Search

Purpose: People with advanced or metastatic cancer and their caregivers may have different care goals and face unique challenges compared with those with early-stage disease or those nearing the end of life. These Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC)-ASCO standards and practice recommendations seek to establish consistent provision of quality survivorship care for people affected by advanced or metastatic cancer., Methods: A MASCC-ASCO expert panel was formed. Standards and recommendations relevant to the provision of quality survivorship care for people affected by advanced or metastatic cancer were developed through conducting (1) a systematic review of unmet supportive care needs; (2) a scoping review of cancer survivorship, supportive care, and palliative care frameworks and guidelines; and (3) an international modified Delphi consensus process., Results: A systematic review involving 81 studies and a scoping review of 17 guidelines and frameworks informed the initial standards and recommendations. Subsequently, 77 experts (including eight people with lived experience) across 33 countries (33% were low- to middle-resource countries) participated in the Delphi study and achieved ≥94.8% agreement for seven standards, (1) Person-Centered Care; (2) Coordinated and Integrated Care; (3) Evidence-Based and Comprehensive Care; (4) Evaluated and Communicated Care; (5) Accessible and Equitable Care; (6) Sustainable and Resourced Care; and (7) Research and Data-Driven Care, and ≥84.2% agreement across 45 practice recommendations., Conclusion: Standards of survivorship care for people affected by advanced or metastatic cancer are provided. These MASCC-ASCO standards support optimization of health outcomes and care experiences by providing guidance to stakeholders (health care professionals, leaders, and administrators; governments and health ministries; policymakers; advocacy agencies; cancer survivors and caregivers). Practice recommendations may be used to facilitate future research, practice, policy, and advocacy efforts.Additional information is available at www.mascc.org, www.asco.org/standards and www.asco.org/survivorship-guidelines.

Background: Population preferences for care at the end of life can inform palliative care policy and direction. Research investigating preferences for care at the end of life has focused predominantly on the context of advanced cancer, with relatively little attention to other life-limiting illnesses that are common causes of death., Objectives: We aimed to investigate preferences for the care of older people at the end of life in three different disease contexts. The purpose was to understand if population preferences for care in the last 3 weeks of life would differ for patients dying from cancer, heart failure or dementia., Methods: Three discrete choice experiments were conducted in Australia with a general population sample using similar methods but different end-of-life disease contexts. Some attributes were common across the three experiments and others differed to accommodate the specific disease context. Each survey was completed by a different panel sample aged ≥45 years (cancer, n = 1548; dementia, n = 1549; heart failure, n = 1003). Analysis was by separate mixed logit models., Results: The most important attributes across all three surveys were costs to the patient and family, patient symptoms and informal carer stress. The probability of choosing an alternative was lowest (0.18-0.29) when any one of these attributes was at the least favourable level, holding other attributes constant across alternatives. The cancer survey explored symptoms more specifically and found patient anxiety with a higher relative importance score than the symptom attribute of pain. Dementia was the only context where most respondents preferred to not have a medical intervention to prolong life; the probability of choosing an alternative with a feeding tube was 0.40 (95% confidence interval 0.36-0.43)., Conclusions: This study suggests a need for affordable services that focus on improving patient and carer well-being irrespective of the location of care, and this message is consistent across different disease contexts, including cancer, heart failure and dementia. It also suggests some different considerations in the context of people dying from dementia where medical intervention to prolong life was less desirable., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: To identify and appraise mobile-based application (mAPP) interventions that have been used to support cancer control and care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: Four electronic databases were systematically searched for studies that reported primary research findings related to mAPP interventions applied in oncology settings in LMICs. A narrative synthesis was performed using the Mhealth Index and Navigation Database as an analytical framework. Results: Twenty studies reporting 18 cancer control and care mAPPs were included in this review. Among these mAPPs, ten focused on prevention, screening and early detection of cancer, five provided information to optimise supportive and palliative care, two provided support to assist treatment-shared decision-making and one covered information for follow-up and survivorship care. Conclusion: Cancer mAPP interventions are gradually gaining attention in LMICs as they provide unique resources for empowering and strengthening the role of people with cancer in their own care. To enhance cancer control, a focus on prevention and early detection is important; however, more mAPP interventions related to cancer treatment, follow-up and survivorship are also needed to enable more cost-effective cancer care., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they do not have any conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Donkor, Ayitey, Adotey, Ofori, Kitson-Mills, Vanderpuye, Opoku, Luckett, Agar and Engel-Hills.)

Background: The routine measurement of patient-reported outcomes in cancer clinical care using electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) is gaining momentum worldwide. However, a deep understanding of the mechanisms underpinning ePROM interventions that could inform their optimal design to improve health outcomes is needed., Objective: This study aims to identify the implicit mechanisms that underpin the effectiveness of ePROM interventions and develop program theories about how and when ePROM interventions improve health outcomes., Methods: A realist synthesis of the literature about ePROM interventions in cancer clinical care was performed. A conceptual framework of ePROM interventions was constructed to define the scope of the review and frame the initial program theories. Literature searches of Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Scopus, and CINAHL, supplemented by citation tracking, were performed to identify relevant literature to develop, refine, and test program theories. Quality appraisal of relevant studies was performed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool., Results: Overall, 61 studies were included in the realist synthesis: 15 (25%) mixed methods studies, 9 (15%) qualitative studies, 13 (21%) descriptive studies, 21 (34%) randomized controlled trials, and 3 (5%) quasi-experimental studies. In total, 3 initial program theories were developed regarding the salient components of ePROM interventions-remote self-reporting, real-time feedback to clinicians, and clinician-patient telecommunication. The refined theories posit that remote self-reporting enables patients to recognize and report symptoms accurately and empowers them to communicate these to clinicians, real-time feedback prompts clinicians to manage symptoms proactively, and clinician-patient telephone interactions and e-interactions between clinic encounters improve symptom management by reshaping how clinicians and patients communicate. However, the intervention may not achieve the intended benefit if ePROMs become a reminder to patients of their illness and are not meaningful to them and when real-time feedback to clinicians lacks relevance and increases the workload., Conclusions: The key to improving health outcomes through ePROM interventions is enabling better symptom reporting and communication through remote symptom self-reporting, promoting proactive management of symptoms through real-time clinician feedback, and facilitating clinician-patient interactions. Patient engagement with self-reporting and clinician engagement in responding to feedback are vital and may reinforce each other in improving outcomes. Effective ePROM interventions might fundamentally alter how clinicians and patients interact between clinic encounters., (©Ramkumar Govindaraj, Meera Agar, David Currow, Tim Luckett. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 28.11.2023.)

Introduction: This systematic review aims to summarise the available literature on the effect of geriatric assessment (multidimensional health assessment across medical, social, and functional domains; "GA") or comprehensive geriatric assessment (geriatric assessment with intervention or management recommendations; "CGA") compared to usual care for older adults with cancer on care received, treatment completion, adverse treatment effects, survival and health-related quality of life., Materials and Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PubMed was conducted to identify randomised controlled trials or prospective cohort comparison studies on the effect of GA/CGA on care received, treatment, and cancer outcomes for older adults with cancer., Results: Ten studies were included: seven randomised controlled trials (RCTs), two phase II randomised pilot studies, and one prospective cohort comparison study. All studies included older adults receiving systemic therapy, mostly chemotherapy, for mixed cancer types (eight studies), colorectal cancer (one study), and non-small cell lung cancer (one study). Integrating GA/CGA into oncological care increased treatment completion (three of nine studies), reduced grade 3+ chemotherapy toxicity (two of five studies), and improved quality of life scores (four of five studies). No studies found significant differences in survival between GA/CGA and usual care. GA/CGA incorporated into care decisions prompted less intensive treatment and greater non-oncological interventions, including supportive care strategies., Discussion: GA/CGA integrated into the care of an older adult with cancer has the potential to optimise care decisions, which may lead to reduced treatment toxicity, increased treatment completion, and improved health-related quality of life scores., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Providing optimal support for carers of people with advanced cancer is critical to facilitating discharge home from hospital. Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool-Intervention (CSNAT-I) has shown promise in supporting carers' needs in this context. This study aimed to explore patient and carers experiences with and views on the acceptability of the CSNAT-I delivered by occupational therapists in an acute oncology setting., Methods: People with advanced cancer and their carers who had previously received the CSNAT-I as part of usual care while admitted to an Australian specialist cancer centre or acute hospital were invited to participate in interviews exploring their perceptions of the intervention. Data were analysed thematically., Results: Two patients and 10 carers participated in semi-structured interviews. Three themes were constructed from the data: Carers viewed the CSNAT-I as comprehensive process that (1) 'covered everything' related to discharge planning; (2) generated an 'increased awareness of needs' for themselves, patients, and clinicians; and (3) triggered an emotional response of feeling 'wrapped up in care' that was maintained as they moved from hospital to home., Conclusion: This study has demonstrated that the CSNAT-I was highly acceptable to carers as part of existing discharge processes supporting them through the transition from hospital to home and can be delivered by occupational therapists and other clinicians with a natural synergy to discharge planning. These findings will inform further development and testing of the delivery model of the CSNAT-I in future trials., (© 2023 The Authors. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Occupational Therapy Australia.)

