Sam H. Ahmedzai

The EORTC QLQ-LC13: a modular supplement to the EORTC core quality of life questionnaire (QLQ-C30) for use in lung cancer clinical trials

The EORTC Study Group on Quality of Life has developed a modular system for assessing the quality of life of cancer patients in clinical trials composed of two basic elements: (1) a core quality of life questionnaire, the EORTC QLQ-C30, covering general aspects of health-related quality of life, and (2) additional disease- or treatment-specific questionnaire modules. Two international field studies were carried out to evaluate the practicality, reliability and validity of the core questionnaire, supplemented by a 13-item lung cancer-specific questionnaire module, the EORTC QLQ-LC13. In this paper, the results of an evaluation of the QLQ-LC13 are reported. The lung cancer questionnaire module comprises both multi-item and single-item measures of lung cancer-associated symptoms (i.e. coughing, haemoptysis, dyspnoea and pain) and side-effects from conventional chemo- and radiotherapy (i.e. hair loss, neuropathy, sore mouth and dysphagia). It was administered to patients with non-resectable lung cancer recruited from 17 countries. In total, 883 and 735 patients, respectively, completed the questionnaire prior to and once during treatment. The symptom measures discriminated clearly between patients differing in performance status. All item scores changed significantly in the expected direction (i.e. lung cancer symptoms decreased and treatment toxicities increased) during treatment. With one exception (problems with a sore mouth), the change of toxicity measures over time was related specifically to either chemo- or radiotherapy. However, the single item on neuropathy did not measure adequately the full range of symptoms. The hypothesised scale structure of the questionnaire was partially supported by the data. The multi-item dyspnoea scale met the minimal standards for reliability (Cronbach alpha coefficient > 0.70), while the pain items did not form a scale with reliability estimates acceptable for group comparisons. In conclusion, the results form international field testing lend support to the EORTC QLQ-LC13 as a clinically valid and useful tool for assessing disease- and treatment-specific symptoms in lung cancer patients participating in clinical trials, when combined with the EORTC core quality of life questionnaire. In a few areas, however, the questionnaire module could benefit from further refinements. In addition, its performance over a longer period of time still needs to be investigated.

Transdermal fentanyl versussustained-release oral morphine in cancer pain: Preference, efficacy, and quality of life

Cancer patients requiring strong opioid analgesia (n = 202; mean age, 61.5 years; range, 18-89 years; 55% men) were recruited from 38 United Kingdom palliative care centers into a randomized, open, two-period, crossover study comparing transdermal fentanyl with sustained-release oral morphine. Patients received one treatment for 15 days followed immediately by the other for 15 days. Daily diaries were completed. Both treatments appeared equally effective in terms of pain control, as assessed by the Memorial Pain Assessment Card and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) pain scores. Fentanyl was associated with significantly less constipation (p < 0.001) and less daytime drowsiness (p = 0.015) but greater sleep disturbance (p = 0.004) and shorter sleep duration (p = 0.008) than morphine. The World Health Organization (WHO) performance status and EORTC global quality of life scores showed no significant difference between treatment groups. Of those patients who were able to express a preference (n = 136), significantly more preferred the fentanyl patches (p = 0.037). We conclude that, in this study, transdermal fentanyl provided pain relief that was acceptable to cancer patients and was associated with less constipation and sedation than morphine. These reduced side effects may contribute to patients preference for the patches.

A Modular Approach to Quality-of-Life Assessment in Cancer Clinical Trials

Cancer clinical trials focus upon the evaluation of such biomedical outcomes as duration of survival, retardation of the disease process and control of major physical symptoms (Buyse et al. 1984; Friedman et al. 1985). In recent years, however, these clinical end points have been criticized for a lack of comprehensiveness (Greer 1984; Greer and Silberfarb 1982). Following the lead of the WHO in defining health as complete physical, mental and social well-being, the scope of investigation has been extended to include assessment of a range of psychosocial variables that can be subsumed under the heading “quality of life.”

Systematic review of the problems and issues of accessing specialist palliative care by patients, carers and health and social care professionals.

Objectives: To determine the problems and issues of accessing specialist palliative care by patients, informal carers and health and social care professionals involved in their care in primary and secondary care settings. Data sources: Eleven electronic databases (medical, health-related and social science) were searched from the beginning of 1997 to October 2003. Palliative Medicine (January 1997–October 2003) was also hand-searched. Study selection: Systematic search for studies, reports and policy papers written in English. Data extraction: Included papers were data-extracted and the quality of each included study was assessed using 10 questions on a 40-point scale. Results: The search resulted in 9921 hits. Two hundred and seven papers were directly concerned with symptoms or issues of access, referral or barriers and obstacles to receiving palliative care. Only 40 (19%) papers met the inclusion criteria. Several barriers to access and referral to palliative care were identified including lack of knowledge and education amongst health and social care professionals, and a lack of standardized referral criteria. Some groups of people failed to receive timely referrals e.g., those from minority ethnic communities, older people and patients with nonmalignant conditions as well as people that are socially excluded e.g., homeless people. Conclusions: There is a need to improve education and knowledge about specialist palliative care and hospice care amongst health and social care professionals, patients and carers. Standardized referral criteria need to be developed. Further work is also needed to assess the needs of those not currently accessing palliative care services.

