Search

Purpose: Parenteral morphine is widely used for dyspnea of imminently dying cancer patients, but the outcomes to expect over time remain largely unknown. We examined outcomes after the administration of parenteral morphine infusion over 48 h in cancer patients with a poor performance status.Methods: This was a multicenter prospective observational study. Inclusion criteria were metastatic/locally advanced cancer, ECOG performance status = 3-4, a dyspnea intensity ≥ 2 on a Support Team Assessment Schedule, Japanese version (STAS-J), and receiving specialized palliative care. After initiating parenteral morphine infusion, we measured dyspnea STAS-J as well as Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS), item 9, and Communication Capacity Scale (CCS), item 4, every 6 h over 48 h.Results: We enrolled 167 patients (median survival = 4 days). The mean age was 70 years, 80 patients (48%) had lung cancer, and 109 (65%) had lung metastases. The mean STAS-J scores decreased from 3.1 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 3.0-3.2) at the baseline to 2.1 (95%CI = 1.9-2.2) at 6 h, and remained 1.6-1.8 over 12-48 h. The proportion of patients with dyspnea relief (STAS-J ≤ 1) increased to 39% at 6 h, and ranged between 49 and 61% over 12-48 h. In contrast, up to 6.6 and 20% of patients showed hyperactive delirium (MDAS item 9 ≥ 2) and an inability to communicate (CCS item 4 = 3), respectively, over 48 h.Conclusions: Overall, terminal dyspnea was relatively well controlled with parenteral morphine, though a significant number of patients continued to suffer from dyspnea. Future efforts are needed to improve outcomes following standardized dyspnea treatment using patient-reported outcomes for imminently dying patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Corticosteroids are often used to treat fatigue and anorexia, but occasionally produce delirium. Information on the predictors of delirium in corticosteroid-treated cancer patients remains limited. Objective: To identify potential factors predicting the development of delirium in corticosteroid-treated cancer patients. Design: An exploratory, multicenter, prospective, observational study. Setting/Subjects: Inclusion criteria for this study were patients who had metastatic or locally advanced cancer and a fatigue or anorexia intensity score of 4 or more on a 0-10 Numerical Rating Scale. Measurement: Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to identify the predictors of delirium diagnosed by the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) within three days of initiation of corticosteroids. Results: Among 207 patients administered corticosteroids, 35 (17%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 12%-23%) developed at least one episode of delirium diagnosed by the CAM. Factors predictive of the development of delirium were as follows: Palliative Performance Scale ≤20, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) = 4, the Support Team Assessment Schedule (STAS) score of drowsiness >1, concurrent opioid use, parenteral hydration volume ≤500 mL, and the absence of lung metastasis. A multivariable analysis identified the independent factors predicting responses as ECOG PS = 4 (odds ratio [OR] 4.0; 95% CI 1.7-9.3), STAS score of drowsiness >1 (OR 3.4; 95% CI 1.4-8.2), and concurrent opioid use (OR 3.7; 95% CI 1.0-13). Conclusion: Delirium in corticosteroid-treated advanced cancer patients may be predicted by PS, drowsiness, and concurrent opioid use. Larger prospective studies are needed to confirm these results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Although corticosteroids can relieve dyspnea in advanced cancer patients, factors predicting the response remain unknown. We aimed to explore potential factors predicting the response to corticosteroids for dyspnea in advanced cancer patients.Methods: In this preliminary multicenter prospective observational study, we included patients who had metastatic or locally advanced cancer, were receiving specialized palliative care services, and had a dyspnea intensity of ≥3 on a 0-10 Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) (worst during the last 24 h). The primary endpoint was NRS of dyspnea on day 3 after the administration of corticosteroids. Univariate/multivariate analyses were conducted to identify factors predicting ≥1-point reduction in NRS.Results: Of 74 patients who received corticosteroids, 50 (68%) showed ≥1-point reduction in dyspnea NRS. Factors that significantly predicted the response were an age of 70 years or older (82 vs. 53%, p = 0.008), absence of liver metastases (77 vs. 46%, p = 0.001), Palliative Prognostic Index (PPI) ≤ 6 (90 vs. 61%, p = 0.041), presence of pleuritis carcinomatosa with a small collection of pleural effusions (84 vs. 55%, p = 0.011), presence of audible wheezes (94 vs. 60%, p = 0.014), and baseline dyspnea NRS ≥7 (76% vs. 52%, p = 0.041). In a multivariate analysis, factors predicting response included PPI <6 (odds ratio (OR), 36.2; p = 0.021), baseline dyspnea NRS (worst) ≥7 (OR, 6.6; p = 0.036), and absence of liver metastases (OR, 0.19; p = 0.029) or ascites/liver enlargement (OR, 0.13; p = 0.050).Conclusions: The patient characteristics, etiologies of dyspnea, and clinical manifestations may predict responses to corticosteroids for dyspnea. Larger prospective studies are promising to confirm our findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Although corticosteroids are widely used to relieve anorexia, information regarding the factors predicting responses to corticosteroids remains limited. The purpose of the study is to identify potential factors predicting responses to corticosteroids for anorexia in advanced cancer patients.Methods: Inclusion criteria for this multicenter prospective observational study were patients who had metastatic or locally advanced cancer and had an anorexia intensity score of 4 or more on a 0-10 Numerical Rating Scale (NRS). Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to identify the factors predicting ≥2-point reduction in NRS on day 3.Results: Among 180 patients who received corticosteroids, 99 (55 %; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 47-62 %) had a response with ≥2-point reduction. Factors that significantly predicted responses were Palliative Performance Scale (PPS) > 40 and absence of drowsiness. In addition, factors that tended to be associated with ≥2-point reduction in NRS included PS 0-3, absence of diabetes mellitus, absence of peripheral edema, presence of lung metastasis, absence of peritoneal metastasis, baseline anorexia NRS of >6, presence of pain, and presence of constipation. A multivariate analysis showed that the independent factors predicting responses were PPS of >40 (odds ratio = 2.7 [95 % CI = 1.4-5.2]), absence of drowsiness (2.6 [1.3-5.0]), and baseline NRS of >6 (2.4 [1.1-4.8]).Conclusions: Treatment responses to corticosteroids for anorexia may be predicted by PPS, drowsiness, and baseline symptom intensity. Larger prospective studies are needed to confirm these results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Although corticosteroids are widely used to relieve cancer-related fatigue (CRF), information regarding the factors predicting responses to corticosteroids remains limited.Objectives: The aim of this study was to identify potential factors predicting responses to corticosteroids for CRF in advanced cancer patients.Methods: Inclusion criteria for this multicenter, prospective, observational study were patients who had metastatic or locally advanced cancer and had a fatigue intensity score of 4 or more on a 0-10 Numerical Rating Scale (NRS). Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to identify the factors predicting two-point reduction or more in NRS on day 3.Results: Among 179 patients who received corticosteroids, 86 (48%; 95% CI 41%-56%) had a response with two-point reduction or more. Factors that significantly predicted responses were performance status score of 3 or more, Palliative Performance Scale score more than 40, absence of ascites, absence of drowsiness, absence of depression, serum albumin level greater than 3 mg/dL, serum sodium level greater than 135 mEq/L, and baseline NRS score greater than 5. A multivariate analysis showed that the independent factors predicting responses were baseline NRS score greater than 5 (odds ratio [OR] 6.6, 95% CI 2.8-15.4), Palliative Performance Scale score more than 40 (OR 4.4, 95% CI 2.1-9.3), absence of drowsiness (OR 3.4, 95% CI 1.7-6.9), absence of ascites (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.1-4.7), and absence of pleural effusion (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.0-5.0).Conclusion: Treatment responses to corticosteroids for CRF may be predicted by baseline symptom intensity, performance status, drowsiness, and severity of fluid retention symptoms. Larger prospective studies are needed to confirm these results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nausea and vomiting are among the most common and distressing symptoms in patients with advanced cancer. Olanzapine, an antipsychotic agent, is known to have an affinity for multiple neurotransmitter receptors. Previous studies have reported olanzapine to be efficacious in the treatment of nausea and vomiting. Although it has been administered at a number of facilities, its applicability to treat nausea and vomiting in patients with advanced cancer is poorly understood. We investigated the use of olanzapine for nausea and vomiting in patients with advanced cancer at multiple centers. This retrospective study was carried out at seven palliative care units and three facilities with palliative care teams in Japan from 2013 to 2015. The dosage of olanzapine, treatment duration, and duration from initial use until death were collected from the medical records. One hundred and eight patients met our inclusion criteria. The average dose of olanzapine was 3.6 mg (2.5 mg, n = 61; 5 mg, n = 46; 10 mg, n = 1) and average treatment duration was 18.7 days. The average duration from initial use until death was 39.0 days. There were no differences in the duration of administration until death between olanzapine doses (2.5 and 5 mg). Our results suggest that olanzapine have been used in patients with poor prognoses for nausea and vomiting in patients with advanced cancer. Conducting a prospective trial would further yield promising results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Although delirium is a common complication in terminally ill cancer patients and can cause considerable distress for family members, little is known about effective care strategies for terminal delirium. The primary aims of this study were 1) to clarify the distress levels of bereaved families and their perceived necessity of care; and 2) to explore the association between these levels and family-reported professional care practice, family-reported patient behavior, and their interpretation of the causes of delirium. A multicenter questionnaire survey was conducted on 560 bereaved family members of cancer patients who developed delirium during their final two weeks in eight certified palliative care units across Japan. We obtained 402 effective responses (response rate, 72%) and, as 160 families denied delirium episodes, 242 responses were analyzed. The bereaved family members reported that they were very distressed (32%) and distressed (22%) about the experience of terminal delirium. On the other hand, 5.8% reported that considerable or much improvement was necessary, and 31% reported some improvement was necessary in the professional care they had received. More than half of the respondents had ambivalent wishes, guilt and self-blame, and worries about staying with the patient. One-fourth to one-third reported that they felt a burden concerning proxy judgments, burden to others, acceptance, and helplessness. High-level emotional distress and family-perceived necessity of improvement were associated with a younger family age; male gender; their experience of agitation and incoherent speech; their interpretation of the causes of delirium as pain/physical discomfort, medication effects, or mental weakness/death anxiety; and their perception that medical staff were not present with the family, not respecting the patient''s subjective world, not explaining the expected course with daily changes, and not relieving family care burden. In terminal delirium, a considerable number of families experienced high levels of emotional distress and felt some need for improvement of the specialized palliative care service. Control of agitation symptoms with careful consideration of ambivalent family wishes, providing information about the pathology of delirium, being present with the family, respecting the patient''s subjective world, explaining the expected course with daily changes, and relieving family care burden can be useful care strategies. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]