A Retrospective Observational Study of Factors Affecting the Efficacy of Concurrent Prescription of Naldemedine for Opioid-Induced Constipation Caused by Oxycodone Tablets.

Naldemedine is indicated for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation (OIC), but reports on its efficacy in preventing OIC are few. Therefore, we retrospectively investigated factors affecting the efficacy of concurrent prescription of naldemedine on OIC. Outpatients with cancer who were started on oxycodone 10 mg/d were included in the study. The eligible patients were classified by their physicians into the following three groups: Group A used regular laxatives before the introduction of oxycodone and initiated naldemedine treatment simultaneously with oxycodone administration, Group B did not take laxatives before the introduction of oxycodone and started naldemedine simultaneously with oxycodone administration, and Group C had been administering regular laxatives before the introduction of oxycodone and were not prescribed naldemedine simultaneously with oxycodone treatment. The Support Team Assessment Schedule Japanese edition score for constipation, frequency of defecation, Bristol Stool Form Scale, sense of incomplete rectal evacuation, and development or worsening of straining to pass bowel movements were compared among the three groups before and after oxycodone administration. In Group B, there was significant worsening of the four parameters except for the sense of incomplete rectal evacuation, whereas Groups A and C did not present any changes. In logistic regression analysis, body weight ≥51.8 kg was a factor significantly decreasing the preventive effect of naldemedine on OIC, and regular use of laxatives was a factor significantly increasing the preventive effect of naldemedine on OIC. Thus, the initiation of naldemedine should be considered depending on the body weight and regular laxative use.

Relationship between Pain Scores and EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL Scores in Outpatients with Cancer Pain Receiving Opioid Therapy.

Cancer pain is one of the most frequent and distressing symptoms associated with cancer and has a serious impact on the QOL of patients. However, inadequate pain treatment has also been reported in outpatients with cancer pain. The aims of this study were (1) to evaluate the relationship between pain intensity using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) and QOL scores using the Japanese version of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (QOL Questionnaire Core 15 for Palliative Care (QLQ-C15-PAL)), and (2) to investigate their association with various pain patterns, especially with baseline and breakthrough pain. Forty outpatients who were receiving opioid therapy and obtained informed consent participated. We collected a total of 222 pharmacist consultations during the study period. Global QOL scores and pain scores (PA) in the QLQ-C15-PAL (PA score, 0-100) at the first visit were significantly correlated with worst pain intensity. In addition, the scores for the worst pain were significantly correlated with not only physical functioning scores but also with emotional functioning scores. The correlations between the worst pain NRS and PA scores were positive. Specifically, patients tended to report large variability of NRS scores when the PA score was less than 40 and also when they exhibited pain patterns with "baseline and breakthrough cancer pain in the same day" or "baseline pain throughout the day." Reducing the worst pain NRS and relieving breakthrough pain appear to be important measures to improve the QOL of outpatients receiving opioid therapy for cancer pain.

Effect of Continuous Pharmacist Interventions on Pain Control and Side Effect Management in Outpatients with Cancer Receiving Opioid Treatments.

For improving the QOL of patients diagnosed with cancer, early palliative care is recommended, aiming to minimize pain and opioid-induced side effects. Herein, we evaluated the effect of continuous interventions for pain management and opioid-induced side effects in outpatients with cancer. Pharmacists continuously performed interventions on patients on their hospital visits, starting from the first visit for opioid introduction to intervention via telephone. We recorded their pain patterns and intensities, use of rescue doses, and types and degrees of side effects during these interventions. The physicians were suggested appropriate recommendations for increased doses or alternative opioids when the pharmacists considered the analgesic dose should be titrated. During the study period, palliative care pharmacists conducted 105 interviews for 27 patients (male: 19 and female: 8) with cancer pain. Pain intensities significantly decreased after the pharmacists' continuous intervention, including those from telephone interviews, with their appropriate recommendations and increased opioid doses. Side effects such as nausea and constipation increased or remained unaffected even after the intervention, likely due to the increased opioid doses. Approximately 90% of recommendations for pain control were accepted by the physicians and helped to control the pain intensities. Before starting physician consultations, pharmacists informed the patients that adequate pain control and side effect management were achievable through regular interviews, wherein patient symptoms were monitored and patients received detailed explanations of pharmaceutical care and courteous and continuous counseling.