Optimal pain management for patients with cancer in the modern era.

Pain is a common symptom among patients with cancer. Adequate pain assessment and management are critical to improve the quality of life and health outcomes in this population. In this review, the authors provide a framework for safely and effectively managing cancer-related pain by summarizing the evidence for the importance of controlling pain, the barriers to adequate pain management, strategies to assess and manage cancer-related pain, how to manage pain in patients at risk of substance use disorder, and considerations when managing pain in a survivorship population. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:182-196. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Electroacupuncture attenuates nociceptive behaviors in a mouse model of cancer pain.

Pain is a major symptom in cancer patients, and cancer-induced bone pain (CIBP) is the most common type of moderate and severe cancer-related pain. The current available analgesic treatments for CIBP have adverse effects as well as limited therapeutic effects. Acupuncture is proved effective in pain management as a safe alternative therapy. We evaluated the analgesic effect of acupuncture in treatment of cancer pain and try to explore the underlying analgesic mechanisms. Nude mice were inoculated with cancer cells into the left distal femur to establish cancer pain model. Electroacupuncture (EA) treatment was applied for the xenograft animals. Pain behaviors of mice were evaluated, followed by the detections of neuropeptide-related and inflammation-related indicators in peripheral and central levels. EA treatment alleviated cancer-induced pain behaviors covering mechanical allodynia, thermal hyperalgesia and spontaneous pain, and also down-regulated immunofluorescence expressions of neuropeptide CGRP and p75 in the skin of affected plantar area in xenograft mice, and inhibited expressions of overexpressed neuropeptide-related and inflammation-related protein in the lumbar spinal cord of xenograft mice. Overall, our findings suggest that EA treatment ameliorated cancer-induced pain behaviors in the mouse xenograft model of cancer pain, possibly through inhibiting the expressions of neuropeptide-related and inflammation-related protein in central level following tumor cell xenografts.

Virtual reality for pain management in hospitalized patients with cancer: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalized patients with cancer often experience acute and/or chronic pain. Although virtual reality (VR) has been extensively studied across a wide range of clinical settings, no studies have yet evaluated potential impact on pain management in this patient population. METHODS: Prospective randomized controlled trial at an urban academic hospital comparing VR against an active control to mitigate moderate-severe cancer disease and treatment-related pain. RESULTS: A total of 128 adult hospitalized patients with cancer (any tumor type) were randomized to 10 minutes of immersive VR distraction therapy or 10 minutes of two-dimensional guided imagery distraction therapy delivered by handheld tablet. Participants in the two arms were similar in age, sex, race, presence of metastatic disease, concurrent pain specialist consultation, and baseline opioid use. Although both groups experienced improved self-reported pain scores (primary outcome), those randomized to VR experienced significantly greater reduction in pain immediately after intervention compared with active control (p = .03). This difference was sustained for 24 hours as well (p = .004). Within-group analysis showed significant improvement in VR arm of pain bothersomeness (p = .05) and general distress (p = .03) as well. CONCLUSION: Among hospitalized adult patients with moderate-severe pain related to cancer and cancer therapies, VR provided more nonpharmacologic pain relief than active control and this benefit sustained long after conclusion of the intervention. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Virtual reality (VR), a developing technology that immerses the user in new environments, has been shown to improve pain in different patient populations. To test the role of VR in improving pain in hospitalized patients with cancer who report moderate-severe pain, we compared the impact of a 10-minute immersive VR intervention to that of a 10-minute two-dimensional guided imagery experience to improve self-reported pain scores. We found that, although both interventions improved pain, VR did so significantly more. Moreover, participants assigned to VR had sustained improvement in pain 24 hours later.

Virtual Reality for advanced cancer patients assisted at home: A randomized controlled interventional study.

