Search

Objective To examine sociodemographic characteristics and caring experiences associated with being an older rather than younger carer of an adult with a chronic health condition. Methods The population-based cross-sectional South Australian Health Omnibus survey was administered in 2016. Multiple logistic regression was used to identify sociodemographic characteristics and caring experiences associated with being an older (≥65 years) versus younger (Results Of 988 survey respondents who self-identified as carers, 198(20%) were 65 years or over. Characteristics associated with being an older carer included having a partner, having poor physical health, being born outside Australia, have no formal qualification, living in a household of 1–2 people, have an annual household income ≤$60,000, and owning one's home. Carer experiences associated with older carer status included providing ≥40 h of care per week, perceived control over caring, and caring for someone with a neurological condition, whereas caring for someone with a mental illness, reporting poor mental health of their own, and providing personal care were inversely associated. Discussion Interventions directed at older carers should consider the increased likelihood that they may be investing large amounts of time in caring for someone with a neurological condition, and be culturally and linguistically diverse.

Background Cancer cachexia negatively affects quality of life (QoL) and increases symptom burden. A multimodal treatment approach may optimize cachexia outcomes, including QoL. We evaluated QoL and symptoms over time among patients attending a multidisciplinary clinical service for cancer cachexia. Methods Adults with cancer who attended the clinical service three times between 2017 and 2020 were included. Quality of life and symptoms were assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of life Questionnaire Core 15 Palliative Care (EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL) and the Functional Assessment Anorexia/Cachexia Therapy (FAACT) questionnaires. Physical function was assessed using the 30s sit-to-stand test and handgrip strength. Results Overall, 162 patients (age = 67.2 ± 12.0 years) were included. Mean six-month weight loss at baseline was 10.4% ± 9.4%. Mean body weight was stable between clinic visits (P = 0.904) and no change in sit-to-stand repetitions (P = 0.133) or handgrip strength (P = 0.734) occurred over time. Improvements in EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL overall QoL (Δ10.7 ± 2.5, P < 0.001), physical function (Δ8.0 ± 2.4, P = 0.003) and emotional function (Δ11.4 ± 2.9, P < 0.001) occurred by the second visit. EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL fatigue (Δ13.8 ± 2.9, P < 0.001), pain (Δ10.3 ± 3.3, P = 0.007), nausea/vomiting (Δ16.1 ± 3.0, P < 0.001) and appetite symptoms (Δ25.9 ± 3.8, P < 0.001) also improved by the second visit. FAACT total score (Δ14.6 ± 2.7, P < 0.001), anorexia-cachexia symptoms (Δ6.6 ± 1.1, P< 0.001), and physical (Δ3.7 ± 0.70, P < 0.001), emotional (Δ1.9 ± 0.60, P = 0.005) and functional wellbeing (Δ2.7 ± 0.71, P = 0.001) improved by the second visit. All improvements in EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL and FAACT outcomes were maintained at the third visit. Conclusion Significant improvements in QoL and symptoms were associated with attending a cancer cachexia clinical service. Our findings support using multidisciplinary, multimodal cancer cachexia treatment approaches to improve patient wellbeing.

The article collates the narratives of experiences of the international faculty who mentored the quality improvement teams from India since 2017.

BackgroundOlder adults living with dementia frequently transition between healthcare settings. Care transitions increase vulnerability and risk of iatrogenic harm.Aim and objectiveTo examine the quality of transitional care arrangements within discharge documentation for older people living with dementia.DesignSecondary analysis of cohort study data.MethodA secondary analysis of the IDEAL Study [ACTRN12612001164886] discharge documents, following the STROBE guidelines. Participants had a confirmed diagnosis of dementia and were discharged from hospital to a nursing home. An audit tool was used to extract the data. This was developed through a synthesis of existing tools and finalised by an expert panel. The analysis assessed the quality of discharge documentation, in the context of transitional care needs, and presented results using descriptive statistics. Functional ability; physical health; cognition and mental health; medications; and socio environmental factors were assessed.ResultsSixty participants were included in analyses, and half were male (52%), with a total participant mean age of 83 (SD 8.7) years. There was wide variability in the quality of core discharge information, ranging from excellent (37%), adequate (43%) to poor (20%). A sub-group of these core discharge documentation elements that detailed the participants transitional care needs were rated as follows: excellent (17%), adequate (46%) and poor (37%).ConclusionDischarge documentation fails to meet needs of people living with dementia. Improving the quality of discharge documentation for people living with dementia transitioning from hospital to nursing home is critical to provide safe and quality care.Relevance to clinical practiceThere is a need for safe, timely, accurate and comprehensive discharge information to ensure the safety of people living with dementia and prevent adverse harm.

BackgroundMost health care systems are facing the challenge of providing health services to support the increasing numbers of older people with chronic life-limiting conditions at the end of life. Many policies focus primarily on increasing the proportion of deaths at home.ObjectivesThis study aims to investigate preferences for care throughout the latter stages of a life-limiting illness, particularly the importance of location of care, location of death, and the use of life-sustaining measures. It focuses on preferences for the care of an older person with advanced cancer in the last 3 weeks of life.MethodsA survey using discrete choice experiment (DCE) methods was completed online by a general population sample of 1548 Australians aged 45 years and over. The experiment included 12 attributes, and each respondent completed 11 choice sets. Analysis was by a mixed logit model and latent class analysis (LCA).ResultsThe most important attributes influencing care preferences were cost, patient anxiety, pain control, and carer stress (relative importance scores 0.21, 0.19, 0.14, and 0.14, respectively), with less importance given to place of care and place of death (relative importance scores 0.03 and 0.01). The model predicted that 42% would consider receiving most care in hospital better than at home (58%) holding the levels of other attributes constant across the alternatives, while 42% would consider death in hospital better than at home (58%). Three population segments with different preferences were identified by the LCA, the largest (46.5%) prioritised how the patient and carer felt as well as the pain control achieved, the next largest (28.1%) prioritised cost, and the smallest segment (25.4%) prioritised a single room when an inpatient.ConclusionsThis study shows that investment in services to support people at the end of life would be better targeted toward programmes that improve patient and carer wellbeing irrespective of the location of care and death.