Older people's views about home as a place of care at the end of life

Objectives: To explore the attitudes of older people towards home as a place of care when dying. Design: A two-phase qualitative study using focus groups and semi-structured interviews. Participants: Eight focus group discussions were held with 32 participants recruited from six purposively selected community groups representing older people in Sheffield, UK. A further 16 men and 29 women participated in semi-structured interviews. Results: Participants identified that home was more than a physical location, representing familiarity, comfort and the presence of loved ones. While participants anticipated that home would be their ideal place of care during dying, practical and moral problems associated with it were recognised by many. Some had no informal carer. Others did not want to be a ‘burden’ to family and friends, or were worried about these witnessing their suffering. Those who had children did not wish them to deliver care that was unduly intimate. Concerns were expressed about the quality of care that could be delivered at home, particularly in relation to accommodating health technologies and providing adequate symptom relief. Worries were also expressed about those living in poor material circumstances. Mixed views were expressed about the presence of professional carers within the home. Although they were seen to provide much needed support for the informal carer, the presence of ‘strangers’ was regarded by some as intrusive and compromising the ideal of ‘home’. Discussion: Older people perceive factors they associate with ‘home’ as crucial to a good death, most notably presence of friends and family, but many anticipate that they would prefer to be cared for elsewhere when dying. These findings run counter to assumptions that the medicalised, institutional death cannot be a ‘good death’. It is important that dying in hospital is not demonized, but rather efforts made to examine how institutional deaths can take on a more meaningful quality.

Pet ownership and human health: a brief review of evidence and issues

Research into the association between pet ownership and human health has produced intriguing, although frequently contradictory, results often raising uncertainty as to whether pet ownership is advisable on health grounds The question of whether someone should own a pet is never as simple as whether that pet has a measurably beneficial or detrimental effect on the owners physical health. The emotional bond between owner and pet can be as intense as that in many human relationships and may confer similar psychological benefits. Death of a pet can cause grief similar to that in human bereavement, whereas threat of loss of a pet may be met with blunt refusal and non-compliance with advice on health. We examine the current evidence for a link between pet ownership and human health and discuss the importance of understanding the role of pets in peoples lives. Research dating from the 1980s popularised the view that pet ownership could have positive benefits on human health. Benefits ranged from higher survival rates from myocardial infarction1; a significantly lower use of general practitioner services (prompting some researchers to speculate on considerable potential savings to health expenditure)2; a reduced risk of asthma and allergic rhinitis in children exposed to pet allergens during the first year of life3 4; a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease5; and better physical and psychological wellbeing in community dwelling older people.6 No studies have found significant social or economic differences between people who do or do not have pets that would adequately explain differences in health outcome, leading to the belief that pet ownership itself is the primary cause of the reported benefits. Although the research did much to raise awareness of the importance that people attach to their pets, recent studies have failed to replicate …

Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Randomized Study of Eicosapentaenoic Acid Diester in Patients With Cancer Cachexia

PURPOSE Eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) has been proposed to have specific anticachectic effects. This trial compared EPA diethyl ester with placebo in cachectic cancer patients for effects on weight and lean body mass. PATIENTS AND METHODS Five hundred eighteen weight-losing patients with advanced gastrointestinal or lung cancer were studied in a multicenter, double-blind, placebo controlled trial. Patients were randomly assigned to receive a novel preparation of pure EPA at a dose of 2 g or 4 g daily or placebo (2g EPA, n = 175; 4 g EPA, n = 172; placebo, n = 171). Patients were assessed at 4 weeks and 8 weeks. RESULTS The groups were well balanced at baseline. Mean weight loss at baseline was 18% (n = 518). Over the 8-week treatment period, both intention-to-treat analysis and per protocol analysis revealed no statistically significant improvements in survival, weight, or other nutritional variables. There was, however, a trend in favor of EPA with analysis of the primary end point, weight, at 8 weeks showing a borderline, nonsignificant treatment effect (P = .066). Relative to placebo, mean weight increased by 1.2 kg with 2 g EPA (95% CI, 0 kg to 2.3 kg) and by 0.3 kg with 4 g EPA (-0.9 kg to 1.5 kg). CONCLUSION The results indicate no statistically significant benefit from single agent EPA in the treatment of cancer cachexia. Future studies should concentrate on other agents or combination regimens.

