PALLiative care in ONcology (PALLiON): A cluster-randomised trial investigating the effect of palliative care on the use of anticancer treatment at the end of life.

BACKGROUND: Effects on anticancer therapy following the integration of palliative care and oncology are rarely investigated. Thus, its potential effect is unknown. AIM: To investigate the effects of the complex intervention PALLiON versus usual care on end-of-life anticancer therapy. DESIGN: Cluster-randomised controlled trial (RCT), registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (No. NCT01362816). The complex intervention consisted of a physician education program enhancing theoretical, clinical and communication skills, a patient-centred care pathway and patient symptom reporting prior to all consultations. Primary outcome was overall use, start and cessation of anticancer therapy in the last 3 months before death. Secondary outcomes were patient-reported outcomes. Mixed effects logistic regression models and Cox proportional hazard were used. SETTING: A total of 12 Norwegian hospitals (03/2017-02/2021). PARTICIPANTS: Patients ⩾18 years, advanced stage solid tumour, starting last line of anticancer therapy, estimated life expectancy ⩽12 months. RESULTS: A total of 616 (93%) patients were included (intervention: 309/control:307); 63% males, median age 69, 77% had gastrointestinal cancers. Median survival time from inclusion was 8 (IQR 3-14) and 7 months (IQR 3-12), and days between anticancer therapy start and death were 204 (90-378) and 168 (69-351) (intervention/control). Overall, 78 patients (13%) received anticancer therapy in the last month (intervention: 33 [11%]/control: 45 [15%]). No differences were found in patient-reported outcomes. CONCLUSION: We found no significant differences in the probability of receiving end-of-life anticancer therapy. The intervention did not have the desired effect. It was probably too general and too focussed on communication skills to exert a substantial influence on conventional clinical practice.

Advance care planning with older Norwegian adults in their homes: a narrative ethnographic study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of advance care planning (ACP) is to enable patients to define and discuss their values and preferences to ensure that the care they receive is consistent with their needs and wishes. Most studies of ACP with older adults focus on conversations conducted in institutions. This study aimed to explore how ACP with older patients is carried out and experienced by healthcare professionals when the conversations occur in their private homes. METHODS: The data were obtained from participant observations of ACP conversations in the homes of eight older patients with advanced cancer, which also involved relatives and healthcare professionals. Additionally, ethnographic interviews were conducted with the healthcare professionals. We undertook a narrative analysis of what was said, and how the individuals acted and interacted. RESULTS: The home influenced both the substance and form of the ACP conversations. The patients and relatives welcomed the healthcare professionals as guests and were encouraged to share their perceptions of their current situation, joys and worries. Their values were often implicit in their stories about past experiences. The planning mainly focused on life-prolonging treatment and the preferred future place of care. Several patients were not ready to discuss one or more ACP issues. The palliative-care-team physician addressed the patients' readiness for ACP by asking for permission to move on to a different topic, shifting between serious and lighter topics, and using elements from the home as 'door openers' to continue conversations. ACP conversations were an essential basis for future palliative care and cooperation, giving important additional information about the patient and their relatives. CONCLUSION: Conducting the ACP conversations in the patients' homes ensured a homely atmosphere that facilitated a caring approach when sensitive issues were discussed, and in turn supported the identification of important personal values. The healthcare professionals expressed that the ACP conversations represented an essential common reference point and provided a shared awareness of the expected disease trajectory and the values, preferences and needs of the patient. These findings are particularly important given that many older patients struggle to verbalize or form an opinion on issues affecting their future.

Zopiclone versus placebo for short-term treatment of insomnia in patients with advanced cancer-a double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled clinical multicenter phase IV trial.

