reported variables. Depression-related variables were rarely reported, for example, antidepressant use (17%) and previous depressive episodes (12%). Only 25% of the studies assessed and classified depression according to a validated diagnostic system. CONCLUSION: Current practice for describing sample characteristics and assessing depression varies greatly between studies. A more standardized practice is recommended to enhance the generalizability and utility of findings. Stakeholders are encouraged to work toward a common standard for sample descriptions.

How are palliative care cancer populations characterized in randomized controlled trials? A literature review.

CONTEXT: The difficulties in defining a palliative care patient accentuate the need to provide stringent descriptions of the patient population in palliative care research. OBJECTIVES: To conduct a systematic literature review with the aim of identifying which key variables have been used to describe adult palliative care cancer populations in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: The data sources used were MEDLINE (1950 to January 25, 2010) and Embase (1980 to January 25, 2010), limited to RCTs in adult cancer patients with incurable disease. Forty-three variables were systematically extracted from the eligible articles. RESULTS: The review includes 336 articles reporting RCTs in palliative care cancer patients. Age (98%), gender (90%), cancer diagnosis (89%), performance status (45%), and survival (45%) were the most frequently reported variables. A large number of other variables were much less frequently reported. CONCLUSION: A substantial variation exists in how palliative care cancer populations are described in RCTs. Few variables are consistently registered and reported. There is a clear need to standardize the reporting. The results from this work will serve as the basis for an international Delphi process with the aim of reaching consensus on a minimum set of descriptors to characterize a palliative care cancer population.

Radiation therapy in malignant spinal cord compression: what is the current knowledge on fractionation schedules? A systematic literature review.

Malignant spinal cord compression (MSCC) in patients with short life expectancy is most frequently treated with radiotherapy and/or corticosteroids. Hypofractionation has been proven to be efficient in metastatic bone pain, but the level of evidence for hypofractionation in MSCC is limited. Searches were performed in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library for all relevant articles. Two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified. The first RCT compared hypofractionation (8 gray (Gy)×2) with a more fractionated regimen. No differences in symptom control, duration of response or survival were detected. The second RCT compared 8 Gy×2 with 8 Gy×1. No significant differences in symptom control, duration of response or survival were detected. Five prospective non-randomised studies identified no differences in post-treatment motor function. Of 17 identified retrospective studies the largest included 1304 patients, treated with five different regimens ranging from 8 Gy×1 to 2 Gy×20, and found similar post-treatment ambulatory status. A Cochrane review based on the first published RCT concluded that short courses of radiotherapy appear to be justified in patients with a poor prognosis.