Search

Summary: Background & Aims: The prevalence of artificially administered nutrition and hydration (AANH) in different age groups among patients with advanced cancer remains unknown. The present study investigated the current utilization of AANH according to age groups in palliative care units. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study. We obtained information on primary nutritional administration routes during the first week of admission and data on the averaged calorie sufficiency rate or total calorie intake on the 7th day of admission. Patients were divided into five age groups (18–39, 40–59, 60–74, 75–89, and 90- years). Among patients receiving AANH, the proportions of higher-calorie AANH were compared between the five age groups. Results: A total of 1453 patients were included. The proportion of patients categorized as receiving nutrition and hydration via the parenteral route was the highest in the 18–39 and 40–59 groups (52.4 and 41.1%, respectively). Among patients receiving AANH (n = 534), the proportions of patients categorized into the

Parenteral morphine is widely used for dyspnea of imminently dying cancer patients (terminal dyspnea). However, the efficacy of other opioids such as oxycodone remains largely unknown.To explore the efficacy of parenteral oxycodone vs. morphine by continuous infusion over 24 hours in cancer patients with terminal dyspnea.This was a pre-planned subgroup analysis of a multicenter prospective observational study. Inclusion criteria were advanced cancer patients admitted to palliative care units, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status = 3-4, and a dyspnea intensity ≥2 on the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale (IPOS) for which oxycodone or morphine was initiated by continuous infusion. We measured dyspnea IPOS scores over 24 hours.We analyzed 164 patients who received oxycodone (n = 26) and morphine (n = 138) for dyspnea (median survival = 5 days). The mean age was 70 years, 58 patients (35%) had lung cancer, and 97 (59%) had lung metastases. Complete case analysis revealed that mean dyspnea IPOS scores decreased from 3.0 (standard deviation = 0.7) to 1.5 (0.7) in the oxycodone group (difference in means = 1.5; P 0.001), and from 2.9 (0.7) to 1.6 (1.0) in the morphine group (difference in means = 1.3; P 0.001). No significant between-group differences existed in the IPOS scores at 24 hours (P = 0.753). Adverse events were seen in no and 5 patients in the oxycodone and morphine groups, respectively.Parenteral oxycodone may be equally effective and safe as morphine in the treatment of terminal dyspnea in cancer patients. Future randomized controlled trials should confirm the efficacy and safety of opioids other than morphine for terminal dyspnea.

Background: Although many Japanese patients wish to take a bath in their last days, the safety of bathing for patients with a prognosis of a few days is not known. Objective: To examine whether taking a bath affects the survival of advanced cancer patients with prognoses of a few days. Design: A single-center prospective cohort study. Setting/Subject: Advanced cancer patients in their last days of life in a palliative care unit of a Japanese hospital. We compared patients who took baths with those who did not. The primary endpoint was 24-hour survival rate. Result: Among 110 patients eligible for this prospective study, 89 (72%) met the inclusion criteria. Forty-eight patients (43%, 223 person-days) were eligible for analysis. A total of 28 patient-days were classified into the bathing group, and 192 patient-days were classified into the nonbathing group. After propensity score matching, the 24-hour death rate was 10.7% in the bathing group and 8.0% in the nonbathing group, respectively (mean difference 2.8% with 95% confidence interval of −11.2% to 16.8%, p = 0.65). Conclusion: Taking a bath does not appear to bear a significant association with shortening of life among advanced cancer patients in their last days of life.

The benefits of artificial nutrition and hydration in patients with advanced cancer remain unknown. Therefore, we conducted a prospective study to evaluate effects of enteral nutrition (EN) and parenteral nutrition and hydration (PNH) on survival in palliative care units.This study involved a secondary analysis of a multicenter cohort study. Data of primary nutritional administration routes during the first week after admission (oral intake, enteral tube feeding, parenteral nutrition, parenteral hydration, poor oral intake) were obtained. Data of averaged calorie sufficiency rate/total calorie intake [high (75% ≤ or 750 kcal/day ≤), moderate (50-75% or 500-750 kcal/day), low (25-50% or 250-500 kcal/day), very low (25% or250 kcal/day)] were also obtained. After investigating the implementation of artificial nutrition and hydration, participants were divided into three groups according to the nutritional administration route and calorie sufficiency rate/total calorie intake: EN, PNH, and control. We conducted time-to-event analyses using the Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test, and univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses.Patients were divided into the EN group (n = 730), PNH group (n = 190), and control group (n = 533). Differences in survival rates among the three groups were significant (Log-rank P 0.001). Median survival times were 43.0 (95% CI 40-46), 33.0 (95% CI 29-37), and 15.0 (95% CI 14-16) days, respectively (P 0.001). In the multivariate-adjusted model, a significantly lower risk of mortality was observed in Cox's proportional hazard model in the EN group and PNH groups (HR 0.43 [95% CI 0.37-0.49], P 0.001; and HR 0.52 [95% CI 0.44-0.62], P 0.001, respectively) than in the control group.This study indicated the clinical benefits of EN and PNH for patients with advanced cancer. Nevertheless, managing symptoms to improve oral intake is essential before initiation of PNH, because EN was superior to PNH.