PURPOSE: Insomnia is frequent in patients with advanced cancer, and a variety of pharmacological agents is used to treat this condition. Still, few clinical trials have investigated the effectiveness of pharmacological sleep therapies in this patient group. We aimed to study the short-term effectiveness of zopiclone on sleep quality in patients with advanced cancer who report insomnia. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter, phase IV clinical trial in adult patients with metastatic malignant disease and insomnia. Patients were treated with zopiclone or placebo for six subsequent nights. Primary end point was patient-reported sleep quality during the final study night (NRS 0-10). Secondary end points were patient-reported sleep onset latency (SOL) and total sleep time (TST). RESULTS: Forty-one patients were randomized, with 18 being analyzed in the zopiclone group and 21 in the placebo group. Median age was 66, median Karnofsky performance score was 80, and 56% were male. Mean sleep quality at end of study was 2.9 (CI 2.3 to 3.8) in the zopiclone group and 4.5 (CI 3.6 to 5.4) in the placebo group (p = 0.021). At end of study, SOL was significantly different between the treatment groups: zopiclone 29 min (CI 13 to 51) and placebo 62 min (CI 40 to 87) (p = 0.045). TST was not significantly different across groups: zopiclone 449 min (403 to 496) and placebo 411 min (CI 380 to 440) (p = 0.167). CONCLUSION: Zopiclone improved short-term patient-reported sleep quality in this cohort of patients with advanced cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02807922.

The short-term impact of methylprednisolone on patient-reported sleep in patients with advanced cancer in a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial.

PURPOSE: Although corticosteroids are frequently used in patients with advanced cancer, few studies have examined the impact of these drugs on patient-reported sleep. We aimed to examine the short-term impact of methylprednisolone on patient-reported sleep in patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: Patient-reported sleep was a predefined secondary outcome in a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial that evaluated the analgesic efficacy of corticosteroids in advanced cancer patients (18+), using opioids, and having pain ≥ 4 past 24 h (NRS 0-10). Patients were randomized to the methylprednisolone group with methylprednisolone 16 mg × 2/day or placebo for 7 days. The EORTC QLQ-C30 (0-100) and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index questionnaire (PSQI) (0-21) were used to assess the impact of corticosteroids on sleep at baseline and at day 7. RESULTS: Fifty patients were randomized of which 25 were analyzed in the intervention group and 22 in the control group. Mean age was 64 years, mean Karnofsky performance status was 67 (SD 13.3), 51% were female, and the mean oral daily morphine equivalent dose was 223 mg (SD 222.77). Mean QLQ-C30 sleep score at baseline was 29.0 (SD 36.7) in the methylprednisolone group and 24.2 (SD 27.6) in the placebo group. At day 7, there was no difference between the groups on QLQ-C30 sleep score (methylprednisolone 20.3 (SD 32.9); placebo 28.8 (SD 33.0), p = 0.173). PSQI showed similar results. CONCLUSIONS: Methylprednisolone 16 mg twice daily for 7 days had no impact on patient-reported sleep in this cohort of patients with advanced cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial information NCT00676936 (13.05.2008).

Serum concentrations of opioids when comparing two switching strategies to methadone for cancer pain.

PURPOSE: Our aim was to compare pharmacological aspects of two switching strategies from morphine/oxycodone to methadone; the stop and go (SAG) strategy in which methadone is started directly after the initial opioid has been stopped, and the 3-days switch (3DS), in which morphine/oxycodone is gradually changed to methadone by cross-tapering over 3 days. METHODS: Forty-two cancer patients with pain and/or opioid side effects were assessed in this randomised trial. Trough serum concentrations of methadone, morphine, morphine-6-glucuronide (M6G), and oxycodone were measured on days 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, and 14. Primary outcome was number of patients with methadone concentrations in apparent C(SS) on day 4. Secondary outcomes were exposure to opioids during the first 3 days, interindividual variation of opioid concentrations, and correlation between methadone concentrations and pain intensity (PI) day 3. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients received methadone (16 in the SAG group, 19 in the 3DS group). The median preswitch morphine equivalent doses were 620 (range 350-2000) mg/day in the SAG group and 800 (range 90-3600) mg/day in the 3DS group (p = 0.43);42% reached C(SS) for methadone in the SAG group on day 4 compared with 22% in the 3DS group (p = 0.42). The SAG group was significantly less exposed to morphine/M6G/oxycodone and significantly more exposed to methadone in the first 3 days. Methadone showed a low correlation with PI. More patients dropped out after intervention in the SAG group than in the 3DS group (38% vs. 5%; p = 0.032). One SAG patient suffered from respiratory depression on day 5. CONCLUSION: The SAG group was initially more exposed to methadone and less to the replaced opioids but without observed clinical benefit and with a higher dropout rate. Patients switched to methadone should be followed closely for the first 5 days, regardless of switching strategy.

