Cancer Pain and Opioid Use Disorder.

Opioid use disorder (OUD) is increasingly recognized and co-present in patients with cancer. Unfortunately, OUD is not addressed or treated adequately in oncology settings. In addition, patients with cancer-related pain treated with narcotic pain medications are at risk for nonmedical opioid use (NMOU). More than two-thirds of patients with advanced cancer have pain. Both OUD and NMOU need to be concomitantly addressed alongside cancer-related pain management to avoid complications such as overdose. We review the approach to identifying and treating OUD and NMOU in patients with cancer and cancer-related pain.

Medical Complications of Psychiatric Treatment: An Update.

Psychiatric medications are used commonly in hospitalized patients and are particularly indicated in patients who are critically ill to manage many conditions. Due to their many indications in the intensive care unit (ICU), psychiatric medications should be closely monitored in these medically compromised patients for adverse reactions and medical complications because they may affect essentially all organ systems. These range from life-threatening reactions to other less significant effects, such as sedation, to other detrimental complications, such as pancreatitis. Knowledge of psychopharmacology as well as the diagnosis and treatment of these complications is imperative in treating patients in the ICU.

Early Childhood Adversity and its Associations With Anxiety, Depression, and Distress in Women With Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Certain vulnerability factors have been found to place patients at risk for depression and anxiety, especially within the context of medical illness. OBJECTIVES: We sought to describe the relationships among early childhood adversity (ECA) and anxiety, depression and distress in patients with breast cancer. METHODS: Patients with breast cancer (stages 0-IV) were assessed for ECA (i.e., the Risky Families Questionnaire subscales include Abuse/Neglect/Chaotic Home Environment), distress (i.e., Distress Thermometer and Problem List), anxiety (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Anxiety), depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Depression), meeting standardized cut-off thresholds for distress (Distress Thermometer and Problem List ≥4 or ≥7)/anxiety (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Anxiety ≥8)/depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Depression ≥8) and demographic factors. RESULTS: A total of 125 participants completed the study (78% response rate). ECA was associated with depression (p <0.001), anxiety (p = 0.001), and distress (p = 0.006), meeting cut-off threshold criteria for distress (p = 0.024), anxiety (p = 0.048), and depression (p = 0.001). On multivariate analysis, only depression (p = 0.04) and emotional issues (i.e., component of Distress Thermometer and Problem List) (p = 0.001) were associated with ECA. Neglect, but not Abuse and Chaotic Home Environment, was associated with depression (ß = 0.442, p < 0.001), anxiety (ß = 0.342, p = 0.002), and self-identified problems with family (ß = 0.288, p = 0.022), emotion (ß = 0.345, p = 0.004), and physical issues (ß = 0.408, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: ECA and neglect are associated with multiple psychologic symptoms, but most specifically depression in the setting of breast cancer. ECA contributes to psychologic burden as a vulnerability factor. ECA may help to explain individual patient trajectories and influence the provision of patient-centered care for psychologic symptoms in patients with breast cancer.

ReCAP: Would Women With Breast Cancer Prefer to Receive an Antidepressant for Anxiety or Depression From Their Oncologist?

PURPOSE: Patient treatment preferences for the management of anxiety and depression influence adherence to treatment and treatment outcomes, yet the preferences of patients with breast cancer for provider-specific pharmacologic management of anxiety and depression is unknown. This study examined the antidepressant prescriber preferences of patients with breast cancer and their preferences for treatment by a mental health professional. METHODS: Patients with breast cancer (stages 0 to IV) were asked two questions: "Would you be willing to have your oncologist treat your depression or anxiety with an antidepressant medication if you were to become depressed or anxious at any point during your treatment?" and "Would you prefer to be treated by a psychiatrist or mental health professional for problems with either anxiety or depression?" In addition, the Distress Thermometer and Problem List, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Risky Families Questionnaire, and demographic information were assessed. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-five participants completed the study. A total of 60.4% were willing to accept an antidepressant from an oncologist, and 26.3% preferred treatment by a mental health professional. The 77.3% who were willing to receive an antidepressant from their oncologist reported either no preference or that treatment by a mental health professional did not matter (P = .01). Participants taking antidepressants (P = .02) or reporting high chronic stress (P = .03) preferred a mental health professional. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients accepted antidepressant prescribing by their oncologist; only a minority preferred treatment by a mental health professional. These findings suggest that promoting education of oncologists to assess psychological symptoms and manage anxiety and depression as a routine part of an outpatient visit is beneficial

Effect of recombinant human deoxyribonuclease on oropharyngeal secretions in patients with head-and-neck cancers treated with radiochemotherapy.

PURPOSE: The current study examined the effect of recombinant human deoxyribonuclease (rhDNase) on quality of life (QOL) measures, clinical improvement, and DNA content of thick oropharyngeal secretions (OPS) in patients with head-and-neck (H&N) cancers. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Thirty-six patients with local-regional advanced H&N cancer receiving chemoradiationtherapy (CRT) were randomized to receive either placebo or rhDNase. Endpoints included MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Head and Neck (MDASI-HN) and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck (FACT-NH) scores, along with clinical assessment and DNA concentration of OPS. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in patients' QOL outcomes over the study period. Both groups showed an increase in symptom and interference scores, although patients in the rhDNase group showed a greater decline in both scores during the 3 months posttreatment. Similarly, both groups showed a decline in physical and functional well being but recovered in the 3 months posttreatment follow-up, with the rhDNase group exhibiting speedier recovery. Patients in the rhDNase group exhibited significant clinical improvement in OPS, blindly assessed by a physician, compared with the placebo group (67% vs 27%, respectively; P=.046). The rhDNase group showed no change in OPS-DNA concentration, although the placebo group showed a significant increase in DNA concentration during the drug trial (P=.045). There was no differences in acute toxicities between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary data suggest that rhDNase did not significantly improve study primary endpoints of QOL measures compared with the placebo group. However, there was a significant improvement in secondary endpoints of clinically assessed OPS and DNA concentration compared with placebo in H&N cancer patients treated with CRT. Further investigation in larger numbers of patients is warranted.