Kong, M., Shin, S.H., Lee, E., & Yun, E.K. (2014). The effect of laughter therapy on radiation dermatitis in patients with breast cancer: A single-blind prospective pilot study. OncoTargets and Therapy, 7, 2053–2059.
To measure the effectiveness of laughter therapy for preventing radiation-induced dermatitis in patients with breast cancer who are receiving radiation therapy (RT)
Thirty-seven patients were enrolled in the study. Eighteen patients were assigned to the experimental group, which received laughter therapy during radiation treatment, based on their preference to participate. Nineteen patients who did not want to participate in the laughter therapy were assigned to the control group. The laughter therapy started at the beginning of therapy and continued until completion of RT. In this three-part intervention study, patients were assessed by staff observation or a questionnaire before and after laughter therapy. Patients in the control group were not allowed to use any prophylactic creams or lotion (p. 2054).
PHASE OF CARE: Active antitumor treatment
Single-blind, two-group, prospective, nonrandom design
The authors stated that, although laughter therapy showed favorable therapeutic efficacy in preventing dermatitis and alleviating pain, they could not draw a definite conclusion because of the lack of statistical significance. An additional study of a larger sample group is necessary. Some limitations exist in this small pilot study, which makes it difficult to interpret the data and draw conclusions.
This single-blind, prospective, pilot study showed that laughter therapy can be beneficial in preventing radiation-induced dermatitis in patient with breast cancer; however, a well-designed randomized study with a larger sample size is needed to confirm the efficacy of the study.
Laughter therapy may have a beneficial effect on patients with radiation dermatitis undergoing breast cancer treatment. However, not enough data exist to support the sole use of this intervention during treatment.
Kongsgaard, U.E., Eeg, M., & Greisen, H. (2014). The use of Instanyl® in the treatment of breakthrough pain in cancer patients: A 3-month observational, prospective, cohort study. Supportive Care in Cancer, 22, 1655–1662.
To evaluate Instanyl® for breakthrough pain in patients with cancer in real-life settings
This study followed adult patients with cancer receiving Instanyl® in seven countries at 61 centers. The Brief Pain Inventory Short Form (BPI) and patient Treatment Satisfaction Scale (TSS) questionnaires were used to assess patient satisfaction with pain management. Descriptive statistics of the patient population were also collected. The Instanyl® doses received by patients were 50, 100, and 200 micrograms, and data were collected at three time points: baseline, week 4, and week 13.
Observational prospective cohort study
The primary outcome variables were success of titration, measured by whether maintenance dose level was achieved, and the dose level of Instanyl® (maintenance dose). The secondary outcome variables measured were changes in maintenance dose and the level of background pain medication, severity and impact of pain on daily life (assessed by the BPI), and satisfaction with current pain medicine (assessed by the TSS). The BPI and TSS were only used in the United Kingdom and in France and were assessed at baseline and during week 4. Adverse drug reactions were measured as well as reasons for and time to Instanyl® termination.
The successful titration of Instanyl® to a maintenance dose was achieved in 84.5% of patients. There was a difference noted between different countries with successful titration rates highest in Greece and Norway and lowest in France and the United Kingdom. The majority of the patients who were successfully titrated achieved this with 50 micrograms of fentanyl, which was the lowest dose. Most patients showed no change in the maintenance dose strength throughout the study even though disease progression was expected. 49.8% of patients were successfully titrated at 50 micrograms, the lowest dose. Treatment was followed to the duration of 13 weeks. In 4.5% of patients, termination was due to lack of efficacy; in 2.3% it was due to adverse effects; and in 7.1% it was due to the inability to successfully titrate the medication. Patients' worst-pain scores, pain severity, and pain interference with activities declined significantly within the first four weeks (p < .001).
The rate of successful titration and pain management using Instanyl® was high in this study, and successful titration was often achieved with the lowest possible dose of Instanyl®. Patients were more satisfied with their pain management and had reductions in pain severity, worst-pain score, and pain interference with daily activities.