Introduction This review aims to systematically identify and appraise the methodological quality of claims on the cost of delirium; and discuss challenges and opportunities for improvements in the precision of the estimates. Methods Searches of scientific papers and gray literature were performed up until June 2020. The Larg and Moss checklist was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Results After deduplication, the search identified 317 potentially relevant articles, of which 17 articles were eligible for inclusion. After adjusting for inflation and common currency, the cost of delirium ranged between $806 and $24,509 (in 2019 US$). Discussion This review found significant variation among the cost estimates and methodological quality. There has been limited focus on dementia as a sequela of delirium in terms of economic implications, but recent evidence suggests cost implications of delirium may be 52% higher when dementia is considered.

This study explores healthcare professionals (HCPs)’ perception and current management of sleep disturbance (SD) in people with malignant brain tumours and their caregivers. We aimed to identify barriers to effective management of SD in neuro-oncology care. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 11 HCPs involved in neuro-oncology care. The study was underpinned by the Capability Opportunity Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model within the Behavioural Change Wheel (BCW) guiding topic selection for the exploration of underlying processes of HCPs’ behaviours and care decisions for SD management. Data were analysed thematically using a framework synthesis, and subsequently mapped onto the BCW to identify barriers for effective management and recommend potential interventions. We identified four themes: HCPs’ clinical opinions about SD, the current practice of SD management in neuro-oncology clinics, gaps in the current practice, and suggested areas for improvements. HCPs perceived SD as a prevalent yet secondary issue of low priority in neuro-oncology care. SD was unrecognised, and inadequately managed in usual clinical settings. Interventional options included modifying the use of corticosteroids or prescribing sedatives. When mapped onto the BCW, themes identified main barriers as a lack of awareness among HCPs about SD warranting care, due to the absence of screening tools and limited knowledge and resources for therapeutic interventions. Multidisciplinary HCPs need training in the routine use of appropriate sleep assessment tools, and access to clear management pathways. More professional resources are needed to educate staff in implementing appropriate interventions for people with malignant brain tumours who are experiencing SD.

Mentors at seven United States and Australian academic institutions partnered with seven leading Indian academic palliative care and cancer centers to undertake a program combining remote and in-person mentorship, didactic instruction, and project-based learning in quality improvement. From its inception in 2017 to 2020, the Promoting Assessment and Improvement of the Cancer Experience (PC-PAICE) Program conducted three cohorts for capacity building of 22 Indian palliative care and cancer programs. Indian leadership established a Mumbai training hub in 2019 with philanthropic support, Quality Improvement Hub (e.g., QI-Hub) India. In 2020 the project which now focuses on both palliative care and cancer teams as EQuIP-India. EQuIP now leads ongoing Indian national collaboratives and training in quality improvement and is integrated into India's National Cancer Grid. PC-PAICE demonstrates a feasible model of international collaboration and capacity building in palliative care and cancer quality improvement. It is one of several networked, blended learning approaches with potential for rapid scaling of evidence-based practices.

Background Sleep is an important element in health-related quality of life of cancer patients and caregivers. This study aimed to explore the experience of sleep disturbance in people with malignant brain tumors (BT) and their family caregivers. Methods Participants were recruited from ambulatory neuro-oncology clinics. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 24 patients (67% with high-grade gliomas) and 14 caregivers. Data were analyzed thematically using a framework synthesis. Results We identified six themes relating to perceptions of the nature, impact, causal factors, and interventions for sleep disturbance, beliefs about sleep and impact, and personal coping strategies. Participants described their sleep disturbance in terms of insomnia symptoms; most commonly difficulties initiating and maintaining sleep. Participants had varied views on causal factors including the BT diagnosis and treatment and caregiver burden. However, excessive thinking and BT-related anxiety were evident in both patients and caregivers. The described impact on daytime functioning due to non-restful sleep and fatigue appeared to be significant and many participants needed daytime naps, although they understated the impact on individual functioning. Some participants were reluctant to seek help from clinicians for sleep disturbance due to previous experiences where sleep disturbance was overlooked, or because they held negative views toward pharmacological interventions. Participants reported various coping strategies, ranging from relaxation-promoting techniques to behaviors to distract thinking at night that may instead disturb sleep. Conclusions Psychological factors contribute to sleep disturbance in patients with BT and caregivers. This population may benefit from information about sleep disturbance and interventions targeting anxiety.

With cannabis medicines now obtaining legal status in many international jurisdictions (generally on the authorisation of a medical professional), a rapid increase in consumer demand for access to cannabis as a therapeutic option in the treatment and management of a range of indications is being noted. Despite this accessibility, knowledge on optimal use is lacking. Further drug development and clinical trials at regulatory standards are necessary both if a better understanding of the efficacy of cannabis medicines, optimal product formulation and indication-specific dosing is needed and to ensure the broader quality and safety of cannabis medicines in the clinical setting.To enable this, clinical, academic and public calls for the undertaking of rigorous clinical trials to establish an evidence base for the therapeutic use of cannabis medicines have been made internationally. While this commitment to undertake human studies with cannabis medicines is welcomed, it has highlighted unique challenges, notably in the review stages of ethics and governance. This often results in lengthy delays to approval by Human Research Ethics Committees (herein ‘HREC’, Australia’s nomenclature for Institutional Review Boards) and trial commencement. A principal concern in these cases is that in contrast to clinical trials using other more conventional pharmaceutical products, trials of cannabis medicines in humans often involve the use of an investigational product prior to some (or any) of the preclinical and pharmaceutical safety issues being established. This paucity of data around product safety, potential drug interactions, continuity of supply, shelf life and product storage results in apprehension by HRECs and governance bodies to endorse trials using cannabis medicines.This manuscript draws from the experiences of Australian researchers and staff involved in clinical trials of cannabis medicines to describe some of the common difficulties that may be faced in the HREC approval process. It also presents practical advice aimed to assist researchers, HRECs and governance officers navigate this complex terrain. While the authors’ experiences are situated within the Australian setting, many of the barriers described are applicable within the international context and thus, the solutions that have been proposed are typically adaptive for use within other jurisdictions.

