Successful Management of Terminal Delirium With Transdermal Blonanserin Patch in a Terminally Ill Cancer Patient.

Delirium is a distressing condition in terminally ill cancer patients, often treated with antipsychotics. Administering them orally, subcutaneously, or intravenously can be challenging in severely agitated patients. Transdermal antipsychotic patches offer an alternative, but their use for terminal delirium remains underexplored. We present the case of a 73-year-old man with advanced diffuse large B cell lymphoma who developed severe mixed delirium during third-line chemotherapy. Nonpharmacological interventions and oral risperidone plus intravenous haloperidol failed to improve his condition. Subsequently, a transdermal blonanserin patch was applied, resulting in the resolution of hallucinations on day 1 and agitation on day 3, allowing improved communication. The patch was easily applied daily without notable adverse events. However, he deteriorated a week later with an estimated survival of days, ultimately requiring continuous midazolam for refractory agitation. This case underscores the potential of transdermal blonanserin patches for delirium in terminally ill cancer patients, emphasizing the need for future prospective studies.

Comparison of Pharmacological Treatments for Agitated Delirium in the Last Days of Life.

CONTEXT: Antipsychotics are often used in managing symptoms of terminal delirium, but evidence is limited. OBJECTIVES: To explore the comparative effectiveness of haloperidol with as-needed benzodiazepines (HPD) vs. chlorpromazine (CPZ) vs. levomepromazine (LPZ) for agitated delirium in the last days. METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted in two palliative care units in Japan. Adult cancer patients who developed agitated delirium with a modified Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS-PAL) of one or more were included; palliative care specialist physicians determined that the etiology was irreversible; and estimated survival was 3 weeks or less. Patients treated with HPD, CPZ, or LPZ were analyzed. We measured RASS, NuDESC, Agitation Distress Scale (ADS), and Communication Capacity Scale (CCS) on Days 1 and 3. RESULTS: A total of 277 patients were enrolled, and 214 were analyzed (112 in HPD, 50 in CPZ, and 52 in LPZ). In all groups, the mean RASS-PAL score significantly decreased on Day 3 (1.37 to -1.01, 1.87 to -1.04, 1.79 to -0.62, respectively; P < 0.001); the NuDESC and ADS scores also significantly decreased. The percentages of patients with moderate to severe agitation and those with full communication capacity on Day 3 were not significantly different. The treatments were well-tolerated. While one-fourth of HPD group changed antipsychotics, 88% or more of CPZ and LPZ groups continued the initial antipsychotics. CONCLUSION: Haloperidol with as-needed benzodiazepine, chlorpromazine, or levomepromazine may be effective and safe for terminal agitation. Chlorpromazine and levomepromazine may have an advantage of no need to change medications.

Continuous Deep Sedation for Psycho-Existential Suffering: A Multicenter Nationwide Study.

Background: There is ongoing debate on whether continuous deep sedation (CDS) for psycho-existential suffering is appropriate. Objective: We aimed to (1) clarify clinical practice of CDS for psycho-existential suffering and (2) assess its impact on patients' survival. Methods: Advanced cancer patients admitted to 23 palliative care units in 2017 were consecutively enrolled. We compared patients' characteristics, CDS practices, and survival between those receiving CDS for psycho-existential suffering ± physical symptoms and only for physical symptoms. Results: Of 164 patients analyzed, 14 (8.5%) received CDS for psycho-existential suffering ± physical symptoms and only one of them (0.6%) solely for psycho-existential suffering. Patients receiving CDS for psycho-existential suffering, compared with those only for physical symptoms, were likely to have no specific religion (p = 0.025), and desired (78.6% vs. 22.0%, respectively; p < 0.001) and requested a hastened death more frequently (57.1% vs. 10.0%, respectively; p < 0.001). All of them had a poor physical condition with limited estimated survival, and mostly (71%) received intermittent sedation before CDS. CDS for psycho-existential suffering caused greater physicians' discomfort (p = 0.037), and lasted for longer (p = 0.029). Dependency, loss of autonomy, and hopelessness were common reasons for psycho-existential suffering that required CDS. The survival time after CDS initiation was longer in patients receiving it for psycho-existential suffering (log-rank, p = 0.021). Conclusion: CDS was applied to patients who suffered from psycho-existential suffering, which often associated with desire or request for a hastened death. Further studies and debate are warranted to develop feasible treatment strategies for psycho-existential suffering.

