Search

For two decades, the Pain & Policy Studies Group (PPSG), a global research program at the University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, has worked passionately to fulfill its mission of improving pain relief by achieving balanced access to opioids worldwide. PPSG's early work highlighted the conceptual framework of balance leading to the development of the seminal guidelines and criteria for evaluating opioid policy. It has collaborated at the global level with United Nations agencies to promote access to opioids and has developed a unique model of technical assistance to help national governments assess regulatory barriers to essential medicines for pain relief and amend existing or develop new legislation that facilitates appropriate and adequate opioid prescribing according to international standards. This model was initially applied in regional workshops and individual country projects and then adapted for PPSG's International Pain Policy Fellowship, which provides long-term mentoring and support for several countries simultaneously. The PPSG disseminates its work online in several ways, including an extensive Web site, news alerts, and through several social media outlets. PPSG has become the focal point for expertise on policy governing drug control and medicine and pharmacy practice related to opioid availability and pain relief., (Copyright © 2017 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To understand changes in pain severity over time and to explore the factors associated with pain changes in ambulatory patients with solid tumors., Patients and Methods: We enrolled 3,106 patients with invasive cancer of the breast, prostate, colon/rectum, or lung from multiple sites. At baseline and 4 to 5 weeks later, patients rated their pain level on a 0 to 10 numerical rating scale. A 2-point change in pain score was defined as a clinically significant change in pain. Multivariable logistic models were fitted to examine the effects of pain management and demographic and clinical factors on change in pain severity., Results: We analyzed 2,761 patients for changes in pain severity. At initial assessment, 53.0% had no pain, 23.5% had mild pain, 10.3% had moderate pain, and 13.2% had severe pain. Overall, one third of patients with initial pain had pain reduction within 1 month of follow-up, and one fifth had an increase, and the improvement and worsening of pain varied by baseline pain score. Of the patients without pain at initial assessment, 28.4% had pain (8.9% moderate to severe) at the follow-up assessment. Logistic regression analysis showed that inadequate pain management was significantly associated with pain deterioration, as were lower baseline pain level, younger age, and poor health status., Conclusion: One third of patients have pain improvement and one fifth experience pain deterioration within 1 month after initial assessment. Inadequate pain management, baseline pain severity, and certain patient demographic and disease characteristics are associated with pain deterioration.

Background: Many international governmental and nongovernmental organizations regard unrelieved cancer pain as a significant global public health problem. Although opioids such as morphine are considered essential medicines in the provision of palliative care and for treating cancer pain, especially when the pain is severe, low- and middle-income countries often lack such medications., Aim: The primary aim of this study was to examine countries' government and health-care system influences on opioid availability for cancer pain and palliative care, as a means to identify implications for improving appropriate access to prescription opioids., Design: A multivariate regression of 177 countries' consumption of opioids (in milligrams/death from cancer and AIDS) contained country-level predictor variables related to public health, including Human Development Index, palliative care infrastructure, and health system resources and expenditures., Results: Results were highly explanatory (adjusted R(2) = 82%) and Human Development Index was the most predictive variable when controlling for all other factors in the statistical model (B = 11.875, confidence interval = 10.216, 13.534, p < 0.0001)., Conclusions: Study findings demonstrate that a limited number of predictor variables characterizing a country's government and health-care system infrastructure can explain its opioid consumption level, with the greatest influence being very high Human Development Index. However, Human Development Index is not the most policy-relevant factor, and this finding should be reconciled against the reality that many countries with low or medium Human Development Index have succeeded in creating and sustaining a health-care system to strengthen cancer pain care and palliative care, including through the appropriate use of essential prescription opioids.

Objective: Opioid analgesics are the drugs of choice for the treatment of moderate to severe acute and cancer pain. Although their role in the management of chronic pain not related to cancer is controversial, there is increasing evidence for their benefit in certain patient populations., Design: A 32-item survey to assess Wisconsin physicians' knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes toward opioid analgesic use was mailed to 600 randomly selected licensed physicians, resulting in a 36% response rate., Results: Half of the respondents considered diversion a moderate or severe problem in Wisconsin. A majority considered addiction to be a combination of physiological and behavioral characteristics, rather than defining it solely as a behavioral syndrome. Most physicians felt it lawful and acceptable medical practice to prescribe opioids for chronic cancer pain, but only half held this view if the pain was not related to cancer. Fewer physicians considered such prescribing as lawful and generally accepted medical practice if the patient had a history of substance abuse. About two-thirds of physicians were not concerned about being investigated for their opioid prescribing practices, but some admitted that fear of investigation led them to lower the dose prescribed, limit the number of refills, or prescribe a Schedule III or IV rather than a Schedule II opioid., Conclusion: Wisconsin physicians who responded to this survey held many misconceptions about the prescribing of opioids. Such views, coupled with a lack of knowledge about laws and regulations governing the prescribing of controlled substances, may result in inadequate prescribing of opioids with resultant inadequate management of pain.