Background This analysis aims to evaluate health-related quality of life (HrQoL) (primary outcome for this analysis), nausea and vomiting, and pain in patients with inoperable malignant bowel obstruction (IMBO) due to cancer or its treatments randomised to standardised therapies plus octreotide or placebo over a maximum of 72 h in a double-blind clinical trial. Methods Adults with IMBO and vomiting recruited through 12 services spanning inpatient, consultative and community settings in Australia were randomised to subcutaneous octreotide infusion or saline. HrQoL was measured at baseline and treatment cessation (EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL). Mean within-group paired differences between baseline and post-treatment scores were analysed using Wilcoxon Signed Rank test and between group differences estimated using linear mixed models, adjusted for baseline score, sex, age, time, and study arm. Results One hundred six of the 112 randomised participants were included in the analysis (n = 52 octreotide, n = 54 placebo); 6 participants were excluded due to major protocol violations. Mean baseline HrQoL scores were low (octreotide 22.1, 95% CI 14.3, 29.9; placebo 31.5, 95% CI 22.3, 40.7). There was no statistically significant within-group improvement in the mean HrQoL scores in the octreotide (p = 0.21) or placebo groups (p = 0.78), although both groups reported reductions in mean nausea and vomiting (octreotide p p = 0.02) and pain scores (octreotide p p = 0.03). Although no statistically significant difference in changes in HrQoL scores between octreotide and placebo were seen, an adequately powered study is required to fully assess any differences in HrQoL scores. Conclusion The HrQoL of patients with IMBO and vomiting is poor. Further research to formally evaluate the effects of standard therapies for IMBO is therefore warranted. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12608000211369 (date registered 18/04/2008)

Background Emerging evidence supports the clinical impact of sleep disturbance (SD) on cancer patients. This study aimed to determine the prevalence and predictors of SD in people with malignant brain tumors and caregivers, and explore any relationship between the patient-caregiver dyad’s sleep. Methods Eighty-one adults with primary malignant (91%) or metastatic (9%) brain tumors and their family caregivers (n = 44) completed a series of self-report questionnaires, including the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), the Insomnia Severity Index, and the drowsiness item of The MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Brain Tumor in an Australian ambulatory neuro-oncology setting. Participants were grouped by the PSQI cutoff (SD > 5), and binary logistic regression analyses were performed to identify risk factors. Results Of patients, 53% reported SD and 15% of those clinically significant insomnia, and 27% reported moderate to severe daytime drowsiness. Whereas anxiety, depression, fatigue, pain, neurocognitive symptoms, and antiemetic use were higher in patients with SD, fatigue and KPS were strong predictors of SD. In caregivers, 55% reported poor sleep and 13% clinical insomnia. Anxiety, caregiver burden, and comorbid illness were significantly associated with caregivers’ SD. The individual’s SD did not affect the chance of the other member of the patient-caregiver dyad experiencing SD. Conclusions More than half the sample had sleep disturbance, which was linked to many concomitant symptoms, such as fatigue in patients and anxiety in caregivers, potentially contributing to distress and functional impairment. Understanding underlying mechanisms of SD, the potential use of these clinical predictors in care settings, and options for management is warranted.

Sleep disturbance is easily overlooked in subspecialty consultations and may remain untreated during and after initial treatment of malignant brain tumours (BT). This study aimed to explore perceptions of healthcare professionals (HCPs) actively engaged in neuro-oncology care towards sleep disturbance in adults with primary or secondary BT and to identify facilitators and barriers to assessment and management of sleep disturbance. A survey was conducted to explore HCPs’ perceptions about their knowledge, skills, and confidence in managing sleep disturbance in people with BT. The survey also explored their beliefs, motivation, and perceived role in managing sleep disturbance, and views on contributing external factors that impacted management. Seventy-three interdisciplinary HCPs with average of 9.3 years of clinical experience in neuro-oncology participated. Fifty-five percent of participants were medical or radiation oncologists. Participants reported a high observed prevalence of sleep disturbance, especially in inpatient settings, during initial treatment, and after tumour progression or recurrence. Only 20% of participants reported routinely reviewing sleep-related symptoms during consultations. General symptom screening questions were perceived as helpful to identify sleep disturbance. Almost all respondents (92%) viewed corticosteroids as the most relevant risk factor, followed by psychological distress. The most frequent clinical responses were offering verbal advice and prescribing medication. The lack of time, resources, and training for managing sleep issues were commonly reported barriers. Overall, participants perceived sleep disturbance as highly prevalent in neuro-oncology and positively viewed the importance of managing this symptom. Practical barriers to management were reported that future interventions can target.

INTRODUCTION: A pandemic coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, causes COVID-19, a potentially life-threatening respiratory disease. Patients with cancer may have compromised immunity due to their malignancy and/or treatment, and may be at elevated risk of severe COVID-19. Community transmission of COVID-19 could overwhelm health care services, compromising delivery of cancer care. This interim consensus guidance provides advice for clinicians managing patients with cancer during the pandemic. MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic: In patients with cancer with fever and/or respiratory symptoms, consider causes in addition to COVID-19, including other infections and therapy-related pneumonitis. For suspected or confirmed COVID-19, discuss temporary cessation of cancer therapy with a relevant specialist. Provide information on COVID-19 for patients and carers. Adopt measures within cancer centres to reduce risk of nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 acquisition; support population-wide social distancing; reduce demand on acute services; ensure adequate staffing; and provide culturally safe care. Measures should be equitable, transparent and proportionate to the COVID-19 threat. Consider the risks and benefits of modifying cancer therapies due to COVID-19. Communicate treatment modifications, and review once health service capacity allows. Consider potential impacts of COVID-19 on the blood supply and availability of stem cell donors. Discuss and document goals of care, and involve palliative care services in contingency planning. CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AS A RESULT OF THIS STATEMENT: This interim consensus guidance provides a framework for clinicians managing patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic. In view of the rapidly changing situation, clinicians must also monitor national, state, local and institutional policies, which will take precedence. ENDORSED BY: Australasian Leukaemia and Lymphoma Group; Australasian Lung Cancer Trials Group; Australian and New Zealand Children's Haematology/Oncology Group; Australia and New Zealand Society of Palliative Medicine; Australasian Society for Infectious Diseases; Bone Marrow Transplantation Society of Australia and New Zealand; Cancer Council Australia; Cancer Nurses Society of Australia; Cancer Society of New Zealand; Clinical Oncology Society of Australia; Haematology Society of Australia and New Zealand; National Centre for Infections in Cancer; New Zealand Cancer Control Agency; New Zealand Society for Oncology; and Palliative Care Australia.