Background: The majority of cancer patients and cancer care clinicians-CCCs (e.g., oncologists) believe that exercise is an important adjunct therapy that should be embedded in standard practice. Yet, CCCs do not routinely discuss exercise with their patients, nor do they regularly refer them to exercise professionals (e.g., exercise physiologists-EPs). This study evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of an evidence-based approach to improving exercise communication between CCCs and their patients, including an exercise referral pathway., Methods: Implementation and testing of the Exercise Communication and Referral Pathway (ECRP) occurred in Sydney, Australia. The ECRP included a brief oncology-initiated communication exchange with patients, CCC exercise referral to an EP, followed by EP-initiated telephone consultation with patients concerning tailored exercise advice. Participant perceptions concerning the feasibility and applicability of the ECPR were evaluated. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with CCCs (n = 3), cancer patients (n = 21), and an EP (n = 1). Inductive thematic analysis was undertaken., Results: Analysis generated three themes: (1) Navigating the role of CCCs in the ECRP, suggesting that oncology-initiated communication is a cue to action, however there was a lack of role clarity regarding exercise referral; (2) Implementing Patient-Orientated Care within a Standardised Pathway, highlighting the need for tailored information and advice for patients that reflects individual disease, socio-cultural, and environmental factors, and; (3) Taking Steps Towards Action, revealing the need for structural (e.g., EP initiated contact with patients) and policy changes (i.e., changes to Medicare, direct oncologist referral) to engage patients and better integrate exercise as part of standard care., Conclusions: Findings provide important insights into improving oncology-patient exercise communication and developing an exercise referral pathway to increase engagement and patient reach. However, individual (e.g., experience, knowledge) and contextual factors (e.g., time, resources) need consideration when implementing an ECRP., Trial Registration: This trial was prospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical (#ACTRN12620000358943) on March 13, 2020., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose: This study asked consumers (patients, carers) and healthcare professionals (HCPs) to identify the most important symptoms for adults with cancer and potential treatment interventions., Methods: A modified Delphi study was conducted involving two rounds of electronic surveys based on prevalent cancer symptoms identified from the literature. Round 1 gathered information on participant demographics, opinions and/or experience on cancer symptom frequency and impact, and suggestions for interventions and/or service delivery models for further research to improve management of cancer symptoms. In Round 2, respondents ranked the importance of the top ten interventions identified in Round 1. In Round 3, separate expert panels of consumers and healthcare professionals (HCPs) attempted to reach consensus on the symptoms and interventions previously identified., Results: Consensus was reached for six symptoms across both groups: fatigue, constipation, diarrhoea, incontinence, and difficulty with urination. Notably, fatigue was the only symptom to reach consensus across both groups in Round 1. Similarly, consensus was reached for six interventions across both groups. These were the following: medicinal cannabis, physical activity, psychological therapies, non-opioid interventions for pain, opioids for breathlessness and cough, and other pharmacological interventions., Conclusions: Consumers and HCPs prioritise differently; however, the symptoms and interventions that reached consensus provide a basis for future research. Fatigue should be considered a high priority given its prevalence and its influence on other symptoms. The lack of consumer consensus indicates the uniqueness of their experience and the need for a patient-centred approach. Understanding individual consumer experience is important when planning research into better symptom management., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: About 70% of patients with advanced cancer experience pain. Few studies have investigated the use of healthcare in this population and the relationship between pain intensity and costs., Methods: Adults with advanced cancer and scored worst pain ≥ 2/10 on a numeric rating scale (NRS) were recruited from 6 Australian oncology/palliative care outpatient services to the Stop Cancer PAIN trial (08/15-06/19). Out-of-hospital, publicly funded services, prescriptions and costs were estimated for the three months before pain screening. Descriptive statistics summarize the clinico-demographic variables, health services and costs, treatments and pain scores. Relationships with costs were explored using Spearman correlations, Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests, and a gamma log-link generalized linear model., Results: Overall, 212 participants had median worst pain scores of five (inter-quartile range 4). The most frequently prescribed medications were opioids (60.1%) and peptic ulcer/gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) drugs (51.6%). The total average healthcare cost in the three months before the census date was A$6,742 (95% CI $5,637, $7,847), approximately $27,000 annually. Men had higher mean healthcare costs than women, adjusting for age, cancer type and pain levels (men $7,872, women $4,493, p<0.01) and higher expenditure on prescriptions (men $5,559, women $2,034, p<0.01)., Conclusions: In this population with pain and cancer, there was no clear relationship between healthcare costs and pain severity. These treatment patterns requiring further exploration including the prevalence of peptic ulcer/GORD drugs, and lipid lowering agents and the higher healthcare costs for men., Trial Registration: ACTRN12615000064505. World Health Organisation unique trial number U1111-1164-4649. Registered 23 January 2015., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 McCaffrey et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Introduction: Many patients experience unrelieved neuropathic cancer-related pain. Most current analgesic therapies have psychoactive side effects, lack efficacy data for this indication and have potential medication-related harms. The local anaesthetic lidocaine (lignocaine) has the potential to help manage neuropathic cancer-related pain when administered as an extended, continuous subcutaneous infusion. Data support lidocaine as a promising, safe agent in this setting, warranting further evaluation in robust, randomised controlled trials. This protocol describes the design of a pilot study to evaluate this intervention and explains the pharmacokinetic, efficacy and adverse effects evidence informing the design., Methods and Analysis: A mixed-methods pilot study will determine the feasibility of an international first, definitive phase III trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of an extended continuous subcutaneous infusion of lidocaine for neuropathic cancer-related pain. This study will comprise: a phase II double-blind randomised controlled parallel-group pilot of subcutaneous infusion of lidocaine hydrochloride 10% w/v (3000 mg/30 mL) or placebo (sodium chloride 0.9%) over 72 hours for neuropathic cancer-related pain, a pharmacokinetic substudy and a qualitative substudy of patients' and carers' experiences. The pilot study will provide important safety data and help inform the methodology of a definitive trial, including testing proposed recruitment strategy, randomisation, outcome measures and patients' acceptability of the methodology, as well as providing a signal of whether this area should be further investigated., Ethics and Dissemination: Participant safety is paramount and standardised assessments for adverse effects are built into the trial protocol. Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conferences. This study will be considered suitable to progress to a phase III study if there is a completion rate where the CI includes 80% and excludes 60%. The protocol and Patient Information and Consent Form have been approved by Sydney Local Health District (Concord) Human Research Ethics Committee 2019/ETH07984 and University of Technology Sydney ETH17-1820., Trial Registration Number: ANZCTR ACTRN12617000747325., Competing Interests: Competing interests: This is an investigator-initiated study. AL has received honoraria for lectures and educational material from BMS and Astra Zeneca. DS is funded by the Sydney Partnership for Health, Education, Research and Enterprise as a translational research fellow. AM is a member of the clinical advisory board for Bod Australia, has received honoraria for conference presentations from Bayer, is a member of the DSMB of the CannabisCINV study and is a member of the advisory board for the Lambert Cannabinoid Therapeutics Initiative. CS is a member of the executive committee of ANZSPM and of the executive of PCNT., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Aims: This study aimed to (1) explore the perceptions of people living with cancer about exercise in general and exercise as an adjunct form of cancer care, (2) explore their perceptions regarding exercise counselling needs and preferences, and (3) investigate how these perceptions of exercise as an adjunct form of cancer care shape survivors exercise levels postcancer diagnosis., Methods: A cross-sectional design and online survey were used to recruit cancer survivors via cancer-related networks throughout Australia. Two factor analyses were conducted to examine the structure and reduce the number of variables pertaining to exercise during and after the cancer treatment. Extracted components were used in one-way analysis of variance to compare differences in physical activity levels postcancer diagnosis., Results: Participants (N = 288) had very positive perceptions of exercise, yet only 50% of participants would prefer to receive exercise counselling. Those who were more active postcancer diagnosis had higher exercise beliefs than those who were similarly active (p = 0.04, r = 0.27) and less active (p = 0.03, r = 0.24) postdiagnosis. Those who were less active also had lower exercise knowledge than those who were similarly active (p = 0.01, r = 0.31) and more active (p = 0.03, r = 0.26). Safety beliefs did not significantly differ between cancer survivors' activity levels (p = 0.16) CONCLUSION: This survey highlights the potential benefits of a concentrated effort in connecting survivors to relevant services and resources, and utilizing cancer clinicians to communicate with survivors about the role of exercise in cancer care., (© 2022 John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Background: Paracentesis is commonly undertaken in patients with cancer-related ascites., Aim: To systematically investigate the symptomatic benefits and harms experienced by patients with cancer undergoing paracentesis using real-world data in the palliative care setting., Design: Prospective, multisite, observational, consecutive cohort study. Benefits and harms of paracentesis were assessed between 01/07/2018 and 31/02/2021 as part of routine clinical assessments by treating clinicians at four timepoints: (T0) before paracentesis; (T1) once drainage ceased; (T2) 24 h after T1 and (T3) 28 days after T1 or next paracentesis, if sooner., Setting/participants: Data were collected from 11 participating sites across five countries (Australia, England, Hong Kong, Malaysia and New Zealand) on 111 patients undergoing paracentesis via a temporary (73%) or indwelling (21%) catheter: 51% male, median age 69 years, Australia-modified Karnofsky Performance Score 50., Results: At T1 ( n  = 100), symptoms had improved for most patients (81%), specifically abdominal distension (61%), abdominal pain (49%) and nausea (27%), with two-thirds experiencing improvement in ⩾2 symptoms. In the remaining patients, symptoms were unchanged (7%) or worse (12%). At least one harm occurred in 32% of patients, the most common being an ascitic leak ( n  = 14). By T3, 89% of patients had experienced some benefit and 36% some harm, including four patients who experienced serious harm, one of which was a fatal bowel perforation., Conclusion: Most patients obtained rapid benefits from paracentesis. Harms were less frequent and generally mild, but occasionally serious and fatal. Our findings help inform clinician-patient discussions about the potential outcomes of paracentesis in this frail population.