Physical exercise for cancer patients with advanced disease: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Physical exercise can improve cancer patients' functioning and reduce their symptom levels. A randomized, controlled trial was launched to test the hypothesis that physical exercise reduces fatigue and improves physical performance in cancer patients with advanced and incurable disease. METHODS: Cancer patients (n = 231) with a life expectancy ≤2 years were randomized to a physical exercise group (PEG, n = 121) or a control usual care group (UCG, n = 110). The PEG exercised under supervision 60 minutes twice a week for 8 weeks. Assessments were performed before and after the intervention. The primary outcome was physical fatigue (PF) measured by the Fatigue Questionnaire. Physical performance was a secondary outcome measured by the Shuttle Walk Test (SWT) and hand grip strength (HGS) test. Analyses were performed after multiple imputations for missing data. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier, NCT00397774). FINDINGS: Thirty-six percent of the PEG were lost to follow-up compared with 23% of the UCG, primarily as a result of disease progression. Seventy-eight PEG and 85 UCG patients completed the intervention. Analyses showed no significant between-group effects in PF. However, clinically and statistically significant between-group effects were found for the SWT and HGS test. INTERPRETATION: Fatigue was not reduced but physical performance (SWT and HGS test) was significantly improved after 8 weeks of physical exercise. Physical exercise might therefore be a suitable approach for maintaining physical capacity in cancer patients with incurable and advanced disease.

PALLiON - PALLiative care Integrated in ONcology: study protocol for a Norwegian national cluster-randomized control trial with a complex intervention of early integration of palliative care.

BACKGROUND: Several publications have addressed the need for a systematic integration of oncological care focused on the tumor and palliative care (PC) focused on the patient with cancer. The exponential increase in anticancer treatments and the high number of patients living longer with advanced disease have accentuated this. Internationally, there is now a persuasive argument that introducing PC early during anticancer treatment in patients with advanced disease has beneficial effects on symptoms, psychological distress, and survival. METHODS: This is a national cluster-randomized trial (C-RCT) in 12 Norwegian hospitals. The trial investigates effects of early, systematic integration of oncology and specialized PC in patients with advanced cancer in six intervention hospitals compared with conventional care in six. Hospitals are stratified on the size of local catchment areas before randomization. In the intervention hospitals, a three-part complex intervention will be implemented. The backbone of the intervention is the development and implementation of patient-centered care pathways that contain early, compulsory referral to PC and regular and systematic registrations of symptoms. An educational program must be completed before patient inclusion. A total of 680 patients with advanced cancer and one caregiver per patient are included when patients come for start of last line of chemotherapy, defined according to national treatment guidelines. Data registration, clinical variables, and patient- and caregiver-reported outcomes take place every 2 months for 1 year or until death. The primary outcome is use of chemotherapy in the last 3 months of life by comparing the proportion of patients who receive this in the intervention and control groups. Primary outcome is use of chemotherapy in the last 3 months before death, i.e. number of patients. Secondary outcomes are initiation, discontinuation and number of cycles, last 3 months of life, administration of other medical interventions in the last month of life, symptom burden, quality of life (QoL), satisfaction with information and follow-up, and caregiver health, QoL, and satisfaction with care. DISCUSSION: Results from this C-RCT will be used to raise the awareness about the positive outcomes of early provision of specialized palliative care using pathways for patients with advanced cancer receiving medical anticancer treatment. The long-term clinical objective is to integrate these patient-centered pathways in Norwegian cancer care. The specific focus on the patient and family and the organization of a predictable care trajectory is consistent with current Norwegian strategies for cancer care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03088202. Registered on 23 March 2017.

An exploratory study examining the relationship between performance status and systemic inflammation frameworks and cytokine profiles in patients with advanced cancer.

