Benefits, Harms, and Stakeholder Perspectives Regarding Opioid Therapy for Pain in Individuals With Metastatic Cancer: Protocol for a Descriptive Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Opioids are a key component of pain management among patients with metastatic cancer pain. However, the evidence base available to guide opioid-related decision-making in individuals with advanced cancer is limited. Patients with advanced cancer or cancer that is unlikely to be cured frequently experience pain. Opioids are a key component of pain management among patients with metastatic cancer pain. Many individuals with advanced cancer are now living long enough to experience opioid-related harm. Emerging evidence from chronic noncancer pain literature suggests that longer-term opioid therapy may have limited benefits for pain and function, and opioid-related harms are also a major concern. However, whether these benefits and harms of opioids apply to patients with cancer-related pain is unknown. OBJECTIVE: This manuscript outlines the protocol for the "Opioid Therapy for Pain in Individuals With Metastatic Cancer: The Benefits, Harms, and Stakeholder Perspectives (BEST) Study." The study aims to better understand opioid decision-making in patients with advanced cancer, along with opioid benefits and harms, through prospective examination of patients' pain experiences and opioid side effects and understanding the decision-making by patients, care partners, and clinicians. METHODS: This is a multicenter, prospective cohort study that aims to enroll 630 patients with advanced cancer, 20 care partners, and 20 clinicians (670 total participants). Patient participants must have an advanced solid cancer diagnosis, defined by the American Cancer Society as cancer that is unlikely to be cured. We will recruit patient participants within 12 weeks after diagnosis so that we can understand opioid benefits, harms, and perspectives on opioid decision-making throughout the course of their advanced cancer (up to 2 years). We will also specifically elicit information regarding long-term opioid use (ie, opioids for ≥90 consecutive days) and exclude patients on long-term opioid therapy before an advanced cancer diagnosis. Lived-experience perspectives related to opioid use in those with advanced cancer will be captured by qualitative interviews with a subset of patients, clinicians, and care partners. Our data collection will be grounded in a behavioral decision research approach that will allow us to develop future interventions to inform opioid-related decision-making for patients with metastatic cancer. RESULTS: Data collection began in October 2022 and is anticipated to end by November 2024. CONCLUSIONS: Upon successful execution of our study protocol, we anticipate the development of a comprehensive evidence base on opioid therapy in individuals with advanced cancer guided by the behavioral decision research framework. The information gained from this study will be used to guide interventions to facilitate opioid decisions among patients, clinicians, and care partners. Given the limited evidence base about opioid therapy in people with cancer, we envision this study will have significant real-world implications for cancer-related pain management and opioid-related clinical decision-making. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/54953.

Experiences of Aging with Opioid Use Disorder and Comorbidity in Opioid Treatment Programs: A Qualitative Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The number of older adults entering opioid treatment programs (OTPs) to treat opioid use disorder (OUD) is increasing. However, the lived experiences of aging in OTPs have not been examined. OBJECTIVE: To explore the aging experience with OUD and barriers to medical care for older adults who receive care in OTPs. DESIGN: From November 2021 to July 2022, we conducted 1-to-1, semi-structured qualitative interviews in English and Spanish, audio-recorded, transcribed, systematically coded, and analyzed to identify key themes regarding the challenges of aging with OUD and managing chronic diseases. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-six adults aged ≥ 55 enrolled in OTPs in San Diego, California. APPROACH: A descriptive qualitative approach was used. Major themes and subthemes were identified through thematic analysis until thematic saturation was reached. KEY RESULTS: All participants were on methadone and had a mean age of 63.4 (SD 5.1) years; 11 (30.6%) identified as female, 14 (39%) as Hispanic/Latino, and 11 (36%) as Black, with a mean duration of methadone treatment of 5.6 years. Chronic diseases were common, with 21 (58.3%) reporting hypertension, 9 (25%) reporting untreated hepatitis C, and 32 (88.9%) having ≥ 2 chronic diseases. Three major themes emerged: (1) avoidance of medical care due to multiple intersectional stigmas, including those related to drug use, substance use disorder (SUD) treatment, ageism, and housing insecurity; (2) increasing isolation with aging and loss of family and peer groups; (3) the urgent need for integrating medical and aging-focused care with OUD treatment in the setting of increasing health and functional challenges. CONCLUSIONS: Older adults with OUD reported increasing social isolation and declining health while experiencing multilevel stigma and discrimination. The US healthcare system must transform to deliver age-friendly care that integrates evidence-based geriatric models of care incorporated with substance use disorder treatment and addresses the intersectional stigma this population has experienced in healthcare settings.

