A task group of the Science Committee of the Association for Palliative Medicine of Great Britain and Ireland (APM) was convened to produce some up-to-date, evidence-based, practical, clinical guidelines on the management of cancer-related breakthrough pain in adults. On the basis of a review of the literature, the task group was unable to make recommendations about any individual interventions, but was able to make a series of 12 recommendations about certain generic strategies. However, most of the aforementioned recommendations are based on limited evidence (i.e., case series, expert opinion). The task group also proposed a definition of breakthrough pain, and some diagnostic criteria for breakthrough pain.
Pharmacist-delivered educational interventions seem to reduce adverse events and improve satisfaction, but their clinical benefit on pain intensity is debatable. Our analysis suggests that the role of pharmacists may be important but a deeper understanding and evaluation of the active components of these interventions is needed within clinical trials before wider implementation into clinical practice can be recommended.
Based on this consensus opinion and other literature, we suggest four drugs that should be made available in all settings caring for dying patients with cancer, to decrease the gap between knowledge and practice: morphine (i.e., an opioid), midazolam (a benzodiazepine), haloperidol (a neuroleptic), and an antimuscarinic.
In a qualitative study reported by Olav Lindqvist and colleagues, the range of nonpharmacological caregiving activities used in the last days of a patient's life are described.
Purpose
To provide evidence-based recommendations on the management of malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) for patients with advanced cancer.
Methods
The Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) MBO study group conducted a systematic review of databases (inception to March 2021) to identify studies about patients with advanced cancer and MBO that reported on the following outcomes: symptom management, bowel obstruction resolution, prognosis, overall survival, and quality of life. The review was restricted to studies published in English, but no restrictions were placed on publication year, country, and study type. As per the MASCC Guidelines Policy, the findings were synthesized to determine the levels of evidence to support each MBO intervention and, ultimately, the graded recommendations and suggestions.
Results
The systematic review identified 17,656 published studies and 397 selected for the guidelines. The MASCC study group developed a total of 25 evidence-based suggestions and recommendations about the management of MBO-related nausea and vomiting, bowel movements, pain, inflammation, bowel decompression, and nutrition. Expert consensus-based guidance about advanced care planning and psychosocial support is also provided.
Conclusion
This MASCC Guideline provides comprehensive, evidence-based recommendations about MBO management for patients with advanced cancer.
Care in Cancer formed a subgroup to develop evidence-based recommendations on the management of constipation in patients with advanced cancer Methods: These recommendations were developed in accordance with the MASCC Guidelines Policy. A search strategy for Medline was developed, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were explored for relevant reviews / trials respectively. The recommendations were categorised by the level of evidence, and a "category of guideline" based on the level of evidence (i.e. "recommendation", "suggestion", or "no guideline possible") Results: The Group produced 15 recommendations, with varying levels of evidence, and so varying categories of guideline. The recommendations relate to the assessment, the treatment, and the re-assessment of constipation. Conclusions: These recommendations provide a framework for the management of constipation in advanced cancer, although every patient needs individualised management.
BackgroundA continuous subcutaneous infusion (CSCI) delivered via syringe pump is a method of drug administration used to maintain symptom control when a patient is no longer able to tolerate oral medication. Several classes of drugs, such as opioids, antiemetics, anticholinergics, antipsychotics and benzodiazepines are routinely administered by CSCI alone or in combinations. Previous studies attempting to identify the most-common CSCI combinations are now several years old and no longer reflect current clinical practice. The aim of this work was to review current clinical practice and identify CSCI drug combinations requiring analysis for chemical compatibility and stability.MethodsUK pharmacy professionals involved in the delivery of care to palliative patients in hospitals and hospices were invited to enter CSCI combinations comprised of two or more drugs onto an electronic database over a 12-month period. In addition, a separate Delphi study with a panel of 15 expert healthcare professionals was completed to identify a maximum of five combinations of drugs used to treat more complex, but less commonly encountered symptoms unlikely to be identified by the national survey.ResultsA total of 57 individuals representing 33 separate palliative care services entered 1,945 drug combinations suitable for analysis, with 278 discrete combinations identified. The top 40 drug combinations represented nearly two-thirds of combinations recorded. A total of 23 different drugs were administered in combination and the median number of drugs in a combination was three. The Delphi study identified five combinations for the relief of complex or refractory symptoms.ConclusionThis study represents the first step towards developing authoritative national guidance on the administration of drugs by CSCI. Further work will ensure healthcare practitioners have the knowledge and confidence that a prescribed combination will be both safe and efficacious.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.