This study adds to the body of evidence regarding the efficacy of opioid nasal spray for breakthrough pain. The authors suggest that patients who did not respond were likely those for whom titration to full dosage was not achieved. Nurses need to be aware of full dosage needs for efficacy. There continues to be a lack of evidence regarding the long-term effects and any potential adverse effects on the nasal cavity for this medication type.
Kong, M., & Hong, S.E. (2013). Topical use of recombinant human epidermal growth factor (EGF)-based cream to prevent radiation dermatitis in breast cancer patients: A single-blind randomized preliminary study. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention, 14, 4859–4864.
To determine if the use of a human epidermal growth factor (EGF)-based cream can prevent radiation dermatitis in patients with breast cancer treated with radiation
Patients with breast cancer needing post-operative radiation randomly were assigned to use human recombinant EGF-based cream (intervention) or general supportive skin care (control). The intervention group applied study cream three times daily to the radiated area from start of treatment through two weeks post-completion of treatment. The control group washed gently with or without mild soap, patting to dry. No cosmetics, perfumes, creams, or lotions were allowed on the treated area in the control arm.
Examination of site was completed prior to RT, weekly during RT, and six weeks post-RT. Skin changes were scored using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) criteria by a radiation oncologist blinded to group assignment. Pain was evaluated with a 10-point visual analog scale. Intervention patients completed a questionnaire regarding ease of cream application at the end of the study.
Although there was a difference in the intervention and control groups in terms of grade 3 dermatitis, (15% compared to 40%), there was no statistical difference between the intervention of human recombinant EGF-based cream and the control of supportive skin care. As with previous studies, total RT dose and lymph node radiation were prognostic factors for grade 3 radiation dermatitis. This study did not look at patient-related prognostic factors that potentially contribute to increased radiation dermatitis.
There continues to be no “best practice” for prevention and treatment of radiation dermatitis. Practice varies worldwide. Further studies with a large sample size and inclusion of a double-blinding would be useful for this product as several studies have shown with EGF for wound healing.
Komatsu, Y., Okita, K., Yuki, S., Furuhata, T., Fukushima, H., Masuko, H., . . . Takahashi, Y. (2015). Open-label, randomized, comparative, phase III study on effects of reducing steroid use in combination with palonosetron. Cancer Science, 106, 891–895.
To evaluate chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and adverse events when dexamethasone is eliminated on days 2 and 3 of moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (not including anthracyclines or cyclophosphamide) in combination with palonosetron or another 5HT3 receptor antagonist
The control group received 9.9 mg of dexamethasone IV then 0.75 mg of palonosetron IV before moderately emetogenic chemotherapy then either 8 mg of oral dexamethasone or 6.6 mg of IV dexamethasone on days 2 and 3 of chemotherapy. The treatment group received only 9.9 mg of dexamethasone IV then 0.75 mg of palonosetron IV before moderately emetogenic chemotherapy and no additional prophylactic antiemetics. Rescue antiemetic drugs (excluding dexamethasone, NK1 receptor antagonists, serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and serotonin–norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors) were allowed for both the treatment and control groups.
Open-label, noninferiority, randomized, comparative, phase 3 study
The noninferiority of the experimental group in regard to complete response rate (acute and delayed phases) and complete control rate (overall, acute, and delayed phases) was demonstrated. There was no difference between the treatment and control groups. A subgroup analysis according to age, sex, and chemotherapy showed no statistical differences in complete response rates. No significant difference in adverse events was found between the treatment and control group with primary events in both groups being constipation, hiccups, anorexia, and elevated alanine transaminase.
There was no difference in chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (acute and delayed) or adverse events between one-day dexamethasone plus palonosetron versus three-day dexamethasone plus palonosetron among patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (not including anthracyclines or cyclophosphamide).
The one-day administration of dexamethasone (with palonosetron) was adequate in controlling acute and delayed nausea and vomiting in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy when the chemotherapy did not include anthracyclines or cyclophosphamide.
