Context. Although opioids and pregabalin are widely used for cancer-related neuropathic pain (CNP), no clinical trials exist to determine which medications are effective when an opioid-pregabalin combination therapy fails.Objectives. We investigated the efficacy of duloxetine for CNP nonresponsive or intolerant to opioid-pregabalin combination therapy.Methods. A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was performed at 12 specialized palliative care services in Japan. Patients with CNP average pain scores (Brief Pain Inventory [BPI]eItem 5) $ 4 in the previous 24 hours and nonresponsive or intolerant to opioid-pregabalin combination therapy were eligible. Patients with chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathies were excluded. Patients were administered duloxetine 20 mg/day titrated to 40 mg/day or placebo for 10 days. The primary endpoint was BPI-Item 5 on Day 10. Responder analysis measured proportions of patients with 30% and 50% pain decreases.Results. Seventy patients were enrolled. Complete case analysis revealed mean BPI-Item 5 on Day 10 of 4.03 for Group D vs. 4.88 for Group P (P ¼ 0.053). Baseline observation carried forward analysis revealed mean BPI-Item 5 on Day 10 of 4.06 and 4.91 for Groups D and P, respectively (P ¼ 0.048). Clinically meaningful pain improvement ($30%) was reported by 44.1% (n ¼ 15) of patients in Group D vs. 18.2% (n ¼ 6) in Group P (P ¼ 0.02); 32.4% (n ¼ 11) vs. 3.0% (n ¼ 1) of patients in Groups D and P, respectively, reported pain reduction $ 50% (P ¼ 0.002).Conclusion. Adding duloxetine to opioid-pregabalin therapy might have clinical benefit in alleviating refractory CNP. Further studies are needed to conclude the efficacy of adding duloxetine. J Pain Symptom

BackgroundCancer care is currently the most important medical issue in Japan. Total pain of cancer patients consists of a combination of four factors: physical, psychological, social distress, and spiritual pain. Previous studies showed female cancer patients ask for more psychological support and seem to suffer different types of distress compared with male patients, for example, appearance-related symptoms. However, other factors of cancer distress related to gender have not been defined comprehensively. The aim of this study is to clarify the gender differences in cancer distress types in order to elucidate the measures that should be taken in Japan to improve the quality of whole cancer care based on gender-based medicine.MethodsThe data of new patients who had visited the psycho-oncology outpatient service of Kinki University Hospital during the period of May 2013 to October 2015 were collected. Demographic factors and all assessed items were extracted from the patients’ medical charts retrospectively. Based on an inquiry of cancer patients in 2010, each item representing the four factors of “total pain” of cancer patients was chosen, i.e., physical distress (pain, changes in appearance), psychological distress (anxiety, depression), social distress (family problems, job-related problems), and spiritual pain; together with sexuality issues, and answers were analyzed. Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS) was used for the assessment of psychological distress. Chi-square test and Fisher’s exact test were performed for gender differences in the cancer distress types. Pearson’s analysis and multiple logistic regression analysis were performed for the association of gender with each item.ResultsThe data of 101 cancer patients were analyzed and there were more female patients than male patients (female: male ratio = 71:30). Female cancer patients were more likely to suffer from psycho-social issues such as changes in appearance, family problems and sexuality issues than male patients, and male patients were more likely to have spiritual pain.ConclusionsThere were gender differences in the distress types of cancer patients. In order to improve the quality of whole cancer care, more intensive intervention by medical professionals and social support is needed from the viewpoint of gender-based medicine and psycho-oncology.

BackgroundNon-organic lesions or diseases of unknown origin are sometimes misdiagnosed as “psychogenic” disorders or “psychosomatic” diseases. For the quality of life and safety of patients, recent attention has focused on diagnostic error. The aim of this study was to clarify the factors that affected misdiagnoses in psychosomatic medicine by examining typical cases and to explore strategies that reduce diagnostic errors.Case presentationThe study period was from January 2001 to August 2017. The data of patients who had visited the Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, Kindai University Hospital and its branches, Sakai Hospital and Nihonbashi Clinic, were collected. All patients were aged 16 years or over. Multiple factors, such as age, sex, presenting symptoms, initial diagnosis, final diagnosis, sources of re-diagnosis and types of diagnostic errors were retrospectively analyzed from the medical charts of 20 patients. Among them, four typical cases can be described as follows. Case 1; a 79-year-old woman, initially diagnosed with psychogenic vomiting due to depression that was changed to gastric torsion as the final diagnosis. Case 2; a 24-year-old man, diagnosed with an eating disorder that was later changed to esophageal achalasia. Case 10; a 60-year-old woman’s diagnosis changed from conversion disorder to localized muscle atrophy. Case 19; a 68-year-old man, appetite loss from depression due to cancer changed to secondary adrenal insufficiency, isolated ACTH deficiency (IAD).ConclusionThis study showed that multiple factors related to misdiagnoses were combined and had a mutual influence. However, they can be summarized into two important clinical observations, diagnostic system-related problems and provider issues. Provider issues contain mainly cognitive biases such as Anchoring, Availability, Confirmation bias, Delayed diagnosis, and Representativeness. In order to avoid diagnostic errors, both a diagnostic system approach and the reduction of cognitive biases are needed. Psychosomatic medicine doctors should pay more attention to physical symptoms and systemic examination and can play an important role in accepting a perception of patients based on a good, non prejudicial patient/physician relationship.

Aims/Introduction: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Materials and Methods: Several electronic databases were examined on 16 January 2021, including PubMed, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov. Randomized controlled trials were included to compare ACT with usual treatment for people with type 2 diabetes reported in any language. Primary outcome measures were glycated hemoglobin, self-care ability assessed by the summary of diabetes self-care activities and all adverse events. The secondary outcome measure was acceptance assessed by the acceptance and action diabetes questionnaire. Results: Of 678 publications initially identified, three trials were included in the metaanalysis. ACT resulted in a reduction in glycated hemoglobin (mean difference -0.62 points lower in the intervention group; 95% confidence interval -1.07 to -0.16; I 2 = 0%; low-quality evidence). In addition, ACT increased the score of the summary of diabetes self-care activities (mean difference 8.48 points higher in the intervention group; 95% confidence interval 2.16-14.80; high-quality evidence). Adverse events were not measured in all trials. ACT increased scores of the acceptance and action diabetes questionnaire (mean difference 5.98 points higher in the intervention group; 95% confidence interval, 1.42-10.54; I 2 = 43%; low-quality evidence). Conclusions: ACT might reduce glycated hemoglobin, and increase self-care ability and acceptance among people with type 2 diabetes.

No abstract