Pharmacological treatment of depression in patients with a primary brain tumour

Paroxetine-Overview of the Molecular Mechanisms of Action

In the 21st century and especially during a pandemic, the diagnosis and treatment of depression is an essential part of the daily practice of many family doctors. It mainly affects patients in the age category 15–44 years, regardless of gender. Anxiety disorders are often diagnosed in children and adolescents. Social phobias can account for up to 13% of these diagnoses. Social anxiety manifests itself in fear of negative social assessment and humiliation, which disrupts the quality of social functioning. Treatment of the above-mentioned disorders is based on psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy. Serious side effects or mortality from antidepressant drug overdose are currently rare. Recent studies indicate that paroxetine (ATC code: N06AB), belonging to the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, has promising therapeutic effects and is used off-label in children and adolescents. The purpose of this review is to describe the interaction of paroxetine with several molecular targets in various points of view including the basic chemical and pharmaceutical properties. The central point of the review is focused on the pharmacodynamic analysis based on the molecular mechanism of binding paroxetine to various therapeutic targets.

Pharmacological treatment of depression in people with a primary brain tumour

BACKGROUND

This is the second updated version of the Cochrane Review published in Issue 3, 2010 and first updated in Issue 5, 2013. People with a primary brain tumour often experience depression, for which drug treatment may be prescribed. However, they are also at high risk of epileptic seizures, cognitive impairment, and fatigue, all of which are potential adverse side effects of antidepressants. The benefit, or harm, of pharmacological treatment of depression in people with a primary brain tumour is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of pharmacological treatment of depression in people with a primary brain tumour.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated the search to include CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO to September 2019. As in the original review, we also handsearched Neuro-Oncology, Journal of Neuro-Oncology, Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, and Journal of Clinical Oncology: for the current update we handsearched the latest three years of articles from these journals (up to November 2019).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for all randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies of any pharmacological treatment of depression in people with a histologically diagnosed primary brain tumour.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

No studies met the inclusion criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

We found no eligible studies evaluating the benefits of any pharmacological treatment of depression in people with a primary brain tumour.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We identified no high-quality studies that investigated the value of pharmacological treatment of depression in people with a primary brain tumour. RCTs and detailed prospective studies are required to inform the effective pharmacological treatment of this common and important complication of brain tumours. Since the last version of this review none of the related new literature has provided additional information to change these conclusions.

The Effect of Hypnotics on Sleep Quality and Cognitive Function in Patients with Brain Tumors

Objective

We investigated the effect of hypnotics on sleep quality, cognitive function, and depressive mood in patients with insomnia following brain tumor resection.

Methods

From patients who underwent brain tumor resection, we recruited 10 patients with insomnia who received hypnotics for more than 1 week during a 3-week follow-up period (insomnia group). We also recruited 12 control patients with brain tumors but without insomnia (control group). We evaluated sleep quality at baseline and 3 weeks later using the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), the Stanford Sleepiness Scale (SSS), and the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) and investigated cognitive function and depression using the Computerized Neuropsychological Test and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI).

Results

At baseline, SSS, ISI, PSQI, and BDI scores were significantly higher and visual continuous performance test (VCPT) and auditory continuous performance test (ACPT) scores were significantly lower in the insomnia than in the control group. Three weeks later, the patients who had received hypnotics had significantly higher ISI, PSQI, ESS, VCPT, ACPT, visual span forward and backward, and visual recognition test scores, and significantly lower BDI scores.

Conclusion

Quality of sleep in patients with insomnia following brain tumor resection was initially poor but improved significantly after taking hypnotic medication. Further, the hypnotic medications appeared to contribute to the amelioration of cognitive impairments and depressive moods in patients who previously underwent brain tumor resection. We thus recommend the use of hypnotics for patients with brain tumors with insomnia.

Depression and glioblastoma, complicated concomitant diseases: a systemic review of published literature

Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is the most common primary brain cancer. Depression is a common co-morbidity of this condition. Despite this common interaction, relatively little research has been performed on the development of GBM-associated depression. We performed a literary search of the PubMed database for articles published relating to GBM and depression. A total of 85 articles were identified with 46 meeting inclusion criteria. Depression significantly impacts care, decreasing medication compliance, and patient survival. Diagnostically, because depression and GBM share intricate neuro-connectivity in a way that effect functionality, these diseases can be mistaken for alternative psychological or pathological disorders, complicating care. Therapeutically, anti-depressants have anti-tumor properties; yet, some have been shown to interfere with GBM treatment. One reason for this is that the pathophysiological development of depression and GBM share several pathways including altered regulation of the 5-HT receptor, norepinephrine, and 3':5'-cyclic monophosphate. Over time, depression can persist after GBM treatment, affecting patient quality of life. Together, depression and GBM are complicated concomitant diseases. Clinicians must be aware of their co-existence. Because of overlapping molecular pathways involved in both diseases, careful medication selection is imperative to avoid potential adverse interactions. Since GBMs are the most common primary brain cancer, physicians dealing with this disease should be prepared for the development of depression as a potential sequela of this condition, given the related pathophysiology and the known poor outcomes.