Patient-defined factors that are important at the end of life include being physically independent for as long as possible, good symptom control, and spending quality time with friends and family. Hospice care adds to the quality of care and these patient-centered priorities for people with cancer and their families in the last weeks and days of life. Evidence from large observational studies demonstrate that hospice care can improve outcomes directly and support better and more appropriate health care use for people in the last stages of cancer. Team-based community hospice care has measurable benefits for patients, their family caregivers, and health services. In addition to improved symptom control for patients and a greater likelihood of time spent at home, caregiver outcomes are better when hospice care is accessed: informational needs are better met, and caregivers have an improved ability to move on with life after the patient’s death compared with people who did not have access to these services. Hospice care continues to evolve as its reach expands and the needs of patients continue to broaden. This is reflected in the transition from hospice being based on excellence in nursing to teams with a broad range of health professionals to meet the complex and changing needs of patients and their families. Additional integration of cancer services with hospice care will help to provide more seamless care for patients and supporting family caregivers during their caregiving and after the death of the patient.

Background Delirium is a serious and distressing neurocognitive condition common in people with advanced illness. The understanding of delirium pathophysiology is limited and largely hypothetical. To accelerate empirical understanding of delirium pathophysiology, robust scientific methods for conducting and reporting delirium biomarker studies are urgently needed. The aim of this study was to develop international consensus on the core elements of high-quality delirium biomarker studies. Methods A three-round modified Delphi survey was conducted from February to August 2019. Participants were international researchers experienced in conducting delirium studies from a range of settings (hospital, university, research centres). Round one commenced with open-ended questions developed from results from a prior systematic review and the REMARK (REporting recommendations for tumour MARKer prognostic studies) checklist. Responses were qualitatively analysed, and closed statements were developed. Participants then ranked the importance of these statements using a 5-point Likert scale in rounds 2 and 3. A priori consensus was defined as ≥70% participant agreement. Descriptive statistics for each item were computed including the mean Likert scores, SD and median participant scores. Results Twenty-eight participants completed survey round one, 16 completed round two and 19 completed the final round. Consensus was achieved for a total of 60 items. Conclusion The Delphi survey identified items that expert researchers agreed were important in the conduct of delirium biomarker studies. These reporting items provide a strong platform for improved methodological quality and opportunities to synthesise future delirium biomarker studies.

Context Chronic breathlessness is a clinical syndrome that results in significant distress and disability. Morphine can reduce chronic breathlessness when the contributing etiologies are optimally treated. Objectives Does oxycodone reduce chronic breathlessness compared with placebo? Methods A multisite, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-arm, fixed-dose trial of oral controlled-release oxycodone 15 mg (5 mg, eight hourly) or placebo (ACTRN12609000806268 at www.anzctr.org.au). As-needed immediate-release morphine (2.5 mg per dose; six and less doses/day) was available for both arms as required by one ethics committee overseeing the trial. Recruitment occurred from 2010 to 2014 in 14 inpatient and outpatient respiratory, cardiology, and palliative care services across Australia. Participants were adults, with chronic breathlessness (modified Medical Research Council Scale 3 or 4), who were opioid naive. The primary end point was the proportion of people with greater than 15% reduction from baseline in the intensity of breathlessness now (0–100 mm visual analogue scale) comparing arms Days 5–7. Secondary end points were average and worst breathlessness, quality of life, function, and harms. Results Of 157 participants randomized, 155 were included (74 oxycodone and 81 placebo), but the study did not reach target recruitment. There was difference in neither between groups for the primary outcome (P = 0.489) nor any of the prespecified secondary outcomes. Placebo participants used more as-needed morphine (mean 7.0 vs. 4.2 doses; P ≤ 0.001). Oxycodone participants reported more nausea (P Conclusion There was no signal of benefit from oxycodone over placebo. Future research should focus on investigating the existence of an opioid class effect on the reduction of chronic breathlessness.

To review the published literature on the cost of delirium. Every study has found that delirium increases the cost of care in every setting, in hospital, after discharge at home and in long-term care. Delirium results in increased financial and social costs which, when considered with the impacts on morbidity and mortality, support the call to urgently improve prevention, screening, diagnosis and treatment of delirium. Delirium is common with serious short- and long-term sequelae. However, there are no licensed treatments internationally and relatively little biomedical discovery with the target of finding a cure, with the invisibility or underestimation of the economic implications as a potential driver for this inertia. We conducted a narrative review of published literature in English quantitatively evaluating the financial and social costs of delirium to the health and care systems, patients and their carers. Delirium increases the cost of the index hospitalisation as well as increasing the need for post-acute care and the demands on unpaid, often older, carers. Delirium may cause as much as 10% of all cases of dementia and the ongoing need for care of these people with dementia doubles the cost of delirium. Prevention of delirium not only reduces the cost of delirium but also may decrease subsequent rate of dementia. The high cost of delirium itself as well as the resultant dementia warrants greater efforts to prevent delirium and discover effective treatment.

Background Systematic reviews and guidelines are available to guide management of cough in lung cancer, but evidence for intervention efficacy is limited, and little research has yet described current practice. Aim To canvass the experiences and perspectives of Australian health professionals with regard to the clinical importance and current management of cough in people with lung cancer. Methods An open, online, cross-sectional survey was conducted in 2018. Health professionals of all disciplines were eligible, and recruitment was by direct approach to lung cancer multidisciplinary teams, professional listservs and conferences. Findings Fifty-eight people completed the survey, of whom 26 (45%) were medical practitioners, 21 (36%) registered nurses, and 10 (17%) allied health practitioners. Nearly all (>90%) considered cough to be of clinical concern and welcomed efforts to improve management. In most services, ≤25% of patients with clinically concerning cough receive management. Opiates were perceived to be the most consistently effective pharmacological strategy, with ≥50% participants indicating minimal or variable effectiveness for all others. The few participants who had experience of non-pharmacological strategies perceived these to be only somewhat or variably effective. Discussion Results from this study identified variability in the management of cough associated with lung cancer, and suggest this problem may be under-treated in most services. Unmet needs identified by this study are likely under-estimated due to the volunteer effect associated with open surveys. Conclusion Further efforts are needed to raise awareness about the importance of managing cough and provide evidence-based strategies for this population.

