scholarly journals Comprehensive Consensus Based Guidelines on Intrathecal Drug Delivery Systems in the Treatment of Pain Caused by Cancer Pain

2011 ◽  
Vol 3;14 (3;5) ◽  
pp. E283-E312
Author(s):  
Timothy R. Deer

Background: Chronic persistent pain as a result of terminal illness, either as a consequence of the disease or the necessary treatment, is common in patients with cancer. For these patients with moderate-to-severe intractable pain, intrathecal (IT) drug delivery systems may represent an effective option for pain management. Thus, IT drug delivery is a viable treatment strategy for both neuropathy and nociceptive pain in the cancer population. However, there is a scarcity of comprehensive guidelines in implanting IT drug delivery systems in the treatment of pain caused by cancer. Objective: This article outlines consensus guidelines for the implementation of intrathecal therapy in patients with cancer-related pain and other end of life states causing pain. We highlight the multidisciplinary criteria that warrant careful consideration to ensure meaningful analgesia. Methods: Evidence was compiled, ranked, and strength considered by an invited panel of wellpublished and innovative clinician research leaders in pain medicine. Based on that analysis, an accumulation of evidence from observational and randomized prospective trials supports the use of intrathecal (IT) drug delivery to provide effective analgesia for patients with cancer-related pain, including individuals at the end of life. Although not all patients are candidates for this invasive treatment modality, clinicians can determine the appropriateness of proceeding with device implantation by carefully evaluating the individual’s overall medical status, psychological stability, social support system, and prognosis of disease. Further, consumption of health care resources and cost-effective treatment is becoming more of a priority; not only is this therapy appropriate medically, but also economically. This multifaceted approach to patient selection assists in maximizing treatment effect and avoiding unintended consequences of therapy. Limitations: The limitations of these guidelines include that these are of expert panel guidelines. The literature describes appropriate preparation of guidelines based on evidence derived from randomized trials and systematic reviews. However, there is also value for consensus-based guidelines due to non-availability of evidence from either systematic reviews of randomized trials or randomized trials alone. In addition, the evidence is not available on many aspects of intrathecal infusion systems even with observational studies and case reports. Thus, the present approach with expert consensus guidelines is acceptable. Conclusions: These consensus guidelines are intended to assist clinicians in identifying the candidacy of patients with cancer-related pain and end of life diseases causing pain that may benefit from intrathecal drug delivery. With careful consideration of the patient’s medical comorbidities and prior therapies, communication with the oncologist, proper psychological evaluation, and appropriate trialing technique, clinicians can effectively optimize the use of IT therapy for cancer pain. The panel advocates for a much wider application of IT therapy to provide meaningful analgesia for patients with cancer pain, including those at the end of life from a variety of causes. Key words: Intrathecal, cancer, palliative, pain, guidelines, opioids, consensus, selection, evidence

2018 ◽  
Vol 126 (6) ◽  
pp. 2038-2046 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriel Carvajal ◽  
Denis Dupoiron ◽  
Valerie Seegers ◽  
Nathalie Lebrec ◽  
François Boré ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 130 (2) ◽  
pp. 289-297 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa M. Stearns ◽  
Alaa Abd-Elsayed ◽  
Christophe Perruchoud ◽  
Robert Spencer ◽  
Krisstin Hammond ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. E583-E594

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer (PC) is one of the most lethal cancers and is the eleventh most common cancer worldwide. This disease is characterized by an often-fatal evolution and a high burden of symptoms, particularly pain. Several studies have demonstrated that pancreatic cancer patients have a high prevalence of pain, with up to 82% of patients reporting pain, often requiring systemic strong opioids as mainstay treatment. This comprehensive review of pancreatic cancer related pain (PCRP), focuses on current mechanisms that lead to pain including regional invasion processes, as well as the local secretion of factors that sensitize nociceptive nerves. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to conduct a review of PCRP and provide updates on intrathecal drug delivery in PC therapeutic recommendations. STUDY DESIGN: We used a narrative review design. We present a novel perspective in the field of pain research by converging data from intrathecal drug delivery trials with previous elements of molecular pain research in PCRP. METHODS: The literature review relating to PCRP pathophysiology and intrathecal drug delivery systems (IDDS) was done with searches of English, French, and Spanish abstracts, using PubMed, Dynamed, EMBASE, SciELO, Uptodate, Google Scholar, and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles from IDDS inception until August 2020. Different search strings based on MESH terms were used including: pain, chronic pain, cancer pain, prevalence, pathophysiology, pancreatic cancer, analgesia, invasive pain procedures, celiac plexus neurolysis, pancreatic neuropathy, intrathecal drug delivery, or a combination of these terms. A narrative review based on these sources was prepared. RESULTS: This paper reviews aspects related to pancreatic adenocarcinoma and PCRP prevalence and focuses on recent developments in pathophysiology with IDDS as a pain management strategy. We summarize the best available evidence regarding intrathecal therapy (IT) for PCRP management; 18 studies of IDDS including at least 236 PC patients are analyzed. LIMITATIONS: Some limitations include: IDDS studies heterogeneity regarding disease stage, patient population, and technical aspects, such as catheter placement and treatment regimen, do not allow integration of studies. CONCLUSION: This review analyzes both past and current literature with a critical analysis of findings and respective recommendations. Most studies of IDDS in PCRP evaluate outcomes on pain using one-dimensional pain scales, such as VAS. Other relevant results, such as performance status or quality of life, are not frequently reported. Burden of disease variables, such as cancer stage, location, and comorbidities, like depression and systemic analgesia co-prescription, are usually not presented in these studies. In the same way, most studies do not precisely inform IDDS titration and IT medication. These factors make integration of IDDS in PC studies difficult. Future studies regarding impact of IDDS on pain control on quality of life, in this particular population, may help clinicians in deciding the optimal time and approach for IDDS. The studies should report data on particular disease, comorbidities, and treatment regimens. KEY WORDS: Adenocarcinoma, cancer pain, pain, pancreatic carcinoma, pancreatic neoplasms, pain management, physiopathology, prevalence


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document