Antidepressants for the treatment of depression in people with cancer

BACKGROUND

Major depression and other depressive conditions are common in people with cancer. These conditions are not easily detectable in clinical practice, due to the overlap between medical and psychiatric symptoms, as described by diagnostic manuals such as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD). Moreover, it is particularly challenging to distinguish between pathological and normal reactions to such a severe illness. Depressive symptoms, even in subthreshold manifestations, have been shown to have a negative impact in terms of quality of life, compliance with anti-cancer treatment, suicide risk and likely even the mortality rate for the cancer itself. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of antidepressants in this population are few and often report conflicting results.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of antidepressants for treating depressive symptoms in adults (aged 18 years or older) with cancer (any site and stage).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic bibliographic databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2017, Issue 6), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to June week 4 2017), Embase Ovid (1980 to 2017 week 27) and PsycINFO Ovid (1987 to July week 4 2017). We additionally handsearched the trial databases of the most relevant national, international and pharmaceutical company trial registers and drug-approving agencies for published, unpublished and ongoing controlled trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs comparing antidepressants versus placebo, or antidepressants versus other antidepressants, in adults (aged 18 years or above) with any primary diagnosis of cancer and depression (including major depressive disorder, adjustment disorder, dysthymic disorder or depressive symptoms in the absence of a formal diagnosis).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently checked eligibility and extracted data using a form specifically designed for the aims of this review. The two authors compared the data extracted and then entered data into Review Manager 5 using a double-entry procedure. Information extracted included study and participant characteristics, intervention details, outcome measures for each time point of interest, cost analysis and sponsorship by a drug company. We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We retrieved a total of 10 studies (885 participants), seven of which contributed to the meta-analysis for the primary outcome. Four of these compared antidepressants and placebo, two compared two antidepressants, and one three-armed study compared two antidepressants and placebo. In this update we included one additional unpublished study. These new data contributed to the secondary analysis, while the results of the primary analysis remained unchanged.For acute-phase treatment response (6 to 12 weeks), we found no difference between antidepressants as a class and placebo on symptoms of depression measured both as a continuous outcome (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.01 to 0.11, five RCTs, 266 participants; very low certainty evidence) and as a proportion of people who had depression at the end of the study (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.08, five RCTs, 417 participants; very low certainty evidence). No trials reported data on follow-up response (more than 12 weeks). In head-to-head comparisons we only retrieved data for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus tricyclic antidepressants, showing no difference between these two classes (SMD -0.08, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.18, three RCTs, 237 participants; very low certainty evidence). No clear evidence of a beneficial effect of antidepressants versus either placebo or other antidepressants emerged from our analyses of the secondary efficacy outcomes (dichotomous outcome, response at 6 to 12 weeks, very low certainty evidence). In terms of dropouts due to any cause, we found no difference between antidepressants as a class compared with placebo (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.38, seven RCTs, 479 participants; very low certainty evidence), and between SSRIs and tricyclic antidepressants (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.30, three RCTs, 237 participants). We downgraded the certainty (quality) of the evidence because the included studies were at an unclear or high risk of bias due to poor reporting, imprecision arising from small sample sizes and wide confidence intervals, and inconsistency due to statistical or clinical heterogeneity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Despite the impact of depression on people with cancer, the available studies were very few and of low quality. This review found very low certainty evidence for the effects of these drugs compared with placebo. On the basis of these results, clear implications for practice cannot be deduced. The use of antidepressants in people with cancer should be considered on an individual basis and, considering the lack of head-to-head data, the choice of which agent to prescribe may be based on the data on antidepressant efficacy in the general population of individuals with major depression, also taking into account that data on medically ill patients suggest a positive safety profile for the SSRIs. To better inform clinical practice, there is an urgent need for large, simple, randomised, pragmatic trials comparing commonly used antidepressants versus placebo in people with cancer who have depressive symptoms, with or without a formal diagnosis of a depressive disorder.

