Introduction
Delirium in advanced cancer may include reduced activity, sparse speech, and impaired engagement. Catatonia can produce overlapping findings, including mutism, staring, withdrawal, and abnormal motor tone. Medical and neurologic cohorts show that the syndromes can coexist, although estimates vary by diagnostic criteria (Wilson et al. Reference Wilson, Carlson and Duggan2017; Ramirez-Bermudez et al. Reference Ramirez-Bermudez, Medina-gutierrez and Gomez-cianca2022; Trzepacz et al. Reference Trzepacz, Franco and Chakrabarti2025; Mormando et al. Reference Mormando, Reinfeld and Genova2026). The distinction remains consequential because benzodiazepines are first-line treatment for catatonia but may impair arousal, while dopamine antagonists used for dangerous agitation require caution when catatonic signs remain prominent (Rogers et al. Reference Rogers, Oldham and Fricchione2023; Wilson et al. Reference Wilson, Oldham and Francis2025). This report addresses a narrower clinical problem: how serial assessment informed medication decisions when a lorazepam challenge was uninterpretable and the care objective shifted toward comfort and a safe transition home.
Case description
A man in his late 30s with metastatic melanoma involving bone, lungs, brain, and leptomeninges was admitted with progressive weakness, reduced oral intake, headache, nausea, and altered mental status. His neurologic history included leptomeningeal disease complicated by hydrocephalus requiring ventriculoperitoneal shunting and seizures treated with brivaracetam. He had recently received proton craniospinal irradiation and remained exposed to corticosteroids and cancer-directed therapy. Shortly before admission, he had been fully oriented, fluent, attentive, independently ambulatory, and independent in activities of daily living.
During hospitalization, his mental status fluctuated substantially. He was variably disoriented, inattentive, somnolent, and unable to provide a coherent history. At other times, he refused food, medications, care, or safety recommendations and required repeated prompting. Neurologic evaluation included electroencephalography and serial neuroradiologic studies. Leptomeningeal disease, possible shunt dysfunction, irradiation, corticosteroids, seizures, acute illness, poor intake, sleep disruption, and centrally acting medications remained plausible contributors. The evolving formulation was toxic-neurologic encephalopathy with delirium.
Psychiatry was consulted after reduced speech, and movement and episodic waxy flexibility were observed. On the initial Bush-Francis Catatonia Rating Scale (BFCRS) examination, immobility, mutism, staring, and withdrawal each scored 1, and waxy flexibility scored 3, for a total of 7. A 2-mg intravenous lorazepam challenge was administered. He fell asleep within 35 minutes, preventing a meaningful immediate reassessment. Four hours after intravenous lorazepam administration, the score was 1 for mutism alone; arousal remained somewhat somnolent. Other examinations documented variable mutism, repetitive hand movements, perseveration, echolalia or verbigeration, stereotypy, negativism, resistance, automatic obedience, and ambitendency. The clustered findings raised concern for catatonic features, but their prominence varied with arousal. Concurrent fluctuations in attention, orientation, and wakefulness supported delirium within a broader encephalopathy. There was no sustained fever, severe rigidity, autonomic instability, or other evidence of malignant catatonia.
The patient was placed on a scheduled Ativan dose of 1 mg twice daily after this trial described above. Scheduled intravenous lorazepam was then progressively reduced by total daily dose from 2 mg to 1.5 mg, 1 mg, and 0.75 mg. When twice-daily dosing was used, doses were given at 1 PM and 8 PM; morning administration was avoided to prevent confusion with the antiseizure-medication schedule and avoid comorbid oversedation. Transient increases in movement, speech, and walking occurred, but somnolence, disorientation, concurrent care, and spontaneous fluctuation prevented causal attribution. The dose was briefly returned to 1 mg total daily. Severe agitation subsequently emerged, and standing lorazepam was stopped rather than interpreted as beneficial on the basis of the lower BFCRS score alone.
Over subsequent days, catatonic signs became less sustained, while impaired attention, fluctuating arousal, somnolence, and disorientation remained prominent. This course supported the evolving impression of a broader encephalopathy with delirium and intermittent early catatonic features; it did not exclude possible catatonia early in the admission.
The syndrome later included recurrent late-day agitation, line-pulling, and behavioral rapid-response activations; 2 episodes resulted in staff injury. Scheduled haloperidol was introduced for behavioral safety rather than a primary psychotic disorder and adjusted to 3 mg orally at 4 PM and 10 PM, with intravenous haloperidol reserved for severe, nonredirectable agitation. Documented evening agitation improved after this change. No extrapyramidal symptoms, rigidity, oversedation, or QTc change occurred. Pain was evaluated as a potentially modifiable contributor.
Repeat magnetic resonance imaging was limited by intolerance but demonstrated persistent leptomeningeal abnormality on available sequences. During a multidisciplinary family meeting, Neurology identified leptomeningeal disease as the most likely driver of his altered mental status and proton craniospinal irradiation as the next most likely contributor; neither was expected to improve with medical optimization. His wife initially favored additional cancer-directed treatment but, after discussion of his functional status and prognosis, considered care at home with an emphasis on comfort. She asked that corticosteroids and psychiatric medications be reduced when feasible to preserve wakefulness, mobility, nutrition, and communication. The team also explained that uncontrolled agitation could make home care unsafe.
