Continuous intrathecal therapy for refractory cancer pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis focusing on partially implanted devices
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/1651-226X.2026.45778Keywords:
Intrathecal, cancer pain, systematic review, meta-analysis, equipment and suppliesAbstract
Context: Conventional pain therapies sometimes fail in patients with severe neuropathic pain or bone metastases. Intrathecal therapy provides an alternative but is resource-intensive, technically demanding and costly.
Objective: To compare the advantages and limitations of partially implanted devices (PIDs) versus conventional medical management or totally implanted devices (TIDs) in adults with cancer-related pain.
Methods: A systematic literature review up to September 2024 was conducted, with an updated search performed in August 2026. Eligible studies included those on adults with refractory cancer pain receiving PID intrathecal therapy compared with conventional therapy, and comparative studies evaluating PIDs versus TIDs. Pain intensity was analysed using a meta-analysis; a synthesis without meta-analysis was used for other outcomes.
Results: Of the 1,102 records, 15 were included, evaluating pain intensity, systemic opioid dose, quality of life (QoL), depression/anxiety, functional capacity and complications in PID-treated patients. A meta-analysis of pain intensity at 4 weeks showed statistically significant reduction with intrathecal therapy, which also reduced opioid use and improved QoL. Complication rates were lower than in conventional therapy. Investigations of depression/anxiety and functional capacity were limited, with inconsistent findings. Certainty of evidence was moderate for pain intensity and QoL; low for opioid dose, depression/anxiety and complications; and very low for functional capacity.
Conclusions: Intrathecal therapy for refractory cancer pain with PIDs provides superior pain relief and improved QoL compared with the conventional therapy in patients with refractory cancer pain. Evidence for psychological and functional outcomes remains limited. Overall certainty of evidence is low to moderate, but findings support intrathecal therapy as a clinically meaningful option for selected patients.
Downloads
References
Faiman B. Pain as the fifth vital sign: challenges in managing cancer-related pain. J Adv Pract Oncol. 2025;16(5):161–2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.6004/jadpro.2025.16.5.1
Carlson CL. Effectiveness of the World Health Organization cancer pain relief guidelines: an integrative review. J Pain Res. 2016;9:515–34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S97759
Goel V, Kaizer A, Darrow D, Rosielle D, Owens B, Blaes A. Cancer patients quality of life after intrathecal drug delivery for advanced pain management: a patient-reported outcome analysis. Pain Med. 2025;26(5):261–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/pm/pnaf012
Zech DFJ, Grond S, Lynch J, Hertel D, Lehmann KA. Validation of World Health Organization Guidelines for cancer pain relief: a 10-year prospective study. Pain. 1995;63(1):65–76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3959(95)00017-M
Meuser T, Pietruck C, Radbruch L, Stute P, Lehmann KA, Grond S. Symptoms during cancer pain treatment following WHO-guidelines: a longitudinal follow-up study of symptom prevalence, severity and etiology. Pain. 2001;93(3):247–57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3959(01)00324-4
Ventafridda V, Tamburini M, Caraceni A, De Conno F, Naldi F. A validation study of the WHO method for cancer pain relief. Cancer. 1987;59(4):850–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19870215)59:4<850::AID-CNCR2820590432>3.0.CO;2-1
Mercadante S. Cancer pain treatment strategies in patients with cancer. Drugs. 2022;82(13):1357–66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40265-022-01780-6
Afsharimani B, Kindl K, Good P, Hardy J. Pharmacological options for the management of refractory cancer pain-what is the evidence? Support Care Cancer. 2015;23(5):1473–81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-015-2678-9
Brogan SE, Winter NB, Abiodun A, Safarpour R. A cost utilization analysis of intrathecal therapy for refractory cancer pain: identifying factors associated with cost benefit. Pain Med. 2013;14(4):478–86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/pme.12060
Liu HJ, Li WY, Chen HF, Cheng ZQ, Jin Y. Long-term intrathecal analgesia with a wireless analgesia pump system in the home care of patients with advanced cancer. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2017;34(2):148–53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1049909115615110
Ma K, Jin Y, Wang L, Feng Z-Y, Song T, Yang X-Q, et al. Intrathecal delivery of hydromorphone vs morphine for refractory cancer pain: a multicenter, randomized, single-blind, controlled noninferiority trial. Pain. 2020;161(11):2502–10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001957
Nitescu P, Sjöberg M, Appelgren L, Curelaru I. Complications of intrathecal opioids and bupivacaine in the treatment of ‘refractory’ cancer pain. Clin J Pain. 1995;11(1):45–62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00002508-199503000-00006
Zheng S, He L, Yang X, Li X, Yang Z. Evaluation of intrathecal drug delivery system for intractable pain in advanced malignancies: a prospective cohort study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96(11):e6354. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000006354
Giglio M, Preziosa A, Mele R, Brienza N, Grasso S, Puntillo F. Effects of an intrathecal drug delivery system connected to a subcutaneous port on pain, mood and quality of life in end stage cancer patients: an observational study. Cancer Control. 2022;29:10732748221133752. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/10732748221133752
Rizvi S, Kumar K. History and present state of targeted intrathecal drug delivery. Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2015;19(2):474. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11916-014-0474-8
Caregiver Skane. HTA South. Report No.: HTA-SYD slutrapport. Skåne, Sweden: HTA South; 2024.