The role of cytokines in the systemic inflammatory response (SIR) is now well established. This is in keeping with the role of the SIR in tumorigenesis, malignant spread, and the development of cachexia. However, the relationship between performance status/systemic inflammation frameworks and cytokine profiles is not clear. The aim of the present study was to examine the relationship between the Eastern cooperative oncology group performance status/modified Glasgow prognostic score (ECOG-PS/mGPS) and cooperative oncology group performance status/neutrophil platelet score (ECOG-PS/NPS) frameworks and their cytokine profile in patients with advanced cancer.This was a retrospective interrogation of data already collected as part of a recent clinical trial (NCT00676936). The relationship between the independent variables (ECOG-PS/mGPS and ECOG-PS/NPS frameworks), and dependent variables (cytokine levels) was examined using independent Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal Wallis tests where appropriate.Of the 40 patients included in final analysis the majority had evidence of an SIR assessed by mGPS (78%) or NPS (53%). All patients died on follow-up and the median survival was 91 days (4-933 days). With increasing ECOG-PS there was a higher median value of Interleukin 6 (IL-6, P = .016) and C-reactive protein (CRP, P < .01) and lower albumin (P < .01) and poorer survival (P < .001). With increasing mGPS there was a higher median value of IL-6 (P = .016), Macrophage migration inhibitory factor (MIF, P = .010), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR, P < .01) and poorer survival (P < .01). With increasing NPS there was a higher median value of TGF-ß (P < .001) and C-reactive protein (P = .020) and poor survival (P = .001). When those patients with an ECOG-PS 0/1 and mGPS0 were compared with those patients with an ECOG-PS 2 and mGPS2 there was a higher median value of IL-6 (P = .017) and poorer survival (P < .001). When those patients with an ECOG-PS 0/1 and NPS0 were compared with those patients with an ECOG-PS 2 and NPS1/2 there was a higher median value of IL-6 (P = .002), TGF-ß (P < .001) and poorer survival (P < .01).In patients with advanced cancer IL-6 was associated with the ECOG-PS/mGPS and ECOG-PS/NPS frameworks and survival in patients with advanced cancer. Therefore, the present work provides supporting evidence that agents targeting IL-6 are worthy of further exploration.

Zopiclone versus placebo for short-term treatment of insomnia in patients with advanced cancer: study protocol for a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite the high prevalence of insomnia in patients with advanced cancer, there are no randomized controlled trials on pharmacological interventions for insomnia in this group of patients. A variety of pharmacological agents is recommended to manage sleep disturbance for insomnia in the general population, but their efficacy and safety in adults with advanced cancer are not established. Thus, there is a need to evaluate the effectiveness of medications for insomnia in order to improve the evidence in patients with advanced cancer. One of the most used sleep medications at present in patients with cancer is zopiclone. METHODS: This is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter trial. A total of 100 patients with metastatic cancer who report insomnia will be randomly allocated to zopiclone or placebo. The treatment duration with zopiclone/placebo is 6 consecutive nights. The primary endpoint is patient-reported sleep quality during the final study night (night 6) assessed on a numerical rating scale of 0-10, where 0 = Best sleep and 10 = Worst possible sleep. Secondary endpoints include the mean patient-reported total sleep time and sleep onset latency during the final study night (night 6). DISCUSSION: Results from this study on treatment of insomnia in advanced cancer will contribute to clinical decision-making and improve the treatment of sleep disturbance in this patient cohort. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02807922 . Registered on 21 June 2016.

The relationship between pro-inflammatory cytokines and pain, appetite and fatigue in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: Systemic inflammation is associated with reduced quality of life and increased symptoms in patients with advanced cancer. The aims of this study were to examine the relationships between inflammatory biomarkers and the Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) of pain, appetite and fatigue; and to explore whether levels of baseline biomarkers were associated with changes in these PROMs following treatment with corticosteroids. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An exploratory analysis was done on a trial examining the analgesic properties of corticosteroids in patients with advanced cancer. Inclusion criteria were: >18 years, taking opioids for moderate or severe cancer pain; pain ≥4 (numerical rating scale 0-10). Serum was extracted and levels of inflammatory biomarkers were assessed. PROMs of pain, appetite and fatigue were assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30). The relationships between PROMs and inflammatory biomarkers were examined using Spearman Rho-Rank and multiple regression analysis. RESULTS: Data were available on 49 patients. Levels of sTNF-r1, IL-6, IL-18, MIF, MCP-1, TGF-ß1, IL-1ra, and C-reactive protein (CRP) and Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) were elevated; IL-1ß, IL-2, IL-4, IL-8, IL-10, IL-12(p70), interferon-γ, MIP-1α, and TNF-α were below the level of detection. The following correlations were observed: appetite and IL-6 and CRP; fatigue and IL-1ra (rs: 0.38-0.41, p< .01). There was no association between pretreatment biomarkers and effect from corticosteroid treatment. CONCLUSION: In patients with advanced cancer and pain, some pro-inflammatory cytokines were related to appetite and fatigue. Inflammatory biomarkers were not associated with pain or with the efficacy of corticosteroid therapy. Further research examining the attenuation of the systemic inflammatory response and possible effects on symptoms would be of interest.