On the final documented evening, Supportive Care collaborated on a trial of oral medication while his wife remained overnight. With her present, no further episode of agitation was documented. He remained pleasantly confused, oriented to self and partly to place, and was not oversedated. The calm night supported a plan for discharge home with hospice, but the transition remained pending because of medical-insurance barriers.
Discussion
Diagnostic criteria and bedside measures
Under Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-5-TR), catatonia is diagnosed when at least 3 of 12 characteristic signs are present, including stupor, catalepsy, waxy flexibility, mutism, negativism, posturing, mannerisms, stereotypy, non-influenced agitation, grimacing, echolalia, and echopraxia. In medically ill patients, the clinician must distinguish a sustained or recurrent psychomotor syndrome from reduced engagement caused by sedation, neurologic impairment, severe depression, or delirium. The Bush-Francis Catatonia Screening Instrument can identify signs at the bedside, while the expanded BFCRS quantifies severity and change; neither is a stand-alone diagnostic test (Rogers et al. Reference Rogers, Oldham and Fricchione2023; Wilson et al. Reference Wilson, Oldham and Francis2025). A lorazepam challenge may provide supportive information, but sedation and spontaneous fluctuation can make the result difficult to interpret.
DSM-5-TR delirium requires an acute, fluctuating disturbance in attention and awareness, an additional cognitive disturbance, evidence of a physiological cause, and a course not better explained by a preexisting neurocognitive disorder or occurring exclusively during coma. The Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) operationalizes delirium as acute onset or fluctuating course plus inattention, together with either disorganized thinking or altered level of consciousness. The 4 ‘A’s Test for Delirium (4AT): Alertness, Abbreviated Mental Test–4 (AMT4), Attention, and Acute change or fluctuating course assesses alertness, brief orientation, attention, and acute change or fluctuation. CAM-ICU adapts this approach for critically ill or nonverbal patients. These instruments should be paired with a premorbid baseline and serial examination because a single assessment may miss fluctuation (Wilson et al. Reference Wilson, Carlson and Duggan2017; Ramirez-Bermudez et al. Reference Ramirez-Bermudez, Medina-gutierrez and Gomez-cianca2022). A positive delirium assessment does not exclude concurrent catatonic signs.
Diagnostic overlap in this case
The principal difficulty was how to interpret catatonic signs within a fluctuating encephalopathy. Mutism, staring, immobility, waxy flexibility, and withdrawal raised concern for catatonia, while inattention, disorientation, altered arousal, and the neurologic course supported delirium. ICU and neurologic studies document concurrent syndromes (Wilson et al. Reference Wilson, Carlson and Duggan2017; Ramirez-Bermudez et al. Reference Ramirez-Bermudez, Medina-gutierrez and Gomez-cianca2022). None of 201 delirious patients met a more restrictive research definition, indicating that overlap estimates depend on diagnostic thresholds (Trzepacz et al. Reference Trzepacz, Franco and Chakrabarti2025). In a general-hospital cohort, improvement in catatonic signs did not consistently coincide with remission of delirium (Mormando et al. Reference Mormando, Reinfeld and Genova2026). Here, the BFCRS organized observations but did not adjudicate etiology: the decrease from 7 to 1 occurred during somnolence and neurologic variability. The longitudinal formulation remained toxic-neurologic encephalopathy with delirium and intermittent early catatonic features, rather than a definitive autonomous catatonic syndrome.
Therapeutic tension
Lorazepam created both a treatment and interpretive dilemma. The initial 2-mg intravenous challenge produced sleep, preventing an immediate reassessment. The lower BFCRS score was not accompanied by clear improvement in attention, communication, intake, or sustained function. Tapering reflected concern that sedation was compounding delirium, not dismissal of the initial catatonia concern. Serial BFCRS findings therefore had to be interpreted alongside arousal, attention, orientation, mobility, and engagement. Severe evening agitation later became the treatment target. As catatonic signs became less sustained and agitation threatened safety, scheduled haloperidol was introduced and evening agitation improved. This association cannot isolate medication effect from environmental or clinical changes; no rigidity, extrapyramidal effects, oversedation, or QTc change were documented. Evidence supports short-term comfort benefit, not reversal of delirium (Hui et al. Reference Hui, Frisbee-hume and Wilson2017).
Palliative and supportive-care relevance
Relative contributions of leptomeningeal disease, seizures, radiation, corticosteroids, acute illness, pain, poor intake, and polypharmacy remained uncertain. The family meeting translated that uncertainty into priorities: comfort, adequate wakefulness for interaction, and sufficient behavioral control for safe care at home. The final oral regimen was tested with his wife present overnight. Absence of agitation during one night could not predict sustained control, but it provided a pragmatic assessment of caregiver-supported home care while hospice planning continued. In advanced cancer, diagnostic labels matter insofar as they guide treatment that preserves comfort, communication, and care consistent with prognosis and patient-valued outcomes (Robbins-Welty et al. Reference Robbins-Welty, Gensler and Kalivas2025).
Conclusion
Catatonic signs may occur within a broader delirious or encephalopathic syndrome in advanced CNS cancer. A lower BFCRS score after lorazepam should be interpreted alongside serial changes in arousal, attention, and function, particularly when treatment is intended to preserve comfort and support a feasible transition home.
Acknowledgments
No artificial intelligence tools were used in the preparation of this manuscript.
Author contributions
L.V.F.: Conceptualization, investigation, data curation, formal analysis, writing – original draft, and writing – review and editing.
Funding
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests
The author declares none.
Ethics and consents
Written consent for publication was obtained from the patient’s wife.