OBJECTIVE: Virtual Reality (VR) has been demonstrated to be an effective option for integrating psychological interventions in different therapeutic settings. This randomized controlled interventional study aims to assess the effects of VR, compared to tablet controlled intervention, on anxiety, depression, pain, and short-term psychophysical symptoms in advanced cancer patients assisted at home. METHODS: Participants were provided with a VR headset or a tablet (TAB) for 4 days. On the first and last day, anxiety and depression were measured by Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and pain by Brief Pain Inventory. Before and after each VR and tablet session, symptoms were collected by the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS). RESULTS: Fifty-three patients (27 VR vs. 26 TAB) completed the study. Anxiety significantly decreased in the VR group after the 4-day intervention. The analysis of ESAS showed a significant improvement in pain (p = 0.013), tiredness (p < 0.001), and anxiety (p = 0.013) for TAB group, and a significant reduction in tiredness (p < 0.001) in the VR group. CONCLUSIONS: Technological and user-friendly tools, such as VR and tablets, might be integrated with traditional psychological interventions to improve anxiety and cancer-related short-term symptoms. Further studies are needed to better consolidate the possible beneficial effects of VR.

Pain coping, multidisciplinary care, and mHealth: Patients' views on managing advanced cancer pain.

OBJECTIVE: Pain is common among people with advanced cancer. While opioids provide significant relief, incorporating psycho-behavioral treatments may improve pain outcomes. We examined patients' experiences with pain self-management and how their self-management of chronic, cancer-related pain may be complemented by behavioral mobile health (mHealth) interventions. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with patients with advanced cancer and pain. Each participant reviewed content from our behavioral mHealth application for cancer pain management and early images of its interface. Participants reflected on their experiences self-managing cancer pain and on app content. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using a combination of inductive and deductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Patients (n = 28; 54% female; mean age = 53) across two geographic regions reported using psychological strategies (e.g., reframing negative thoughts, distraction, pain acceptance, social support) to manage chronic cancer-related pain. Patients shared their perspectives on the integration of psycho-behavioral pain treatments into their existing medical care and their experiences with opioid hesitancy. Patient recommendations for how mHealth interventions could best support them coalesced around two topics: 1.) convenience in accessing integrated pharmacological and psycho-behavioral pain education and communication tools and 2.) relevance of the specific content to their clinical situation. CONCLUSIONS: Integrated pharmacological and psycho-behavioral pain treatments were important to participants. This underscores a need to coordinate complimentary approaches when developing cancer pain management interventions. Participant feedback suggests that an mHealth intervention that integrates pain treatments may have the capacity to increase advanced cancer patients' access to destigmatizing, accessible care while improving pain self-management.

Acupuncture treatment for liver cancer pain: A meta-analysis.

Acupuncture treatment is a common intervention for the clinical relief of primary liver cancer (PLC) pain, but there is variability in its efficacy. This review systematically assessed the efficacy and safety of acupuncture treatment for PLC pain by meta-analysis. A total of 17 randomized controlled trial studies involving 1162 patients met the inclusion criteria. This study identified the acupuncture method, treatment duration, and patient age were the main factors affecting the efficacy of acupuncture treatment.

Integrative Approaches for Cancer Pain Management.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The goal of this review is to summarize updates to the broad array of complementary therapies available for cancer pain. This paper will serve as a reference for clinicians managing pain in cancer patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Patients are embracing integrative therapies in growing numbers; clinicians must be prepared to incorporate these therapies into patients' existing treatment regimens. This requires knowledge regarding risks, benefits, and potential interactions with existing cancer therapies. Integrative cancer pain management strategies have shown promise, with several proven effective for the management of cancer pain. Energy therapies, including acupuncture, and biologicals and nutraceuticals including overall diet and vitamin D, have the highest level of evidence for efficacy. The remaining therapies discussed in this chapter may be beneficial for patients on a case-by-case basis; risks and benefits of each individual therapy as described in the text must be further assessed in future rigorous trials to further clarify the role of these complementary therapies in cancer pain management.

The role of spirituality in pain experiences among adults with cancer: an explanatory sequential mixed methods study.