Cross-cultural comparison of continuous deep sedation for advanced cancer patients in East Asian countries: prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Cultural, social, and legal factors have been known to affect physicians' practice of continuous deep sedation. There have been few quantitative studies to compare continuous deep sedation practice in Asian countries. We aimed to describe and compare clinical characteristics of continuous deep sedation in Japan, Korea and Taiwan. METHODS: Patients with advanced cancer admitted to participating palliative care units were enrolled from January 2017 to September 2018. We evaluated and compared (i) the prevalence of continuous deep sedation, (ii) the characteristics of sedated and non-sedated groups in each country, and (iii) continuous deep sedation administration patterns among the three countries. RESULTS: A total of 2158 participants were included in our analysis, and 264 received continuous deep sedation. The continuous deep sedation prevalence was 10, 16 and 22% in Japan, Korea and Taiwan, respectively. Delirium was the most frequent target symptom in all countries, along with dyspnoea (in Japan) and psychological symptoms (in Korea). Midazolam was most frequently used in Japan and Taiwan, but not in Korea (P < 0.001). Among the patients receiving continuous deep sedation, the hydration amount on the final day was significantly different, with median volumes of 200, 500 and 0 mL in Japan, Korea and Taiwan, respectively (P < 0.001). In Korea, 33% of the continuous deep sedation administration caused a high degree of physicians' discomfort, but 3% in Japan and 5% in Taiwan (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical practices of continuous deep sedation and physicians' discomfort related to continuous deep sedation initiation highly varied across countries. We need to develop optimal decision-making models of continuous deep sedation and hydration during continuous deep sedation in each country.

Do Types of Opioids Matter for Terminal Cancer Dyspnea? A Preliminary Multicenter Cohort Study.

CONTEXT: Dyspnea is among the most distressing symptoms in the last weeks to days of life (terminal dyspnea). While physicians frequently use parenteral opioids other than morphine for terminal dyspnea, little is known about their effects in cancer patients. OBJECTIVES: To explore the effectiveness and safety of parenteral morphine, oxycodone, and hydromorphone for cancer patients with terminal dyspnea. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a multicenter cohort study that consecutively enrolled advanced cancer patients with moderate/severe terminal dyspnea. Participating palliative care physicians initiated parenteral opioids (morphine/oxycodone/hydromorphone), utilizing a standardized treatment algorithm. We examined the dyspnea intensity (Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale [IPOS]) at 24 and 48 hours. RESULTS: Of 108 patients (mean age = 72), 66 (61%), 34 (32%), and 8 (7.4%) received morphine, oxycodone, and hydromorphone, respectively. At 24 hours, mean dyspnea IPOS scores significantly decreased from 3.0 (standard error (SE) = 0.1) at the baseline to 1.6 (0.1), 2.9 (0.1) to 2.0 (0.2), and 3.5 (0.2) to 1.2 (0.4) in the morphine (P < 0.001), oxycodone (P < 0.001), and hydromorphone (P = 0.011) groups, respectively. At 48 hours, the IPOS scores significantly reduced from 2.9 (0.1) at the baseline to 1.4 (0.1), 2.9 (0.1) to 1.6 (0.2), and 3.5 (0.2) to 1.2 (0.2) in the morphine (P < 0.001), oxycodone (P < 0.001), and hydromorphone (P = 0.004) groups, respectively. No significant differences in mean scores were found among the three groups at 24 (P = 0.080) and 48 hours (P = 0.322). Adverse events were rare. CONCLUSION: Parenteral morphine, oxycodone, and hydromorphone may be similarly effective and safe for cancer patients with terminal dyspnea.