Background: Theory-based and qualitative evaluations in pilot trials of complex clinical interventions help to understand quantitative results, as well as inform the feasibility and design of subsequent effectiveness and implementation trials., Aim: To explore patient, family, clinician and volunteer ('stakeholder') perspectives of the feasibility and acceptability of a multicomponent non-pharmacological delirium prevention intervention for adult patients with advanced cancer in four Australian palliative care units that participated in a phase II trial, the 'PRESERVE pilot study'., Design: A trial-embedded qualitative study via semi-structured interviews and directed content analysis using Michie's Behaviour Change Wheel and the Theoretical Domains Framework., Setting/participants: Thirty-nine people involved in the trial: nurses ( n  = 17), physicians ( n  = 6), patients ( n  = 6), family caregivers ( n  = 4), physiotherapists ( n  = 3), a social worker, a pastoral care worker and a volunteer., Results: Participants' perspectives aligned with the 'capability', 'opportunity' and 'motivation' domains of the applied frameworks. Of seven themes, three were around the alignment of the delirium prevention intervention with palliative care (intervention was considered routine care; intervention aligned with the compassionate and collaborative culture of palliative care; and differing views of palliative care priorities influenced perspectives of the intervention) and four were about study processes more directly related to adherence to the intervention (shared knowledge increased engagement with the intervention; impact of the intervention checklist on attention, delivery and documentation of the delirium prevention strategies; clinical roles and responsibilities; and addressing environmental barriers to delirium prevention)., Conclusion: This theory-informed qualitative study identified multiple influences on the delivery and documentation of a pilot multicomponent non-pharmacological delirium prevention intervention in four palliative care units. Findings inform future definitive studies of delirium prevention in palliative care. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry , ACTRN12617001070325; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=373168.

Examining and addressing unmet care needs is integral to improving the provision and quality of cancer services. This review explored the prevalence of unmet supportive care needs, and factors associated with unmet need, in adults with advanced cancers (solid and hematological malignancies) and their caregivers. Electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE) were searched, producing 85 papers representing 81 included studies. People with advanced cancer reported the highest unmet needs in financial, health system and information, psychological, and physical and daily living domains, whereas caregivers reported the highest unmet needs in psychological, and patient care and support domains. Distress, depression, and anxiety were associated with higher unmet needs across all unmet need domains for people with advanced cancer and their caregivers. Substantial heterogeneity in study populations and methods was observed. Findings from this review can inform targeted strategies and interventions to address these unmet needs in people with advanced cancer., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The management of older adults with cancer is rapidly becoming a significant challenge in radiation oncology (RO) practice. The education of future radiation oncologists in geriatric oncology is fundamental to ensuring that older adults receive high-quality care. Currently RO trainees receive little training and education in geriatric oncology. The objective of this study was to define core geriatric RO curriculum learning outcomes relevant to RO trainees worldwide., Methods and Materials: A 2-stage modified Delphi consensus was conducted. Stage 1 involved the formation of an expert reference panel (ERP) of multiprofessional experts in geriatric oncology and/or RO and the compilation of a potential geriatric RO learning outcomes set. Stage 2 involved 3 iterative rounds: round 1 and round 2 (both online surveys), and an intervening ERP round. These aimed at identifying and refining ideal geriatric RO learning outcomes. Invited participants for round 1 and 2 included oncology health care professionals with expertise across RO, geriatric oncology, and/or education and consumers. Predefined Delphi consensus definitions were applied to the results of rounds 1 and 2., Results: An ERP of 11 experts in geriatric oncology and/or RO was formed. Seventy potential knowledge- and skill-based learning outcomes were identified. In round 1, 103 of 179 invited eligible Delphi participants completed the survey (58% response rate). The ERP round was conducted, resulting in the exclusion of 28 learning outcomes. In round 2, 54 of 103 completed the survey (52% response rate). This identified a final total of 33 geriatric RO learning outcomes., Conclusions: The geriatric RO learning outcomes described in this study form an international consensus that can inform RO training bodies worldwide. This represents the first fundamental step in developing a global educational framework aimed at improving RO trainee knowledge and skills in geriatric oncology., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: This study aimed to 1) understand factors impacting the implementation of exercise communication and referral, and 2) explore integrated clinical approaches to exercise communication and referral in cancer care., Methods: Seven focus groups (N = 53) were conducted with clinicians and exercise professionals throughout Sydney, Australia. A sub-sample of participants (n = 9) attended a half-day workshop to identifying best practice approaches for moving forward. Data were analysed using thematic content analysis., Results: Two themes emerged: 1) Factors impacting the knowledge-to-action gap, inclusive of limited exercise specific knowledge and training opportunities, funding structure, and current referral process, and 2) Recommendations for a consistent and efficient way forward, detailing the need for oncologist-initiated communication, distribution of cancer-exercise resources, and access to exercise professionals with cancer expertise., Conclusions: This study identified factors (e.g., cancer-exercise specific training, integration of exercise physiologists) influencing exercise counselling and referral. A potential implementation-referral approach accounting for these factors and how to incorporate exercise into a standard model of cancer care, is described. Future testing is required to determine feasibility and practicality of these approaches., Practical Implications: A pragmatic model is provided to guide implementation-referral, inclusive of oncologist-initiated communication exchange, relevant resources, and access to exercise professionals with cancer expertise., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Anorexia (loss of appetite) is a prevalent and distressing symptom in people with cancer, with limited effective interventions. Medicinal cannabis has shown promise in improving appetite-related symptoms in people with cancer., Aim: To assess the efficacy of medicinal cannabis for improving appetite-related symptoms in people with cancer, considering measures and outcomes, interventions and toxicity., Design: Systematic review with narrative approach to synthesis and meta-analysis., Data Sources: Databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, CENTRAL), websites and trials registries were searched from inception to February 2021. Included studies were randomised controlled trials (RCT) in English peer-reviewed journals comparing medicinal cannabis with placebo and/or another intervention. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool., Results: Five studies were included that compared medicinal cannabis interventions (dronabinol, nabilone and cannabis extract) either with placebo ( n  = 4) or megestrol acetate ( n  = 1). Measures and trial endpoints varied, but efficacy was demonstrated in one trial only, in which dronabinol significantly improved chemosensory perception and other secondary outcomes (taste of food, premeal appetite, proportion of calories consumed as protein) compared with placebo. Cannabis interventions were generally well tolerated across studies, regardless of the product or dose, although the comprehensive measurement of toxicities was limited., Conclusion: Evidence from RCTs that medicinal cannabis increases appetite in people with cancer is limited. Measures, outcomes and interventions were variable, and toxicities have not been comprehensively evaluated. Future research should carefully consider biological mechanisms to guide more nuanced selection of endpoints and interventions, including product, dose and administration.