PURPOSE: Foundational research demonstrates that spirituality may affect the way people with cancer experience pain. One potential route is through alterations in thoughts and beliefs, such as pain-related catastrophizing. The purpose of this study is to understand whether spirituality impacts pain experiences through pain-related catastrophizing. METHODS: This explanatory sequential mixed methods study was informed by an adapted Theory of Unpleasant Symptoms. Data were collected via online surveys (N = 79) and follow-up qualitative interviews (N = 25). Phase 1 employed Empirical Bayesian analysis. Phase 2 used deductive content analysis. Phase 3 involved creating a mixed methods joint display to integrate findings and draw meta inferences. RESULTS: Results indicate that total spiritual well-being was directly negatively associated with pain-related catastrophizing, and indirectly negatively associated with the outcomes of pain interference, pain severity, and pain-related distress. Qualitative categories highlight the supportive role of spirituality when facing pain, while also shedding light on the limitations of spirituality in the context of some pain (i.e., severe, neuropathic, and/or chronic). Mixed methods findings reveal the importance of spirituality for some people as they face cancer and cancer-related pain, as well as the need for integrating spirituality as part of a larger pain management plan. CONCLUSIONS: This research advances supportive cancer care by exploring the complex role of spirituality in pain experiences. Findings will inform further exploration into the role of spirituality in supporting holistic symptom management in the context of cancer, as well as developing and testing interventions to enhance spirituality and address symptom-related suffering.

Randomized controlled trial of an app for cancer pain management.

PURPOSE: The primary objective of this investigation was to devise a mobile application for self-management of cancer-related discomfort, with the overarching goal of enhancing patients' overall well-being. Would the utilization of the self-management application result in an amelioration of life quality compared to conventional follow-up procedures? METHODS: Modules were meticulously devised with the collaborative expertise of oncology pain specialists employing the Delphi technique. Reliability of the consultation was assessed using Cronbach's α. After developing the app, a prospective randomized controlled study was conducted to evaluate the app's effect on participants' quality of life. The trial group used the app; the control group received a follow-up telephone consultation. Assessments of quality of life were conducted both at baseline and following a 4-week intervention period. RESULTS: After two rounds of Delphi expert consultation, the functional modules of Pain Guardian were determined to include five functional modules, including pain self-measurement (real-time dynamic recording of pain by patients), patient reminders (reminders of outbreaks of pain disposal, medication, and review), uploading of examination reports, online consultation, health education, and other functional modules. Cronbach's α was 0.81. Overall, 96 patients (including esophageal, gastric, colorectal, nasopharyngeal, pulmonary, pancreatic, breast, ovarian, uterine, bone, thoracic, bladder, cervical, soft tissue sarcoma, mediastinal, and lymphoma) with cancer pain were divided into the trial and control groups. There were no significant differences in basic information and quality of life at baseline between groups. After 4 weeks of intervention, quality of life was significantly higher in the trial group than in the control group. Patients' satisfaction with the app was high (93.7%). CONCLUSIONS: The primary obstacle encountered in the development of applications for managing cancer-related discomfort lies in the sensitive nature of the subject matter, potentially leading to patient apprehension regarding application usage for pain management. Consequently, meticulous attention to user preferences and anticipations is imperative, necessitating the creation of an application characterized by user-friendliness and medical efficacy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trials Registry ChiCTR1800016066; http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=27153 . Date of Registration: 2018-05-09.

The use of interventional procedures for cancer pain. A brief review.

CONTEXT: Pain is a common experience in people living with cancer. Concerns around opioid prescribing have seen a move toward a multi-modality management approach, which includes interventional pain procedures. PURPOSE: In this paper we discuss the interventional pain procedures used to treat cancer pain at two major tertiary centers in Australia. METHODS AND RESULTS: This expert review provides practical insights on cancer pain management from healthcare providers in different specialties. These insights can be used to guide the management of a wide range of cancer pain types. CONCLUSIONS: Furthermore, this review identifies the need for a systematic and comprehensive approach to the management of cancer pain that is broader than that of a single specialty. With recent advances in pain management procedures, an interdisciplinary approach is essential in order to provide an up to date, patient tailored approach to pain management. This review will help inform the development of a cancer pain intervention registry.