[Approaching patients who require palliative care]. / Tilnaerming til pasienter som trenger palliativ behandling.

The aim of palliative medicine is the best possible quality of life. Based upon literature and clinical experience we address factors of importance for the meeting between the palliative patient and the physician. Family and network, personality and behaviour vary between palliative patients and have effect upon their coping; these factors should be reflected in the meeting between the physician and the patient. Communication with a palliative patient also aims at a systematic assessment of his or her various symptoms and the physician should have a broad armamentarium of communications skills. The optimal way to assess symptoms is by use of clinical interviews supplemented with standardized measurements. Instruments such as the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System are very useful in the assessment of the commonest symptoms. The assessments should include patients' perspectives and what priority they give to relevant interventions. Treatment should be evaluated systematically in order to avoid ineffective treatments and to reduce side effects and interactions. The aim is to give patients as good and as long a time as possible in the place in which they want to spend the last part of their lives. Palliative medicine often combines the art of medicine with new technology. The focus on quality of life and the patient perspective is paramount, and the approach to the patient should reflect this.

[The dying patient]. / Den døende pasient.

All doctors in clinical practice have to face dying patients. In order to give help to the patient and his nearest family, the doctor needs knowledge about the dying process and how to relieve suffering. Based on relevant literature and own clinical experience, we discuss the challenges of identifying the terminal phase, ethical issues concerning medical treatment, and how to offer adequate symptom relief. We describe how to relieve pain and other symptoms, and how to organise the care of the dying. Drugs that may be useful in relieving suffering are described with dosing proposals. Family members have to be helped as well with information and reassurance. A Norwegian Standard for Palliation focusing on the organisation of palliative and terminal care has recently been published.

Polypharmacy in patients with advanced cancer and pain: a European cross-sectional study of 2282 patients.

CONTEXT: Patients with advanced cancer need multiple drugs to control symptoms and to treat cancer and concomitant diseases. At the same time, the goal of treatment changes as life expectancy becomes limited. This results in a risk for polypharmacy, maintained use of unneeded drugs, and drug-drug interactions (DDIs). OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to analyze the use of medications and to identify unneeded drugs, and drugs and drug combinations with a risk for DDIs in a cohort of advanced cancer pain patients, defined by a need for a World Health Organization analgesic ladder Step III opioid. METHODS: All drugs taken within a study day by cancer patients receiving opioids for moderate or severe pain (Step III opioids) were analyzed. Nonopioids and adjuvants were analyzed for their use across countries. Unneeded medications and drugs and drug combinations with a risk for pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic DDIs were identified on the basis of published literature and electronic resources. RESULTS: In total, 2282 patients from 17 centers in 11 European countries were included. They received a mean of 7.8 drugs (range 1-20). Over one-quarter used 10 or more medications. The drugs and drug classes most frequently coadministered with opioids were proton pump inhibitors, laxatives, corticosteroids, paracetamol (acetaminophen), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, metoclopramide, benzodiazepines, anticoagulants, antibiotics, anticonvulsants, diuretics, and antidepressants. The use of nonopioids and essential adjuvants varied across countries. Approximately 45% of patients received unnecessary or potentially unnecessary drugs, and about 7% were given duplicate or antagonizing agents. Exposures to DDIs were frequent and increased the risk of sedation, gastric ulcerations, bleedings, and neuropsychiatric and cardiac complications. Many patients were exposed to pharmacokinetic DDIs involving cytochrome P450, including about 58% who used a Step III opioid CYP3A4 (izoenzyme of cytochrome P450) substrate, and more than 10% who were given major CYP3A4 inhibitors or inducers. CONCLUSION: Patients with cancer treated with a World Health Organization Step III opioid use a high number of drugs. Nonopioid analgesics and corticosteroids are frequently used, but different patterns of use between countries were found. Many patients receive unneeded drugs and are at risk of serious DDIs. These findings demonstrate that drug therapy in these patients needs to be evaluated continuously.