Toward reducing racialized pain care disparities: Approaching cannabis research and access through the lens of equity and inclusion.

There is growing interest in cannabis use for cancer pain. This commentary aims to discuss the evidence surrounding cannabis use for cancer pain in the context of the long-racialized landscape of cannabis policies and the disparity in pain control among cancer patients holding minoritized racial identities. Much evidence surrounding both the benefits and harms of cannabis use in cancer patients, and all patients in general, is lacking. Although drawing on the research in cancer that is available, it is also important to illustrate the broader context about how cannabis' deep roots in medical, political, and social history impact patient use and health care policies. There are lessons we can learn from the racialized disparities in opioid risk mitigation strategies, so they are not replicated in the settings of cannabis for cancer symptom management. Additionally, the authors intentionally use the term "cannabis" here rather than "marijuana.: In the early 1900s, the lay press and government popularized the use of the word "marijuana" instead of the more common "cannabis" to tie the drug to anti-Mexican prejudice.

Expert consensus-based guidance on approaches to opioid management in individuals with advanced cancer-related pain and nonmedical stimulant use.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians treating cancer-related pain with opioids regularly encounter nonmedical stimulant use (i.e., methamphetamine, cocaine), yet there is little evidence-based management guidance. The aim of the study is to identify expert consensus on opioid management strategies for an individual with advanced cancer and cancer-related pain with nonmedical stimulant use according to prognosis. METHODS: The authors conducted two modified Delphi panels with palliative care and addiction experts. In Panel A, the patient's prognosis was weeks to months and in Panel B the prognosis was months to years. Experts reviewed, rated, and commented on the case using a 9-point Likert scale from 1 (very inappropriate) to 9 (very appropriate) and explained their responses. The authors applied the three-step analytical approach outlined in the RAND/UCLA to determine consensus and level of clinical appropriateness of management strategies. To better conceptualize the quantitative results, they thematically analyzed and coded participant comments. RESULTS: Consensus was achieved for all management strategies. The 120 Experts were mostly women (47 [62%]), White (94 [78%]), and physicians (115 [96%]). For a patient with cancer-related and nonmedical stimulant use, regardless of prognosis, it was deemed appropriate to continue opioids, increase monitoring, and avoid opioid tapering. Buprenorphine/naloxone transition was inappropriate for a patient with a short prognosis and of uncertain appropriateness for a patient with a longer prognosis. CONCLUSION: Study findings provide urgently needed consensus-based guidance for clinicians managing cancer-related pain in the context of stimulant use and highlight a critical need to develop management strategies to address stimulant use disorder in people with cancer. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Among palliative care and addiction experts, regardless of prognosis, it was deemed appropriate to continue opioids, increase monitoring, and avoid opioid tapering in the context of cancer-related pain and nonmedical stimulant use. Buprenorphine/naloxone transition as a harm reduction measure was inappropriate for a patient with a short prognosis and of uncertain appropriateness for a patient with a longer prognosis.

The Contribution of Cancer-Specific Psychosocial Factors to the Pain Experience in Cancer Survivors.

Palliative care teams are increasingly called up to manage chronic pain in cancer survivors. Chronic pain is common in cancer survivors and is heavily influenced by biopsychosocial factors. This study aimed to determine the relative contribution of unique cancer-specific psychosocial factors, pain catastrophizing, and multisite pain to the pain experience in 41 cancer survivors who completed curative cancer treatment. To test the research hypotheses, a series of nested linear regression models were used with likelihood ratio testing to test the individual and collective contribution of cancer-specific psychosocial factors (fear of cancer recurrence, cancer distress, cancer-related trauma), pain catastrophizing, and the number of pain sites on the pain experience. The results indicate pain catastrophizing and multisite pain explained a significant degree of variance in pain interference scores ( P < .001) and pain severity ( P = .005). Cancer-specific psychosocial factors did not significantly predict variability in pain interference ( P = .313) or pain severity ( P = .668) over and above pain catastrophizing and the number of sites of pain. In summary, pain catastrophizing and multisite pain contribute to the chronic cancer-related pain experienced by cancer survivors. Palliative care nurses are well positioned to improve chronic pain among cancer survivors by assessing and treating pain catastrophizing and multisite pain.