Sympathetic nerve blocks for persistent pain in adults with inoperable abdominopelvic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Persistent visceral pain is an unpleasant sensation coming from one or more organs within the body. Visceral pain is a common symptom in those with advanced cancer. Interventional procedures, such as neurolytic sympathetic nerve blocks, have been suggested as additional treatments that may play a part in optimising pain management for individuals with this condition. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of neurolytic sympathetic nerve blocks for persistent visceral pain in adults with inoperable abdominopelvic cancer compared to standard care or placebo and comparing single blocks to combination blocks. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases without language restrictions on 19 October 2022 and ran a top-up search on 31 October 2023: CENTRAL; MEDLINE via Ovid; Embase via Ovid; LILACS. We searched trial registers without language restrictions on 2 November 2022: ClinicalTrials.gov; WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We searched grey literature, checked reference lists of reviews and retrieved articles for additional studies, and performed citation searches on key articles. We also contacted experts in the field for unpublished and ongoing trials. Our trial protocol was preregistered in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews on 21 October 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any sympathetic nerve block targeting sites commonly used to treat abdominal pelvic pain from inoperable malignancies in adults to standard care or placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently selected trials based on predefined inclusion criteria, resolving any differences via adjudication with a third review author. We used a random-effects model as some heterogeneity was expected between the studies due to differences in the interventions being assessed and malignancy types included in the study population. We chose three primary outcomes and four secondary outcomes of interest. We sought consumer input to refine our review outcomes and assessed extracted data using Cochrane's risk of bias 2 tool (RoB 2). We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE system. MAIN RESULTS: We included 17 studies with 1025 participants in this review. Fifteen studies with a total of 951 participants contributed to the quantitative analysis. Single block versus standard care Primary outcomes No included studies reported our primary outcome, 'Proportion of participants reporting no worse than mild pain after treatment at 14 days'. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of sympathetic nerve blocks on reducing pain to no worse than mild pain at 14 days when compared to standard care due to insufficient data (very low-certainty evidence). Sympathetic nerve blocks may provide small to 'little to no' improvement in quality of life (QOL) scores at 14 days after treatment when compared to standard care, but the evidence is very uncertain (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.70 to 0.25; I² = 87%; 4 studies, 150 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the risk of serious adverse events as defined in our review as only one study contributed data to this outcome. Sympathetic nerve blocks may have an 'increased risk' to 'no additional risk' of harm compared with standard care (very low-certainty evidence). Secondary outcomes Sympathetic nerve blocks showed a small to 'little to no' effect on participant-reported pain scores at 14 days using a 0 to 10 visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain compared with standard care, but the evidence is very uncertain (mean difference (MD) -0.44, 95% CI -0.98 to 0.11; I² = 56%; 5 studies, 214 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There may be a 'moderate to large' to 'little to no' reduction in daily consumption of opioids postprocedure at 14 days with sympathetic nerve blocks compared with standard care, but the evidence is very uncertain (change in daily consumption of opioids at 14 days as oral milligrams morphine equivalent (MME): MD -41.63 mg, 95% CI -78.54 mg to -4.72 mg; I² = 90%; 4 studies, 130 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of sympathetic nerve blocks on participant satisfaction with procedure at 0 to 7 days and time to need for retreatment or treatment effect failure (or both) due to insufficient data. Combination block versus single block Primary outcomes There is no evidence about the effect of combination sympathetic nerve blocks compared with single sympathetic nerve blocks on the proportion of participants reporting no worse than mild pain after treatment at 14 days because no studies reported this outcome. There may be a small to 'little to no' effect on QOL score at 14 days after treatment, but the evidence is very uncertain (very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the risk of serious adverse events with combination sympathetic nerve blocks compared with single sympathetic nerve blocks due to limited reporting in the included studies (very low-certainty evidence). Secondary outcomes The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of combination sympathetic nerve blocks compared with single sympathetic nerve blocks on participant-reported pain score and change in daily consumption of opioids postprocedure, at 14 days. There may be a small to 'little to no' effect, but the evidence is very uncertain (very low-certainty evidence). There is no evidence about the effect on participant satisfaction with procedure at 0 to 7 days and time to need for retreatment or treatment effect failure (or both) due to these outcomes not being measured by the studies. Risk of bias The risk of bias was predominately high for most outcomes in most studies due to significant concerns regarding adequate blinding. Very few studies were deemed as low risk across all domains for any outcome. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is limited evidence to support or refute the use of sympathetic nerve blocks for persistent abdominopelvic pain due to inoperable malignancy. We are very uncertain about the effect of combination sympathetic nerve blocks compared with single sympathetic nerve blocks. The certainty of the evidence is very low and these findings should be interpreted with caution.