Cognitive assessment is a cornerstone of geriatric care. Cognitive impairment has the potential to significantly impact multiple phases of a person’s cancer care experience. Accurately identifying this vulnerability is a challenge for many cancer care clinicians, thus the use of validated cognitive assessment tools are recommended. As international cancer guidelines for older adults recommend Geriatric Assessment (GA) which includes an evaluation of cognition, clinicians need to be familiar with the overall interpretation of the commonly used cognitive assessment tools. This rapid review investigated the cognitive assessment tools that were most frequently recommended by Geriatric Oncology guidelines: Blessed Orientation-Memory-Concentration test (BOMC), Clock Drawing Test (CDT), Mini-Cog, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire (SPMSQ). A detailed appraisal of the strengths and limitations of each tool was conducted, with a focus on practical aspects of implementing cognitive assessment tools into real-world clinical settings. Finally, recommendations on choosing an assessment tool and the additional considerations beyond screening are discussed.

Objectives: Delirium in critically ill adults is highly prevalent and has multiple negative consequences. To-date, trials of interventions to prevent or treat delirium report heterogenous outcomes. To develop international consensus among key stakeholders for a core outcome set for future trials of interventions to prevent and/or treat delirium in critically ill adults.Design: Core outcome set development, as recommended by the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Handbook. Methods of generating items for the core outcome set included a systematic review and qualitative interviews with ICU survivors and family members. Consensus methods include a two-round web-based Delphi process and a face-to-face meeting using nominal group technique methods.Subjects: International representatives from three stakeholder groups: 1) clinical researchers, 2) ICU interprofessional clinicians, and 3) ICU survivors and family members.Setting: Telephone interviews, web-based surveys, and a face-to-face consensus meeting held at the 2019 European Delirium Association’s annual meeting in Edinburgh, Scotland.Intervention: None.Measurements and Main Results: Qualitative interviews with 24 ICU survivors and family members identified 36 potential outcomes; six were additional to the 97 identified from the systematic review. After item reduction, 32 outcomes were presented in Delphi Round 1; 179 experts participated, 38 ICU survivors/family members (21%), 100 clinicians (56%), 41 researchers (23%). Three additional outcomes were added to Round 2; 134 Round 1 participants (75%) completed it. Upon conclusion of the consensus building processes, the final core outcome set comprised seven outcomes: delirium occurrence (including prevalence or incidence); delirium severity; time to delirium resolution; health-related quality of life; emotional distress (i.e., anxiety, depression, acute and posttraumatic stress); cognition (including memory); and mortality.Conclusions: This core outcome set, endorsed by the American and Australian Delirium Societies and European Delirium Association, is recommended for future clinical trials evaluating delirium prevention or treatment interventions in critically ill adults.

Background: Trials of interventions for delirium in various patient populations report disparate outcomes and measures but little is known about those used in palliative care trials. A core outcome set promotes consistency of outcome selection and measurement. Aim: To inform core outcome set development by examining outcomes, their definitions, measures and time-points in published palliative care studies of delirium prevention or treatment delirium interventions. Design: Prospectively registered systematic review adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Data sources: We searched six electronic databases (1980–November 2020) for original studies, three for relevant reviews and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for unpublished studies and ongoing trials. We included randomised, quasi-randomised and non-randomised intervention studies of pharmacological and non-pharmacological delirium prevention and/or treatment interventions. Results: From 13/3244 studies (2863 adult participants), we identified 9 delirium-specific and 13 non-delirium specific outcome domains within eight Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) taxonomy categories. There were multiple and varied outcomes and time points in each domain. The commonest delirium specific outcome was delirium severity ( n = 7), commonly using the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (6/8 studies, 75%). Four studies reported delirium incidence. Non-delirium specific outcomes included mortality, agitation, adverse events, other symptoms and quality of life. Conclusion: The review identified few delirium interventions with heterogeneity in outcomes, their definition and measurement, highlighting the need for a uniform approach. Findings will inform the next stage to develop consensus for a core outcome set to inform delirium interventional palliative care research.

Background: Access to palliative care in the community enables people to live in their preferred place of care, which is often home. Community palliative care services struggle to provide timely 24-h services to patients and family. This has resulted in calls for ‘accessible and flexible’ models of care that are ‘responsive’ to peoples’ changing palliative care needs. Digital health technologies provide opportunities to meet these requirements 24-h a day. Aim: To identify digital health technologies that have been evaluated for supporting timely assessment and management of people living at home with palliative care needs and/or their carer(s), and the evidence-base for each. Design: A systematic review of systematic reviews (‘meta-review’). Systematic reviews evaluating evidence for virtual models of palliative or end-of-life care using one or more digital health technologies were included. Systematic reviews were evaluated using the Risk of Bias Tool for Systematic Reviews. A narrative approach was used to synthesise results. Data sources: Medline, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL and Cochrane Database of systematic reviews were searched for English-language reviews published between 2015 and 2020. Results: The search yielded 2266 articles, of which 12 systematic reviews met criteria. Sixteen reviews were included in total, after four reviews were found via handsearching. Other than scheduled telehealth, video-conferencing, or after-hours telephone support, little evidence was found for digital health technologies used to deliver virtual models of palliative care. Conclusions: There are opportunities to test new models of virtual care, beyond telehealth and/or video conferencing, such as 24-h command centres, and rapid response teams. Systematic review registration number: Prospero CRD42020200266

Background Trials of interventions to prevent or treat delirium in adults in an acute hospital setting report heterogeneous outcomes. Our objective was to develop international consensus among key stakeholders for a core outcome set (COS) for future trials of interventions to prevent and/or treat delirium in adults with an acute care hospital admission and not admitted to an intensive care unit. Methods A rigorous COS development process was used including a systematic review, qualitative interviews, modified Delphi consensus process, and in-person consensus using nominal group technique (registration http://www.comet- initiative.org/studies/details/796). Participants in qualitative interviews were delirium survivors or family members. Participants in consensus methods comprised international representatives from three stakeholder groups: researchers, clinicians, and delirium survivors and family members. Results Item generation identified 8 delirium-specific outcomes and 71 other outcomes from 183 studies, and 30 outcomes from 18 qualitative interviews, including 2 that were not extracted from the systematic review. De-duplication of outcomes and formal consensus processes involving 110 experts including researchers (N = 32), clinicians (N = 63), and delirium survivors and family members (N = 15) resulted in a COS comprising 6 outcomes: delirium occurrence and reoccurrence, delirium severity, delirium duration, cognition, emotional distress, and health-related quality of life. Study limitations included exclusion of non-English studies and stakeholders and small representation of delirium survivors/family at the in-person consensus meeting. Conclusions This COS, endorsed by the American and Australian Delirium Societies and European Delirium Association, is recommended for future clinical trials evaluating delirium prevention or treatment interventions in adults presenting to an acute care hospital and not admitted to an intensive care unit.

