Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jul;30(7):5645-5658.
doi: 10.1007/s00520-022-06895-w. Epub 2022 Feb 15.

A systematic review of assessment approaches to predict opioid misuse in people with cancer

Affiliations

A systematic review of assessment approaches to predict opioid misuse in people with cancer

Robyn Keall et al. Support Care Cancer. 2022 Jul.

Abstract

Context: Cancer prevalence is increasing, with many patients requiring opioid analgesia. Clinicians need to ensure patients receive adequate pain relief. However, opioid misuse is widespread, and cancer patients are at risk.

Objectives: This study aims (1) to identify screening approaches that have been used to assess and monitor risk of opioid misuse in patients with cancer; (2) to compare the prevalence of risk estimated by each of these screening approaches; and (3) to compare risk factors among demographic and clinical variables associated with a positive screen on each of the approaches.

Methods: Medline, Cochrane Controlled Trial Register, PubMed, PsycINFO, and Embase databases were searched for articles reporting opioid misuse screening in cancer patients, along with handsearching the reference list of included articles. Bias was assessed using tools from the Joanna Briggs Suite.

Results: Eighteen studies met the eligibility criteria, evaluating seven approaches: Urine Drug Test (UDT) (n = 8); the Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain (SOAPP) and two variants, Revised and Short Form (n = 6); the Cut-down, Annoyed, Guilty, Eye-opener (CAGE) tool and one variant, Adapted to Include Drugs (n = 6); the Opioid Risk Tool (ORT) (n = 4); Prescription Monitoring Program (PMP) (n = 3); the Screen for Opioid-Associated Aberrant Behavior Risk (SOABR) (n = 1); and structured/specialist interviews (n = 1). Eight studies compared two or more approaches. The rates of risk of opioid misuse in the studied populations ranged from 6 to 65%, acknowledging that estimates are likely to have varied partly because of how specific to opioids the screening approaches were and whether a single or multi-step approach was used. UDT prompted by an intervention or observation of aberrant opioid behaviors (AOB) were conclusive of actual opioid misuse found to be 6.5-24%. Younger age, found in 8/10 studies; personal or family history of anxiety or other mental ill health, found in 6/8 studies; and history of illicit drug use, found in 4/6 studies, showed an increased risk of misuse.

Conclusions: Younger age, personal or familial mental health history, and history of illicit drug use consistently showed an increased risk of opioid misuse. Clinical suspicion of opioid misuse may be raised by data from PMP or any of the standardized list of AOBs. Clinicians may use SOAPP-R, CAGE-AID, or ORT to screen for increased risk and may use UDT to confirm suspicion of opioid misuse or monitor adherence. More research into this important area is required.

Significance of results: This systematic review summarized the literature on the use of opioid misuse risk approaches in people with cancer. The rates of reported risk range from 6 to 65%; however, true rate may be closer to 6.5-24%. Younger age, personal or familial mental health history, and history of illicit drug use consistently showed an increased risk of opioid misuse. Clinicians may choose from several approaches. Limited data are available on feasibility and patient experience. PROSPERO registration number. CRD42020163385.

Keywords: Cancer; Drug misuse; Opioid; Pain; Screening.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow diagram of the article selection process

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. International Agency for Research on Cancer- World Health Organisation. Global Cancer Observatory,. 2018 [cited 2020 4th November,]
    1. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Cancer in Australia: In brief 2019. Cancer series no. 122. , A.I.o.H. Wellbeing, Editor. 2019: Canberra.
    1. Caraceni A, et al. Use of opioid analgesics in the treatment of cancer pain: evidence-based recommendations from the EAPC. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13(2):e58–68. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(12)70040-2. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Swarm RA, et al. Adult Cancer Pain, Version 3. 2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2019;17(8):977–1007. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2019.0038. - DOI - PubMed
    1. National Institute on Drug Abuse. Misuse of prescription drugs report overview. 2021 [cited 2021 9th March,]; Available from: https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/misuse-prescript... on 2021

Publication types

MeSH terms