Management of pain in cancer patients- lessons from practices during the COVID-19: a qualitative study of cancer care providers' perspectives.

BACKGROUND: The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has impacted health systems globally and affected managing many chronic conditions, including cancer. This study aimed to explore the perceptions of multi-disciplinary cancer care providers on how cancer pain management was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Participants were eligible if they were cancer care providers of any specialty and discipline from two tertiary hospitals in Australia. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews to explore cancer care providers' perspectives on cancer pain management within COVID-19. Thematic analysis of interview transcripts used an integrated approach that started with inductive coding before coding deductively against a behaviour framework called the COM-B Model, which proposes that 'capability', 'motivation' and 'opportunity' are requisites for any behaviour. RESULTS: Twenty-three providers participated. Five themes were developed and interpreted from the analysis of data, namely: "Telehealth enables remote access to cancer pain management but also created a digital divide", "Access to cancer pain management in the community is compromised due to the pandemic", "COVID-19 negatively impacts hospital resource allocation", "Patients were required to trade off cancer pain management against other health priorities" and "Hospital restrictions result in decreased social and psychological support for patients with cancer pain". CONCLUSIONS: The landscape of cancer pain management in the Australian health system underwent substantial shifts during the COVID-19 pandemic, with lasting impacts. Cancer care providers perceived the pandemic to have significant adverse effects on pain management across multiple levels, with repercussions for patients experiencing cancer-related pain. A more adaptive health system model needs to be established in the future to accommodate vulnerable cancer patients.

Use of Temporary Percutaneous Peripheral Nerve Stimulation in an Oncologic Population: A Retrospective Review.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with an underlying cancer diagnosis may experience pain from many sources. Temporary, percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) is a minimally invasive procedure that can control pain in those who have failed conservative management. The purpose of this retrospective review is to show the use of PNS in managing pain in the oncologic setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Temporary, percutaneous PNS was placed under fluoroscopic or ultrasound guidance for 15 patients at a cancer pain facility. Cases were grouped by subtypes of cancer pain (ie, tumor-related, treatment-related, cancer-associated conditions, and cancer-independent). Before PNS, patients were refractory to medical management or previous interventional treatments. Patients were observed with routine clinic visits to monitor pain levels via visual analog scale (VAS) and quality-of-life measures. PNS was removed after the indicated 60-day treatment period. RESULTS: This retrospective review presents ten successful cases of oncologic-related pain treated with PNS. Patients with subtypes of pain that were tumor related, from cancer-associated conditions, and cancer independent all experienced a similar degree of pain relief. However, patients with cancer-treatment-related pain experienced the least analgesia from PNS. We also present six cases in which PNS did not provide adequate pain relief. CONCLUSION: PNS is an emerging technology in neuromodulation that may be useful in managing pain, especially in the oncologic population. Patients with cancer-related and non-cancer-related pain localized to a specific nerve distribution should be considered appropriate candidates for PNS. Further research is needed to optimize patient selection and indications for PNS in the population with cancer.

[Tumor-associated pain]. / Tumorassoziierter Schmerz.