Efficacy of methylprednisolone on pain, fatigue, and appetite loss in patients with advanced cancer using opioids: a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial.

PURPOSE: Corticosteroids are frequently used in cancer pain management despite limited evidence. This study compares the analgesic efficacy of corticosteroid therapy with placebo. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients with cancer receiving opioids with average pain intensity ≥ 4 (numeric rating scale [NRS], 0 to 10) in the last 24 hours were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned to methylprednisolone (MP) 16 mg twice daily or placebo (PL) for 7 days. Primary outcome was average pain intensity measured at day 7 (NRS, 0 to 10); secondary outcomes were analgesic consumption (oral morphine equivalents), fatigue and appetite loss (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Quality of Life Questionnaire C30, 0 to 100), and patient satisfaction (NRS, 0 to 10). RESULTS: A total of 592 patients were screened; 50 were randomly assigned, and 47 were analyzed. Baseline opioid level was 269.9 mg in the MP arm and 160.4 mg in the PL arm. At day-7 evaluation, there was no difference between the groups in pain intensity (MP, 3.60 v PL, 3.68; P = .88) or relative analgesic consumption (MP, 1.19 v PL, 1.20; P = .95). Clinically and statistically significant improvements were found in fatigue (-17 v 3 points; P .003), appetite loss (-24 v 2 points; P = .003), and patient satisfaction (5.4 v 2.0 points; P = .001) in favor of the MP compared with the PL group, respectively. There were no differences in adverse effects between the groups. CONCLUSION: MP 32 mg daily did not provide additional analgesia in patients with cancer receiving opioids, but it improved fatigue, appetite loss, and patient satisfaction. Clinical benefit beyond a short-term effect must be examined in a future study.

Do corticosteroids provide analgesic effects in cancer patients? A systematic literature review.

CONTEXT: Corticosteroids are frequently used in cancer patients for their analgesic properties. The evidence for analgesic effects of corticosteroids in palliative care has not been established. OBJECTIVES: To assess the evidence for the use of corticosteroids in cancer pain management. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed. The articles were evaluated according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluations system by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: The search provided 514 references, four of which were included. Another two trials were identified from reference lists. Two of these six studies were excluded from the qualitative review. One crossover study showed a significant reduction in pain intensity of 13 (visual analogue 0-100 scale) accompanied by significant lower analgesic consumption in favor of the steroid group. In another study, the addition of steroids did not have any effect on pain. In two studies, outcomes of pain intensity or analgesic consumption were not adequately reported. However, one of these studies showed significant pain reduction, whereas the other found no effect. Corticosteroids given in medium doses were well tolerated in studies for up to seven days. However, the studies indicated that corticosteroids may have serious toxicity and even higher mortality when administered in high doses over eight weeks. CONCLUSION: Corticosteroids may have a moderate analgesic effect in cancer patients. The paucity of relevant studies was striking; consequently, the evidence was graded as "very low." More studies addressing the analgesic efficacy in cancer patients are required.

Computer-based assessment of symptoms and mobility in palliative care: feasibility and challenges.

The aims of the study were to explore the ability of cancer patients who are primarily receiving palliative care to use a touchscreen computer for assessment of symptoms and mobility and to investigate which factors predicted the need for assistance during the assessment. Before the main data collection, a pilot study was conducted to explore the preferences of these patients toward using such a computerized assessment tool. Patients were recruited from nine different inpatient and outpatient palliative care and general cancer clinics in Norway. The patients responded to 60 items on symptoms and mobility directly on the computer. In the pilot study (n=20), 11 patients (55.0%) preferred computerized assessment over paper and pencil, whereas five (25.0%) had no preference. In the main data collection, 370 patients (52.7% men with mean age 62 years and mean Karnofsky Performance Status score of 70) completed the assessment. Eighty-six patients (23.2%) required assistance. Patients requiring assistance were significantly older, had worse performance status, and poorer cognitive function than those not requiring assistance. Predictors for requiring assistance were age (P<0.001) and performance status (P<0.001). Because higher age and worse performance status resulted in more need of assistance, assessment tools should be short and user-friendly to ensure good compliance in frail patients.