Komatsu, H., Hayashi, N., Suzuki, K., Yagasaki, K., Iioka, Y., Neumann, J., . . . & Ueno, N.T. (2012). Guided self-help for prevention of depression and anxiety in women with breast cancer. ISRN Nursing, 716367.
Evaluate the effects of a self-help program on depression and anxiety in women with breast cancer receiving chemotherapy
Patients were assigned to intervention or treatment groups by authors (not random assignment). The intervention was a self-learning package aimed at rehearsing the chemotherapy procedure, improving beliefs in managing side effects, and helping build problem-solving skills. This group also was given a professional-led support group that met two to three times during the study. The control group received usual care including a chemotherapy education leaflet. Nurses monitored patient progress from review of patient diaries in the intervention group that documented side effects and self management performed at the beginning of each cycle of chemotherapy. Nurses involved with the intervention were educated and demonstrated increased knowledge regarding improving coping processes in daily living. Data were collected at baseline, one week, three months, and six months.
PHASE OF CARE: Active antitumor treatment
Non-random, two-group comparison, quasi-experimental—historical control approach
No significant differences were found in outcomes between study groups. Study measures improved over time in all patients.
This study did not find that the intervention tested here had an effect on depression or anxiety.
This particular study did not demonstrate effectiveness of the intervention tested here. The study had several limitations. Anxiety and depression improved in all patients, suggesting that usual nursing education provided was just as effective as the expanded approach used here. Several study results have suggested that interventions aimed at improving anxiety and depression are most effective for patients who have clinically relevant anxiety and depression.
Kollmannsberger, C., Schittenhelm, M., Honecker, F., Tillner, J., Weber, D., Oechsle, K., . . . Bokemeyer, C. (2006). A phase I study of the humanized monoclonal anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibody EMD 72000 (matuzumab) in combination with paclitaxel in patients with EGFR-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Annals of Oncology, 17, 1007–1013.
To evaluate the effectiveness of dexamethasone and pyridoxine on the frequency and severity of palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (PPE) in patients with solid tumors receiving pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD).
Evaluable patients had at least two cycles of therapy. A total of 51 cycles of PLD was applied to the 19 patients. The maximum tolerated dose was 60 mg/m2 every 28 days. In a second step, interval reductions at the highest four weekly doses from 28 to 21 to 14 days were planned. Patients received oral dexamethasone 8 mg BID on days 1 to 5 with vitamin B6 100 mg BID continuously along with PLD.
PPE was evaluated with a scale from grade 1 to 4. The specific grading scale was not discussed.
Compared to reported frequencies of up to 25%, the incidence of PPE caused by PLD appeared to decrease with concomitant dexamethasone and vitamin B6.
Koller, A., Miaskowski, C., De Geest, S., Opitz, O., & Spichiger, E. (2012). A systematic evaluation of content, structure, and efficacy of interventions to improve patients' self-management of cancer pain. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 44, 264–284.
Although the efficacy of various intervention components could not be clearly delineated, this systematic review provides an overview of the various structural and content components of intervention studies to improve cancer pain management and an evaluation of combinations of components.
Nurses need to be aware of the various structural and content components of interventions to support patients’ self-management of cancer pain. The interventions should be culturally appropriate and include written material; a face-to-face educational session of at least 15 minutes; and information about pain treatment, cognitive barriers to pain management, and implementation of self-management pain strategies.
Koller, A., Miaskowski, C., De Geest, S., Opitz, O., & Spichiger, E. (2013). Results of a randomized controlled pilot study of a self-management intervention for cancer pain. European Journal of Oncology Nursing, 17, 284–291.
To evaluate the PRO-SELF© Plus Pain Control Program in a German population to determine effect sizes and feasibility
Participants received six visits and four phone calls from an intervention nurse, who taught them effective ways to self-manage their pain, including how to set pain goals, how to titrate prescribed analgesics, how to communicate with their physician, and how to identify management strategies to achieve their pain goals. They also received nurse coaching on their recent successes and failures, as well as individualized information about their medications during each visit and phone call.