Tumor-associated pain has a high prevalence and is still a challenging aspect of pain medicine. Treatment-related etiologies often coexist with pain caused by the oncological disease itself. For cancer pain as well, a pathophysiologically oriented analysis of nociceptive, nociplastic and neuropathic pain is advisable for planning a tailored treatment. The analgesic three-step ladder of the World Health Organization (WHO) should be customized in this context, incorporating antineuropathic or antihypersensitizing pharmacological approaches as well as minimally invasive techniques. Psycho-oncological and exercise therapy interventions should be considered. In cases of long-term courses of treatment or following curative oncological treatment, chronically persistent or chronic tumor-associated pain can occur, necessitating multimodal therapeutic approaches analogue to noncancer pain conditions. Close integration with palliative medicine enhances the therapeutic effectiveness during the transition from nonpalliative to palliative treatment phases.

[Prioritizing the integrated management of cancer pain to comprehensively enhance the diagnosis and treatment proficiency in cancer pain].

As one of the most common complications of cancer or its treatment, cancer-related pain can negatively affect the functional status and quality of life of patients. Pain management for cancer patients in China started later than that in developed countries. After 30 years of efforts by health authorities and medical professionals, cancer pain management in China has made great progress. However, with the accelerated aging of the Chinese population, the increasing incidence of cancer, the prolonged survival of cancer patients, and the strengthening of people's expectations for high-quality life, there is still a gap between the development level of cancer pain management in China and the actual health needs of cancer patients. This article provides a comprehensive overview of the current state and future challenges facing the integrated management of cancer pain in China. Simultaneously, it offers a prospective outlook on future developments, thereby furnishing vital information for professionals engaged in the field of cancer pain management.

Exploring health professionals' knowledge of cancer-related pain: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Cancer-related pain is a complex multidimensional experience that affects all aspects of life. To support those impacted by cancer-related pain it is essential that health professionals have adequate knowledge in its assessment and management. AIMS: To explore the knowledge of health professionals regarding cancer-related pain. METHODS: A scoping review methodology was used to systematically search the literature published between 2010 and 2020. Databases CINAHL, Medline and PsycINFO were searched using terms 'cancer pain', 'healthcare professional', 'knowledge', 'attitudes' and 'barriers'. FINDINGS: The search identified 38 articles. They focused on nursing knowledge with minimal involvement of allied health professionals. Knowledge levels were variable with the majority demonstrating poor knowledge. Common knowledge gaps included around fear of addiction, principles of cancer-related pain assessment and management, and interventional techniques. CONCLUSION: Knowledge of cancer-related pain is variable with several knowledge gaps. More work is needed to ensure health professionals have adequate knowledge regarding the complexity of cancer-related pain.

Schwann cells as a target cell for the treatment of cancer pain.

Tumor erosion and metastasis can invade surrounding tissues, damage nerves, and sensitize the peripheral primary receptors, inducing pain, which can potentially worsen the suffering of patients with cancer. Reception and transmission of sensory signal receptors, abnormal activation of primary sensory neurons, and activation of glial cells are involved in cancer pain. Therefore, exploring promising therapeutic methods to suppress cancer pain is of great significance. Various studies have found that the use of functionally active cells is a potentially effective way to relieve pain. Schwann cells (SCs) act as small, biologically active pumps that secrete pain-relieving neuroactive substances. Moreover, SCs can regulate the progression of tumor cells, including proliferation and metastasis, through neuro-tumor crosstalk, which emphasizes the critical role of SCs in cancer and cancer pain. The mechanisms by which SCs repair injured nerves and exert analgesia include neuroprotection, neurotrophy, nerve regeneration, neuromodulation, immunomodulation, and enhancement of the nerve-injury microenvironment. These factors may ultimately restore the damaged or stimulated nerves and contribute to pain relief. Strategies for pain treatment using cell transplantation mainly focus on analgesia and nerve repair. Although these cells are in the initial stages of nerve repair and pain, they open new avenues for the treatment of cancer pain. Therefore, this paper discusses, for the first time, the possible mechanism of SCs and cancer pain, and new strategies and potential problems in cancer pain treatment.

Pre-Diagnosis Pain in Patients With Pancreatic Cancer Signals the Need for Aggressive Symptom Management.