IntroductionMajor depressive disorder (MDD) in people with advanced life-limiting illnesses can have significant impact on the quality-of-life of those affected. The management of MDD in the palliative care setting can be challenging as typical antidepressants may not work in time nor be tolerated due to coexisting organ dysfunctions, symptom burden and frailty. Parenteral ketamine was found to exhibit effective and rapid-onset antidepressant effect even against treatment-resistant depression in the psychiatric population. However, there is currently neither feasibility study nor available prospective study available to inform of the safety, tolerability and efficacy of such for MDD in the palliative setting.Methods and analysisThis is an open-labelled, single arm, phase II pilot feasibility study involving adult patients with advanced life-limiting illnesses and MDD across four palliative care services in Australia. It has an individual dose-titration design (0.1–0.4 mg/kg) with weekly treatments of subcutaneous ketamine infusion over 2 hours. The primary outcome is feasibility. The secondary outcomes are related to the safety, tolerability and antidepressant efficacy of ketamine, participants’ satisfaction in relation to the trial process and the reasons for not completing the study at various stages. The feasibility data will be reported using descriptive statistics. Meanwhile, side effects, tolerability and efficacy data will be analysed using change of assessment scores from baseline.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was acquired (South Western Sydney Local Health District: HREC/18/LPOOL/466). The results of this study will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant conferences.Trial registration numberAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry Number: ACTRN12618001586202; Pre-results.

ObjectivesWe aimed to identify and evaluate: (1) treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE (worse or new since baseline)) and the subgroup of severe TEAEs in a placebo-controlled 7-day randomised trial of regular, low-dose, sustained-release oral morphine for chronic breathlessness and (2) clinical characteristics associated with TEAE.MethodsSafety analysis of trial data. Adults with chronic breathlessness (modified Medical Research Council breathlessness score ≥2) due to heart or lung disease, or cancer, not on regular opioids were eligible. Symptoms associated with opioids (TEAE of special interest) were systematically sought using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) grading. Other harms could be reported at any time. The relationship between characteristics and presence of ≥1 TEAE of special interest was explored using univariable logistic regression analyses.Results1449/5624 (26%) Adverse Events from 279 participants were TEAE of which 150/1449 (10%) were severe (CTCAE grades 3–5). 1086/5624 (75%) were events of special interest of which 41/1086 (4%) were severe. Compared with placebo, morphine was not associated with more TEAE or severe TEAE of special interest (TEAE: OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.38, p=0.20; severe TEAE: OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.27 to 3.41, p=0.95) nor with CTCAE severity grade (χ2=4.39, p=0.50). Among the 26/150 (17%) with severe TEAEs, study withdrawal was more common in the morphine arm (18/26 (69%) morphine arm; 8/26 (30%) placebo arm). None of the severe TEAEs was a respiratory harm.ConclusionsSevere morphine-associated toxicity was uncommon and not associated with study arm. Clinical consequences were minor and self-limiting.Trial registration numberACTRN126000806268.

© The Author(s) 2019. The concept of moral distress comes from nursing ethics, and was initially defined as ‘…when one knows the right thing to do, but institutional constraints make it nearly impossible to pursue the right course of action’. There is a large body of literature associated with moral distress, yet multiple definitions now exist, significantly limiting its usefulness. We undertook a systematic review of the argument-based bioethics literature on this topic as the basis for a critical appraisal, identifying 55 papers for analysis. We found that moral distress is most frequently framed around individual experiences of distress in relation to local practices and constraints, and understood in terms of power relations and workplace hierarchies. This understanding is directly derived from, and often still seen as specific to, nursing. Frequently the perspective of the morally distressed individual is privileged. Understandings of moral distress have evolved towards an ‘occupational health approach’, with the assumption that moral distress should be measured and prevented. Counter-perspectives were identified, highlighting conceptual problems. Based on our review, we propose a redefinition of moral distress: ‘Ethical unease or disquiet resulting from a situation where a clinician believes they have contributed to avoidable patient or community harm through their involvement in an action, inaction or decision that conflicts with their own values’. This definition is specific enough for research use, anchored in clinicians’ professional responsibilities and concerns about harms to patients, framed relationally rather than hierarchically, and amenable to multiple perspectives on any given morally distressing situation.

IntroductionMorphine may decrease the intensity of chronic breathlessness but data from a large randomised controlled trial (RCT) are lacking. This first, large, parallel-group trial aimed to test the efficacy and safety of regular, low-dose, sustained-release (SR) morphine compared with placebo for chronic breathlessness.MethodsMultisite (14 inpatient and outpatient cardiorespiratory and palliative care services in Australia), parallel-arm, double-blind RCT. Adults with chronic breathlessness (modified Medical Research Council≥2) were randomised to 20 mg daily oral SR morphine and laxative (intervention) or placebo and placebo laxative (control) for 7 days. Both groups could take ≤6 doses of 2.5 mg, ‘as needed’, immediate-release morphine (≤15 mg/24 hours) as required by the ethics review board. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in intensity of breathlessness now (0–100 mm visual analogue scale; two times per day diary) between groups. Secondary endpoints included: worst, best and average breathlessness; unpleasantness of breathlessness now, fatigue; quality of life; function; and harms.ResultsAnalysed by intention-to-treat, 284 participants were randomised to morphine (n=145) or placebo (n=139). There was no difference between arms for the primary endpoint (mean difference −0.15 mm (95% CI −4.59 to 4.29; p=0.95)), nor secondary endpoints. The placebo group used more doses of oral morphine solution during the treatment period (mean 8.7 vs 5.8 doses; p=0.001). The morphine group had more constipation and nausea/vomiting. There were no cases of respiratory depression nor obtundation.ConclusionNo differences were observed between arms for breathlessness, but the intervention arm used less rescue immediate-release morphine.Trial registration numberACTRN12609000806268.

