No abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to identify potential variables influencing the clinical presentation of breakthrough cancer pain (BTP). Methods: Cancer patients with a diagnosis of BTP were enrolled. Demographic and clinical characteristics, as well as background pain and BTP characteristics were collected. Multivariate analyses were conducted to assess the correlation between BTP characteristics and the variables examined. Results: Data of 4016 patients were analysed. Average daily number of BTP episodes was 2.4, mean intensity was 7.5, and a mean duration was 43.3 min. A short onset BTP was observed in 68.9% of patients. In 30.5% of patients BTP was predictable. There were 86.0% of participants who reported a marked interference of BTP with their daily activities. Furthermore, 86.8% of patients were receiving opioids for the management of BTP. The average time to meaningful pain relief was 16.5 min and 70.9% of patients were satisfied with their BTP medications. Age, head and neck cancer, Karnofsky, background pain intensity, predictable and fast onset BTP were independently associated with the number of BTP episodes. BTP pain intensity was independently associated with background pain intensity, fast onset BTP, and Karnofsky. Neuropathic pain mechanism was independently associated with unpredictable BTP. Variables independently associated with a longer duration of BTP were age, place of visit, cancer diagnosis, disease-oriented therapy, background pain intensity and mechanism, and unpredictable BTP. Age, Karnofsky, background pain intensity, fast onset, and long duration of BTP were independently associated with interference with daily activity. Conclusions: BTP has a variable presentation depending on interdependent relationships among its different characteristics.

All the three opioids used as first-line therapy were effective, well tolerated, and required similar amounts of symptomatic drugs or co-analgesics. Methadone was significantly less expensive, but required more changes, up and down, of the doses, suggesting that dose titration of this drug requires major clinical expertise.

Although the prevalence of delirium seems to be similar to that reported in other acute settings, delirium tended to worsen or poorly responded to a palliative care treatment. Some clinical factors were independently associated with delirium. This information is relevant for decision-making when delirium does not change despite a traditional intervention. Continuous assessment of delirium should be performed in these settings to detect deterioration of cognitive function. Further studies should elucidate whether an earlier approach to palliative care would decrease the prevalence of delirium at a late stage of disease.

In advanced cancer patients, a range of oral problems significantly may impact on the physical, social, and psychological well-being of advanced cancer patients to varying degrees. These symptoms should be carefully assessed early but become imperative in the palliative care setting when they produce relevant consequences that may be life-threatening other than limiting the daily activities, particularly eating and drinking.

More than 60% of palliative care patients have relevant sleep disturbances. Several factors associated with sleep disorders have been identified and should prompt physicians to make a careful examination and subsequent treatment of these disturbances.

c i a l D i s t r i b u t i o n U n a u t h o r i z e d u s e p r o h i b i t e d . A u t h o r i s e d u s e r s c a n d o w n l o a d , d i s p l a y , v i e w a n d p r i n t a s i n g l e c o p y f o r p e r s o n a l u s eCurrent Medical Research & Opinion Vol. 28, No. 11, 2012, 1775-1779 AbstractObjectives:The aim of this prospective, open-label study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of tapentadol (TP) in the management of cancer pain. Methods:A 4 weeks' prospective study was carried out in 50 opioid-naive cancer patients with moderate-severe pain. Each patient initially received twice-daily doses of slow-release TP 50 mg. Doses were then managed to maintain adequate relief or dose-limiting toxicity, on the basis of the clinical response. The following parameters were recorded at weekly intervals for 4 weeks: pain and opioid-related adverse effects, quality of life measured with the Spitzer score, TP escalation index percent (TPEI%) and TP escalation index in mg (TPEImg), calculated at the end of the study, pain mechanisms, and PainDETECT at baseline. Results:Of 50 patients, 39 completed the entire study and 11 discontinued the treatment for different reasons. Pain intensity significantly decreased from baseline to all the week intervals (p50.0005), and adverse effects did not changed significantly, while quality of life improved. TP escalation indexes were low and no relationship was found with age, gender, and pain mechanisms. Conclusion:Tapentalol started in doses of 100 mg/day was well-tolerated and effective in opioid-naive patients with cancer pain, regardless of the pain mechanism. It can be considered as a flexible drug to be used in patients with moderate-severe pain. Limitations:This was an open-label study for exploratory purposes. Data should be confirmed in controlled studies with a larger number of patients. IntroductionCancer pain management is based on a sequential approach of drugs, as suggested by the WHO, through steps corresponding to drugs with different potencies. Application of the WHO three-step analgesic ladder has been reported to provide satisfactory pain relief in up to 90% of patients with cancer pain 1 . This approach has had an impact of paramount importance in terms of clinical outcome and educational perspective, although evidence is lacking, particularly with regard to possible alternatives, because of the paucity of controlled studies in this field. More recently, studies have examined the role of opioid analgesics and confirmed that more data are necessary 2 . It is anticipated that new drugs will be evaluated in the near future. For personal use only.

PS at home seems to be a feasible treatment option among selected patients and makes a potentially important contribution to improving care for those who choose to die at home. Although the existing studies provide only low-quality evidence, the decision to use PS does not seem to anticipate patients' death. More homogeneous prospective studies on a large number of patients should confirm this observation.