Ontario H. Intrathecal drug delivery systems for cancer pain: a health technology assessment. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2024;24(2):1–162.
Watch R. Retraction Watch Database. 2023. [cited 2026 Feb 5]. Available from: https://retractionwatch.com/retraction-watch-database/
National Heart Lung, and Blood Institute. Study quality assessment tools. 2021. [cited 2026 Feb 5] Available from: https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-topics/study-quality-assessment-tools
Sterne JA, Hernan MA, Reeves BC, Savovic J, Berkman ND, Viswanathan M, et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ. 2016;355:i4919. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i4919
Swedish Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Assessment of Social Services (SBU). Critical appraisal tool: Non-randomised studies of interventions. Stockholm: SBU; 2020. Available from: https://www.sbu.se/globalassets/ebm/bedomning_icke_randomiserade_studier_tilldelas.pdf
Mercadante S, Intravaia G, Villari P, Ferrera P, Riina S, David F, et al. Intrathecal treatment in cancer patients unresponsive to multiple trials of systemic opioids. Clin J Pain. 2007;23(9):793–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/AJP.0b013e3181565d17
Sjoberg M, Appelgren L, Einarsson S, Hultman E, Linder LE, Nitescu P, et al. Long-term intrathecal morphine and bupivacaine in ‘refractory’ cancer pain. I. Results from the first series of 52 patients. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1991;35(1):30–43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-6576.1991.tb03237.x
Sjöberg M, Nitescu P, Appelgren L, Curelaru I. Long-term intrathecal morphine and bupivacaine in patients with refractory cancer pain results from a morphine, bupivacaine dose regimen of 0.5:4.75 mg/ml. Anesthesiology. 1994;80(2):284–97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00000542-199402000-00008
Cheng KI, Tang CS, Chu KS, Yip NS, Yu KL, Tseng CK. Retrospective investigation of intermittent bolus intrathecal morphine for cancer pain patients. Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 1993;9(11):632–42.
Qin W, Zhao L, Liu B, Yang Y, Mao P, Xu L, et al. Comparison of external system and implanted system in intrathecal therapy for refractory cancer pain in China: a retrospective study. Brain Behav. 2023;13(1):e2851. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/brb3.2851
Fernandez-Torres B, Fontan-Atalaya IM, Peralta-Espinosa E, Diaz-Rodriguez D. Predictive factors for efficacy and safety of intrathecal infusion devices for oncological pain. Br J Pain. 2023;17(6):569–78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/20494637231198231
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Diaz-Rodriguez D, Fontan-Atalaya IM, Peralta-Espinosa E, Fernandez-Torres B. Differences in efficacy and safety between intrathecal infusion devices in cancer pain. Pain Pract. 2024;24(1):42–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/papr.13279
Ding Y, Deng H, Peng J. Clinical observation of the treatment of refractory cancer pain with cancer pain information platform and IDDS under home analgesia mode: a retrospective study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2024;103(27):e38765. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000038765
Madrid JL, Fatela LV, Lobato RD, Gozalo A. Intrathecal therapy: rationale, technique, clinical results. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand Suppl. 1987;85:60–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-6576.1987.tb02671.x
Neira F, Ortega J, Martinez F, Murillo H, CarrascoJimenez M. The Du Pen intrathecal catheter: alternative to multidose sequential mechanical infusion systems for management of cancer pain? Pain Clinic. 1996;8(4):353–63.
Jose de A, Luciano P, Vicente V, Juan Marcos AS, Gustavo FC. Role of catheter’s position for final results in intrathecal drug delivery. analysis based on CSF dynamics and specific drugs profiles. Korean J Pain. 2013;26(4):336–46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3344/kjp.2013.26.4.336
Lund Schaldemose E, Skjodt Rafn B, Envold Bidstrup P, Olloni A, Schattiger K, Christensen P, et al. Treatment of neuropathic pain in cancer survivors: a scoping review of pharmacological, exercise, and psychosocial interventions. Acta Oncol. 2026;65:333–43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2340/ao.v65.45347
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Mohammadhossein Radafshar, Maria E.C. Schelin, Elisabeth Bondesson, Sofia Löfvendahl, Eric Ahl, Sven Oredsson, Mikael Segerlantz
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