Influence of dosing pattern of antipsychotics on treatment outcome of delirium in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines recommend antipsychotics for the treatment of delirium; however, there has been no confirmed recommendation regarding their administrating patterns. This study aims to investigate whether different dosing patterns of antipsychotics (single or multiple administrations) influence the outcomes of delirium treatment. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of a prospective observational study involving patients with advanced cancer and delirium receiving antipsychotics. The Delirium Rating Scale Revised-98 was administered at baseline and after 72 h of starting pharmacotherapy. Patients were classified into single administration group (received a single dosage within 24 h before the assessment) and multiple administration group (received more than one dosage). RESULTS: A total of 555 patients (single administration 492 (88.6%); multiple administration 63 (11.4%)) were subjected to analyses. The patients in the multiple administration group were more likely to be male, in psycho-oncology consulting settings, with lower performance status, with hyperactive delirium and with severer delirium symptoms. In the multivariate analysis, single administration was significantly associated with better improvement of delirium (p < 0.01, 95% confidence interval: 1.83-5.87) even after controlling covariates. There were no significant differences in the mean dosages of antipsychotics per day in chlorpromazine equivalent (single administration 116.8 mg/day, multiple administration 123.5 mg/day) and the incidence of adverse events between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this observational study sample, Delirium Rating Scale severity score improvement in single administration was higher than that seen in multiple administration. There was no difference in adverse events between the two groups.

Visualizing How to Use Antipsychotics for Agitated Delirium in the Last Days of Life.

CONTEXT: How physicians use antipsychotics for agitated delirium in the last days of life varies markedly, which could hamper the quality of care. OBJECTIVES: To examine adherence to an algorithm-based treatment for terminal agitated delirium, and explore its effectiveness and safety. METHODS: A single-center, prospective, observational study was conducted in a 27-bed palliative care unit in Japan. All adult cancer patients who developed agitated delirium with a modified Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) of +1 or more were included; the palliative care specialists determined that the etiology was irreversible, the estimated survival was three weeks or less, and the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status was three or four. Patients were treated with an algorithm to visualize how to use antipsychotics, with the treatment goal defined as no agitation (RASS≤0) or acceptable agitation for patients and families. We provided all patients nonpharmacological management to alleviate the symptoms of delirium and administered antipsychotic medications when the nonpharmacological approach was insufficient. We measured the adherence rate, RASS, Nursing Delirium Screening Scale items 2, 3, 4 (Nu-DESC), and Agitation Distress Scale item 2 (ADS) on days 0, 1, 3, 7, 14, 21, and 24 hours before death. RESULTS: A total of 164 patients were enrolled. Adherence rates were 99, 94, and 89%, and treatment goals were achieved in 66, 83, and 93% on days one, three, and seven, respectively. The mean RASS decreased from +1.41 to -0.84 on day three; Nu-DESC decreased from 4.19 to 1.83, and ADS decreased from 1.54 to 0.38. There were seven severe adverse events (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) of 3), including aspiration (n = 3), apnea (n = 2), tremor (n = 1), and muscle rigidity (n = 1) on day three. CONCLUSION: The algorithm-based treatment could be feasible, effective, and safe. Visualizing how palliative care specialists provide pharmacological management could be beneficial for nonspecialist clinicians, and clinical, educational, and research implications warrant further empirical testing.

The feasibility and effects of a pharmacological treatment algorithm for cancer patients with terminal dyspnea: A multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: How clinicians treat patients with terminal dyspnea widely varies, which could hamper quality care. We visualized comprehensive pharmacological treatment delivered by palliative care physicians. AIM: To examine adherence to a comprehensive pharmacological treatment algorithm for patients with terminal dyspnea, and to explore its outcomes during 48 h. DESIGN: A multicenter cohort study at five sites (February 2020 to June 2021). SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: We prospectively enrolled consecutive patients with advanced cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 3-4, and moderate/severe dyspnea. Participating palliative care physicians initiated algorithm-based treatment. The primary outcome was the proportion of adherence to the treatment algorithm over 24 h (predefined goal, 70%). We evaluated the adherence, goal achievement, and dyspnea level with a numerical rating scale (NRS), as well as adverse events over 48 h. RESULTS: All 108 patients received algorithm-based pharmacological treatment. Among 96 and 87 patients who were alive at 24 and 48 h, respectively, 96 (100%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 96%-100%) and 82 (94%; 95%CI = 87%-98%) continued to receive the algorithm treatment, respectively, and 66 (69%; 95%CI = 59%-77%) and 64 (74%; 95%CI = 63%-82%) achieved the treatment goals, respectively. Using a complete case analysis with paired t-tests, mean dyspnea NRS scores significantly reduced from 7.3 (standard error, 0.2) at the baseline to 4.9 (0.3) at 24 h (n = 72; p < 0.001), and 7.2 (0.3) at the baseline to 4.6 (0.4) at 48 h (n = 55; p < 0.001). Most adverse events were mild to moderate. CONCLUSIONS: The comprehensive pharmacological treatment algorithm was feasible, and the study data supports its preliminary efficacy and safety. The use of this algorithm may help clinicians improve care for patients with terminal dyspnea.