Background: The purpose of this systematic review was to (a) examine the effects of interventions delivered by a heart failure professional for mild cognitive impairment and dementia on cognitive function, memory, working memory, instrumental activities of daily living, heart failure knowledge, self-care, quality of life and depression; and (b) identify the successful elements of these strategies for heart failure patients with mild cognitive impairment or dementia. Methods and results: During March 2018, an electronic search of databases including CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO was conducted. All randomised controlled trials, which examined an intervention strategy to help heart failure patients with mild cognitive impairment or dementia cope with self-care, were included. An initial search yielded 1622 citations, six studies were included ( N= 595 participants, mean age 68 years). There were no significant improvements in cognitive function and depression. However, significant improvements were seen in memory ( p=0.015), working memory ( p=0.029) and instrumental activities of daily living ( p=0.006). Nurse led interventions improved the patient’s heart failure knowledge ( p=0.001), self-care ( pConclusions: Modest evidence for nurse led interventions among heart failure patients with mild cognitive impairment or dementia was identified. These results must be interpreted with caution in light of the limited number of available included studies.

Background: Delirium is common, distressing, serious and under-researched in specialist palliative care settings. Objectives: To examine whether people requiring palliative care were included in non-pharmacological delirium intervention studies in inpatient settings, how they were characterised and what their outcomes were. Design: Systematic review (PROSPERO 2017 CRD42017062178). Data sources: Systematic search in March 2017 for non-pharmacological delirium intervention studies in adult inpatients. Database search terms were ‘delirium’, ‘hospitalisation’, ‘inpatient’, ‘palliative care’, ‘hospice’, ‘critical care’ and ‘geriatrics’. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodological checklists guided risk of bias assessment. Results: The 29 included studies were conducted between 1994 and 2015 in diverse settings in 15 countries (9136 participants, mean age = 76.5 years ( SD = 8.1), 56% women). Most studies tested multicomponent interventions ( n = 26) to prevent delirium ( n = 19). Three-quarters of the 29 included studies ( n = 22) excluded various groups of people requiring palliative care; however, inclusion criteria, participant diagnoses, illness severity and mortality indicated their presence in almost all studies ( n = 26). Of these, 21 studies did not characterise participants requiring palliative care or report their specific outcomes (72%), four reported outcomes for older people with frailty, dementia, cancer and comorbidities, and one was explicitly focused on people receiving palliative care. Study heterogeneity and limitations precluded definitive determination of intervention effectiveness and only allowed interpretations of feasibility for people requiring palliative care. Acceptability outcomes (intervention adverse events and patients’ subjective experience) were rarely reported overall. Conclusion: Non-pharmacological delirium interventions have frequently excluded and under-characterised people requiring palliative care and infrequently reported their outcomes.

BackgroundAdvance care planning (ACP) is identified as being an important process for people with dementia. However, its efficacy for improving outcomes relevant for the individual, carers and the health system has yet to be established.AimWe conducted a systematic review with the aims of testing the efficacy of ACP for people with dementia and describing the settings and population in which it has been evaluated.MethodsA search was completed of electronic databases in August 2016. Articles were included if they described interventions aimed at increasing planning for future care of people with dementia, delivered to the person with dementia, their carers and/or health professionals.ResultsOf 4,772 articles returned by searches, 30 met the inclusion criteria, testing interventions in nursing home (n= 16) community (n = 10) and acute care (n = 4) settings. Only 18 interventions directly involved the person with dementia, with the remainder focusing on surrogate decision-makers. In all settings, interventions were found effective in increasing ACP practice. In nursing homes, ACP was found to influence care and increase the concordance between end of life wishes and care provided. Interventions in the community were found to improve patient quality of life but were not shown to influence concordance.ConclusionFuture research should focus on ways to involve people with dementia in decision-making through supported means.

Head-to-head comparison of reliability, validity and responsiveness of four patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) suitable for assessing health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in palliative care settings: EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL, FACT-G7, FACIT-Pal and short-form FACIT-Pal-14. Secondary analysis of two phase III randomised trials: ketamine for chronic cancer pain, octreotide for vomiting in inoperable malignant bowel obstruction. Sub-groups were defined by Australia-modified Karnofsky performance status (AKPS) and participants’ global impression of change (GIC). Two aspects of reliability were assessed: internal consistency (Cronbach alpha, α); test–retest reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC)) of patients with stable AKPS and those who self-reported ‘no change’ on GIC. Construct validity was assessed via pre-determined hypotheses about sensitivity of PROM scores to AKPS groups and responsiveness of PROM change scores to GIC groups using analysis of variance. FACIT-Pal had better internal consistency (α ranged 0.59–0.80, 15/18 ≥ 0.70) than QLQ-C15-PAL (0.51–0.85, 4/8 ≥ 0.70) and FACT-G7 (0.54–0.64, 0/2 ≥ 0.70). FACIT scales had better test–retest reliability (FACIT-Pal 11/27 ICCs ≥ 0.70, FACT-G7 2/3 ICCs ≥ 0.70) than QLQ-C15-PAL (2/30 ICCs ≥ 0.70, 18/30 ≤ 0.5). Four scales demonstrated sensitivity to AKPS: QLQ-PAL-15 Physical Functioning and Global QOL, FACT-G Functional Wellbeing and FACIT-Pal Trial Outcome Index (TOI). Nine scales demonstrated responsiveness: three in the ketamine trial population (QLQ-C15-PAL Pain, FACIT-Pal-14, FACT-G7), six in the octreotide trial population (QLQ-C15-PAL Fatigue; FACIT-Pal PalCare, TOI, Total; FACT-G Physical Wellbeing and Total). No PROM was clearly superior, confirming that choosing the best PROM requires careful consideration of the research goals, patient population and the domains of HRQOL targeted by the intervention being investigated.