Compassionate Care for People with Cancer and Opioid Use Disorder.

ABSTRACT: Opioid use disorder (OUD) is an important comorbidity to assess and manage in people with cancer. In this article, the authors discuss strategies for safe opioid management in individuals with OUD and cancer-related pain using a composite case example. They highlight core approaches to pain management, including motivational interviewing, harm reduction, and evidence-based treatments, as well as advocacy for person-centered end-of-life care.

"It Is So Easy For Them to Dismiss": A Phenomenological Study of Cancer Survivors With Chronic Cancer-Related Pain.

Background: For many cancer survivors post-cure, chronic pain is a devastating complication of cancer treatment. The prevalence of chronic pain among cancer survivors is double that of the general population. However, little is known about the pain experience of cancer survivors who may have a different perspective than people with advanced cancer or people with noncancer pain. Objective: To understand the lived experience of chronic cancer-related pain in cancer survivors. Methods: We used a qualitative design with a descriptive phenomenological method to conduct in-depth interviews of 13 cancer survivors residing in the United States who completed curative cancer therapy, were at least three months from treatment, and experienced pain attributable to cancer. Data collection was focused on the lived experience and management of chronic cancer-related pain and a deep understanding of how the experience of chronic cancer-related pain shapes pain management choices. Results: The participants had a variety of primary cancer types and cancer pain syndromes. Three essential themes epitomized the experience of living with chronic cancer-related pain: invisible suffering at the cost of survival, an opioid paradox, and a lack of answers on what to expect and what might help. Conclusion and Implications: The results highlight an opportunity for pain self-management, education, and psychosocial interventions to optimize pain in cancer. Participants' experiences identify several opportunities to improve chronic cancer-related pain. Future efforts should prioritize access to multimodal pain treatments, high-quality communication, and expand clinicians' knowledge and skills to manage chronic pain.

Pharmacologic Pain Management: What Radiation Oncologists Should Know.

Individuals with cancer experience a host of symptoms, especially when the malignancy is advanced. Pain occurs from the cancer itself or related treatments. Undertreated pain contributes to patient suffering and lack of engagement in cancer-directed therapies. Adequate pain management includes thorough assessment; treatment by radiotherapists or anesthesia pain specialists; anti-inflammatory medications, oral or intravenous opioid analgesics, and topical agents; and attention to the emotional and functional effects of pain, which may involve social workers, psychologists, speech therapists, nutritionists, physiatrists and palliative medicine providers. This review discusses typical pain syndromes arising in cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy and provides concrete recommendations for pain assessment and pharmacologic treatment.

Evaluation of the efficacy and mechanisms of a novel intervention for chronic pain tailored to people with HIV: The STOMP protocol.

BACKGROUND: Behavioral interventions for chronic pain among people with HIV (PWH) are understudied, with great potential to improve pain and function. Chronic pain is an important comorbidity that affects between 30% and 85% of PWH and is associated with greater odds of functional impairment, increased emergency room utilization, suboptimal retention in HIV care, and failure to achieve virologic suppression. However, to date, there are few effective and scalable interventions for chronic pain in PWH. OBJECTIVE: This manuscript outlines the protocol for a randomized control trial of a novel theory-based pain self-management intervention, "Skills TO Manage Pain" (STOMP), developed for and tailored to PWH versus enhanced usual care controls. STOMP is a 12-week intervention developed from prior work on pain self-management in PWH and rigorous intervention mapping. The STOMP intervention has three major components: group sessions, one-on-one pain self-management sessions, and peer leaders. METHODS: STOMP is a 2-arm randomized trial conducted with PWH with chronic pain. The trial compares STOMP, a theory-based intervention tailored to improving chronic pain in PWH, with a comparison group receiving enhanced usual care effectiveness on pain and HIV proximal outcome measures. The proposed sample size is 280 PWH recruited from two high-volume Center for AIDS Research Network of Integrated Clinical Systems clinical sites. RESULTS: Study procedures are ongoing, and results will be recorded in future manuscripts. CONCLUSION: The study will generate evidence on the effectiveness of STOMP with the potential to dramatically change chronic pain treatment for PWH. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicialtrials.gov, Clinical Trials Registration # NCT03692611https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03692611?term=STOMP&cond=Hiv&draw=2&rank=1.

Eliminate the buprenorphine DEA X waiver: Justification using a policy analysis approach.