Internet-based guided self-help for glioma patients with depressive symptoms: a randomized controlled trial

Depressive symptoms are common in glioma patients, and can negatively affect health-related quality of life (HRQOL). We performed a nation-wide randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effects of an online guided self-help intervention for depressive symptoms in adult glioma patients. Glioma patients with depressive symptoms were randomized to a 5-week online course based on problem-solving therapy, or a waiting list control group. After having received the intervention, the glioma patient groups combined were compared with patients with cancer outside the central nervous system (non-CNS cancer controls), who also received the intervention. Sample size calculations yielded 63 participants to be recruited per arm. The primary outcome [depressive symptoms (CES-D)] and secondary outcomes [fatigue (Checklist Individual Strength (CIS)) and HRQOL (Short Form-36)], were assessed online at baseline, post-intervention, and 3 and 12 months follow-up. In total, 89 glioma patients (intervention N = 45; waiting list N = 44) and 26 non-CNS cancer controls were included, of whom 35 and 54% completed the intervention, respectively. Recruitment could not be extended beyond 3.5 years due to funding. On depression, no statistically significant differences between the groups were found. Fatigue decreased post-treatment in the glioma intervention group compared with the waiting list group (p = 0.054, d = 0.306). At 12 months, the physical component summary (HRQOL) remained stable in glioma patients, while scores improved in non-CNS cancer controls (p = 0.035, d = 0.883). In this underpowered study, no evidence for the effectiveness of online guided self-help for depression or HRQOL in glioma patients was found, but it may improve fatigue.

Trial registration Netherlands Trial Register NTR3223.

Psychiatric symptoms in glioma patients: from diagnosis to management

Patients with primary intrinsic brain tumors can experience neurological, cognitive, and psychiatric symptoms that greatly affect daily life. In this review, we focus on changes in personality and behavior, mood issues, hallucinations, and psychosis, because these are either difficult to recognize, to treat, or are understudied in scientific literature. Neurobehavioral symptoms are common, often multiple, and causation can be multifactorial. Although different symptoms sometimes require a different treatment approach, we advise a comprehensive treatment approach, including pharmacological treatment and/or psychotherapy where appropriate. Further research is needed to obtain a better estimate of the prevalence of psychiatric symptoms in glioma patients, and the extent to which these affect everyday functioning and family life.

Antidepressants for the treatment of depression in people with cancer

BACKGROUND

Major depression and other depressive conditions are common in people with cancer. These conditions are not easily detectable in clinical practice, due to the overlap between medical and psychiatric symptoms, as described by diagnostic manuals such as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD). Moreover, it is particularly challenging to distinguish between pathological and normal reactions to such a severe illness. Depressive symptoms, even in subthreshold manifestations, have been shown to have a negative impact in terms of quality of life, compliance with anti-cancer treatment, suicide risk and likely even the mortality rate for the cancer itself. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy and tolerability of antidepressants in this population group are few and often report conflicting results.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects and acceptability of antidepressants for treating depressive symptoms in adults (18 years or older) with cancer (any site and stage).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic bibliographic databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2014, Issue 3), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to April week 3, 2014), EMBASE Ovid (1980 to 2014 week 17) and PsycINFO Ovid (1987 to April week 4, 2014). We additionally handsearched the trial databases of the most relevant national, international and pharmaceutical company trial registers and drug-approving agencies for published, unpublished and ongoing controlled trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs allocating adults (18 years or above) with any primary diagnosis of cancer and depression (including major depressive disorder, adjustment disorder, dysthymic disorder or depressive symptoms in the absence of a formal diagnosis) comparing antidepressants versus placebo, or antidepressants versus other antidepressants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently checked eligibility and extracted data using a form specifically designed for the aims of this review. The two authors compared the data extracted and then entered data into RevMan 5 with a double-entry procedure. Information extracted included study and participant characteristics, intervention details, outcome measures for each time point of interest, cost analysis and sponsorship by a drug company. We used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We retrieved a total of nine studies (861 participants), with seven studies contributing to the meta-analysis for the primary outcome. Four of these compared antidepressants and placebo, two compared two antidepressants and one-three armed study compared two antidepressants and a placebo arm. For the acute phase treatment response (6 to 12 weeks), we found very low quality evidence for the effect of antidepressants as a class on symptoms of depression compared with placebo when measured as a continuous outcome (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.01 to 0.11, five RCTs, 266 participants) or as a proportion of people who had depression (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.08, five RCTs, 417 participants). No trials reported data on the follow-up response (more than 12 weeks). In head-to-head comparisons we only retrieved data for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus tricyclic antidepressants, providing very low quality evidence for the difference between these two classes (SMD -0.08, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.18, three RCTs, 237 participants). No clear evidence of an effect of antidepressants versus either placebo or other antidepressants emerged from the analyses of the secondary efficacy outcomes (dichotomous outcome, response at 6 to 12 weeks, very low quality evidence). We found very low quality evidence for the effect of antidepressants as a class in terms of dropouts due to any cause compared with placebo (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.53, six RCTs, 455 participants), as well as between SSRIs and tricyclic antidepressants (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.30, three RCTs, 237 participants). We downgraded the quality of the evidence because the included studies were at an unclear or high risk of bias due to poor reporting, imprecision arising from small sample sizes and wide confidence intervals, and inconsistency due to statistical or clinical heterogeneity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Despite the impact of depression on people with cancer, available studies were very few and of low quality. This review found very low quality evidence for the effects of these drugs compared with placebo. On the basis of these results clear implications for practice cannot be made. The use of antidepressants in people with cancer should be considered on an individual basis and, considering the lack of head-to-head data, the choice of which agent should be prescribed may be based on the data on antidepressant efficacy in the general population of individuals with major depression, also taking into account that data on medically ill patients suggest a positive safety profile for the SSRIs. Large, simple, randomised, pragmatic trials comparing commonly used antidepressants versus placebo in people with cancer with depressive symptoms, with or without a formal diagnosis of a depressive disorder, are urgently needed to better inform clinical practice.

