Background: Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) is an effective approach to treat pain. However, data regarding patterns of PCA use for cancer pain are limited. The purpose of this study was to define the patterns of PCA use and related outcomes in hospitalized patients with cancer. Methods: We identified 90 patients with cancer admitted to a single academic center who received PCA for nonsurgical, cancer-related pain and survived to discharge between January 2013 and January 2014. Data collected included patient demographics, cancer diagnosis, type of cancer-related pain, PCA use, opioid-specific adverse events, and 30-day readmission rates for pain. Univariable and multivariable linear regression models were used to analyze the association between patient and clinical variables with PCA duration. Logistic regression models were used to evaluate the relationship between patient and clinical variables and 30-day readmission rates. Results: The median length of hospitalization was 10.2 days with a median PCA duration of 4.4 days. Hematologic malignancies were associated with longer PCA use (P=.0001), as was younger age (P=.032). A trend was seen toward decreased 30-day readmission rates with longer PCA use (P=.054). No correlation was found between 30-day readmission and any covariate studied, including age, sex, cancer type (solid vs hematologic), pain type, palliative care consult, or time from PCA discontinuation to discharge. Conclusions: This study suggests that there is longer PCA use in younger patients and those with hematologic malignancies admitted with cancer-related pain, with a trend toward decreased 30-day readmission rates in those with longer PCA use.
Emily J. Martin, Eric J. Roeland, Madison B. Sharp, Carolyn Revta, James D. Murphy, Katherine E. Fero and Heidi N. Yeung
Emily J. Martin, Andrew R. Bruggeman, Vinit V. Nalawade, Reith R. Sarkar, Edmund M. Qiao, Brent S. Rose and James D. Murphy
Background: Patients with advanced esophageal cancer often experience pain and dysphagia, yet the optimal palliative management remains unclear. This retrospective study evaluated outcomes and adverse effects of palliative radiotherapy (RT) compared with esophageal stenting among a cohort of U.S. veterans with metastatic esophageal cancer. Patients and Methods: We identified 1,957 veterans in the United States with metastatic esophageal cancer who received palliative RT to the esophagus or esophageal stenting, and assessed the risks of severe adverse effects, including esophageal fistula formation, perforation, obstruction, hemorrhage, and esophagitis. We determined palliative efficacy by evaluating pain and dysphagia scores before and after intervention. Multivariable analyses were used to control for potential confounding factors. Results: In our cohort, 1,593 patients underwent RT and 364 underwent esophageal stenting. The cumulative incidence of any severe adverse effect at 6 months was higher among patients who received stents compared with those who received RT (21.7% vs 12.4%; P<.0010). In multivariable analysis, patients who received stents had an increased risk of any severe adverse effect, including fistula, perforation, and hemorrhage (all P<.0500). Multivariable analysis also showed that, compared with stenting, RT was associated with more rapid and durable pain relief (P<.0010) with no difference in relief of dysphagia over time when accounting for pretreatment dysphagia scores (P=.1029). Conclusions: Compared with esophageal stenting, RT was associated with a decreased risk of adverse effects, greater pain relief, and equivalent relief of moderate to severe dysphagia over time. Unmeasured patient- or tumor-related factors could have influenced the choice of intervention, thereby impacting our study outcomes. To our knowledge, this is the largest study to date analyzing the comparative risks and benefits of palliative RT and esophageal stenting among patients with metastatic esophageal cancer.
Andrea Cercek, Karyn A. Goodman, Carla Hajj, Emily Weisberger, Neil H. Segal, Diane L. Reidy-Lagunes, Zsofia K. Stadler, Abraham J. Wu, Martin R. Weiser, Philip B. Paty, Jose G. Guillem, Garrett M. Nash, Larissa K. Temple, Julio Garcia-Aguilar and Leonard B. Saltz
Standard therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is preoperative chemoradiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy. At Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) the authors began offering FOLFOX (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) as initial treatment for patients with high-risk LARC to target micrometastases while treating the primary tumor. The purpose of this study is to report the safety and efficacy of initial FOLFOX given before chemoradiotherapy on tumor downsizing and pathologic complete response (pathCR) in LARC. The records of patients with stage II/III rectal cancer treated at MSKCC between 2007 and 2012 were reviewed. Of approximately 300 patients with LARC treated at MSKCC, 61 received FOLFOX as initial therapy. Of these 61 patients, 57 received induction FOLFOX (median 7 cycles) followed by chemoradiation, and 4 experienced an excellent response, declined chemoradiation, and underwent total mesorectal excision (TME). Twelve of the 61 patients did not undergo TME: 9 had a complete clinical response (CCR), 1 declined despite persistent tumor, 1 declined because of comorbidities, and 1 developed metastatic disease. Among the 61 patients receiving initial FOLFOX, 22 (36%) had either a pathCR (n=13) or a CCR (n=9). Of the 49 patients who underwent TME, all had R0 resections and 23 (47%) had tumor response greater than 90%, including 13 (27%) who experienced a pathCR. Of the 28 patients who received all 8 cycles of FOLFOX, 8 experienced a pathCR (29%) and 3 a CCR (11%). No serious adverse events occurred that required a delay in treatment during FOLFOX or chemoradiation. FOLFOX and chemoradiation before planned TME results in tumor regression, a high rate of delivery of planned therapy, and a substantial rate of pathCRs, and offers a good platform for nonoperative management in select patients.