Introduction: Pain is a common and distressing symptom in people living with cancer that requires a patient-centred approach to management. Since 2010, the Australian Government has invested heavily in developing regional cancer centres to improve cancer outcomes. This study explored patient and carer experiences of care from a regional cancer centre with specific reference to cancer pain management., Methods: A qualitative approach was used with semi-structured telephone interviews. Participants were outpatients at a regional cancer centre in New South Wales who had reported worst pain of 2 or more on a 0-10 numerical rating scale, and their carers. Questions explored experiences of pain assessment and management, and perceptions of how these were affected by the regional setting. Researchers analysed data using a deductive approach, using Mead and Bower's (2000) framework of factors influencing patient-centred care., Results: Eighteen telephone interviews were conducted with 13 patients and 5 carers. Participants perceived that living in a regional setting conferred advantages to the patient-centredness of care via influences at the levels of professional context, the doctor-patient relationship, and consultation. These influences included established and ongoing relationships with a smaller number of care providers who were members of the community, and heightened accessibility in terms of travel/parking, flexible appointments, and ample time spent with each patient. The first of these factors was also perceived to contribute to continuity of care between specialist and primary care providers. However, one negative case reported disagreement between providers and a difficulty accessing specialist pain services. Several participants also reported a preference, and unmet need, for non-pharmacological rather than pharmacological pain management., Conclusion: While much research has focused on lack of services and poorer outcomes for people with cancer in rural areas, the Australian regional setting may offer benefits to the patient-centredness of cancer pain management and continuity of care. More research is needed to better understand the benefits and trade-offs of cancer care in regional versus urban settings, and how each can learn from the other. An unmet need for non-pharmacological rather than pharmacological pain management is among the most consistent findings of qualitative studies of patient/carer preferences across settings.

As the global population ages, the care of older adults with cancer is increasingly recognised as a growing challenge in oncology practice worldwide. At present, outcomes for older adults with cancer are worse than younger counterparts. The need for improved clinician education around geriatric oncology is internationally recognised as being fundamental to addressing this problem. Radiation therapy represents an excellent localised treatment modality for older adults due to its limited systemic toxicity, especially in circumstances in which surgery and chemotherapy are deemed inappropriate. Thus, the education of future radiation oncologists and other radiation oncology professionals (including radiation therapists, nurses, and physicists) in geriatric oncology is crucial to ensuring the complex needs of this patient population are met. However, evidence shows that within the specialty of radiation oncology, knowledge levels around key concepts in geriatric oncology are low and there is limited educational focus on the specific issues important for the care of older adults. An evidence-based, global approach to improving radiation oncology professionals' knowledge and clinical practice in geriatric oncology is needed to provide optimal care for older adults undergoing radiation therapy. This article provides an overview of the current status of geriatric oncology training and education in the specialty of radiation oncology and future directions to improve the knowledge and skills of radiation oncology professionals in caring for older adults., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Management of neuropathic cancer pain (NCP) refractory to regular opioids remains an important challenge. The efficacy of pregabalin for NCP except chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) has already been confirmed in two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) compared with placebo. Duloxetine offers the potential of analgesia in opioid refractory NCP. However, there are no RCT of duloxetine for the management of opioid-refractory NCP as a first line treatment. Both classes of drugs have the potential to reduce NCP, but there has been no head-to-head comparison for the efficacy and safety, especially given differing side effect profiles., Methods and Analysis: An international, multicentre, double-blind, dose increment, parallel-arm, RCT is planned. Inclusion criteria include: adults with cancer experiencing NCP refractory to opioids; Brief Pain Inventory (BPI)-item 3 (worst pain) of ≥4; Neuropathic Pain on the Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs Pain Scale of ≥12 despite of an adequate trial of regular opioid medication (≥60 mg/day oral morphine equivalent dose). Patients with CIPN are excluded.The study will recruit from palliative care teams (both inpatients and outpatients) in Japan and Australia. Participants will be randomised (1:1 allocation ratio) to duloxetine or pregabalin arm. Dose escalation is until day 14 and from day 14 to 21 is a dose de-escalation period to avoid withdrawal effects. The primary endpoint is defined as the mean difference in BPI item 3 for worst pain intensity over the previous 24 hours at day 14 between groups. A sample size of 160 patients will be enrolled between February 2020 and March 2023., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethics approval was obtained at Osaka City University Hospital Certified Review Board and South Western Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee. The results of this study will be submitted for publication in international journals and the key findings presented at international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: jRCTs051190097, ACTRN12620000656932., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Purpose: Delirium leads to poor outcomes for patients and careers and has negative impacts on staff and service provision. Cancer rates in elderly populations are increasing and frequently, cancer diagnoses are a co-morbidity in the context of frailty. Data relating to the epidemiology of delirium in hospitalised cancer patients are limited. With the overarching purpose of improving delirium detection and reducing the morbidity and mortality of delirium in cancer patients, we reviewed the epidemiological data and approach to delirium detection in hospitalised, adult oncology patients., Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and SCOPUS databases were searched from January 1996 to August 2017. Key concepts were delirium, cancer, inpatient oncology and delirium screening/detection., Results: Of 896 unique studies identified; 91 met full-text review criteria. Of 12 eligible studies, four applied recommended case ascertainment methods to all patients, three used delirium screening tools alone or with case ascertainment tools sub-optimally applied, four used tools not recommended for delirium screening or case ascertainment, one used the Confusion Assessment Method with insufficient information to determine if it met case ascertainment status. Two studies presented delirium incidence rates: 7.8%, and 17% respectively. Prevalence rates ranged from 18-33% for general medical or oncology wards; 42-58% for Acute Palliative Care Units (APCU); and for older cancer patients: 22% and 57%. Three studies reported reversibility; 26% and 49% respectively (APCUs) and 30% (older patients with cancer). Six studies had a low risk of bias according to QUADAS-2 criteria; all studies in the APCU setting were rated at higher risk of bias. Tool selection, study flow and recruitment bias reduced study quality., Conclusion: The knowledge base for improved interventions and clinical care for adults with cancer and delirium is limited by the low number of studies. A clear distinction between screening tools and diagnostic tools is required to provide an improved understanding of the rates of delirium and its reversibility in this population., (© 2022. Crown.)

