Background: Breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) is a predictor of interference with general activities and poor pain management. The extent of this influence has not yet been determined. Objective: This study aimed to investigate the influence of BTcP on general activities, and pain management in patients with controlled background pain. Design: Single-center prospective observational study. Setting/Subjects: The study cohort comprised 258 consecutive patients (female, 40.0%; mean age, 64.5 years) who had received opioid medication for cancer pain for over 2 weeks. Measurements: A recommended diagnostic algorithm was used to quantitate and compare interference with general activities, average background pain intensity over the previous 24 hours (24h-PI), and achievement of personalized pain goals (PPGs) (24h-PI≤PPG) of 119 patients with and 139 patients without BTcP. Results: Interference with general activities, 24h-PI, and PPG scores [mean (standard deviation)] in patients with BTcP were 2.8 (2.2), 3.0 (1.7), and 1.8 (1.4), respectively, which are all significantly higher than for those without BTcP [1.3 (2.0), p < 0.01; 1.7 (1.6), p < 0.01; 1.5 (1.3), p = 0.03], respectively. A significantly smaller percentage of patients with BTcP than without BTcP achieved their PPGs (36.1% vs. 67.6%, p < 0.01). Conclusions: BTcP has a negative impact on general activities and pain management. Healthcare providers should recognize that management of BTcP is important in improving general activities and management of cancer pain.

Background: The study aimed to clarify the efficacy of the “3‐Day Surprise Question (3DSQ)” in predicting the prognosis for advanced cancer patients with impending death.Patients and Methods: This study was a part of multicenter prospective observational study which investigated the dying process in advanced cancer patients in Japan. For patients with a Palliative Performance Scale ≤20, the 3DSQ “Would I be surprised if this patient died in the next 3 days?” was answered by their physicians. In addition to the sensitivity and specificity of the 3DSQ, the characteristics of patients who survived longer than expected were examined via multivariate analysis.Results: Among the 1896 patients enrolled, 1411 were evaluated. Among 1179 (83.6%) patients who were classified into the “Not surprised” group, 636 patients died within 3 days. Among 232 (16.4%) patients of “Yes surprised” group, 194 patients lived longer than 3 days. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the 3DSQ were 94.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 92.7% to 95.8%), 26.3% (95% CI: 24.8% to 27.6%), 53.9% (95% CI: 53.0% to 54.7%), and 83.6% (95% CI: 78.7% to 87.7%), respectively. Multivariate analysis showed palpable radial artery, absent respiration with mandibular movement, SpO₂ ≥ 90%, opioid administration, and no continuous deep sedation as characteristics of patients who lived longer than expected.Conclusions: The 3‐Day Surprise Question can be a useful screening tool to identify advanced cancer patients with impending death.

Background: Limited information is available on the relationship between C-reactive protein (CRP) levels and pain in advanced cancer. Objectives: To investigate the relationship between serum levels of CRP and subtypes of pain. Design: A secondary cross-sectional analysis of a prospective cohort study. Setting/Subjects: Patients with advanced cancer admitted to 23 palliative care units in Japan. Measurements: Patients rated the severity of pain on the numerical rating scale (NRS) and physicians evaluated pain on the integrated palliative care outcome scale (IPOS). Physicians assessed neuropathic pain and breakthrough pain based on their presence or absence. Patients were divided into four groups according to CRP levels. Comparisons were performed using the Kruskal–Wallis test or chi-squared test. To evaluate the relationship between CRP and subtypes of pain, adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) in logistic models were calculated. Results: We divided 1513 patients into four groups: low CRP ( n = 234), moderate CRP ( n = 513), high CRP ( n = 352), and very high CRP ( n = 414). Spearman's correlation coefficient between CRP and pain NRS and that between CRP and pain IPOS were 0.15 ( p < 0.001) and 0.16 ( p < 0.001), respectively. In the models of pain NRS and pain IPOS, significantly higher adjusted ORs than in the low CRP group were observed in the very high CRP group (1.81 [95% CI 1.14–2.88], p = 0.01; 1.74 [95% CI 1.18–2.57], p = 0.005, respectively). Relationships were not observed between CRP, neuropathic pain, and breakthrough pain. Conclusions: The results indicated direct relationships between CRP, pain NRS, and pain IPOS.