Search

Purpose: In this study, we aimed to assess the clinical characteristics, reasons for referral, and outcomes of patients with brain metastases (BM) referred to the supportive care center. Methods: Equal numbers of patients with melanoma, breast cancer, and lung cancer with (N=90) and without (N=90) BM were retrospectively identified from the supportive care database for study. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze demographic, disease, and clinical data. Kaplan Meier method was used to evaluate survival outcomes. Results: While physical symptom management was the most common reason for referral to supportive care for both patients with and without BM, patients with BM had significantly lower pain scores on ESAS at time of referral (p=0.002). They had greater interaction with acute care in the last weeks of life, with higher rates of ICU admission, emergency room visits, and hospitalizations after initial SC visit. The median survival time from referral to SCC was 0.90 years (95% CI 0.73, 1.40) for the brain metastasis group and 1.29 years (95% CI 0.91, 2.29) for the group without BM. Conclusions: Patients with BM have shorter survival and greater interaction with acute care in the last weeks of life. This population also has distinct symptom burdens from patients without BM. Strategies to optimize integration of SC for patients with BM warrant ongoing study.

Purpose: In this study we aimed to estimate the effectiveness of pharmacological, nutraceutical, and phytopharmaceutical treatments on CRF. Methods: Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid Psych info, CINHAHL and Cochrane Library databases were searched up to 30 September 2021. Randomized controlled trials of pharmacological, nutraceutical and phytopharmaceutical interventions for treatment of CRF for at least one week duration and have used valid tool to assess severity of CRF as a primary or secondary outcome were considered. Results: 32 eligible studies (4896 patients) were reviewed. For the overall meta-analysis, the random effect models yielded the treatment effect (95% CI) of −0.29 (−0.48,−0.09), p < 0.001. The meta-analysis did not show significant reduction of CRF with treatment with ginseng (n = 6), guarana (n = 3), megestrol (n = 2), mistletoe (n = 3), psychostimulants (n = 14), SSRI/antidepressants (n = 2). Corticosteroids (n = 2) showed significant reduction in CRF with treatment effects of 0.94 (−1.21, −0.67), p

Background: Patients with cancer-related pain use opioids for nociceptive pain, while gabapentinoids are common to treat neuropathic pain. The simultaneous use of opioids with gabapentinoids has be...

Context The use of a handheld or electric fan has been proposed as one component of the complex clinical interventions used in the relief of dyspnea; however, there is a lack of consensus regarding its efficacy. Objectives We performed a systematic review to determine the effectiveness of fan therapy for the treatment of dyspnea. Methods We searched the Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, PsycInfo, and Cochrane Library databases to identify all fan therapy studies published from January 1, 1946 to September 31, 2018. The search terms included “dyspnea,” “dysponea,” “dyspneic,” “short of breath,” “shortness of breath,” “breathless,” “breathlessness,” “breathing difficulty,” “labored breathing,” and “fan.” Searches were limited to articles in English or Chinese. The bibliographies of identified articles were also manually searched. Three authors independently assessed papers for inclusion. Results Ten of the 92 unique records identified met the inclusion criteria (nine randomized controlled trials and one cohort study). Most studies (80%) were conducted in the hospital setting, and none were double blinded. Nearly half (159 [46%]) of the 344 total subjects had cancer. The most common nonmalignant disease was chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The most common duration of fan therapy was five minutes. Six studies (60%) reported a significant improvement in dyspnea with fan therapy. There are two ongoing trials being conducted based on a search of trial registries. Conclusion Limited direct evidence from randomized controlled trials indicates that fan therapy may effectively alleviate dyspnea. Additional trials are warranted to confirm this finding and explore the use of fan therapy for the treatment of dyspnea in more diverse populations and settings.

IMPORTANCE: One of the main aims of research on nonmedical opioid use (NMOU) is to reduce the frequency of NMOU behaviors through interventions such as universal screening, reduced opioid exposure, and more intense follow-up of patients with elevated risk. The absence of data on the frequency of NMOU behavior is the major barrier to conducting research on NMOU. OBJECTIVE: To determine the overall frequency of and the independent predictors for NMOU behavior. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this prognostic study, 3615 patients with cancer were referred to the supportive care center at MD Anderson Cancer Center from March 18, 2016, to June 6, 2018. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they had cancer and were taking opioids for cancer pain for at least 1 week. Patients were excluded if they had no follow-up within 3 months of initial consultation, did not complete the appropriate questionnaire, or did not have scheduled opioid treatments. After exclusion, a total of 1554 consecutive patients were assessed for NMOU behavior using established diagnostic criteria. All patients were assessed using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale, the Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain (SOAPP), and the Cut Down, Annoyed, Guilty, Eye Opener–Adapted to Include Drugs (CAGE-AID) survey. Data were analyzed from January 6 to September 25, 2020. RESULTS: A total of 1554 patients (median [interquartile range (IQR)] age, 61 [IQR, 52-69] years; 816 women [52.5%]; 1124 White patients [72.3%]) were evaluable for the study, and 299 patients (19.2%) had 1 or more NMOU behaviors. The median (IQR) number of NMOU behaviors per patient was 1 (IQR, 1-3). A total of 576 of 745 NMOU behaviors (77%) occurred by the first 2 follow-up visits. The most frequent NMOU behavior was unscheduled clinic visits for inappropriate refills (218 of 745 [29%]). Eighty-eight of 299 patients (29.4%) scored 7 or higher on SOAPP, and 48 (16.6%) scored at least 2 out of 4 points on the CAGE-AID survey. Results from the multivariate model suggest that marital status (single, hazard ratio [HR], 1.58; 95% CI, 1.15-2.18; P = .005; divorced, HR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.01-2.03; P = .04), SOAPP score (positive vs negative, HR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.04-1.74; P = .02), morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) (HR, 1.003; 95% CI, 1.002-1.004; P

12086 Background: One of the methodological barriers to conducting research on interventions for NOMU (Aberrant Opioid Use Behaviors) among cancer patients is the lack of data on the frequency of this problem. Although the frequency of risk factors has been established by our group and others, not all the patients with risk factors will be diagnosed with having NMOU behaviors, and some patients with no previous risk factors will engage in NMOU. AIM: To characterize the overall frequency of NMOU for a duration of 3 months, as well independent predictors for NMOU. Methods: In this retrospective study, 1558 consecutive patients referred to supportive care clinic (SCC) from 3/18/2016 to 6/6/2018 were reviewed for development of NMOU using established diagnostic criteria. Patients were eligible if they were ≥18 years, had a diagnosis of cancer, and were on opioids for pain for at least a week. All patients were assessed with the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS), SOAPP-14, and CAGE-AID. Descriptive statistics, spearman correlation coefficient, multivariate analysis were performed. Results: 299 patients (19%) had ≥1 NMOU behavior. The median (IQR) NMOU behavior was 1 (1-2); range 1-10. Most NMOU occurred at 1st and 2nd follow up visits. The most frequent NMOU behavior was unscheduled clinic visit for inappropriate refills. 29/299 (10%) NMOU patients received specialized care for high-risk for aberrant opioid misuse by interdisciplinary team. Results of multivariate logistic regression model showed Marital status (Divorced vs. Married, OR=1.47, 95% CI: 0.98, 2.22, p=0.654 (marginally significant); Single vs. Married, OR=1.68, 95% CI: 1.15, 2.46, p=0.0079), SOAPP (Positive vs. Negative, OR=1.42, 95% CI: 1.05, 1.93, p=0.0238), morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) (OR=1.004, 95% CI: (1.003, 1.006), p