Background: Most 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., Objectives: This 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., Methods: A 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)., Results: The 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., Conclusions: This 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., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

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.

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., (Copyright © 2021 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Older adults with cancer are at risk of overtreatment or undertreatment when decision-making is based solely on chronological age. Although a geriatric assessment is recommended to inform care, the time and expertise required limit its feasibility for all patients. Screening tools offer the potential to identify those who will benefit most from a geriatric assessment. Consensus about the optimal tool to use is lacking., Objective: To appraise the evidence on screening tools used for older adults with cancer and identify an optimal screening tool for older adults with cancer who may benefit from geriatric assessment., Evidence Review: Systematic review of 4 databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL [Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature], and PubMed) with narrative synthesis from January 1, 2000, to March 14, 2019. Studies reporting on the diagnostic accuracy and use of validated screening tools to identify older adults with cancer who need a geriatric assessment were eligible for inclusion. Data were analyzed from March 14, 2019, to March 23, 2020., Findings: Seventeen unique studies were included, reporting on the use of 12 screening tools. Most studies were prospective cohort studies (n = 11) with only 1 randomized clinical trial. Not all studies reported time taken to administer the screening tools. The Geriatric-8 (G8) (n = 12) and the Vulnerable Elders Survey-13 (VES-13) (n = 9) were the most frequently evaluated screening tools. The G8 scored better in sensitivity and the VES-13 in specificity. Other screening tools evaluated include the Groningen Frailty Index, abbreviated comprehensive geriatric assessment, and Physical Performance Test in 2 studies each. All other screening tools were evaluated in 1 study each., Conclusions and Relevance: To date, the G8 and VES-13 have the most evidence to recommend their use to inform the need for geriatric assessment. When choosing a screening tool, clinicians will need to weigh the tradeoffs between sensitivity and specificity. Future research needs to further validate or improve current screening tools and explore other factors that can influence their use, such as ease of use and resourcing.

This multi-site, double blind, parallel arm, fixed dose, randomised placebo controlled phase III study compared megestrol acetate 480 mg/day with dexamethasone 4 mg/day for their net effects on appetite in people with cancer anorexia. Patients with advanced cancer and anorexia for ≥ 2 weeks with a score ≤ 4 (0-10 numeric rating scale (NRS) 0 = no appetite, 10 = best possible appetite) were recruited. Participants received megestrol 480 mg or dexamethasone 4 mg or placebo daily for up to 4 weeks. Primary outcomes were at day 7. Responders were defined as having a ≥ 25% improvement in NRS over baseline. There were 190 people randomised (megestrol acetate n = 61; dexamethasone n = 67, placebo n = 62). At week 1 (primary endpoint), 79·3% in the megestrol group, 65·5% in the dexamethasone group and 58·5% in the placebo group (p = 0.067) were responders. No differences in performance status or quality of life were reported. Treatment emergent adverse events were frequent (90·4% of participants), and included altered mood and insomnia. Hyperglycemia and deep vein thromboses were more frequent when on dexamethasone than the other two arms. There was no difference in groups between the three arms, with no benefit seen over placebo with anorexia improving in all arms.Trail registration: The trial was registered on 19/08/2008 with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12608000405314).

Aim: A serious syndrome for cancer in-patients, delirium risk increases with age and medical acuity. Screening tools exist but detection is frequently delayed or missed. We test the 'Single Question in Delirium' (SQiD), in comparison to psychiatrist clinical interview., Methods: Inpatients in two comprehensive cancer centres were prospectively screened. Clinical staff asked informants to respond to the SQiD: "Do you feel that [patient's name] has been more confused lately?". The primary endpoint was negative predictive value (NPV) of the SQiD versus psychiatrist diagnosis (Diagnostic and Statistics Manual criteria). Secondary endpoints included: NPV of the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM), sensitivity, specificity and Cohen's Kappa coefficient., Results: Between May 2012 and July 2015, the SQiD plus CAM was applied to 122 patients; 73 had the SQiD and psychiatrist interview. Median age was 65 yrs. (interquartile range 54-74), 46% were female; median length of hospital stay was 12 days (5-18 days). Major cancer types were lung (19%), gastric or other upper GI (15%) and breast (14%). 70% of participants had stage 4 cancer. Diagnostic values were similar between the SQiD (NPV = 74, 95% CI 67-81; kappa = 0.32) and CAM (NPV = 72, 95% CI 67-77, kappa = 0.32), compared with psychiatrist interview. Overall the CAM identified only a small number of delirious cases but all were true positives. The specificity of the SQiD was 87% (74-95) The SQiD had higher sensitivity than CAM (44% [95% CI 41-80] vs 26% [10-48])., Conclusion: The SQiD, administered by bedside clinical staff, was feasible and its psychometric properties are now better understood. The SQiD can contribute to delirium detection and clinical care for hospitalised cancer patients.

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

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 < 0.01; placebo p = 0.02) and pain scores (octreotide p < 0.01; placebo 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: Delirium is highly problematic in palliative care (PC). Preliminary data indicate a potential role for melatonin to prevent delirium, but no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are reported in PC., Methods: Patients aged ≥18 years, with advanced cancer, admitted to an inpatient Palliative Care Unit (PCU), having a Palliative Performance Scale rating ≥ 30%, and for whom consent was obtained, were included in the study. Patients with delirium on admission were excluded. The main study objectives were to assess the feasibility issues of conducting a double-blind RCT of exogenous melatonin to prevent delirium in PC: recruitment, retention, procedural acceptability, appropriateness of outcome measures, and preliminary efficacy and safety data. Study participants were randomized in a double-blind, parallel designed study to receive daily melatonin 3 mg or placebo orally at 21:00 over 28 days or less if incident delirium, death, discharge or withdrawal occurred earlier. Delirium was diagnosed using the Confusion Assessment Method. Efficacy endpoints in the melatonin and placebo groups were compared using time-to-event analysis: days from study entry to onset of incident delirium., Results: Over 16 months, 60/616 (9.7%; 95% CI: 7.5-12.4%) screened subjects were enrolled. The respective melatonin (n = 30) vs placebo (n = 30) outcomes were: incident delirium in 11/30 (36.7%; 95%CI: 19.9-56.1%) vs 10/30 (33%; 95% CI: 17.3-52.8%); early discharge (6 vs 5); withdrawal (6 vs 3); death (0 vs 1); and 7 (23%) vs 11 (37%) reached the 28-day end point. The 25th percentile time-to-event were 9 and 18 days (log rank, χ 2  = 0.62, p = 0.43) in melatonin and placebo groups, respectively. No serious trial medication-related adverse effects occurred and the core study procedures were acceptable. Compared to those who remained delirium-free during their study participation, those who developed delirium (n = 21) had poorer functional (p = 0.036) and cognitive performance (p = 0.013), and in particular, poorer attentional capacity (p = 0.003) at study entry., Conclusions: A larger double-blind RCT is feasible, but both subject accrual and withdrawal rates signal a need for multisite collaboration. The apparent trend for shorter time to incident delirium in the melatonin group bodes for careful monitoring in a larger trial., Trial Registration: Registered on July 21st 2014 with ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT02200172 .