Comparative study of clinicians' and family members' perceptions of patients' end-of-life experiences.

OBJECTIVE: End-of-life experiences (ELEs), such as deathbed visions (DBVs), have been reported worldwide. However, ELEs have rarely been discussed in clinical practice, possibly because of the different perceptions of ELEs among clinicians and families. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the differences in perception regarding ELEs, especially DBVs, between clinicians and families. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre, prospective and observational study with patients with cancer. After the patients' death, clinicians recorded their perceptions of patients' ELEs during the palliative care unit admission, and bereaved families responded to a questionnaire about ELEs. The primary outcome was the frequency and concordance of DBVs from the perspective of bereaved family members and clinicians. The second outcome was each group's frequency of terminal lucidity and terminal coincidence. RESULTS: The study included 443 patients. DBVs were reported more frequently by family members than clinicians (14.0% vs 2.7%, p<0.001). Among family members, terminal lucidity and terminal coincidence were observed at 7% and 7.9%, respectively, while only one case each was reported by clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians and family members may perceive ELEs differently. Enabling patients and their families to talk about ELEs would assist in optimising grief care.

Defining "Continuous Deep Sedation" Using Treatment Protocol: A Proposal Article.

Context: Continuous deep sedation (CDS) is regarded as a far-reaching form of sedative use for symptom control, but there are no established uniform definitions. Objectives: To propose types of sedative use related to CDS using treatment protocols with three parameters: documented treatment goals, rapidity of dose titration, and planned duration of treatment. Methods: Opinion article. Results: We propose four types of sedative use potentially related to CDS: (1) proportional sedation (treatment goal is symptom relief with regular monitoring to maximize patient communication, not a decrease in consciousness; with gradual use of sedatives; there is a chance to cease sedatives), (2) rapid proportional sedation (treatment goal is symptom relief with a rapid loading phase, followed by regular monitoring to maximize patient communication; there is a chance to cease sedatives), (3) deep sedation with a chance of cessation (deep sedation intended initially, followed by regular assessments of appropriateness of treatment goal; there is a chance to cease sedatives), and (4) continuous deep sedation until death (deep sedation indicated from initiation and maintained until death). Conclusion: This article proposes an idea that the use of treatment protocols that visualize treatment goals, rapidity of dose titration, and planned duration of treatment may help understand the existing variations in sedative use over the world. The use of treatment protocols in the same way when defining a medical treatment in other specialty fields might clear up the current confusion about the use of sedatives.

Are Prognostic Scores Better Than Clinician Judgment? A Prospective Study Using Three Models.