Neither average nor worst pain scores demonstrated statistically significant group-by-time interaction effects between the intervention and control group over the 10-week or 22-week period. The difference in the knowledge scores between the intervention and control groups was statistically significant. A large percentage of participants did not complete the study for various reasons.
This study was the first to adapt a U.S.-developed pain intervention for a German audience. It did increase pain self-management knowledge and determine effect sizes for pain intensity scores.
The nursing intervention piece of this trial can have a great effect on the participants. In the U.S. and German trials, the nursing interventions were able to have an effect on fear of addiction, fear of tolerance, physical dependence, and the patients' understanding of taking their medications on a schedule.
Kolden, G.G., Strauman, T.J., Ward, A., Kuta, J., Woods, T.E., Schneider, K.L., . . . Mullen, B. (2002). A pilot study of group exercise training (GET) for women with primary breast cancer. Feasibility and health benefits. Psycho-Oncology, 11, 447–456.
A group exercise training (GET) intervention was delivered in a structured format three times per week for 16 weeks. The one-hour GET training sessions emphasized physical activities that promote aerobic fitness, strength, and flexibility. The warm-up period lasted 10–15 minutes, the aerobic training phase lasted 20 minutes, and the resistance training and cool-down phase lasted 20 minutes. Exercise intensity and duration were prescribed on an individual basis using the results from baseline fitness assessments. Two exercise physiologists provided each session. Data were collected at baseline, week 8, and week 16.
A quasi-experimental design was used.
BDI, PANAS, and HRSD were significantly improved from baseline to week 16. There was no statistically significant change in anxiety, as measured by STAI, after the exercise intervention. At baseline, participants were not experiencing high levels of distress.
Anxiety levels were not changed significantly from this exercise program, although other health benefits were reported.
Koike, K., Terui, T., Nagasako, T., Horiuchi, I., Machino, T., Kusakabe, T., . . . Ishitani, K. (2016). A new once-a-day fentanyl citrate patch (Fentos Tape) could be a new treatment option in patients with end-of-dose failure using a 72-h transdermal fentanyl matrix patch. Supportive Care in Cancer, 24, 1053–1059.
To assess effectiveness of a once-a-day fentanyl patch for patients receiving a 72-hour patch that does not last for 72 hours
Patients identified as having end-of-dose failure with a 72-hour fentanyl patch were identified and converted to the once-a-day patch according to manufacturer recommendations. In the evening of the switch day, the new patch was applied immediately after removing the 72-hour patch. Treatment for breakthrough pain was adjusted according to the fentanyl dose, and immediate-release morphine or oxycodone was used for breakthrough pain. If patients were on anti-inflammatories, they remained on this medication. Patients recorded study data daily. Of the patients, 15.6% had the 72-hour patch changed to use every 48 hours. Mean frequency of daily rescue doses for breakthrough pain were analyzed.
Of the patients with suspected end-of-dose failure, 84% were switched to the once-a-day patch. The rest had patches switched at 48 rather than 72 hours. On the last day of the 72-hour patch, mean daily dosing for breakthrough pain was 3.61; on the third day after the switch, the mean daily dosing was 1.18 (p < 0.05). Adverse events occurred in 18% of patients with the new patch, including local skin irritation and sensitivity. Of the patients with shortened interval to 48 hours, three showed a decrease in pain score, two showed no change, and two showed increased scores. After the switch to the once-a-day patch, 61% showed more than a 30% reduction in average pain.
Patients switched to the once-a-day fentanyl patch had a reduction in average pain scores and a reduction in rescue medications needed.
Differentiating between breakthrough pain and end-of-dose pain medication failure is important. This study suggests that these may not always be well determined. Study findings suggest that a once-a-day fentanyl citrate patch may be more effective for pain control than the usual 72-hour fentanyl matrix, particularly in patients with end-of-dose failure. This study is limited by its design and sample size. Further well-designed research is warranted.