Aim: Low participation in cancer clinical trials by culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) patients limits access to cutting-edge treatments and generalizability of results. This is the first study exploring trials knowledge/attitudes and their association with trial participation in Vietnamese- and Anglo-Australian cancer patients., Methods: Eligible patients diagnosed with cancer in the past 10 years were invited to complete a self-report questionnaire comprising validated measures of: trials knowledge and attitudes, preferred information amount, preferred decision-making involvement, health literacy, and past and future (i.e. hypothetical) trial participation. Multivariable linear regression evaluated correlates of trials knowledge/attitudes. Multinomial logistic regression estimated the relationship between trials knowledge/attitudes and possible future trial participation., Results: Vietnamese-Australian participants (n = 50) had more negative attitudes regarding trials than Anglo-Australians (n = 100; B = -9.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], -17.60 to -0.97; P = 0.029), but similar knowledge (B = -0.91; 95% CI, -2.27 to 0.44; P = 0.18). Future trial participation was associated with positive attitudes (odds ratio [OR] = 1.08; 95% CI, 1.04-1.12; P < 0.001) and greater knowledge (OR = 1.30; 95% CI, 1.04-1.62; P = 0.02), but not Vietnamese background (OR = 0.95; 95% CI, 0.27-3.32; P = 0.93)., Conclusion: Despite poorer attitudes regarding trials in Vietnamese-Australians, Vietnamese background was not associated with less likely future trial participation, suggesting low trial participation by CALD patients may be more due to opportunity barriers. Improving knowledge and attitudes may increase trial participation generally., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Background: Delirium is a common debilitating complication of advanced cancer. Objective: To determine if a multicomponent nonpharmacological delirium prevention intervention was feasible for adult patients with advanced cancer, before a phase III (efficacy) trial. Design: Phase II (feasibility) cluster randomized controlled trial. All sites implemented delirium screening and diagnostic assessment. Strategies within sleep, vision and hearing, hydration, orientation, mobility, and family domains were delivered to enrolled patients at intervention site admission days 1-7. Control sites then implemented the intervention ("waitlist sites"). Setting: Four Australian palliative care units. Measurements: The primary outcome was adherence, with an a priori endpoint of at least 60% patients achieving full adherence. Secondary outcomes were interdisciplinary care delivery, delirium measures, and adverse events, analyzed descriptively and inferentially. Results: Sixty-five enrolled patients (25 control, 20 intervention, and 20 waitlist) had 98% delirium screens and 75% diagnostic assessments completed. Nurses (67%), physicians (16%), allied health (8.4%), family (7%), patients (1%), and volunteers (0.5%) delivered the intervention. There was full adherence for 5% patients at intervention sites, partial for 25%. Both full and partial adherence were higher at waitlist sites: 25% and 45%, respectively. One-third of control site patients (32%) became delirious within seven days of admission compared to one-fifth (20%) at both intervention and waitlist sites ( p  = 0.5). Mean (standard deviation) Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-1998 scores were 16.8 + 12.0 control sites versus 18.4 + 8.2 ( p  = 0.6) intervention and 18.7 + 7.8 ( p  = 0.5) waitlist sites. The intervention caused no adverse events. Conclusion: The intervention requires modification for optimal adherence in a phase III trial.

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: 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).

Objectives: To compare physical and mental health status between cancer carers versus non-carers in a population-based sample and explore sociodemographic and caring characteristics associated with poor carer health status., Methods: The South Australian Health Omnibus is a population-based cross-sectional survey. Carer status was self-defined by participants as having cared for someone with cancer in the last 5 years. Health status was considered poor if it was 0.5 standard deviation lower than Australian norms on the Medical Outcomes Study 12-Item Short-Form (SF-12) physical and mental component summary scores (PCS and MCS). Regression analyses compared mean PCS/MCS between carers versus non-carers, controlling for sociodemographic variables, and explored associations between poor health status and caring and support among carers., Results: The weighted sample included 2962 people, of whom 374 (12.6%) were cancer carers and 1993 (67.3%) non-carers. Carers had significantly worse PCS/MCS, controlling for sociodemographic variables, but did not differ significantly regarding proportions with poor health status. Carer characteristics associated with poor PCS and MCS included socio-economic indicators and involvement in medication management. Assisting with household tasks was protective., Conclusions: This population-based study followed those previous ones in finding cancer carers to have poorer mean health status than non-carers. However, differences were less pronounced than previously reported, likely because of the sample being drawn from a general rather than cancer service population and including past as well as current carers, as well as all cancer types and stages. Future longitudinal research is needed to identify factors that predict recovery post caring., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Introduction: Delirium is a significant medical complication for hospitalised patients. Up to one-third of delirium episodes are preventable in older inpatients through non-pharmacological strategies that support essential human needs, such as physical and cognitive activity, sleep, hydration, vision and hearing. We hypothesised that a multicomponent intervention similarly may decrease delirium incidence, and/or its duration and severity, in inpatients with advanced cancer. Prior to a phase III trial, we aimed to determine if a multicomponent non-pharmacological delirium prevention intervention is feasible and acceptable for this specific inpatient group., Methods and Analysis: The study is a phase II cluster randomised wait-listed controlled trial involving inpatients with advanced cancer at four Australian palliative care inpatient units. Intervention sites will introduce delirium screening, diagnostic assessment and a multicomponent delirium prevention intervention with six domains of care: preserving natural sleep; maintaining optimal vision and hearing; optimising hydration; promoting communication, orientation and cognition; optimising mobility; and promoting family partnership. Interdisciplinary teams will tailor intervention delivery to each site and to patient need. Control sites will first introduce only delirium screening and diagnosis, later implementing the intervention, modified according to initial results. The primary outcome is adherence to the intervention during the first seven days of admission, measured for 40 consecutively admitted eligible patients. Secondary outcomes relate to fidelity and feasibility, acceptability and sustainability of the study intervention, processes and measures in this patient population, using quantitative and qualitative measures. Delirium incidence and severity will be measured to inform power calculations for a future phase III trial., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval was obtained for all four sites. Trial results, qualitative substudy findings and implementation of the intervention will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals, and reported at conferences, to study sites and key peak bodies., Trial Registration Number: ACTRN12617001070325; Pre-results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: The aim of the study was to assess four evidence-based assessments utilising exercise challenges that induce breathlessness, each with progressively less demanding levels of exertion, which can be tailored to people with a range of functional capabilities in the setting of advanced cancer for research studies. Functional cut off points for these assessments have not previously been defined., Methods: A cross sectional study of four exercise tests attempted by all participants: 6 min walk test (6MWT); (derived) 2 min walk test (2MWT); arm exercises; and reading numbers aloud. Performance status (Australia-modified Karnofsky Performance Status (AKPS)), baseline breathlessness using the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) breathlessness scale, and a visual analogue scale of intensity and unpleasantness of breathlessness were measured. Co-morbidity was codified using the Charlson Co-morbidity Index. Percentage of people completing each test by AKPS level of function and baseline mMRC breathlessness scores were quantified., Results: In the 68 participants, poorer function decreased the proportion of people able to complete the exercise tests. For completion rates ≥80%, of 6MWT and 2MWT, only people with an AKPS 70-90 had completion. For arm exercises, this included people with an AKPS as low as ≥50; and for reading numbers, it included people with an AKPS of 40 but not below., Conclusions: Walking tests have poor utility in people with high levels of functional impairment. For people with high levels of dependence, reading numbers should be used in evaluating exercise-induced breathlessness in research studies. These data also suggest that people's exertional limitations have been under-estimated as cancer progresses.

