Development of Prognosis in Palliative care Study (PiPS) predictor models to improve prognostication in advanced cancer: prospective cohort study.

Objective: To develop a novel prognostic indicator for use in patients with advanced cancer that is significantly better than clinicians' estimates of survival.

Design: Prospective multicentre observational cohort study.

Setting: 18 palliative care services in the UK (including hospices, hospital support teams, and community teams).

Factors affecting recruitment to an observational multicentre palliative care study.

Objectives: To identify those factors which adversely affected recruitment to a large multicentre palliative care study.

Methods: Patient accrual to a multicentre, observational, palliative care study was monitored at three critical junctures in the research process. (1) Eligibility-did the patient fulfil the study entry criteria? (2) Accessibility-was it possible to access the patient to be able to inform them about the study? (3) Consent-did the patient agree to participate in the study? The reasons why patients were ineligible, inaccessible or refused consent were recorded.

Prognosticating in patients with advanced cancer--observational study comparing the accuracy of clinicians' and patients' estimates of survival.

Background: Clinicians' prognoses in patients with advanced cancer are imprecise. The aim of this study was to compare doctors', nurses' and patients' survival predictions and to identify factors which influence accuracy.

Patients And Methods: Some 1018 patients with advanced cancer were recruited.

Patients' reports or clinicians' assessments: which are better for prognosticating?

Background: The Prognosis in Palliative care Scale (PiPS) predicts survival in advanced cancer patients more accurately than a doctor's or a nurse's estimate. PiPS scores are derived using observer ratings of symptom severity and performance status. The purpose of this study was to determine whether patient-rated data would provide better prognostic estimates than clinician observer ratings.

Development of Prognosis in Palliative care Study (PiPS) predictor models to improve prognostication in advanced cancer: prospective cohort study.

Objective: To develop a novel prognostic indicator for use in patients with advanced cancer that is significantly better than clinicians' estimates of survival.

Design: Prospective multicentre observational cohort study.

Setting: 18 palliative care services in the UK (including hospices, hospital support teams, and community teams).

Development of prognosis in palliative care study (PiPS) predictor models to improve prognostication in advanced cancer: prospective cohort study.

Objective: To develop a novel prognostic indicator for use in patients with advanced cancer that is significantly better than clinicians' estimates of survival.

Design: Prospective multicentre observational cohort study.

Setting: 18 palliative care services in the UK (including hospices, hospital support teams, and community teams).

Experience in the use of the palliative care outcome scale.

Goals Of Work: The objective of the study is to assess the Palliative Care Outcome Scale (POS) as a potential audit tool within a specialist cancer centre. It also aims to answer the following questions: does the tool identify problem areas and demonstrate changes in quality of life over time? How well do staff and patient ratings correlate?

Patients And Methods: The POS questionnaire was piloted at a specialist cancer centre. Thirty consecutive patients admitted to the palliative care wards and ward staff completed questionnaires on admission and twice weekly until discharge or death.

A retrospective study of the association between haematological and biochemical parameters and morphine intolerance in patients with cancer pain.

Background: Morphine is the strong opioid of choice for the treatment of moderate to severe cancer pain according to guidelines of the World Health Organization (WHO). However, a minority of patients do not receive the desired analgesic effect or suffer intolerable side effects from morphine, and are switched to alternative opioids.

Methods: The aim of this retrospective study was to identify factors that might be associated with morphine intolerance.

An assessment of the efficacy and tolerability of a 'double dose' of normal-release morphine sulphate at bedtime.

This study was a prospective, randomized, open, crossover study comparing a double dose (DD) of normal-release (NR) morphine at bedtime with a single dose (SD) of NR morphine at bedtime and 4 h later. Twenty patients completed the study. Four patients required breakthrough analgesia during the SD phase of the study, whilst 11 patients required breakthrough analgesia during the DD phase of the study (P = 0.

Is there a dose response relationship for clodronate in the treatment of tumour induced hypercalcaemia?

Eighty-six patients with tumour induced hypercalcaemia were randomised to 600, 900, 1200 or 1500 mg of intravenous clodronate, according to post hydration serum calcium levels. Sixty-seven were evaluable for response. The overall response rate was 49.

The nature of terminal malignant bowel obstruction and its impact on patients with advanced cancer.

Patients with bowel obstruction due to advanced cancer often have a poor prognosis and suffer distressing symptoms that can be difficult to manage. Research to date has focused on medical interventions and the measurement and control of symptoms. Little attention has been given to patients' perceptions of their quality of life or the impact of their illness.

A phase II study to establish the efficacy and toxicity of sodium valproate in patients with cancer-related neuropathic pain.

The efficacy and toxicity of sodium valproate for cancer-related neuropathic pain was evaluated in a phase II study at this cancer center. Twenty-five patients entered the study over a 13 month period. Pain was assessed using a pain scale based on the Brief Pain Inventory at days 0, 8 and 15.