Franco De Conno

A validation study of the WHO method for cancer pain relief

The method for cancer pain relief proposed by the World Health Organization (WHO) consists of guidelines for a three‐step treatment, from non‐opioids to weak and then strong opioids, according to need. Adjuvant drugs can be added to each step. This report presents the 2‐year experience of the WHO Collaborating Centre at the National Cancer Institute of Milan in the use of this method. This retrospective study shows that a correct use of the analgesic ladder can reduce pain to a third of its initial intensity. The use of non‐opioids had an average duration of 19.2 days; in 52% of the cases treatment was discontinued due to inefficacy and in 42%, to side effects. Weak opioids were administered on an average for 28.0 days. A shift to Strong opioids was made in 92% of the cases due to inefficacy and in 8% because of side effects. Treatment with strong opioids lasted for an average of 46.6 days and can be considered the mainstay of cancer pain therapy. Performance status was not altered considerably during the study and hours of sleep were doubled. The analgesic ladder proved efficacious in 71% of the cases. Neurolytic procedures had to be used in 29%. The authors conclude that analgesics, as proposed by WHO, are the most suitable treatment arm in controlling pain in palliative treatment for advanced cancer patients. Lack of availability or underuse of opioids constitute the real obstacle to the application of this method. Cancer 59:850‐856, 1987.

Prognostic factors in advanced cancer patients: Evidence-based clinical recommendations - A study by the Steering Committee of the European Association for Palliative Care

PURPOSE To offer evidence-based clinical recommendations concerning prognosis in advanced cancer patients. METHODS A Working Group of the Research Network of the European Association for Palliative Care identified clinically significant topics, reviewed the studies, and assigned the level of evidence. A formal meta-analysis was not feasible because of the heterogeneity of published studies and the lack of minimal standards in reporting results. A systematic electronic literature search within the main available medical literature databases was performed for each of the following four areas identified: clinical prediction of survival (CPS), biologic factors, clinical signs and symptoms and psychosocial variables, and prognostic scores. Only studies on patients with advanced cancer and survival < or = 90 days were included. RESULTS A total of 38 studies were evaluated. Level A evidence-based recommendations of prognostic correlation could be formulated for CPS (albeit with a series of limitations of which clinicians must be aware) and prognostic scores. Recommendations on the use of other prognostic factors, such as performance status, symptoms associated with cancer anorexia-cachexia syndrome (weight loss, anorexia, dysphagia, and xerostomia), dyspnea, delirium, and some biologic factors (leukocytosis, lymphocytopenia, and C-reactive protein), reached level B. CONCLUSION Prognostication of life expectancy is a significant clinical commitment for clinicians involved in oncology and palliative care. More accurate prognostication is feasible and can be achieved by combining clinical experience and evidence from the literature. Using and communicating prognostic information should be part of a multidisciplinary palliative care approach.

Episodic (Breakthrough) Pain Consensus Conference of an Expert Working Group of the European Association for Palliative Care

Breakthrough pain is transitory exacerbation of pain that occurs in addition to otherwise stable persistent pain. The wide differences in estimation of incidence reported in literature are probably because of different settings and meanings attributed to the definition of breakthrough pain.

Gabapentin for Neuropathic Cancer Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial From the Gabapentin Cancer Pain Study Group

PURPOSE To determine the analgesic effect of the addition of gabapentin to opioids in the management of neuropathic cancer pain. PATIENTS AND METHODS One hundred twenty-one consecutive patients with neuropathic pain due to cancer, partially controlled with systemic opioids, participated in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-design, 10-day trial from August 1999 to May 2002. Gabapentin was titrated from 600 mg/d to 1,800 mg/d in addition to stable opioid dose. Extra opioid doses were available as needed. Zero to 10 numerical scale was used to rate average daily pain. The average pain score over the whole follow-up period was used as main outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures were: intensity of burning pain, shooting/lancinating pain, dysesthesias (also scored on 0 to 10 numerical scale), number of daily episodes of lancinating pain, presence of allodynia, and daily extra doses of opioid analgesics. RESULTS Overall, 79 patients received gabapentin and 58 (73%) completed the study; 41 patients received placebo and 31 (76%) completed the study. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) on the intent-to-treat population showed a significant difference of average pain intensity between gabapentin (pain score, 4.6) and placebo group (pain score, 5.4; P =.0250). Among secondary outcome measures, dysesthesia score showed a statistically significant difference (P =.0077; ANCOVA on modified intent-to-treat population = 115 patients with at least 3 days of pain assessments). Reasons for withdrawing patients from the trial were adverse events in six patients (7.6%) receiving gabapentin and in three patients receiving placebo (7.3%). CONCLUSION Gabapentin is effective in improving analgesia in patients with neuropathic cancer pain already treated with opioids.

Hyperalgesia and myoclonus with intrathecal infusion of high-dose morphine

We report the case of a patient who developed myoclonus and hyperalgesia following administration of high-dose subarachnoid morphine. This complication occurred with 40-80 mg/day continuous infusion. The pathophysiology of these side effects is discussed.

Role of octreotide, scopolamine butylbromide, and hydration in symptom control of patients with inoperable bowel obstruction and nasogastric tubes: a prospective randomized trial.