Aim: Clinical trials play a critical role in advancing cancer care, but international research shows that few cancer patients, particularly culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) patients, participate in trials. This limits generalizability of trial results and increases health disparities. This study aimed to establish rates and correlates of trial participation among CALD patients in South Western Sydney Local Health District (SWSLHD), a highly culturally diverse area., Methods: Data from all cancer patients diagnosed and/or treated in SWSLHD from January 2006 to July 2016 were analyzed retrospectively. The primary outcome was trial enrolment among patients born in non-English speaking countries (CALD) versus English speaking countries (non-CALD). Multivariable logistic regression evaluated CALD status as a predictor of trial participation. Moderators of trial participation by the different CALD groups, namely those whose preferred language was English (CALD-PLE) or was not English (CALD-PLNE), were examined by testing interactions between CALD status and other demographic and clinical variables., Results: A total of 19 453 patients were analyzed (54.9% non-CALD, 16.5% CALD-PLE, 18.5% CALD-PLNE). Overall, 7.4% of patients were enrolled in a trial. Trial participation was significantly lower in CALD patients than non-CALD patients (5.7% vs 8.4%; odds ratio [OR] = 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69-0.91; P = 0.001). CALD-PLNE patients were less likely to participate in trials than non-CALD (OR = 0.45; 95% CI, 0.36-0.56; P < 0.0001) and CALD-PLE patients (OR = 0.53; 95% CI, 0.67-0.41; P < 0.0001)., Conclusions: Limited English proficiency seems particularly unfavorable to trial participation. Development and evaluation of strategies to overcome language barriers (e.g. simplified and translated multimedia participant information materials) is needed., (© 2017 John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Background: Delirium is a very common and distressing neuropsychiatric syndrome in palliative care. Increasing age, the presence of dementia and advanced cancer are well-known predisposing risk factors for delirium development. Sleep-wake cycle disturbance is frequently seen during delirium and melatonin has a pivotal role in the regulation of circadian rhythms. Current evidence across various settings suggests a potential preventative role for melatonin in patients at risk of delirium, but no studies are currently reported in patients with advanced cancer. The aim of this article is to describe the design of a feasibility study that is being conducted to inform a larger randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial (RCT) to evaluate the role of exogenously administered melatonin in preventing delirium in patients with advanced cancer., Methods/design: Adult patients with a cancer diagnosis who are admitted to the palliative care unit will be randomized into a treatment or placebo group. The pharmacological intervention consists of a single daily dose of immediate-release melatonin (3 mg) at 21:00 ± 1 h, from day 1 to day 28 of admission. The primary objective of this initial study is to assess the feasibility of conducting the proposed RCT by testing recruitment and retention rates, appropriateness of study outcome measures, acceptability of study procedures and effectiveness of the blinding process. The primary outcome measure of the proposed larger RCT is time to first inpatient incident episode of delirium. We also plan to collect data on incident rates of delirium and patient-days of delirium, adjusting for length of admission., Discussion: The outcomes of this feasibility study will provide information on recruitment and retention rates, protocol violation frequency, effectiveness of the blinding process, acceptability of the study procedures, and safety of the proposed intervention. This will inform the design of a fully powered randomized controlled trial to evaluate the preventative role of melatonin administration in patients with advanced cancer., Trial Registration: Registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02200172 Registered on 21 July 2014. Health Canada protocol number: BRI-MELAT-2013 (Final approved protocol version (Version 3): 18 June 2014) (Notice of Amended Authorization (NOA) received 14 November 2014).

Context: Managing symptom clusters or multiple concurrent symptoms in patients with advanced cancer remains a clinical challenge. The optimal processes constituting effective management of symptom clusters remain uncertain., Objectives: To describe the attitudes and strategies of clinicians in managing multiple co-occurring symptoms in patients with advanced cancer., Methods: Semistructured interviews were conducted with 48 clinicians (palliative care physicians [n = 10], oncologists [n = 6], general practitioners [n = 6], nurses [n = 12], and allied health providers [n = 14]), purposively recruited from two acute hospitals, two palliative care centers, and four community general practices in Sydney, Australia. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis and adapted grounded theory., Results: Six themes were identified: uncertainty in decision making (inadequacy of scientific evidence, relying on experiential knowledge, and pressure to optimize care); attunement to patient and family (sensitivity to multiple cues, prioritizing individual preferences, addressing psychosocial and physical interactions, and opening Pandora's box); deciphering cause to guide intervention (disaggregating symptoms and interactions, flexibility in assessment, and curtailing investigative intrusiveness); balancing complexities in medical management (trading off side effects, minimizing mismatched goals, and urgency in resolving severe symptoms); fostering hope and empowerment (allaying fear of the unknown, encouraging meaning making, championing patient empowerment, and truth telling); and depending on multidisciplinary expertise (maximizing knowledge exchange, sharing management responsibility, contending with hierarchical tensions, and isolation and discontinuity of care)., Conclusion: Management of symptom clusters, as both an art and a science, is currently fraught with uncertainty in decision making. Strengthening multidisciplinary collaboration, continuity of care, more pragmatic planning of clinical trials to address more than one symptom, and training in symptom cluster management are required., (Copyright © 2016 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Context: Symptom clusters in advanced cancer can influence patient outcomes. There is large heterogeneity in the methods used to identify symptom clusters., Objectives: To investigate the consistency of symptom cluster composition in advanced cancer patients using different statistical methodologies for all patients across five primary cancer sites, and to examine which clusters predict functional status, a global assessment of health and global quality of life., Methods: Principal component analysis and exploratory factor analysis (with different rotation and factor selection methods) and hierarchical cluster analysis (with different linkage and similarity measures) were used on a data set of 1562 advanced cancer patients who completed the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30., Results: Four clusters consistently formed for many of the methods and cancer sites: tense-worry-irritable-depressed (emotional cluster), fatigue-pain, nausea-vomiting, and concentration-memory (cognitive cluster). The emotional cluster was a stronger predictor of overall quality of life than the other clusters. Fatigue-pain was a stronger predictor of overall health than the other clusters. The cognitive cluster and fatigue-pain predicted physical functioning, role functioning, and social functioning., Conclusions: The four identified symptom clusters were consistent across statistical methods and cancer types, although there were some noteworthy differences. Statistical derivation of symptom clusters is in need of greater methodological guidance. A psychosocial pathway in the management of symptom clusters may improve quality of life. Biological mechanisms underpinning symptom clusters need to be delineated by future research. A framework for evidence-based screening, assessment, treatment, and follow-up of symptom clusters in advanced cancer is essential., (Copyright © 2016 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Dry mouth is a common and troublesome symptom in palliative care. Pilocarpine is a cholinergic agent that promotes salivation., Aim: This study aimed to test the feasibility of using n-of-1 trials to test pilocarpine drops compared to placebo, for patients of palliative care units with advanced cancer, who experienced dry mouth., Design: This was an N-of-1 study, in which each participant was offered three cycles of pilocarpine drops 4% (6 mg tds) (3 days) and placebo drops (3 days) in random order., Setting/participants: Participants were patients of specialist palliative care services with advanced cancer assessed as having a dry mouth, defined as having a score of ⩾ 3 on an 11-point self-rated xerostomia numerical rating scale, from any cause. Patients self-completed a diary using validated symptom and quality-of-life scores. The randomisation order was unmasked at the end of each person's trial by a clinician independent of the trial to allow a treatment decisions for individual patients to be made., Results: Nine patients completed at least 1 cycle; 33 cycles of data were completed in total, comprising 438 doses of pilocarpine. Four patients completed the trial: two responded and two did not. Most withdrawals related to deteriorating condition, unacceptable toxicity, non-compliance with study procedures or withdrawal of consent. Many issues contributed to slow recruitment and high withdrawal rate., Conclusion: The formulation of pilocarpine drops proved unacceptable to most participants. More work is required to determine an appropriate formulation, dose and method of delivery and then a retest of pilocarpine drops for this symptom., (© The Author(s) 2015.)