Matthew H. Kulke, Manisha H. Shah, Al B. Benson III, Emily Bergsland, Jordan D. Berlin, Lawrence S. Blaszkowsky, Lyska Emerson, Paul F. Engstrom, Paul Fanta, Thomas Giordano, Whitney S. Goldner, Thorvardur R. Halfdanarson, Martin J. Heslin, Fouad Kandeel, Pamela L. Kunz, Boris W. Kuvshinoff II, Christopher Lieu, Jeffrey F. Moley, Gitonga Munene, Venu G. Pillarisetty, Leonard Saltz, Julie Ann Sosa, Jonathan R. Strosberg, Jean-Nicolas Vauthey, Christopher Wolfgang, James C. Yao, Jennifer Burns and Deborah Freedman-Cass
Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) comprise a broad family of tumors that may or may not be associated with symptoms attributable to hormonal hypersecretion. The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology for Neuroendocrine Tumors discuss the diagnosis and management of both sporadic and hereditary NETs. This selection from the guidelines focuses on sporadic NETs of the pancreas, gastrointestinal tract, lung, and thymus.
Matthew H. Kulke, Al B. Benson III, Emily Bergsland, Jordan D. Berlin, Lawrence S. Blaszkowsky, Michael A. Choti, Orlo H. Clark, Gerard M. Doherty, James Eason, Lyska Emerson, Paul F. Engstrom, Whitney S. Goldner, Martin J. Heslin, Fouad Kandeel, Pamela L. Kunz, Boris W. Kuvshinoff II, Jeffrey F. Moley, Venu G. Pillarisetty, Leonard Saltz, David E. Schteingart, Manisha H. Shah, Stephen Shibata, Jonathan R. Strosberg, Jean-Nicolas Vauthey, Rebekah White, James C. Yao, Deborah A. Freedman-Cass and Mary A. Dwyer
Neuroendocrine tumors comprise a broad family of tumors, the most common of which are carcinoid and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. The NCCN Neuroendocrine Tumors Guidelines discuss the diagnosis and management of both sporadic and hereditary neuroendocrine tumors. Most of the recommendations pertain to well-differentiated, low- to intermediate-grade tumors. This updated version of the NCCN Guidelines includes a new section on pathology for diagnosis and reporting and revised recommendations for the surgical management of neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas.
Manisha H. Shah, Whitney S. Goldner, Thorvardur R. Halfdanarson, Emily Bergsland, Jordan D. Berlin, Daniel Halperin, Jennifer Chan, Matthew H. Kulke, Al B. Benson III, Lawrence S. Blaszkowsky, Jennifer Eads, Paul F. Engstrom, Paul Fanta, Thomas Giordano, Jin He, Martin J. Heslin, Gregory P. Kalemkerian, Fouad Kandeel, Sajid A. Khan, Wajih Zaheer Kidwai, Pamela L. Kunz, Boris W. Kuvshinoff II, Christopher Lieu, Venu G. Pillarisetty, Leonard Saltz, Julie Ann Sosa, Jonathan R. Strosberg, Craig A. Sussman, Nikolaos A. Trikalinos, Nataliya A. Uboha, Jonathan Whisenant, Terence Wong, James C. Yao, Jennifer L. Burns, Ndiya Ogba and Griselda Zuccarino-Catania
The NCCN Guidelines for Neuroendocrine and Adrenal Tumors provide recommendations for the management of adult patients with neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), adrenal gland tumors, pheochromocytomas, and paragangliomas. Management of NETs relies heavily on the site of the primary NET. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the management options and the 2018 updates to the guidelines for locoregional advanced disease, and/or distant metastasis originating from gastrointestinal tract, bronchopulmonary, and thymus primary NETs.