Substance Abuse in Cancer Pain

Abstract

In the oncology community, opioids recently have become the cornerstone of cancer pain management. This has led to a rapid increase in opioid prescribing in an effort to address the growing public health problem of chronic pain. A new paradigm in noncancer pain management has emerged, that of risk assessment and stratification in opioid therapy. Techniques foreign to cancer pain management have now become commonplace in the noncancer pain setting, such as the use of monitoring compliance via urine drug screens. Amidst these strides in opioid use for pain management, cancer has been changing. The survival rate has increased, and a group of these patients with chronic pain were treated with opioid therapy. With opioid exposure being longer and against the backdrop of prescription drug abuse, the question is how much of the adaptation of the risk management paradigm in chronic pain management is to be imported to cancer pain management?

Morphine: Patient Knowledge and Attitudes in the Central Anatolia Part of Turkey

“…Although thesafety of opioids in long-term use has been well documented, still the risk of addiction to opioids remains a concern (Portenoy, 1995;Manchikanti et al, 2010;Starr et al, 2010). Patients may delay taking their medication, take less than the effective dose, or not take it at all because they fear "addiction" (WHO cancer pain; Ward et al, 1993).…”

Rapid-Onset Opioids for the Treatment of Breakthrough Cancer Pain: Two Cases of Drug Abuse: Table 1

“…However, the increased interest in these drugs shall not reduce the attention in identifying patients at risk of rapid‐onset abuse or addiction [9,10].…”

A Pilot Study To Define Chemical Coping in Cancer Patients Using the Delphi Method

“…Concepts and factors reflected in the questions and response choices were drawn from previous studies. [9][10][11] The second round consisted of questions confirming the definition of chemical coping elicited from the results of the first survey (responses that had garnered agreement among at least 70% of the participants) and also re-asked questions that had an agreement level between 50% and 70% in the first round.…”