Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34292766›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology2021

US Trends in Opioid Access Among Patients With Poor Prognosis Cancer Near the End-of-Life.

Andrea C Enzinger, Kaushik Ghosh, Nancy L Keating, David M Cutler, Mary Beth Landrum, Alexi A Wright

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 67 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
67citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

67 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Changes in opioid prescribing and high-risk co-prescribing after implementation of the 2016 CDC opioid guideline among older adults with and without cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Opioid prescribing patterns at the end of life in an asian advanced cancer cohort: differences by palliative care consultation status.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

7 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Andrea C EnzingerDivision of Population Sciences, Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0001-7502-8081
Kaushik GhoshNew England Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.
Nancy L KeatingDepartment of Healthcare Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0002-8274-4681
David M CutlerNew England Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.
Mary Beth LandrumDepartment of Healthcare Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Alexi A WrightDivision of Population Sciences, Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0002-9776-7114

Funding

PA-20-072, Measuring the Clinical and Economic Outcomes Associated with Delivery Systems: "Are Health Systems Better at Responding to Pandemics?"U19HS024072 · AHRQ · NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH · PI CUTLER, DAVID M · 2015 to 2021
$19.8M
AHRQ HHS U19 HS024072
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeHeightened regulations have decreased opioid prescribing across the United States, yet little is known about trends in opioid access among patients dying of cancer.

methodsAmong 270,632 Medicare fee-for-service decedents with poor prognosis cancers, we used part D data to examine trends from 2007 to 2017 in opioid prescription fills and opioid potency (morphine milligram equivalents per day [MMED]) near the end-of-life (EOL), defined as the 30 days before death or hospice enrollment. We used administrative claims to evaluate trends in pain-related emergency department (ED) visits near EOL.

resultsBetween 2007 and 2017, the proportion of decedents with poor prognosis cancers receiving ≥ 1 opioid prescription near EOL declined 15.5% (relative percent difference [RPD]), from 42.0% (95% CI, 41.4 to 42.7) to 35.5% (95% CI, 34.9 to 36.0) and the proportion receiving ≥ 1 long-acting opioid prescription declined 36.5% (RPD), from 18.1% (95% CI, 17.6 to 18.6) to 11.5% (95% CI, 11.1 to 11.9). Among decedents receiving opioids near EOL, the mean daily dose fell 24.5%, from 85.6 MMED (95% CI, 82.9 to 88.3) to 64.6 (95% CI, 62.7 to 66.6) MMED. Overall, the total amount of opioids prescribed per decedent near EOL (averaged across those who did and did not receive an opioid) fell 38.0%, from 1,075 morphine milligram equivalents per decedent (95% CI, 1,042 to 1,109) to 666 morphine milligram equivalents per decedent (95% CI, 646 to 686). Simultaneously, the proportion of patients with pain-related ED visits increased 50.8% (RPD), from 13.2% (95% CI, 12.7 to 13.6) to 19.9% (95% CI, 19.4 to 20.4). Sensitivity analyses demonstrated similar declines in opioid utilization in the 60 and 90 days before death or hospice, and suggested that trends in opioid access were not confounded by secular trends in hospice utilization.

conclusionOpioid use among patients dying of cancer has declined substantially from 2007 to 2017. Rising pain-related ED visits suggests that EOL cancer pain management may be worsening.

Indexed as

Administrative Claims, HealthcareAgedAged, 80 and overAnalgesics, OpioidCancer PainDeathDrug PrescriptionsDrug UtilizationEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHumansInsurance, Pharmaceutical ServicesMaleMedicarePain ManagementAnalgesics, Opioid

Identifiers

PMID34292766
PMCPMC8425843

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.