CONTEXT: Several prognostic models such as the Palliative Performance Scale (PPS), Palliative Prognostic Index (PPI), Palliative Prognostic Score (PaP) have been developed to complement clinician's prediction of survival (CPS). However, few studies with large scales have been conducted to show which prognostic tool had better performance than CPS in patients with weeks of survival. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare the prognostic performance of the PPS, PPI, PaP, and CPS in inpatients admitted to palliative care units (PCUs). METHODS: This study was part of a multi-center prospective observational study involving patients admitted to PCUs in Japan. We computed their prognostic performance using the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) and calibration plots for seven, 14-, 30- and 60-day survival. RESULTS: We included 1896 patients with a median overall survival of 19 days. The AUROC was 73% to 84% for 60-day and 30-day survival, 75% to 84% for 14-day survival, and 80% to 87% for seven-day survival. The calibration plot demonstrated satisfactory agreement between the observational and predictive probability for the four indices in all timeframes. Therefore, all four prognostic indices showed good performance. CPS and PaP consistently had significantly better performance than the PPS and PPI from one-week to two-month timeframes. CONCLUSION: The PPS, PPI, PaP, and CPS had relatively good performance in patients admitted to PCUs with weeks of survival. CPS and PaP had significantly better performance than the PPS and PPI. CPS may be sufficient for experienced clinicians while PPS may help to improve prognostic confidence for inexperienced clinicians.

A decision tree prediction model for a short-term outcome of delirium in patients with advanced cancer receiving pharmacological interventions: A secondary analysis of a multicenter and prospective observational study (Phase-R).

OBJECTIVE: There is no widely used prognostic model for delirium in patients with advanced cancer. The present study aimed to develop a decision tree prediction model for a short-term outcome. METHOD: This is a secondary analysis of a multicenter and prospective observational study conducted at 9 psycho-oncology consultation services and 14 inpatient palliative care units in Japan. We used records of patients with advanced cancer receiving pharmacological interventions with a baseline Delirium Rating Scale Revised-98 (DRS-R98) severity score of ≥10. A DRS-R98 severity score of <10 on day 3 was defined as the study outcome. The dataset was randomly split into the training and test dataset. A decision tree model was developed using the training dataset and potential predictors. The area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic curve was measured both in 5-fold cross-validation and in the independent test dataset. Finally, the model was visualized using the whole dataset. RESULTS: Altogether, 668 records were included, of which 141 had a DRS-R98 severity score of <10 on day 3. The model achieved an average AUC of 0.698 in 5-fold cross-validation and 0.718 (95% confidence interval, 0.627-0.810) in the test dataset. The baseline DRS-R98 severity score (cutoff of 15), hypoxia, and dehydration were the important predictors, in this order. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: We developed an easy-to-use prediction model for the short-term outcome of delirium in patients with advanced cancer receiving pharmacological interventions. The baseline severity of delirium and precipitating factors of delirium were important for prediction.

Association of the RASS Score with Intensity of Symptoms, Discomfort, and Communication Capacity in Terminally Ill Cancer Patients Receiving Palliative Sedation: Is RASS an Appropriate Outcome Measure?

Background: Palliative sedation is sometimes needed for refractory symptoms, and the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) is one of the key measures. The primary aim of this study was to explore the association between RASS and degree of distress quantified by other measures: Item "symptom control" of Support Team Assessment Schedule (STAS, item 2), Discomfort Scale for Dementia of Alzheimer Type (Discomfort Scale), and Noncommunicative Patient's Pain Assessment Instrument (NOPPAIN), as well as a communication capacity measured by the Communication Capacity Scale (CCS), item 4. Methods: This was a prospective observational study on terminally ill cancer patients with palliative sedation in a palliative care unit of a designated cancer hospital. Primarily responsible palliative care physicians rated RASS, Discomfort Scale, NOPPAIN, and CCS just before sedation and 1, 4, 24, and 48 hours after, and ward nurses rated STAS at the same time. Since the ward nurses evaluated STAS during palliative sedation, we regarded STAS as a standard of distress measure. Results: A total of 249 assessments were performed for 55 patients. RASS was moderately to highly associated with symptom intensity measured by STAS, discomfort measured by the Discomfort Scale, and pain measured by NOPPAIN (r = 0.63 to 0.73). But communication capacity measured by CCS is not parallel with RASS and demonstrated a valley shape. In 82 assessments with an RASS score of -1 to -3, 11 patients (13%) had physical symptoms of STAS of 2 or more. Conclusions: RASS can roughly estimate physical distress in patients with palliative sedation, but a measure to more precisely quantify the symptom experience is needed.

Feasibility of a fast-track randomized controlled trial of cell-free and concentrated ascites reinfusion therapy for patients with refractory malignant ascites.

