Purpose of review An overview on breakthrough cancer pain (BTCP), including inherent limitations of the terminology, assessment, clinical presentation, and treatment options. Recent findings The estimated prevalence of BTCP is dependent on the defined cutoffs for controlled background pain and the magnitude of the pain flare. In addition, pain flares outside the definition of BTCP are prevalent. In the 11th Revision of the International Classification of Diseases, the temporal characteristics of cancer pain are described as continuous background pain and intermittent episodic pain. BTCP should be assessed by validated methods, and the patient perspective should be included. The pain may be related to neoplastic destruction of bone, viscera, or nerve tissue and is characterized by rapid onset, high intensity, and short duration. Treatment directed towards painful metastases must be considered. Due to pharmacological properties mirroring the pain characteristics, transmucosal fentanyl formulations are important for the treatment of BTCP. Oral immediate release opioids can be used for slow-onset or predictable BTCP. For more difficult pain conditions, parenteral, or even intrathecal pain medication, may be indicated. Summary All clinically relevant episodic pains must be adequately treated in accordance with the patient's preferences. Transmucosal fentanyl formulations are effective for BTCP.

Appetite loss is prevalent in patients with advanced cancer and negatively affects their quality of life. However, understanding of the factors associated with appetite loss is limited. The current study aims to explore characteristics and therapeutic interventions used for patients with and without appetite loss admitted to an acute palliative care unit. Patient characteristics and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), using the 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS 0–10), were registered. Descriptive statistics, independent samples T-tests and chi-square tests were utilized for data analysis. Of the 167 patients included in the analysis, 62% (104) had moderate to severe appetite loss at admission, whereof 63% (66) improved their appetite during their hospital stay. At admission, there was a significant association between appetite loss and having gastrointestinal cancer, living alone, poor performance status and withdrawn anticancer treatment. Patients with appetite loss also experienced more nausea, depression, fatigue, dyspnea and anxiety. In patients with improved appetite during hospitalization, mean decrease in NRS was 3.4 (standard error (SE) 0.27). Additionally, patients living alone were more likely to improve their appetite. Appetite improvement frequently coincided with alleviation of fatigue. Understanding these associations may help in developing better interventions for managing appetite loss in patients with advanced cancer.

Background: Several publications have addressed the need for a systematic integration of oncological care focused on the tumor and palliative care (PC) focused on the patient with cancer. The exponential increase in anticancer treatments and the high number of patients living longer with advanced disease have accentuated this. Internationally, there is now a persuasive argument that introducing PC early during anticancer treatment in patients with advanced disease has beneficial effects on symptoms, psychological distress, and survival. Methods: This is a national cluster-randomized trial (C-RCT) in 12 Norwegian hospitals. The trial investigates effects of early, systematic integration of oncology and specialized PC in patients with advanced cancer in six intervention hospitals compared with conventional care in six. Hospitals are stratified on the size of local catchment areas before randomization. In the intervention hospitals, a three-part complex intervention will be implemented. The backbone of the intervention is the development and implementation of patient-centered care pathways that contain early, compulsory referral to PC and regular and systematic registrations of symptoms. An educational program must be completed before patient inclusion. A total of 680 patients with advanced cancer and one caregiver per patient are included when patients come for start of last line of chemotherapy, defined according to national treatment guidelines. Data registration, clinical variables, and patient- and caregiver-reported outcomes take place every 2 months for 1 year or until death. The primary outcome is use of chemotherapy in the last 3 months of life by comparing the proportion of patients who receive this in the intervention and control groups. Primary outcome is use of chemotherapy in the last 3 months before death, i.e. number of patients. Secondary outcomes are initiation, discontinuation and number of cycles, last 3 months of life, administration of other medical interventions in the last month of life, symptom burden, quality of life (QoL), satisfaction with information and follow-up, and caregiver health, QoL, and satisfaction with care. Discussion: Results from this C-RCT will be used to raise the awareness about the positive outcomes of early provision of specialized palliative care using pathways for patients with advanced cancer receiving medical anticancer treatment. The long-term clinical objective is to integrate these patient-centered pathways in Norwegian cancer care. The specific focus on the patient and family and the organization of a predictable care trajectory is consistent with current Norwegian strategies for cancer care. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03088202. Registered on 23 March 2017.

Introduction The evidence base for parenteral nutrition (PN) in advanced cancer patients is limited. We studied healthcare providers’ (HCPs’) experiences with PN in cancer patients, focusing on perceived treatment benefits and challenges. Methods An 18-item online survey was emailed to HCPs attending one of three regional palliative care seminars held within a 6-month period. The survey included single-response items, multiple-response items, and free text boxes concerning PN. Descriptive statistics and qualitative thematic content analysis were applied. Results One hundred and two seminar participants completed the survey. Ninety-three percent were female, 86% were nurses/oncological nurses, and 80% worked in primary care. Respondents reported a well-functioning collaboration across levels of care. They perceived that PN may increase the patients’ level of energy, improve the general condition, and reduce eating-related distress. On the downside, HCPs observed burdensome side effects, that the treatment was resource-demanding, and that decisions on PN withdrawal were difficult. Conclusion The study results are based on the perspectives of more than 100 HCPs with comprehensive clinical experience with PN. Their knowledge represents an important experience base for improvement of healthcare services and advanced care planning.