Search

To compare the efficacy of antipsychotics (APs) for delirium treatment in patients with cancer, 27 patients treated with 1 of the 4 APs, haloperidol (HPD), risperidone (RIS), olanzapine (OLZ), and quetiapine (QTP), were divided into 2 groups: long half-life (T1/2; HPD, RIS, and OLZ) versus short T1/2 (QTP) or the multiacting receptor-targeted APs (MARTAs; OLZ and QTP) versus the non-MARTA (HPD and RIS). The symptom severity was evaluated by the memorial delirium rating scale (MDAS) on days 0, 3, and 7 following intervention. Significant improvements in total MDAS scores were found in all groups on day 3. However, on day 7, only the short T1/2 group and MARTA group showed significant improvement. Consideration of an AP’s pharmacological properties may be helpful for improving the outcomes of pharmacological delirium intervention in patients with cancer.

Background : Whether effect-site concentrations of propofol (Cep) at loss of consciousness and return of consciousness (LOC and ROC, respectively) in elderly women using Diprifusor are similar is unclear. We investigated whether differences in initial target Cep (Ctarget) alter similarities between Cep values at LOC and ROC. Materials and Methods: In this study, female patients (n = 58, age = 72.5 ± 1.1 years) undergoing knee arthroplasty were administered propofol with Diprifusor. Cep at LOC and ROC were estimated for different Ctarget values (3.0-4.5 mg/ml). Pearson's correlation coefficient analysis and simple regression were performed to assess the relationship between Cep at LOC and ROC for each Ctarget. Differences in correlation coefficients of regression lines obtained from each Ctarget group were determined using the t-test. Results: The different Ctarget groups did not show significant differences in total propofol levels and in Cep values at LOC or ROC. However, Cep at ROC was significantly higher than Cep at LOC when Ctarget was 4.0 and 4.5 μg/ml, whereas these Cep values were not significantly different in low Ctarget groups. Strong positive correlations were observed between Cep at LOC and ROC for all Ctarget groups. Regression coefficients for the different Ctarget groups were not significantly different. Compared to low (≤3.5 μg/ml) Ctarget groups, high Ctarget groups showed significantly shorter time until LOC. Induction quality was not significantly different among the groups. Conclusions: In elderly women, Cep values at LOC are strong predictors of Cep at ROC when Ctarget is 3.0-4.5 μg/ml. High Ctarget groups (≥4.0 μg/ml) exhibited shorter induction times with normal cardiovascular stability.

The primary aim of this study was to clarify the effect of sublingual scopolamine on the intensity of nausea. This was an open uncontrolled study, and the study participants were cancer patients consecutively admitted to a palliative care unit in Japan. When the patients had nausea, they were administered a solution of scopolamine at 0.15 mg sublingually. The intensities of nausea were assessed using the 6-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS 0 = no nausea to 5 = worst nausea) before and 15, 30, and 60 min after administration. Primary endpoints were (1) changes in the NRS of nausea and (2) percentage of patients who achieved a decrease in NRS of 1 or more points 15 min after treatment. Twenty-six patients were recruited for this study. The median NRS significantly decreased from 3.0 (range, 1–5) to 1.5 (0–5) after 15 min, and 84 % (n = 21) of the patients achieved a decrease in NRS of 1 or more points after 15 min. In addition, the median NRS significantly decreased from 3.0 (before) to 0 (30 min) and 0 (60 min). The percentage of patients who achieved a decrease in NRS over 1 point was 96 % (n = 25) in 30 min and 100 % (n = 26) in 60 min. Fifteen percent (n = 4) showed drowsiness. No other adverse effects were reported. Sublingually administered scopolamine may be effective for managing nausea in terminally ill cancer patients. Randomized controlled trials are promising.