Bowel obstruction may be an inoperable complication in patients with end-stage cancer. Scopolamine butylbromide (SB) and octreotide (OCT) have been successfully used with the aim of reducing gastrointestinal (GI) secretions to avoid placement of a nasogastric tube (NGT); however, there have been no comparative studies concerning the efficacy of these drugs. Furthermore, there is little information about the role played by parenteral hydration in symptom control of these patients. In a prospective trial that involved all 17 inoperable bowel-obstructed patients presenting to our services with a decompressive NGT, patients were randomized to OCT 0.3 mg/day or SB 60 mg/day for 3 days through a continuous subcutaneous infusion. Clinical data, survival time, and the time interval from the first diagnosis of cancer to the onset of inoperable bowel obstruction were noted. The intensity of pain, nausea, dry mouth, thirst, dyspnea, feeling of abdominal distension, and drowsiness were assessed by means of a verbal scale before starting treatment with the drugs under study (T0) and then daily for 3 days (T1, T2, T3). Moreover, daily information was collected regarding the quantity of GI secretions through the NGT, the oral intake of fluids, the quantity of parenteral hydration, and the analgesic therapy used. The NGT could be removed in all 10 home care and in 3 hospitalized patients without changing the dosage of the drugs. OCT significantly reduced the amount of GI secretions at T2 (P = 0.016) and T3 (P = 0.020). Compared to the home care patients, the hospitalized patients received significantly more parenteral hydration (P = 0.0005) and drank more fluids (P = 0.025). There was no difference in the daily thirst and dry mouth intensity in relation to the amount of parenteral hydration or the treatment provided (OCT or SB). Independent of antisecretory treatment, the patients receiving less parenteral hydration presented significantly more nausea (T0 P = 0.002; T1 P = 0.001; T2 P = 0.003; T3 P = 0.001) and drowsiness at T3 (P < 0.5). Pain relief was obtained in all 17 patients and only two patients required an increase in morphine dose at T1. All patients with inoperable malignant bowel obstruction should undergo treatment with antisecretory drugs so as to evaluate the possibility of removing the NGT. When a more rapid reduction in GI secretions is desired, OCT should be considered as the first choice drug. Parenteral hydration over 500 ml/day may reduce nausea and drowsiness.

Pain measurement in cancer patients: a comparison of six methods

&NA; A consecutive sample of 53 chronic cancer pain patients were administered 5 different pain intensity scales: a visual analogue scale (VAS), a numerical rating scale from 0 to 10 (NRS), a verbal rating scale (VRS), the Italian Pain Questionnaire (Italian version of the McGill Pain Questionnaire) (PRI), and the Integrated Pain Score (IPS) which is an instrument designed at the Pain Therapy and Palliative Care Division of the National Cancer Institute of Milan to integrate pain intensity and duration in a single measure. These scales were administered before and after a definite therapy change. At the time of the second evaluation the patients were also administered a pain relief scale (IRS). A factor analysis of the scoring properties of these instruments revealed a high degree of association between the variables. A single factor clearly emerged explaining most of the different scales variability. A logistic regression analysis showed that VAS, NRS. VRS were more strongly associated with IRS than PRI and IPS.

A randomized, controlled clinical trial to evaluate the effects of zinc sulfate on cancer patients with taste alterations caused by head and neck irradiation

In uncontrolled clinical trials, the administration of oral zinc sulfate has been reported both to prevent and correct taste abnormalities in cancer patients receiving external radiotherapy (ERT) to the head and neck region.

Studies on the effects of antidepressant drugs on the antinociceptive action of morphine and on plasma morphine in rat and man

&NA; In the rat we studied the effect of 3 tricyclic antidepressants: chlorimipramine, amitriptyline and nortriptyline, and the atypical antidepressant trazodone on pain thresholds when administered alone or together with morphine. Moreover, we evaluated the effect of the antidepressants on free morphine plasma concentrations both in the rat and in man. We observed that chlorimipramine and amitriptyline, two tricyclic antidepressants active on the serotoninergic system, induce analgesia and potentiate morphine analgesia in a dose‐related fashion. The noradrenergic tricyclic nortriptyline and trazodone did not elicit analgesia and inconsistently affected morphine analgesia. In the rat, all drugs tested increased plasma concentrations of morphine with the exception of amitriptyline. In man, only chlorimipramine and amitriptyline increased the plasma concentration of the free opiate.

Pain and pain treatments in European palliative care units. A cross sectional survey from the European Association for Palliative Care Research Network

The Research Network of the European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC) performed a survey of 3030 cancer patients from 143 palliative care centres in 21 European countries. The survey addressed pain intensity and the use of non-opioid analgesics, adjuvant analgesics and opioids. Patients were treated with analgesics corresponding to the WHO pain ladder step I (n / 855), step II (n / 509) and step III (n / 1589). The investigators assessed 32% of the patients as having moderate or severe pain. In general there were small differences between pain intensities across different countries. Cancer primary sites and the presence of metastasis had only minor influences on pain intensity. The most frequently used nonopioid analgesics were NSAIDs (26%) and paracetamol (23%). Adjuvant analgesics or coanalgesics used by / 1% of the patients were corticosteroids (39%), tricylic antidepressants (11%), gabapentin (5%), bisphosphonates (4%), clonazepam (2%), carbamazepine (4%) and phenytoin (2%). The use of non-opioid analgesics and co-analgesics varied widely between countries. Opioids administered for mild to moderate pain were codeine (8%), tramadol (8%), dextropropoxyphene (5%) and dihydrocodeine (2%). Morphine was the most frequently used opioid for moderate to severe pain (oral normal release morphine: 21%; oral sustained-release morphine: 19%; iv or sc morphine: 10%). Other opioids for moderate to severe pain were transdermal fentanyl (14%), oxycodone (4%), methadone (2%), diamorphine (2%) and hydromorphone (1%). We observed large variations in the use of opioids across countries. Finally, we observed that only a minority of the patients who used morphine needed very high doses.