Background: Management of neuropathic pain is challenging. Medications that interfere with sodium channel transport, such as lidocaine, mexilitene and flecainide, are promising as analgesics., Objective: In a general population of patients with a working diagnosis of neuropathic pain, whether if flecainide produces enough of an improvement in pain to warrant further clinical study is determined., Design: Phase I/II prospective exploratory clinical trial. Eligible patients were observed for week 1, then 50 mg flecainide was administered twice daily for week 2 and then administered 100 mg twice daily for week 3. SETTING/ SUBJECTS: Multi-institutional members of the Eastern Co-operative Oncology Group. Patients had neuropathic pain diagnosed by their oncologists as defined by the International Association for the Study of Pain and a diagnosis of cancer or AIDS., Measurements: The Wisconsin Brief Pain Inventory was used. The primary endpoint was a decrease of 3 points (0-10 numerical scale) or a decrease of 50% in the worst pain rating at either day 15 or day 22 relative to the average of days 1 and 8 ratings., Results: Nineteen patients were registered for the study. Four patients were ineligible. Of the remaining 15, one was unevaluable due to incomplete pain rating. Four out of 14 patients had an average drop of 5 points or 53% in their worst pain ratings on a 0-10 numerical scale of pain. No patients withdrew from study because of toxicity. There were no life-threatening or lethal toxicities. All patients were alive at the time of the analysis., Conclusions: Flecainide produced a 30% response rate. Response in this study was defined to be highly relevant and clinically significant reduction in pain. The drug merits study in a randomized placebo-controlled trial.

The under treatment of cancer pain is still a major issue in both oncology and palliative medicine. The initial availability of opioids is seen as an important philosophical step forward in the pharmacological treatment of cancer pain, one for which there continues to be considerable barriers within regulatory and medical domains. Knowledge of the key pharmacological properties of the multiple opioids available will assist in both improved analgesia and side effects. Understanding the mechanisms of pain is important in terms of treatment, especially in terms of the choice of co-analgesic agents. Much of the work obtained from the study of cancer patients is applicable to the non cancer populations, as is work performed in non cancer patients with neuropathic pain.

Background: Controlling pain in cancer patients is often inadequate. A recent multicenter study of patients with metastatic disease who were experiencing pain reported that 36% still had pain severe enough to compromise their daily function., Methods: The author draws on his experiences as well as those of others to review general guidelines and provide specific recommendations for cancer pain management., Results: Three components are critical to managing cancer pain: assessing pain, establishing an appropriate therapeutic opioid regimen, and integrating with other therapies. An appropriate therapeutic opioid regimen involves initiating, consolidating and maintaining therapy. Other strategies (e.g., advanced pharmacological, adjuvant, interventional, and psychological) can be added to opioid therapy., Conclusions: A revision of the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research Cancer Pain Guidelines is currently underway. The management of pain in cancer patients should include more frequent reassessment of both analgesia and side effects to ensure optimal cancer pain relief.

Cancer is primarily a disease of the elderly and the palliation of both disease- and treatment-related symptoms is of importance in the practice of cancer medicine in all patients. Many older patients are treated within community hospitals, in which anticancer therapies are less likely to be given and in which the palliation of symptoms should be of primary importance. Many oncologists struggle with the palliation of symptoms in patients who are near the end of life. This is despite the considerable energies that are spent in palliating symptoms in patients who are receiving anticancer therapies at all disease stages. The management of pain has advanced considerably recently with improvements in pain assessment and pharmacologic interventions. However, elderly patients are less likely than younger patients to receive proper pain management. Elderly patients also are less likely to take opioids for pain because of their attitudes and beliefs. Fatigue, dyspnea, and psychologic issues also are of importance in the management of elderly cancer patients both during anticancer therapy and near the time of death. Some elderly cancer patients die in the care of a hospice, although many are not referred to this service. There are many barriers to the provision of palliative medicine and these may be related to health practitioners, to the patients themselves, or to the health care system of which they are part. The increased educational efforts of health professionals are needed to ensure that all patients, including the elderly, have adequate palliation of their cancer-related symptoms.