Background: Recent studies cast doubt on the net effect of antipsychotics for delirium. Aim: To investigate the influence of these studies and other factors on clinicians’ delirium treatment practice and practice change in palliative care and other specialties using the Theoretical Domains Framework. Design: Australia-wide online survey of relevant clinicians. Setting/participants: Registered nurses (72%), doctors (16%), nurse practitioners (6%) and pharmacists (5%) who cared for patients with delirium in diverse settings, recruited through health professionals’ organisations. Results: Most of the sample ( n = 475): worked in geriatrics/aged (31%) or palliative care (30%); in hospitals (64%); and saw a new patient with delirium at least weekly (61%). More (59%) reported delirium practice change since 2016, mostly by increased non-pharmacological interventions (53%). Fifty-five percent reported current antipsychotic use for delirium, primarily for patient distress (79%) and unsafe behaviour (67%). Common Theoretical Domains Framework categories of influences on respondents’ delirium practice were: emotion (54%); knowledge (53%) and physical (43%) and social (21%) opportunities. Palliative care respondents more often reported: awareness of any named key study of antipsychotics for delirium (73% vs 39%, p Conclusion: Clinicians’ use of antipsychotic during delirium remains common and is primarily motivated by distress and safety concerns for the patient and others nearby. Supporting clinicians to achieve evidence-based delirium practice requires further work.

Background: Acupuncture has been proved effective for cancer related pain (CRP) in China, America and some other countries. However, there is relative lack of evidence to support the use of acupuncture for CRP in Australia. Objectives: To assess the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture for management of CRP in a real-world setting and to understand cancer patients’ experience of undergoing acupuncture for CRP. Methods: A pragmatic randomised controlled trial will be conducted in South Western Sydney Local Health District (SWSLHD) in NSW, Australia. Adults with cancer related pain (n = 106) will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive the acupuncture intervention up front versus after a wait list period of 4 weeks. Pain level (by Numerical Rating Scale), analgesic use, auricular acupressure frequency and adverse events will be assessed at baseline, mid-treatment and post-treatment. Expectancy on trial outcome (by Credibility and Expectancy questionnaire) will be assessed at baseline. The perspective of the participants (by an interview) will be recorded after the last intervention. Expected outcomes: We hypothesise that acupuncture will relieve cancer related pain at mid-treatment and post-treatment. We also hypothesise that few adverse events will be provoked by acupuncture. Trial registration: Australia New-Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ACTRN12620000325909).

© 2020 Background and Purpose: Large non-age-specific radiotherapy utilisation rate (RTU) studies have demonstrated that actual RTU is below the optimal recommended utilisation rate for both curative and palliative intent radiotherapy indications. The optimal utilisation rate for the geriatric oncology cohort of patients has not yet been determined. The purpose of this research was to examine the actual RTU for patients treated in New South Wales (NSW), Australia as a function of increasing age, and the relationship between RTU and tumour site, travelling distance and socio-economic status. Materials & Methods: NSW Central Cancer Registry data (2009–2011) were linked to the NSW Radiotherapy Dataset (2009–2012). RTU was calculated for patients aged

BackgroundThe corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has required specialist palliative care (SPC) services to respond by: (I) integrating infection prevention/control measures into care for their usual caseloads and (II) providing consultations and/or care for people dying from a new disease entity. The aim of the current study was to learn about the response of Australian SPC services to COVID-19 and its consequences in order to inform pandemic practice and policy.MethodsA cross-sectional, anonymous survey was administered online from May to July 2020. Email invitations were sent to 160 providers delivering 503 SPC services listed in the Australian Palliative Care Services Directory. Survey questions asked about service responses to COVID-19, impacts on care quality, and perceived benefits/disadvantages for palliative care clients post-pandemic. Open-ended responses were thematically coded using an established framework that classifies SPC pandemic responses under: 'stuff', 'staff', 'space', 'systems', 'separation', 'sedation', 'communication' and 'equity'.ResultsComplete survey responses were received from 28 providers on behalf of 100 SPC services (response rates of 17%/20% respectively): 29 consultative, 25 community home-based, 21 outpatient, 15 inpatient wards/units, eight inpatient hospice and two other services. Responses were reported across all framework categories except 'sedation'. Concerns centred on: inadequate support for self-management, psychosocial needs and bereavement for clients living at home; pressures on staff capacity and wellbeing; and a perceived lack of health system preparedness for a potential future surge. Rapid implementation of telehealth across Australia was perceived to offer potential benefits to palliative care in the longer term, if provided with ongoing support.ConclusionsMeeting COVID-19-related challenges requires SPC to be agile and responsive. Advocacy is required to ensure the needs of people dying and their families are supported as well as people requiring acute care for COVID-19. Expansion of telehealth during the pandemic presents an opportunity for leveraging to benefit palliative care longer term.

INTRODUCTION Symptoms of raised intracranial pressure (ICP) in recurrent or progressive high-grade glioma (HGG) generally require corticosteroid treatment, often causing toxicity with variable effects on reversing ICP symptoms. Acetazolamide reduces ICP in other clinical settings including case series in glioma. AIM To explore whether addition of oral acetazolamide enables safe dexamethasone dose reduction in management of raised ICP in recurrent and/or progressive HGG. METHODS Participants had recurrent, progressive and/or persistent residual HGG requiring recommencement of dexamethasone, dose increase or dexamethasone dependency; prior/current bevacizumab was an exclusion. Eligible participants were randomised 1:1 to acetazolamide 250mg twice daily or placebo for 8 weeks. Standardised protocols were used for dexamethasone dose changes in both arms, with planned dose decrease from day 5 once ICP symptoms were stable. The primary endpoint was a composite of dexamethasone dose reduction and stability of performance status. Secondary endpoints included toxicity and feasibility (accrual and compliance). RESULTS Thirty participants of a planned sample of 84 were enrolled (mean age 58 y (32-89)) from 7 Australian sites. The mean baseline dexamethasone dose was 6.2mg (4-16mg). Mean duration on treatment was 38 days (4-57) in placebo group and 31 days (3-60) in acetazolamide group, with 9 participants (30%) completing all study treatment (6 placebo, 3 acetazolamide). Study withdrawal was due to adverse events (n=6 (1 placebo, 5 acetazolamide)) and disease progression (n=6 (3 per arm)). Four participants (13%) (2 per arm) were stable responders meeting the primary endpoint criteria (≥50% corticosteroid dose reduction from baseline by 28 days maintained for 7 days, and no deterioration in performance status). Ten participants experienced a total of 13 serious adverse events (acetazolamide arm: 5 participants (33%), 6 events, 2 related). DISCUSSION The addition of acetazolamide did not facilitate dexamethasone reduction. The study closed early due to poor accrual and increasing availability of bevacizumab.