ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021
A Longitudinal Study of Breakthrough Cancer Pain: An Extension of IOPS-MS Study.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- A scoping review of breakthrough cancer pain: Multidimensional patient needs and influencing factors.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2025Review
- Are we doing enough to treat cancer pain? The urgent need for action in oncology practice.Future oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- [Treatment of cancer-related pain-From pharmacotherapy to invasive procedures].Die Anaesthesiologie · 2025Review
- Evaluation of Gabapentin as a Treatment of Breakthrough Cancer Pain Caused by Metastatic Prostate Adenocarcinoma.Journal of pain research · 2023Article
- Fentanyl in cancer pain management: avoiding hasty judgments and discerning its potential benefits.Drugs in context · 2023Review
- Retrospective Observational Study on the Characteristics of Pain and Associated Factors of Breakthrough Pain in AdvancedPain research & management · 2022Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The aim of this study was to longitudinally assess the characteristics of background pain and breakthrough pain (BTcP), analgesic treatment, and satisfaction with treatment four weeks after the first assessment.
methodsAdult cancer patients with a diagnosis of BTcP were included. At T0, age, gender, visit setting, cancer diagnosis, the extent of the disease, ongoing anticancer treatments, and Karnofsky level were recorded. The background pain intensity in the last 24 h (on a numerical scale 0-10), opioids used for background pain, and their doses, expressed as oral morphine equivalents (OME), as well as other analgesic drugs, were recorded. The number of BTcP episodes, their intensity, predictability and precipitating factors, onset duration of untreated episodes, and interference with daily activities were collected. Analgesics and doses used for BTcP, and the mean time to meaningful pain relief after taking medication, were assessed. The level of satisfaction with BTcP medication was also assessed. Adverse effects to be attributed to these medications were also recorded. At T4, the same data were evaluated.
resultsAfter one-month follow-up, patients had a lower number of BTcP episodes and peak intensity, possibly due to the optimization of background analgesia. The principal characteristics of BTcP did not change significantly.
conclusionA careful and continuous assessment should be guaranteed to all patients to limit the burden induced by BTcP, other than treating BTcP episodes with short-onset opioids.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.