Alterations in blood–brain barrier permeability have been proposed to represent a relevant factor contributing to Parkinson’s disease progression. However, few studies have addressed this issue in patients at different stages of disease. Albumin was measured in cerebrospinal fluid and serum samples obtained from 73 non-demented subjects with idiopathic Parkinson’s disease and 47 age-matched control subjects. The albumin ratio (AR) was calculated to assess blood-cerebrospinal fluid and blood–brain barrier function. The group of patients with Parkinson’s disease included 46 subjects with Hoehn-Yahr staging between 1 and 2 and 27, with a score ranging from 2.5 to 4. Statistically significant differences in albumin ratio were found between patients with advanced disease, and both early-stage and unaffected groups. Conversely, early-phase patients did not differ from healthy subjects. Additionally, dopaminergic treatment seems to exert a possible effect on AR values. Our study demonstrates that possible dysfunction of the blood-cerebrospinal fluid barrier, blood–brain barrier, or both, characterize Parkinson’s disease progression. The associations between clinical scores, treatments and biochemical findings suggest a progressive impairment of barrier integrity during the course of the disease.

Background: The aim of this study was to identify potential variables influencing the clinical presentation of breakthrough cancer pain (BTP). Methods: Cancer patients with a diagnosis of BTP were enrolled. Demographic and clinical characteristics, as well as background pain and BTP characteristics were collected. Multivariate analyses were conducted to assess the correlation between BTP characteristics and the variables examined. Results: Data of 4016 patients were analysed. Average daily number of BTP episodes was 2.4, mean intensity was 7.5, and a mean duration was 43.3 min. A short onset BTP was observed in 68.9% of patients. In 30.5% of patients BTP was predictable. There were 86.0% of participants who reported a marked interference of BTP with their daily activities. Furthermore, 86.8% of patients were receiving opioids for the management of BTP. The average time to meaningful pain relief was 16.5 min and 70.9% of patients were satisfied with their BTP medications. Age, head and neck cancer, Karnofsky, background pain intensity, predictable and fast onset BTP were independently associated with the number of BTP episodes. BTP pain intensity was independently associated with background pain intensity, fast onset BTP, and Karnofsky. Neuropathic pain mechanism was independently associated with unpredictable BTP. Variables independently associated with a longer duration of BTP were age, place of visit, cancer diagnosis, disease-oriented therapy, background pain intensity and mechanism, and unpredictable BTP. Age, Karnofsky, background pain intensity, fast onset, and long duration of BTP were independently associated with interference with daily activity. Conclusions: BTP has a variable presentation depending on interdependent relationships among its different characteristics.

Objectives: To explore the effect of breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) treatment on quality of sleep and other aspects of the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with cancer pain. Methods: In an observational, multicenter, cohort study, cancer patients from palliative care units, oncology departments, and pain clinics and affected by BTcP were included. Enrolled patients were assessed at the four visits: T0 (baseline), T7, T14, and T28. Stable chronic background pain (numeric rating scale, NRS ≤ 4) during the whole study period was mandatory. BTcP was treated through transmucosal fentanyl. Three questionnaires were used to measure the HRQoL: EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), and the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS). RESULTS: In 154 patients, the HRQoL showed a significant improvement for all physical and emotional characteristics in the EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL, except for nausea and vomiting (linear p-value = 0.1) and dyspnea (Linear p-value = 0.05). The ESAS and PSQI questionnaires confirmed these positive results (p < 0.0001 and p = 0.002, respectively). Conclusions: This prospective investigation by an Italian expert group, has confirmed that careful management of BTcP induces a paramount improvement on the HRQoL. Because in cancer patients there is a high prevalence of BTcP and this severe acute pain has deleterious consequences, this information can have an important clinical significance.

Ketamine is an anaesthetic agent with a unique dissociative profile and pharmacological effects ranging from the induction and maintenance of anaesthesia to analgesia and sedation, depending on the dose. This article provides information for the clinical use of ketamine in anaesthesia, in both conventional and special circumstances. This is a non-systematic review of the literature, through a PubMed search up to February 2021. With a favourable pharmacokinetic profile, ketamine is used in hospital and prehospital settings for emergency situations. It is suitable for patients with many heart conditions and, unlike other anaesthetics, its potential for cardiorespiratory depression is low. Furthermore, it may be used when venous access is difficult as it may be administered through various routes. Ketamine is the anaesthetic of choice for patients with bronchospasm thanks to its bronchodilatory and anti-inflammatory properties. With a favourable pharmacokinetic profile, ketamine is used in hospital and prehospital settings for emergency situations and is suitable for patients with many cardiac and respiratory conditions.

Objectives: Despite guidelines, a large percentage of cancer patients continue to suffer from ineffectively treated pain. The authors undertook this survey to assess the strengths and weaknesses of cancer pain management in Italy. Design: This was a prospectively administered survey. Participants: The participants were anesthesiologists of the Italian Society of Anesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation and Intensive Care (SIAARTI). Intervention: A 58-item questionnaire covered the demographics and features of cancer pain management in the Italian context. Results: The authors received responses from 611 pain therapists of 279 centers. Only 22% of physicians are exclusively pain therapists. Seventy-five percent are specialists in anesthesiology, intensive care, and pain medicine. Most pain centers are hospital or university facilities (78%). The strengths of cancer pain management in Italy are the careful opioid prescriptions, the use of strategies for the treatment of neuropathic pain, patient/healthcare provider partnerships, and breakthrough cancer pain management. Weaknesses to be addressed include poor adherence to guidelines, inadequate attention toward the patient’s quality of life, insufficient use of minimally invasive techniques, lack of teamwork approaches, inappropriate timing of pain specialist engagement, and poor telemedicine use. Conclusions: Despite several strengths, further efforts are needed to improve the care of patients suffering from cancer pain in Italy.