Opioid analgesics for nociceptive cancer pain: A comprehensive review.

Pain is one of the most burdensome symptoms in people with cancer, and opioid analgesics are considered the mainstay of cancer pain management. For this review, the authors evaluated the efficacy and toxicities of opioid analgesics compared with placebo, other opioids, nonopioid analgesics, and nonpharmacologic treatments for background cancer pain (continuous and relatively constant pain present at rest), and breakthrough cancer pain (transient exacerbation of pain despite stable and adequately controlled background pain). They found a paucity of placebo-controlled trials for background cancer pain, although tapentadol or codeine may be more efficacious than placebo (moderate-certainty to low-certainty evidence).

Do multidisciplinary meetings follow guideline-based care?

Purpose: Multidisciplinary meetings (MDMs) are increasingly being mandated as essential to oncology practice. However, there is a paucity of data on their effectiveness. The aim of this study was to assess whether MDM recommendations were concordant with guidelines in the treatment of lung cancer.

Why do some lung cancer patients receive no anticancer treatment?

Introduction: A significant proportion of lung cancer patients receive no anticancer treatment. This varies from 19% in USA, 33% in Australia, 37% in Scotland, and 50% in Ireland. The aim of this study was to identify the reasons behind this.

Post-prostatectomy radiation therapy: consensus guidelines of the Australian and New Zealand Radiation Oncology Genito-Urinary Group.

Background And Purpose: Three randomised trials have demonstrated the benefit of adjuvant post-prostatectomy radiotherapy (PPRT) for high risk patients. Data also documents the effectiveness of salvage radiotherapy following a biochemical relapse post-prostatectomy. The Radiation Oncology Genito-Urinary Group recognised the need to develop consensus guidelines on to whom, when and how to deliver PPRT.

Medicolegal implications of a multidisciplinary approach to cancer care: consensus recommendations from a national workshop.

Concerns about medicolegal implications of a multidisciplinary approach to cancer care may act as a barrier to the implementation of best practice approaches. While multidisciplinary meetings carry a low level of medicolegal risk, improved documentation and transparency in approach will assist in limiting liability for individual health professionals and health services. The medicolegal implications of a multidisciplinary approach are not affected by whether a health professional bills the patient for attendance at multidisciplinary meetings.

Multidisciplinary care in oncology: medicolegal implications of group decisions.

Consensus is growing that multidisciplinary meetings (MDMs) provide the best means of formulating comprehensive treatment plans for patients with cancer. Although many doctors attend MDMs and contribute to the decision-making process, only a few will become involved in a patient's care after the team meeting. Despite this, if a patient was grieved by a decision made in a MDM and wished to recover damages, all doctors present at the meeting would be personally accountable for decisions related to their area of expertise.