Ketamine sample baseline characteristics.

1<p>the median and interquartile range are reported given the ordinal nature of the data;</p>2<p>the EOLPRO was introduced 5 months after study initiation;</p>3<p>the distribution of the BPI was approximately normal, hence the mean and standard deviation are reported; AKPS  =  Australian-modified Karnofsky Performance Status; BPI  =  Brief Pain Inventory Scale; EOLPRO  =  end of life patient reported outcome; IQR  =  interquartile range; SD  =  standard deviation.</p

Post-treatment EOLPRO scores and responder status cross tabulation.

<p>Post-treatment EOLPRO scores and responder status cross tabulation.</p

Links between key themes identified from the cognitive interviews.

<p>Links between key themes identified from the cognitive interviews.</p

Qualitative study participant characteristics.

<p>AKPS  =  Australian-modified Karnofsky Performance Status; COPD  =  chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; F  =  female; IQR  =  inter-quartile range; M  =  male; MMSE  =  Mini-Mental State Examination; SD  =  standard deviation; TAFE  =  Technical and Further Education.</p

Scripted probes for the cognitive interview.

<p>Scripted probes for the cognitive interview.</p

Key eligibility criteria in the ketamine trial [24].

a<p>Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs score (LANSS) <12;</p>b<p>LANSS score >12.</p

The end-of-life patient-reported outcome measure.

<p>The end-of-life patient-reported outcome measure.</p

Summary of the correlations between EOLPRO scores and other established scales and clinical measures.

1<p>correlations were considered significant when the probability of making a type I error was less than 0.8% to allow for multiple testing;</p>*<p>statistically significant result; AKPS  =  Australian-modified Karnofsky Performance Status; BPI  =  Brief Pain Inventory; CI  =  bootstrap BCa confidence intervals.</p

Proportion of missing values for key variables in the ketamine sample data.

<p>AKPS  =  Australian-modified Karnofsky Performance Status; BPI  =  Brief Pain Inventory; EOLPRO  =  end of life patient reported outcome; MMSE  =  Mini-Mental State Examination; QOL  =  quality of life.</p

Double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial of octreotide in malignant bowel obstruction

Context. Does octreotide reduce vomiting in cancer-associated bowel obstruction? Objectives. To evaluate the net effect of adding octreotide or placebo to standardized therapies on the number of days free of vomiting for populations presenting with vomiting and inoperable bowel obstruction secondary to cancer or its treatment. Methods. Twelve services enrolled people with advanced cancer presenting with vomiting secondary to bowel obstruction where surgery or anti-cancer therapies were not indicated immediately. In a double-blind study, participants were randomized to placebo or octreotide (600 mg/24 hours by infusion). Both arms received standardized supportive therapy (infusion of ranitidine [200 mg/24 hours], dexamethasone [8 mg/24 hours], and parenteral hydration [10e20 mL/kg/24 hours]). The primary outcome was patient-reported days free of vomiting at 72 hours. Results. In a study that recruited to the numbers identified in its power calculation, 87 participants provided data at 72 hours (45, octreotide arm). Seventeen people (octreotide) and 14 (placebo) were free of vomiting for 72 hours (P ¼ 0.67). Mean days free of vomiting were 1.87 (SD 1.10; octreotide) and 1.69 (SD 1.15; placebo; P ¼ 0.47). An adjusted multivariate regression of the incidence of vomiting over the study showed a reduced number of episodes of vomiting in the octreotide group (incidence rate ratio ¼ 0.40; 95% CI: 0.19e0.86; P ¼ 0.019); however, people in the octreotide arm were 2.02 times more likely to be administered hyoscine butylbromide (P ¼ 0.004), potentially reflecting increased colicky pain. Conclusion. Although there was no reduction in the number of days free of vomiting, the multivariate analysis suggests that further study of somatostatin analogues in this setting is warranted