INTRODUCTION: Drug overdoses have reached a historic milestone of over 100,000 deaths in a single year, 75,673 related to opioids. The acceleration in opioid-related deaths coupled with stark health inequities demands a close examination of opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment barriers and swift consideration of policy changes. DESIGN: The aim of this buprenorphine policy analysis is to summarize existing buprenorphine barriers and present policy solutions to improve access and actualize the contributions of Advanced Practice Registered Nurses (APRNs). METHODS: The policy analysis follows five sequential steps: (1) defining the problem, (2) identifying key stakeholders, (3) assessing the landscape of relevant policies, (4) describing viable policy options, and (5) making final recommendations. RESULTS: Although there are laudable efforts to improve buprenorphine access, such as the new buprenorphine guidelines issued in April 2021, without larger-scale changes to federal, state, and scope of practice laws, overdose rates will continue to rise. We recommend a multipronged policy approach to improve buprenorphine treatment access, including eliminating the DEA X waiver, improving OUD education, and adopting full practice authority for APRNs in all states. CONCLUSION: Incremental change is no longer sufficient to address opioid overdose deaths. Bolder and coordinated policy action is possible and necessary to empower the full clinical workforce to apply evidence-based life-saving treatments for OUD. The critical contributions of nurses in advancing equitable access to OUD care are emphasized in the National Academy of Medicine's Report, Future of Nursing: Charting a Path to Achieve Health Equity. Nurses are named as instrumental in improving buprenorphine access. Policy changes that acknowledge and build on evidence-based treatment expansion strategies are sorely needed. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: One of the most robust tools to combat opioid overdose deaths is buprenorphine, a partial opioid agonist, and gold standard medication treatment for OUD, but only 5% of the prescribing workforce possess the required Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) X waiver. A growing body of evidence demonstrates that Advanced Practice Registered Nurses are accelerating the growth in waiver update and buprenorphine use, despite the considerable barriers and limitations described in this policy analysis.

Top Ten Tips Palliative Care Clinicians Should Know About Buprenorphine.

Pain management in palliative care (PC) is becoming more complex as patients survive longer with life-limiting illnesses and population-wide trends involving opioid misuse become more common in serious illness. Buprenorphine, a generally safe partial mu-opioid receptor agonist, has been shown to be effective for both pain management and opioid use disorder. It is critical that PC clinicians become comfortable with indications for its use, strategies for initiation while understanding risks and benefits. This article, written by a team of PC and addiction-trained specialists, including physicians, nurse practitioners, social workers, and a pharmacist, offers 10 tips to demystify buprenorphine use in serious illness.

Opioid-prescribing considerations in patients with cancer and substance misuse or substance use disorder: a scoping review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to describe factors in the existing literature that may inform opioid-prescribing decisions for patients with a past or present history of cancer and past or present substance misuse or substance use disorder. INTRODUCTION: Opioids and opioid-related decisions are critical components of cancer care. Most individuals with cancer will experience pain during cancer care, and over half of patients will receive an opioid prescription. Opioid-prescribing decisions require weighing the benefits and harms. The presence of substance misuse or substance use disorder may elevate the risk of opioid-related harms, but there is a lack of consensus on managing patients at this intersection. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review will consider studies that include adult patients with a past or present history of cancer who also have pain and current or historical substance misuse or substance use disorder. The pain may be cancer-related or non-cancer-related. Studies of patients with all types of cancer will be eligible for inclusion, with the exception of non-melanoma skin cancers. Eligible studies will explore factors that inform opioid-prescribing decisions in this patient population. METHODS: The review will be conducted according to JBI methodology for scoping reviews. Studies written in English since database inception will be included. The databases to be searched include MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), Embase, APA PsycINFO, and Google Scholar. Eligible studies will undergo data extraction by 2 independent reviewers using a data extraction tool created by the authors. A narrative summary will describe study characteristics, population details, and strategies used to determine appropriate pain management in the patient population.

The Relevance of State Laws Regulating Opioid Prescribing for People Living With Serious Illness.