Objective: Psychosocial interventions directed to couples where one has advanced cancer can reduce distress, enhance communication, and provide an opportunity for relational growth. The present study aimed to develop an intervention to facilitate communication about living with advanced cancer using the Patient Dignity Inventory (PDI) as the focus of a clinical interview with couples toward the end of life., Method: Couples were recruited from oncology and palliative care services at a Sydney hospital. After the PDI was developed and manualized as an intervention for couples, the PDI-Couple Interview (PDI-CI) was delivered by a clinical psychologist and comprised the following: (1) the patient completed the PDI; (2) the patient's identified partner completed the PDI about how they thought the patient was feeling; and (3) the clinician reviewed the results with the couple, summarizing areas of concurrence and discordance and facilitating discussion., Results: Some 34 couples were referred, of which 12 consented, 9 of whom completed the clinical interview. Reported benefits included enabling couples to express their concerns together, identifying differences in understanding, and giving "permission to speak" with each other. The focus of the interview around the PDI provided a structure that was particularly acceptable for men. Most couples confirmed that they were "on the same page," and where differences were identified, it provided a forum for discussion and a mutual understanding of the challenges in managing advanced cancer within a supportive context., Significance of Results: Participant couples' experiences of the PDI-CI provide valuable insight into the benefits of this intervention. This preliminary study indicates that the intervention is a relatively simple means of enhancing closer communication and connection between couples where one has advanced cancer and may be an important adjunct in helping prepare couples for the challenges inherent toward the end of life. Further investigation of feasibility with a larger sample is recommended.

Aim: To develop clinical practice guidelines for screening, assessing and managing cancer pain in Australian adults., Methods: This three-phase project utilized the ADAPTE approach to adapt international cancer pain guidelines for the Australian setting. A Working Party was established to define scope, screen guidelines for adaptation and develop recommendations to support better cancer pain control through screening, assessment, pharmacological and non-pharmacological management, and patient education. Recommendations with limited evidence were referred to Expert Panels for advice before the draft guidelines were opened for public consultation via the Cancer Council Australia Cancer Guidelines Wiki platform in late 2012. All comments were reviewed by the Working Party and the guidelines were revised accordingly., Results: Screening resulted in six international guidelines being included for adaptation - those developed by the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (2008), National Health Service Quality Improvement Scotland (2009), National Comprehensive Cancer Network (2012), European Society of Medical Oncology (2011), European Association for Palliative Care (2011, 2012) and National Institute of Clinical Excellence (2012). Guideline adaptation resulted in 55 final recommendations. The guidelines were officially launched in November 2013., Conclusion: International guidelines can be efficiently reconfigured for local contexts using the ADAPTE approach. Availability of the guidelines via the Cancer Council Australia Wiki is intended to promote uptake and enable recommendations to be kept up to date. Resources to support implementation will also be made available via the Wiki if found to be effective by a randomized controlled trial commencing in 2015., (© 2015 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd.)

Background: Cancer pain remains a major public health concern. Despite effective treatments being available to manage the majority of cancer pain, this debilitating symptom is frequently under treated. As cancer has becomes a chronic disease a range of health professionals, including community nurses in Australia are increasingly caring for people living with cancer related pain. Yet, little is known about community nurses capacity to assess and manage cancer pain in accordance with best available evidence., Objectives: This study aimed to: identify the barriers and facilitators to adult cancer pain assessment and management as perceived by Australian health professionals; identify if cancer pain guidelines are currently used; identify barriers and facilitators to guideline use; and establish the need for Australian cancer pain guidelines. This article reports on community nurses' perceptions of managing cancer pain in the community setting., Methods: A cross-sectional survey was administered online. Invitations were circulated via peak bodies and clinical leaders seeking the views and experiences of health professionals involved in caring for people living with cancer pain. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise the quantitative data, and thematic content analysis were used to describe the qualitative data., Results: Sixty-two community nurses responded to the survey, representing 29% of the total sample. These participants reported high levels of adherence to accepted cancer pain management practices in their workplace, with 71% nominating the Palliative Care Therapeutic Guideline V.3 as being most frequently used to manage community patients' cancer related pain. Key barriers to effective cancer pain management in the community were: difficulties accessing non-pharmacological interventions (89%), lack of coordination by multiple providers (89%), and impact of distance on ability to access pain-related services for patients (86%)., Conclusion: A range of system, health professional and consumer barriers limit access to best available treatment in the community setting for people with cancer pain. A clinical pathway that gives step-by-step guidance on evidence-based practice along with an evaluation framework may be the best way of enabling community nurses to ensure their patients with cancer related pain have access to best available care.

Context: Advanced cancer patients typically experience multiple symptoms, which may influence patient outcomes synergistically. The composition of these symptom clusters (SCs) differs depending on various clinical variables and the timing and method of their assessment., Objectives: The objective of this systematic review was to examine the composition, longitudinal stability, and consistency across methodologies of common SCs, as well as their common predictors and outcomes., Methods: A search of MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, and PsycINFO was conducted using variants of symptom clusters, cancer, and palliative care., Results: Thirty-three articles were identified and reviewed. Many SCs were identified, with four common groupings being anxiety-depression, nausea-vomiting, nausea-appetite loss, and fatigue-dyspnea-drowsiness-pain. SCs in most cases were not stable longitudinally. The various statistical methods used (most commonly principal component analysis, exploratory factor analysis, and hierarchical cluster analysis) tended to reveal different SCs. Different measurement tools were used in different studies, each containing a different array of symptoms. The predictors and outcomes of SCs were also inconsistent across studies. No studies of patient experiences of SCs were identified., Conclusion: Although the articles reviewed revealed four groups of symptoms that tended to cluster, there is limited consistency in the way in which SCs and variables associated with them are identified. This is largely due to a lack of agreement about a robust, clinically relevant definition of SCs. Future research should focus on patients' subjective experience of SCs to inform a clinically relevant definition of SCs and how they are managed over time., (Copyright © 2014 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Cancer pain continues to be undertreated in up to half of cases, despite the availability of evidence-based guidelines. This study aimed to: (i) identify barriers and facilitators to adult cancer pain assessment and management, as perceived by Australian health professionals; (ii) establish the perceived need for new Australian guidelines and implementation strategy; (iii) identify which guidelines are used; (iv) identify barriers and facilitators to guideline use. This article focuses on the perceptions of responding oncologists., Methods: A cross-sectional survey was administered online. Invitations were circulated via peak bodies and clinical leaders. Comments were coded independently by two researchers., Results: In all 76 oncologists self-reported high concordance with evidence-based recommendations, except validated pain scales. Perceived barriers to pain management included insufficient non-pharmacological interventions, access to /coordination between services, and time. Only 22 percent of respondents reported using pain guidelines. Perceived barriers to guideline use included lack of access, awareness and any single standard. Respondents were generally supportive of new Australian guidelines and especially an implementation strategy., Conclusion: Barriers to evidence-based practice and guideline use identified by our survey might be addressed via a clinical pathway that gives step-by-step guidance on evidence-based practice along with a framework for evaluation. Particular attention should be paid to promoting use of validated scales, patient education and non-pharmacological interventions, training of an appropriately skilled workforce and improving care coordination. Challenges are discussed., (© 2012 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd.)

Purpose: Multiple systematic reviews and meta-analyses have identified the effectiveness of patient education in improving cancer pain management. However, the mechanisms by which patient education improves pain outcomes are uncertain, as are the optimal delivery, content, timing, frequency, and duration. This review provides best-bet recommendations based on available evidence to guide service managers and clinicians in developing a patient education program., Methods: We used patient-centered care, self-management, coaching, and a behavior change wheel as lenses through which to consider the evidence for elements of patient education most likely to be effective within the context of other strategies for overcoming barriers to cancer pain assessment and management., Results: The evidence suggests that optimal strategies include those that are patient-centered and tailored to individual needs, are embedded within health professional-patient communication and therapeutic relationships, empower patients to self-manage and coordinate their care, and are routinely integrated into standard cancer care. An approach that integrates patient education with processes and systems to ensure implementation of key standards for pain assessment and management and education of health professionals has been shown to be most effective., Conclusion: Patient education is effective in reducing cancer pain and should be standard practice in all settings. For optimal results, patient education should be integrated with other strategies for implementing evidence-based, person-centered care and overcoming barriers at the levels of patient, provider, and health system., (© 2014 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)