Respiratory adverse effects of opioids for breathlessness: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Previous studies have shown that opioids can reduce chronic breathlessness in advanced disease. However, physicians remain reluctant to prescribe opioids for these patients, commonly due to fear of respiratory adverse effects. Aim: To systematically review reported respiratory adverse effects of opioids in patients with advanced disease and chronic breathlessness. Methods: Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane central register of controlled trials, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov and the reference lists of relevant systematic reviews were searched. Two independent researchers screened against predefined inclusion criteria and extracted data. Meta-analysis was conducted where possible. Results: We included 63 out of 1990 articles, describing 67 studies. Meta-analysis showed an increase in partial pressure of carbon dioxide (0.27 kPa; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.45) and no significant change in partial pressure of oxygen and oxygen saturation (both p>0.05). Non-serious respiratory depression (definition variable/not stated) was described in 4/1064 patients. One cancer patient pre-treated with morphine for pain needed temporary respiratory support following nebulized morphine for breathlessness (single case study). Conclusions: We found no evidence of significant or clinically relevant respiratory adverse effects of opioids for chronic breathlessness. Heterogeneity of design and study population, and low study quality are limitations. Larger studies designed to detect respiratory adverse effects are needed

Reduction in potentially inappropriate end-of-life hospital care for cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic:A retrospective population-based study

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic impacted cancer diagnosis and treatment. However, little is known about end-of-life cancer care during the pandemic. Aim: To investigate potentially inappropriate end-of-life hospital care for cancer patients before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design: Retrospective population-based cohort study using data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and the Dutch National Hospital Care Registration. Potentially inappropriate care in the last month of life (chemotherapy administration, &gt;1 emergency room contact, &gt;1 hospitalization, hospitalization &gt;14 days, intensive care unit admission or hospital death) was compared between four COVID-19 periods and corresponding periods in 2018/2019. Participants: A total of 112,919 cancer patients (⩾18 years) who died between January 2018 and May 2021 were included. Results: Fewer patients received potentially inappropriate end-of-life care during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to previous years, especially during the first COVID-19 peak (22.4% vs 26.0%). Regression analysis showed lower odds of potentially inappropriate end-of-life care during all COVID-19 periods (between OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.74–0.88 and OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.87–0.97) after adjustment for age, sex and cancer type. For the individual indicators, fewer patients experienced multiple or long hospitalizations, intensive care unit admission or hospital death during the pandemic. Conclusions: Cancer patients received less potentially inappropriate end-of-life care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Because several factors may have contributed, it is unclear whether this reflects better quality care. However, these findings raise important questions about what pandemic-induced changes in care practices can help provide appropriate end-of-life care for future patients in the context of increasing patient numbers and limited resources.</p

Effect of Bisphosphonates, Denosumab, and Radioisotopes on Bone Pain and Quality of Life in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and Bone Metastases:A Systematic Review

AbstractBone metastases are common in patients with non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), often causing pain and a decrease in quality of life (QoL). The effect of bone-targeted agents is evaluated by reduction in skeletal-related events in which neither pain nor QoL are included. Radioisotopes can be administered for more diffuse bone pain that is not eligible for palliative radiotherapy. The evidence that bone-targeted agents relieve pain or improve QoL is not solid. We performed a systematic review of the effect of bone-targeted agents on pain and QoL in patients with NSCLC. Our systematic literature search included original articles or abstracts reporting on bisphosphonates, denosumab, or radioisotopes or combinations thereof in patients with bone metastases (≥5 patients with NSCLC), with pain, QoL, or both serving as the primary or secondary end point. Of the twenty-five eligible studies, 13 examined bisphosphonates (one also examined denosumab) and 12 dealt with radioisotopes. None of the randomized studies on bisphosphonates or denosumab evaluated pain and QoL as the primary end point. In the single-arm studies of bisphosphonates a decrease in pain or analgesic consumption was found for 38% to 77% of patients. QoL was included in five of 13 studies, but improvement was found in only two. No high-level evidence that bisphosphonates or denosumab reduce pain or improve QoL was found. Although the data are limited, radioisotopes seem to reduce pain with a rapid onset of action and duration of response of 1 to 3 months. The evidence that bisphosphonates or denosumab reduce or prevent pain in patients with NSCLC and bone metastases or that they have an influence on QoL is very weak. Radioisotopes can be used to reduce diffuse pain, although there is no high-level evidence supporting such use