BACKGROUND: Malignant ascites often causes discomfort in advanced cancer patients. Paracentesis is the most common treatment modality, but it requires frequently repeated treatment. Cell-free and concentrated ascites reinfusion therapy (CART) may prolong the paracentesis interval, but controlled trials are lacking. We assessed the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial of CART vs. paracentesis alone for patients with refractory malignant ascites. METHODS: This study was an open-label, fast-track, randomized controlled, feasibility trial. Patients admitted to four designated cancer hospitals who received no further anticancer treatments were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to a CART arm or control (simple paracentesis) arm. The feasibility endpoint was the percentage of patients who completed the study intervention. Secondary endpoints included paracentesis-free survival, patient's request on the questionnaire for paracentesis (PRO-paracentesis)-free survival (the period until the patients first reported that they would want paracentesis if indicated), and adverse events. RESULTS: We screened 953 patients for eligibility. Of 61 patients with refractory malignant ascites, 21 patients were determined as eligible. Finally, 20 patients consented and were allocated; 18 patients (90%, 95% CI: 68.3-98.8) completed the study intervention. All patients had an ECOG performance status of 3 or 4. The median drained ascites volume was 3,200 mL in the CART arm and 2,500 mL in the control arm. In the CART arm, the median reinfused albumin volume was 12.6 g. Median paracentesis-free survivals were 5 days (95% CI: 2-6) in the CART arm, and 6 days (3-9) in the control arm. Median PRO-paracentesis-free survivals were 4 days (2-5) and 5 days (1-9), respectively. A total of 73% of patients received paracentesis within 2 days from their first request for the next paracentesis. One patient in the CART arm developed Grade 1 fever. CONCLUSIONS: A fast-track randomized controlled trial of CART for patients with malignant ascites is feasible. The efficacy and safety of CART should be assessed in future trials. PRO-paracentesis-free survival may be a complementary outcome measure with paracentesis-free survival in future trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered at University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trial Registry as UMIN000031029 . Registered on 28/01/2018.

Family experience of palliative sedation therapy: proportional vs. continuous deep sedation.

PURPOSE: Some patients experience intense symptoms refractory to intensive palliative care, and palliative sedation is sometimes used. Palliative sedation may be classified into proportional and continuous deep sedation (CDS). The primary aim of this study was to compare family experience between families of patients who received proportional or CDS. METHODS: A multicenter questionnaire survey was conducted involving bereaved families of cancer patients who received proportional or CDS based on a sedation protocol. Overall evaluation of sedation (satisfaction, family-perceived distress, appropriateness of timing, and patient distress) and 13-item family concerns, good death, satisfaction with care, depression, quality of care, unfinished business, and balance between symptom relief and maintaining communication were measured. RESULTS: Among the 2120 patients who died, 222 patients received a continuous infusion of midazolam. A sedation protocol was used in 147 patients, and questionnaires were sent to 124 families. A total of 78 responses were finally returned (proportional, 58 vs. CDS, 20). There were no significant differences in the overall evaluation, family concerns, total score of good death, satisfaction, depression, or balance between symptom relief and maintaining communication. On the other hand, some quality of care items, i.e., relationship with medical staff (P < 0.01), physical care by nurses (P = 0.04), and coordination and consistency (P = 0.04), were significantly better in the CDS group than in the proportional sedation group. Family-reported unfinished business was also better in the CDS group, with marginal significance. CONCLUSIONS: Family experience of CDS was not less favorable than proportional sedation, and actually rated more favorably for some elements of quality of care and unfinished business.

