MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408403721 · doi:10.1136/spcare-2024-005185

Long-term opioid prescribing and healthcare encounters in metastatic cancer: observational population study

2025· article· en· W4408403721 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hannah Harsanyi, Lin Yang, Jenny Lau, Winson Y. Cheung, Yuan Xu, Colleen Cuthbert

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Supportive & Palliative Care · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoAlberta Health ServicesSouth Health CampusUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOpioidMedical prescriptionIncidence (geometry)Adverse effectObservational studyRetrospective cohort studyPopulationEmergency departmentEmergency medicineCancerInternal medicineHealth carePsychiatryPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Although opioids are effective for cancer pain management, long-term use may result in adverse effects which are understudied among patients with metastatic disease. OBJECTIVES: To describe long-term opioid prescribing among patients with metastatic cancer and investigate how long-term prescribing practices are associated with the incidence of opioid-related hospitalisations and emergency department visits. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included all opioid-naïve patients diagnosed with solid metastatic cancer in Alberta, Canada from 2004 to 2017 who had ≥1 year of follow-up. Patients were identified and followed using linked administrative health data. Long-term prescribing was defined as receiving a ≥90-day supply of opioids with a <30-day gap in supply within a 180-day period. The incidence rate of opioid-related healthcare encounters was compared based on characteristics of long-term prescribing (timing, dosage, duration and concurrent medications). RESULTS: The study included 10 927 patients, 2521 (23%) of whom received long-term opioid prescribing. These practices became more common near the end of life, with 53% of cases initiated during patients' last year of life. Opioid-related healthcare encounters were experienced by 85 (3.4%) recipients of long-term prescribing. Higher dosage (p<0.001) and concurrent prescribing of anxiolytics (p=0.001), benzodiazepines (p=0.001), antidepressants (p=0.027) and neuroleptics (p<0.001) were associated with a higher incidence of opioid-related healthcare encounters. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term opioid prescribing is common, and patients receiving long-term prescriptions with high dosage or concurrent psychoactive medications may benefit from interventions aimed at reducing opioid-related adverse effects. Further research is needed to determine strategies to minimise opioid-related harms for these patients while providing appropriate pain and symptom management.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.466
Threshold uncertainty score0.926

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.079
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.346 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Supportive & Palliative CareSame topicOpioid Use Disorder TreatmentFrench-language works237,207