Cancer patients are often poly-symptomatic which distressingly affects their quality of lives (QOLs). Alhough, conventional management provides adequate symptom control, yet is coupled with some limitations. Complementary therapies (CTs) have shown beneficial effects in cancer patients for symptomatic relief. The aim of this article is to provide evidence-based review of commonly used CTs for symptom management in cancer care. Hypnosis has promising evidence to be used for managing symptoms such as pain, chemotherapy-induced nausea/vomiting, distress, fatigue, and hot flashes. Guided imagery increases comfort and can be used as a psycho-supportive therapy. Meditation substantially improves psychological function, mental health, and QOL. Cognitive behavioral therapies effectively reduce pain, distress, fatigue, anxiety, and depression; and improve subjective sleep outcomes along with mood and QOL. Yoga has short term beneficial effects for anxiety, depression, fatigue, perceived stress, QOL, and well-being. T'ai Chi and qigong are beneficial adjunctive therapies for supportive cancer care, but their role in reducing cancer pain is not well proven. Acupuncture is effective for reducing treatment related side-effects, pain and fatigue. Other therapies such as massage techniques, energy therapies, and spiritual interventions have also demonstrated positive role in managing cancer-related symptoms and improve overall well-being. However, the clinical effectiveness of these therapies for symptom management in cancer patients cannot be concluded due to poor strength of evidence. Nonetheless, these are relatively free from risks and hence can be given along with conventional treatments. Only by tailoring these therapies as per patient's beliefs and preferences, optimal patient-centered holistic care can be provided.

Introduction: The phantom limb pain (PLP) and phantom limb sensation (PLS) are very common among amputated cancer patients, and they lead to considerable morbidity. In spite of this, there is a lack of epidemiological data of this phenomenon among the Asian population. This study was done to provide the data from Indian population. Methods: The prevalence of PLP, stump pain (SP), and PLS was prospectively analyzed from the amputated cancer patients over a period of 2 years in Dr. B.R.A. Institute Rotary Cancer Hospital, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi. The risk factors and the impact of phantom phenomenon on patients were also noted. Results: The prevalence of PLP was 41% at 3 and 12 months and 45.3% at 6 months, whereas that of SP and PLS was 14.4% and 71.2% at 3 months, 18.75% and 37.1% at 6 months, 15.8% and 32.4% at 12 months, respectively. There was higher prevalence of PLP and PLS among the patients with history of preamputation pain, smoking with proximal level of amputation, receiving general anesthesia, receiving intravenous (IV) opioid postoperative analgesia, and developing neuroma or infection. Conclusion: The prevalence of PLP and PLS was higher among the cancer amputees as compared to SP, and a few risk factors responsible for their higher prevalence were found in our study. The PLP and PLS lead to considerable morbidity in terms of sleep disturbance and depression.

• The basic reproduction number R0 for India was 2.08. • The Rt for India reduced to 1.16 on 22 April, about a month into the nation-wide lockdown. • A gradual lockdown relaxation farther after the first peak has passed is beneficial. • Testing and isolation prevent more secondary infections when social restrictions are relaxed. • Ramping up testing has many benefits and is much more economically feasible than extending lockdowns.

The World Health Organization estimated that more than 60% of the 14 million new cancer cases worldwide in 2012 were reported in the developing part of the world, including Asia, Africa, Central and South America. Cancer survival rate is poorer in developing countries due to diagnosis at late stage and limited access to timely treatment. Since the disease per se cannot be treated even with the best available treatment modalities, what remains important is symptom management and providing comfort care to these patients. The incidence of pain in advanced stages of cancer approaches 70-80%. Lack of preventive strategies, poverty, illiteracy, and social stigma are the biggest cause of pain suffering and patient presenting in advance stage of their disease. The need for palliative care is expanding due to aging of world's population and increase in the rate of cancer in developed and developing countries. A huge gap remains between demand and current palliative care services. Overcoming barriers to palliative care is a major global health agenda that need immediate attention. Main causes of inadequate pain relief remain lack of knowledge among physician and patients, lack of adequate supply of opioids and other drugs for pain relief, strong bureaucracy involved in terms of procurement, and dispensing of opioids. Beside this, poverty and illiteracy remain the most important factors of increased suffering.

Intractable cancer pain not amenable to standard oral or parenteral analgesics is a horrifying truth in 10-15% of patients. Interventional pain management techniques are an indispensable arsenal in pain physician's armamentarium for severe, intractable pain and can be broadly classified into neuroablative and neuromodulation techniques. An array of neurolytic techniques (chemical, thermal, or surgical) can be employed for ablation of individual nerve fibers, plexuses, or intrathecalneurolysis in patients with resistant pain and short life-expectancy. Neuraxial administration of drugs and spinal cord stimulation to modulate or alter the pain perception constitutes the most frequently employed neuromodulation techniques. Lately, there is a rising call for early introduction of interventional techniques in carefully selected patients simultaneously or even before starting strong opioids. After decades of empirical use, it is the need of the hour to head towards professionalism and standardization in order to secure credibility of specialization and those practicing it. Even though the interventional management has found a definite place in cancer pain, there is a dearth of evidence-based practice guidelines for interventional therapies in cancer pain. This may be because of paucity of good quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating their safety and efficacy in cancer pain. Laying standardized guidelines based on existing and emerging evidence will act as a foundation step towards strengthening, credentialing, and dissemination of the specialty of interventional cancer pain management. This will also ensure an improved decision-making and quality of life (QoL) of the suffering patients.