Guidelines for supportive care in multiple myeloma 2011

Supportive care plays an increasingly important role in the modern management of multiple myeloma. While modern treatments have significantly prolonged overall and progression free survival through improved disease control, the vast majority of patients remain incurable, and live with the burden of the disease itself and the cumulative side effects of treatments. Maintenance of quality of life presents challenges at all stages of the disease from diagnosis through the multiple phases of active treatment to the end of life. Written on behalf of the British Committee for Standards in Haematology (BCSH) and the UK Myeloma Forum (UKMF), these evidence based guidelines summarize the current national consensus for supportive and symptomatic care in multiple myeloma in the following areas; pain management, peripheral neuropathy, skeletal complications, infection, anaemia, haemostasis and thrombosis, sedation, fatigue, nausea, vomiting, anorexia, constipation, diarrhoea, mucositis, bisphosphonate‐induced osteonecrosis of the jaw, complementary therapies, holistic needs assessment and end of life care. Although most aspects of supportive care can be supervised by haematology teams primarily responsible for patients with multiple myeloma, multidisciplinary collaboration involving specialists in palliative medicine, pain management, radiotherapy and surgical specialities is essential, and guidance is provided for appropriate interdisciplinary referral. These guidelines should be read in conjunction with the BCSH/UKMF Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Multiple Myeloma 2011.

A randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, double-dummy, parallel-group study to determine the safety and efficacy of oxycodone/naloxone prolonged-release tablets in patients with moderate/severe, chronic cancer pain.

Objective: An examination of whether oxycodone/naloxone prolonged-release tablets (OXN PR) can improve constipation and maintain analgesia, compared with oxycodone prolonged-release tablets (OxyPR) in patients with moderate/severe cancer pain. Methods: Randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, double-dummy, parallel-group study in which 185 patients were randomized to receive up to 120 mg/day of OXN PR or OxyPR over 4 weeks. Efficacy assessments included Bowel Function Index (BFI), Brief Pain Inventory Short-Form (BPI-SF), laxative and rescue medication use. Quality of life (QoL) and safety assessments were conducted. Results: After 4 weeks, mean BFI score was significantly lower with OXN PR; mean total laxative intake was 20% lower with OXN PR. Mean BPI-SF scores were similar for both treatments and the average rate of analgesic rescue medication use was low and comparable. QoL assessments were stable and comparable with greater improvements in constipation-specific QoL assessments with OXN PR. Overall, rates of adverse drug reactions were similar. Conclusions: OXN PR provides superior bowel function in cancer pain patients, compared with OxyPR, without compromising analgesic efficacy or safety. This study confirms that OXN PR is well tolerated and efficacious in cancer pain patients and results are in line with those seen in non-malignant pain patients.

Efficacy and safety of transdermal fentanyl and sustained-release oral morphine in patients with cancer and chronic non-cancer pain.

SUMMARY Purpose: To evaluate effectiveness and safety information of transdermal fentanyl (TDF) (Duragesic/Durogesic*) and sustained-release oral morphine (SRM) in cancer pain (CP) and chronic non-cancer pain (NCP), a pooled analysis was conducted on datasets of published, open label, uncontrolled (no comparator group) and randomised controlled (with SRM as comparator) studies of TDF. Patients and methods: Eight trials with treatment durations of at least 28 days met the inclusion criteria. The effectiveness analysis assessed changes in average pain and pain ‘right now’ scores between baseline and Day 28. The safety analysis evaluated the incidence of adverse events (AEs) reported within the first 28 days of treatment with TDF or SRM. Subgroup analyses included pain type, gender, age, weight, and body mass index. Results: Pooled efficacy data were available from 1220 patients; these showed that both TDF and SRM were effective in improving pain ‘right now’ scores (0–100 scale) from baseline to Day 28. The improvement was significantly more pronounced in the TDF treatment group (–26.7 ± 31.3 for TDF, –18.7 ± 30.9 for SRM, p = 0.002). This favourable effect of TDF was most apparent amongst patients with NCP. Data concerning AEs were available from over 2500 patients with CP (3 out of 10 patients) or chronic NCP (7 out of 10 patients). Significantly fewer patients in the TDF than in the SRM group reported any AE (72% vs. 87% respectively; p < 0.001), or an AE leading to the study drug being permanently discontinued (16% vs. 23% respectively; p < 0.001). Constipation and somnolence occurred considerably less frequently in the TDF than in the SRM treatment group. This difference was statistically significant in both the CP and NCP subgroups. Conclusion: This pooled data analysis provides expanded insight into the safety and effectiveness profile of transdermal fentanyl in patients with chronic pain. It shows significantly improved pain relief with transdermal fentanyl compared with sustained-release oral morphine, and supports current evidence of favourable tolerability of transdermal fentanyl, particularly with regard to reduced constipation and somnolence.