Invasive procedures are commonly required in the diagnosis and management of cancer in adults. However, little is known regarding the prevalence and severity of procedure-related pain in this patient population. This prospective study was conducted to determine the frequency and types of invasive procedures performed in a large comprehensive cancer center, the intensity of pain associated with these procedures, the types of periprocedural analgesics administered, and how these patients would like their procedural pain to be managed in the future. During a 6-week period, 102 cancer patients were interviewed immediately after undergoing an invasive procedure. They were asked to rate the pain they experienced before, during, and after their procedure using a verbal descriptor scale (VDS) ranging from 0 to 10. They also were asked if they would want more, less, or the same amount of pain medication if they were to undergo the same procedure again. The most frequently performed procedures were bone marrow aspirates and biopsies (68%), lumbar punctures (14%), and placements of central venous catheters (10%). The average pain rating during these procedures was 4.2 (standard deviation [SD], 3.0). However, 26% of patients experienced severe pain (VDS score [threesuperoir]7) during the procedures. Twenty-four percent of patients surveyed received conscious sedation for their procedure. There was no statistical relationship between patients' pain ratings and their satisfaction with the pain control they received during the procedures. This study represents the largest descriptive study of procedural pain in adult cancer patients. As more than 50% of these patients experienced moderate to severe pain during procedures, further studies are needed to improve the control of procedure-related pain in patients with cancer.
Jana Portnow, Christine Lim and Stuart A. Grossman
Steven S. Brem, Philip J. Bierman, Henry Brem, Nicholas Butowski, Marc C. Chamberlain, Ennio A. Chiocca, Lisa M. DeAngelis, Robert A. Fenstermaker, Allan Friedman, Mark R. Gilbert, Deneen Hesser, Larry Junck, Gerald P. Linette, Jay S. Loeffler, Moshe H. Maor, Madison Michael, Paul L. Moots, Tara Morrison, Maciej Mrugala, Louis Burt Nabors, Herbert B. Newton, Jana Portnow, Jeffrey J. Raizer, Lawrence Recht, Dennis C. Shrieve, Allen K. Sills Jr, Frank D. Vrionis and Patrick Y. Wen
Louis Burt Nabors, Jana Portnow, Mario Ammirati, Henry Brem, Paul Brown, Nicholas Butowski, Marc C. Chamberlain, Lisa M. DeAngelis, Robert A. Fenstermaker, Allan Friedman, Mark R. Gilbert, Jona Hattangadi-Gluth, Deneen Hesser, Matthias Holdhoff, Larry Junck, Ronald Lawson, Jay S. Loeffler, Paul L. Moots, Maciej M. Mrugala, Herbert B. Newton, Jeffrey J. Raizer, Lawrence Recht, Nicole Shonka, Dennis C. Shrieve, Allen K. Sills Jr, Lode J. Swinnen, David Tran, Nam Tran, Frank D. Vrionis, Patrick Yung Wen, Nicole R. McMillian and Maria Ho
The NCCN Guidelines for Central Nervous System Cancers provide multidisciplinary recommendations for the clinical management of patients with cancers of the central nervous system. These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight recent updates regarding the management of metastatic brain tumors using radiation therapy. Use of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is no longer limited to patients with 3 or fewer lesions, because data suggest that total disease burden, rather than number of lesions, is predictive of survival benefits associated with the technique. SRS is increasingly becoming an integral part of management of patients with controlled, low-volume brain metastases.