Effect of continuous deep sedation on survival in the last days of life of cancer patients: A multicenter prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Continuous deep sedation is ethically controversial with respect to whether it shortens a patient's life. AIM: To examine whether continuous deep sedation shortens patient survival from the day of Palliative Performance Scale decline to 20 (PPS20). DESIGN: A part of a multicenter prospective cohort study (EASED study). SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: We recruited consecutive adult patients with advanced cancer admitted to 23 participating palliative care units in 2017 in Japan. We compared survival from PPS20 between those who did and did not receive continuous deep sedation. Continuous deep sedation was defined as the continuous administration of sedative medication with the intention to keep a patient continuously unconscious to alleviate otherwise uncontrollable symptoms, but the dose of sedatives was adjusted to achieve adequate symptom relief for each patient. The propensity score-weighting method was used to control for potential confounders, and five sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 1926 patients were enrolled. Patients discharged alive were excluded, and we analyzed 1625 patients of whom 156 (9.6%) received continuous deep sedation. Median survival from PPS20 of 1625 patients was 81 h (95% CI: 77-88). The RASS scores decreased to ⩽-4 was 66% at 24 h. Continuous deep sedation was not associated with a significant survival risk (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.85-1.33). All sensitivity analyses, including continuous deep sedation defined as the RASS score was ⩽-4 achieved the essentially the same results. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous deep sedation with careful dose adjustment was not associated with shorter survival in the last days of life in patients with advanced cancer.

Dexamethasone 8 mg for Cancer-Related Fatigue in Inpatients with Advanced Cancer Undergoing Palliative Care: A Multicenter Phase II Trial.

Objective: No standard treatment for cancer-related fatigue (CRF) for inpatients in a palliative care setting exists. The aim of this study was to validate the previous study-derived efficacy of dexamethasone 8 mg for CRF among inpatients in a palliative care setting. Methods: Inpatients with moderate fatigue (≥4/10) were enrolled in a multicenter phase II trial. Dexamethasone 8 mg p.o. or 6.6 mg i.v. was administered for seven days and 4 mg p.o. or 3.3 mg i.v. for seven consecutive days. The primary endpoint was a threshold average change of Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-fatigue subscale score of 3. The secondary endpoints were evaluated with the anorexia-cachexia subscale (ACS), and the Edmonton symptom assessment scale-revised Japanese version. Results: A total of 32 patients were enrolled. On day 8, the mean change of FACIT-fatigue subscale from day 1 was 5.2 (95% confidence interval 0.8-10.0), in which the lower bound was above 0 but not above the prespecified threshold value of 3.0 (p = 0.72). Edmonton symptom assessment system (ESAS)-fatigue was significantly improved by day 3 (p = 0.02), but not on day 8 or day 15. ACS, physical well-being, and ESAS-lack of appetite significantly improved by day 8 and day 15. Adverse events were tolerable. Conclusion: This study showed that dexamethasone 8 mg failed to achieve the preset efficacy for CRF among inpatients in a palliative care setting. However, this treatment improved fatigue and would be an option for CRF. jRCT (jRCTs031180068).

Diagnostic models for impending death in terminally ill cancer patients: A multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Accurately predicting impending death is essential for clinicians to clarify goals of care. We aimed to develop diagnostic models to predict death ≤3 days in cancer patients. METHODS: In this multicenter cohort study, we consecutively enrolled advanced cancer patients admitted to 23 inpatient hospices in 2017. Fifteen clinical signs related to impending death were documented daily from the day when the Palliative Performance Scale (PPS) declined to ≤20-14 days later. We conducted recursive partitioning analysis using the entire data set and performed cross-validation to develop the model (prediction of 3-day impending death-decision tree [P3did-DT]). Then, we summed the number of systems (nervous/cardiovascular/respiratory/musculoskeletal), where any sign was present to underpin P3did score (range = 0-4). RESULTS: Data following PPS ≤20 were obtained from 1396 of 1896 inpatients (74%). The mean age was 73 ± 12 years, and 399 (29%) had gastrointestinal tract cancer. The P3did-DT was based on three variables and had four terminal leaves: urine output (u/o) ≤200 ml/day and decreased response to verbal stimuli, u/o ≤200 ml/day and no decreased response to verbal stimuli, u/o >200 ml/day and Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) ≤-2, and u/o >200 ml/day and RASS ≥-1. The 3-day mortality rates were 80.3%, 53.3%, 39.9%, and 20.6%, respectively (accuracy = 68.3%). In addition, 79.6%, 62.9%, 47.2%, 32.8%, and 17.4% of patients with P3did scores of 4, 3, 2, 1, and 0, respectively, died ≤3 days. CONCLUSION: We successfully developed diagnostic models for death ≤3 days. These may further help clinicians predict impending death and help patients/families prepare for their final days.