CONTEXT: Opioids are commonly used to relieve symptoms such as pain and dyspnea in people living with serious illness. In recent years, 36 states enacted limitations for opioid prescriptions to mitigate the impact of the opioid overdose crisis. Palliative care clinicians have been vocal about the unintended consequences of opioid policies, yet little is known about how state policies apply to opioid prescribing in non-cancer-related serious illness. OBJECTIVE: To summarize current state-level limitations to opioid prescribing and exemptions relevant to people living with non-cancer-related serious illness. METHODS: Investigators searched publicly available laws ("[state] + opioid legislation") to extract information on opioid prescribing and exemptions. Laws were examined for application to palliative care, hospice, non-cancer-related serious illness, and language about specific symptoms was documented when applicable (e.g., pain, dyspnea). RESULTS: Most state laws focused on acute pain and/or initial opioid prescriptions. Thirty-three of the thirty-six states with opioid-limiting legislation exempt situations applicable to people living with non-cancer-related serious illness. Three states did not have any exemptions relevant to people living with non-cancer-related serious illness. DISCUSSION: The results indicate that while most states recognize the importance of timely opioid access for palliation of pain, clinically relevant exemptions for people living with non-cancer-related serious illness may be lacking. When present, language describing palliative care, hospice, and terminal illness exemptions is often broad and may generate confusion between primary and specialty palliative care.

Barriers to Buprenorphine Prescribing for Opioid Use Disorder in Hospice and Palliative Care.

CONTEXT: Hospice and palliative care (HPC) clinicians increasingly care for patients with concurrent painful serious illness and opioid use disorder (OUD) or opioid misuse; however, only a minority of HPC clinicians have an X-waiver license or actively use it to prescribe buprenorphine as medication treatment for OUD. OBJECTIVES: To understand barriers for HPC clinicians to obtaining an X-waiver and prescribing buprenorphine as medication treatment for OUD. METHODS: We performed content analysis on 100 survey responses from members of the national Buprenorphine Peer Support Network, a group of HPC clinicians interested in buprenorphine, on X-waiver status, barriers to obtaining an X-waiver, and barriers to active prescribing. RESULTS: Of 100 HPC clinicians surveyed, only 26 of 57 HPC clinicians with X-waivers had ever prescribed. Prominent barriers included discomfort managing concurrent pain, buprenorphine, and OUD; concerns about impacts on practice; unsupportive practice culture; insufficient practice support; patient facing challenges; and cumbersome regulatory policies. CONCLUSION: Despite HPC clinicians' interest in buprenorphine prescribing for OUD, several steps are needed to facilitate the practice, including clinician education tailored to pain and to clinical challenges faced by HPC clinicians, mentorship on buprenorphine use, and cultural and practice changes to dismantle systemic stigma towards addiction. We propose evidence-based steps derived from our survey findings that individual clinicians, HPC leaders, and national HPC organizations can take to improve care for patients with painful serious illness and OUD.

Pharmacological and Nonpharmacological Management of Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy: A Scoping Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Background: Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a common and debilitating side effect of cancer treatment with no effective preventative strategy or definitive treatment. Purpose: To synthesize empiric literature from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of pharmacological and nonpharmacological management of CIPN. Data Sources: Articles published between January 1, 2010, and February 28, 2021, were identified using keywords searching Medline, PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase. Study Selection: RCTs that recruited individuals who were post-chemotherapy and experienced persistent CIPN symptoms. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Three independent reviewers screened a total of 2023 abstracts. After screening, full-text review, and quality appraisal, 22 articles were included in this review. Data related to study design, participant characteristics, interventions, controls, outcome measures, and relevant findings were extracted from full texts. Descriptive quantitative summaries were calculated and narrative analysis was performed. Results: Of the 22 studies, 4 investigated pharmacologic treatments, 2 compared acupuncture to pharmacologic treatments, and 16 studies examined nonpharmacologic treatments. Pharmacologic studies reported mixed results with evidence of participant response varying by history of chemotherapeutic agent. Acupuncture, exercise/physical therapy, and neurofeedback appear to be effective treatments for CIPN. Evidence regarding biophysical agents and cognitive-behavioral therapy is equivocal. Scrambler therapy is not supported. Limitations: Studies included in this review share several limitations, including widely variable outcome measures, small and demographically homogenous samples, and nonstandardized treatment protocols. Conclusion: This scoping review summarized the current body of high-quality RCTs investigating treatment for CIPN. The majority of studies in this review reports benefits of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions, although management may require a multipronged approach and should be tailored to the individual. Clinical implications are proposed and suggestions made for future research include implementation of standardized intervention protocols, use of outcome measures representative of the spectrum of CIPN symptoms, and stratification by the chemotherapeutic agent.