Louis Burt Nabors, Mario Ammirati, Philip J. Bierman, Henry Brem, Nicholas Butowski, Marc C. Chamberlain, Lisa M. DeAngelis, Robert A. Fenstermaker, Allan Friedman, Mark R. Gilbert, Deneen Hesser, Matthias Holdhoff, Larry Junck, Ronald Lawson, Jay S. Loeffler, Moshe H. Maor, Paul L. Moots, Tara Morrison, Maciej M. Mrugala, Herbert B. Newton, Jana Portnow, Jeffrey J. Raizer, Lawrence Recht, Dennis C. Shrieve, Allen K. Sills Jr, David Tran, Nam Tran, Frank D. Vrionis, Patrick Y. Wen, Nicole McMillian and Maria Ho
Primary and metastatic tumors of the central nervous system are a heterogeneous group of neoplasms with varied outcomes and management strategies. Recently, improved survival observed in 2 randomized clinical trials established combined chemotherapy and radiation as the new standard for treating patients with pure or mixed anaplastic oligodendroglioma harboring the 1p/19q codeletion. For metastatic disease, increasing evidence supports the efficacy of stereotactic radiosurgery in treating patients with multiple metastatic lesions but low overall tumor volume. These guidelines provide recommendations on the diagnosis and management of this group of diseases based on clinical evidence and panel consensus. This version includes expert advice on the management of low-grade infiltrative astrocytomas, oligodendrogliomas, anaplastic gliomas, glioblastomas, medulloblastomas, supratentorial primitive neuroectodermal tumors, and brain metastases. The full online version, available at NCCN. org, contains recommendations on additional subtypes.
Louis Burt Nabors, Jana Portnow, Mario Ammirati, Joachim Baehring, Henry Brem, Paul Brown, Nicholas Butowski, Marc C. Chamberlain, Robert A. Fenstermaker, Allan Friedman, Mark R. Gilbert, Jona Hattangadi-Gluth, Matthias Holdhoff, Larry Junck, Thomas Kaley, Ronald Lawson, Jay S. Loeffler, Mary P. Lovely, Paul L. Moots, Maciej M. Mrugala, Herbert B. Newton, Ian Parney, Jeffrey J. Raizer, Lawrence Recht, Nicole Shonka, Dennis C. Shrieve, Allen K. Sills Jr, Lode J. Swinnen, David Tran, Nam Tran, Frank D. Vrionis, Stephanie Weiss, Patrick Yung Wen, Nicole McMillian and Anita M. Engh
The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Central Nervous System (CNS) Cancers provide interdisciplinary recommendations for managing adult CNS cancers. Primary and metastatic brain tumors are a heterogeneous group of neoplasms with varied outcomes and management strategies. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the NCCN CNS Cancers Panel's discussion and highlight notable changes in the 2015 update. This article outlines the data and provides insight into panel decisions regarding adjuvant radiation and chemotherapy treatment options for high-risk newly diagnosed low-grade gliomas and glioblastomas. Additionally, it describes the panel's assessment of new data and the ongoing debate regarding the use of alternating electric field therapy for high-grade gliomas.
Louis Burt Nabors, Jana Portnow, Mario Ammirati, Joachim Baehring, Henry Brem, Nicholas Butowski, Robert A. Fenstermaker, Peter Forsyth, Jona Hattangadi-Gluth, Matthias Holdhoff, Steven Howard, Larry Junck, Thomas Kaley, Priya Kumthekar, Jay S. Loeffler, Paul L. Moots, Maciej M. Mrugala, Seema Nagpal, Manjari Pandey, Ian Parney, Katherine Peters, Vinay K. Puduvalli, John Ragsdale III, Jason Rockhill, Lisa Rogers, Chad Rusthoven, Nicole Shonka, Dennis C. Shrieve, Allen K. Sills Jr, Lode J. Swinnen, Christina Tsien, Stephanie Weiss, Patrick Yung Wen, Nicole Willmarth, Mary Anne Bergman and Anita Engh
For many years, the diagnosis and classification of gliomas have been based on histology. Although studies including large populations of patients demonstrated the prognostic value of histologic phenotype, variability in outcomes within histologic groups limited the utility of this system. Nonetheless, histology was the only proven and widely accessible tool available at the time, thus it was used for clinical trial entry criteria, and therefore determined the recommended treatment options. Research to identify molecular changes that underlie glioma progression has led to the discovery of molecular features that have greater diagnostic and prognostic value than histology. Analyses of these molecular markers across populations from randomized clinical trials have shown that some of these markers are also predictive of response to specific types of treatment, which has prompted significant changes to the recommended treatment options for grade III (anaplastic) gliomas.