Development of a Scoring System to Determine Proportional Appropriateness of Continuous Deep Sedation: A Concept-of-Proof Study.

Context: Some patients require continuous deep sedation (CDS) for refractory symptoms despite intensive palliative care. The principle of proportionality is proposed on the basis of clinical decisions, but no validated tools to assist such decision making are available. Aim: To develop a scoring system to determine whether CDS is proportionally appropriate. Subjects and Methods: A secondary analysis of a nationwide questionnaire survey of Japanese palliative care specialists was performed. Physicians were asked to rate the degree that they believed CDS to be appropriate in a total of 27 scenarios based on a combination of 3 factors with 3 levels: (1) the estimated survival (days, weeks, and months), (2) the patient's wish (clear and consistent, somewhat unclear and/or inconsistent, and unclear or inconsistent), and (3) confidence in refractoriness of the symptom (definite, probable, and unsure). Based on logistic regression analyses, a scoring system with two formulas (the proportionality score to determine that continuous deep sedation is appropriate [ProScoreCDS-appropriate] and proportionality score to determine that continuous deep sedation is inappropriate [ProScoreCDS-inappropriate]) to predict specialists' decision that CDS is appropriate or inappropriate was developed. The accuracy of the formulas was investigated. Results: Among 695 palliative care specialists, 469 returned the questionnaire (response rate, 69%) and 440 were analyzed. Logistic regression analyses identified that all three factors were significantly associated with physicians' decisions about the appropriateness of performing CDS. Using weighted value, the total score ranged from 3 to 67 for ProScoreCDS-appropriate, and 3 to 27 for ProScoreCDS-inappropriate. The area under the curve (AUC) values of ProScoreCDS-appropriate and ProScoreCDS-inappropriate were 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87-0.89) and 0.81 (95% CI, 0.81-0.82), respectively. Using cutoff points of 41 and 14, sensitivity and specificity were 68.6% and 88.9% for ProScoreCDS-appropriate and 67.7% and 76.0% for ProScoreCDS-inappropriate, respectively. Conclusion: A scoring system to determine whether CDS is proportionally appropriate can be constructed, and a further study to develop a clinical tool is promising.

Efficacy of Proportional Sedation and Deep Sedation Defined by Sedation Protocols: A Multicenter, Prospective, Observational Comparative Study.

PURPOSE: To investigate the efficacy of two types of palliative sedation: proportional and deep sedation, defined by sedation protocols. METHODS: From a multicenter prospective observational study, we analyzed the data of those patients who received the continuous infusion of midazolam according to the sedation protocol. The primary endpoint was goal achievement at 4 hours: in proportional sedation, symptom relief (Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale: IPOS ≤ 1) and absence of agitation (modified Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale: RASS ≤ 0); in deep sedation, the achievement of deep sedation (RASS ≤ -4). Secondary endpoints included deep sedation as a result of proportional sedation, communication capacity (Communication Capacity Scale item 4 ≤ 2), IPOS and RASS scores, and adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 81 patients from 14 palliative care units were analyzed: proportional sedation (n = 64) and deep sedation (n = 17). At 4 hours, the goal was achieved in 77% (n = 49; 95% confidence interval: 66-87) with proportional sedation; and 88% (n = 15; 71-100) with deep sedation. Deep sedation was necessary in 45% of those who received proportional sedation. Communication capacity was maintained in 34% with proportional sedation and 10% with deep sedation. IPOS decreased from 3.5 to 0.9 with proportional sedation, and 3.5 to 0.4 with deep sedation; RASS decreased from +0.3 to -2.6, and +0.4 to -4.2, respectively. Fatal events related to the treatment occurred in 2% (n = 1) with proportional and none with deep sedation. CONCLUSION: Proportional sedation achieved satisfactory symptom relief while maintaining some patients' consciousness, and deep sedation achieved good symptom relief while the majority of patients lost consciousness.