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the impact of pancreatic cancer (PC) pain on associated symptoms, activities, and resource utilization from 2016 to 2020 in an online patient registry. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Responses from PC patient volunteers (N = 1978) were analyzed from online surveys in a cross-sectional study. Comparisons were performed between PC patient groups reporting, (1) the presence vs. absence of pre-diagnosis PC pain, (2) high (4-8) vs. low (0-3) pain intensity scores on an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS), and (3) year of PC diagnosis (2010-2020). Descriptive statistics and all bivariate analyses were performed using Chi-square or Fisher's Exact tests. RESULTS: PC pain was the most frequently reported pre-diagnosis symptom (62%). Pre-diagnostic PC pain was reported more frequently by women, those with a younger age at diagnosis, and those with PC that spread to the liver and peritoneum. Those with pre-diagnostic PC pain vs. those without reported higher pain intensities (2.64 ± 2.54 vs.1.56 ± 2.01 NRS mean ± SD, respectively, P = .0039); increased frequencies of post-diagnosis symptoms of cramping after meals, feelings of indigestion, and weight loss (P = .02-.0001); and increased resource utilization in PC pain management: (ER visits N = 86 vs. N = 6, P = .018 and analgesic prescriptions, P < .03). The frequency of high pain intensity scores was not decreased over a recent 11-year span. CONCLUSIONS: PC pain continues to be a prominent PC symptom. Patients reporting pre-diagnosis PC pain experience increased GI metastasis, symptoms burden, and are often undertreated. Its mitigation may require novel treatments, more resources dedicated to ongoing pain management and surveillance to improve outcomes.

Management of cancer pain due to bone metastasis.

Bone metastases frequently occur in patients with cancer. Skeletal-related events (SREs), including pain, impaired mobility, hypercalcemia, pathological fracture, spinal cord and nerve root compression, and bone marrow infiltration, can decrease the quality of life of the patients and increase the risk of morbidity. The mechanism of pain due to bone metastasis is complicated and involves various interactions among tumor cells, bone cells, activated inflammatory cells, and bone-innervating neurons. Cancer pain due to bone metastasis can be crippling and a chronic state that causes sarcopenia. For pain management, it is important to diagnose whether the pain is based on background pain or breakthrough pain due to bone metastasis. In addition, the management goal of cancer pain due to bone metastasis is not only to achieve pain relief but also to prevent pain progression and SREs. Pain mechanisms should be applied to achieve optimal management. This review aims to discuss the mechanisms of cancer pain due to bone metastasis and review the recommended drug therapies.

Towards precision pain medicine for pain after cancer: the Cancer Pain Phenotyping Network multidisciplinary international guidelines for pain phenotyping using nociplastic pain criteria.

Pain after cancer remains underestimated and undertreated. Precision medicine is a recent concept that refers to the ability to classify patients into subgroups that differ in their susceptibility to, biology, or prognosis of a particular disease, or in their response to a specific treatment, and thus to tailor treatment to the individual patient characteristics. Applying this to pain after cancer, the ability to classify post-cancer pain into the three major pain phenotypes (i.e. nociceptive, neuropathic, and nociplastic pain) and tailor pain treatment accordingly, is an emerging issue. This is especially relevant because available evidence suggests that nociplastic pain is present in an important subgroup of those patients experiencing post-cancer pain. The 2021 International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) clinical criteria and grading system for nociplastic pain account for the need to identify and correctly classify patients according to the pain phenotype early in their treatment. These criteria are an important step towards precision pain medicine with great potential for the field of clinical oncology. Within this framework, the Cancer Pain Phenotyping (CANPPHE) Network, an international and interdisciplinary group of oncology clinicians and researchers from seven countries, applied the 2021 IASP clinical criteria for nociplastic pain to the growing population of those experiencing post-cancer pain. A manual is provided to allow clinicians to differentiate between predominant nociceptive, neuropathic, or nociplastic pain after cancer. A seven-step diagnostic approach is presented and illustrated using cases to enhance understanding and encourage effective implementation of this approach in clinical practice.