Antidepressants for the treatment of depression in people with cancer

BACKGROUND

Major depression and other depressive conditions are common in people with cancer. These conditions are not easily detectable in clinical practice, due to the overlap between medical and psychiatric symptoms, as described by diagnostic manuals such as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD). Moreover, it is particularly challenging to distinguish between pathological and normal reactions to such a severe illness. Depressive symptoms, even in subthreshold manifestations, have been shown to have a negative impact in terms of quality of life, compliance with anti-cancer treatment, suicide risk and likely even the mortality rate for the cancer itself. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy and tolerability of antidepressants in this population group are few and often report conflicting results.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects and acceptability of antidepressants for treating depressive symptoms in adults (18 years or older) with cancer (any site and stage).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic bibliographic databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2014, Issue 3), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to April week 3, 2014), EMBASE Ovid (1980 to 2014 week 17) and PsycINFO Ovid (1987 to April week 4, 2014). We additionally handsearched the trial databases of the most relevant national, international and pharmaceutical company trial registers and drug-approving agencies for published, unpublished and ongoing controlled trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs allocating adults (18 years or above) with any primary diagnosis of cancer and depression (including major depressive disorder, adjustment disorder, dysthymic disorder or depressive symptoms in the absence of a formal diagnosis) comparing antidepressants versus placebo, or antidepressants versus other antidepressants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently checked eligibility and extracted data using a form specifically designed for the aims of this review. The two authors compared the data extracted and then entered data into RevMan 5 with a double-entry procedure. Information extracted included study and participant characteristics, intervention details, outcome measures for each time point of interest, cost analysis and sponsorship by a drug company. We used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We retrieved a total of nine studies (861 participants), with seven studies contributing to the meta-analysis for the primary outcome. Four of these compared antidepressants and placebo, two compared two antidepressants and one-three armed study compared two antidepressants and a placebo arm. For the acute phase treatment response (6 to 12 weeks), we found very low quality evidence for the effect of antidepressants as a class on symptoms of depression compared with placebo when measured as a continuous outcome (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.01 to 0.11, five RCTs, 266 participants) or as a proportion of people who had depression (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.08, five RCTs, 417 participants). No trials reported data on the follow-up response (more than 12 weeks). In head-to-head comparisons we only retrieved data for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus tricyclic antidepressants, providing very low quality evidence for the difference between these two classes (SMD -0.08, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.18, three RCTs, 237 participants). No clear evidence of an effect of antidepressants versus either placebo or other antidepressants emerged from the analyses of the secondary efficacy outcomes (dichotomous outcome, response at 6 to 12 weeks, very low quality evidence). We found very low quality evidence for the effect of antidepressants as a class in terms of dropouts due to any cause compared with placebo (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.53, six RCTs, 455 participants), as well as between SSRIs and tricyclic antidepressants (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.30, three RCTs, 237 participants). We downgraded the quality of the evidence because the included studies were at an unclear or high risk of bias due to poor reporting, imprecision arising from small sample sizes and wide confidence intervals, and inconsistency due to statistical or clinical heterogeneity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Despite the impact of depression on people with cancer, available studies were very few and of low quality. This review found very low quality evidence for the effects of these drugs compared with placebo. On the basis of these results clear implications for practice cannot be made. The use of antidepressants in people with cancer should be considered on an individual basis and, considering the lack of head-to-head data, the choice of which agent should be prescribed may be based on the data on antidepressant efficacy in the general population of individuals with major depression, also taking into account that data on medically ill patients suggest a positive safety profile for the SSRIs. Large, simple, randomised, pragmatic trials comparing commonly used antidepressants versus placebo in people with cancer with depressive symptoms, with or without a formal diagnosis of a depressive disorder, are urgently needed to better inform clinical practice.

Symptom management and quality of life in glioma patients

Symptoms of fatigue, cognitive deficits, depression and changes in personality and behavior are frequently reported in patients with glioma. These symptoms have a large impact on the everyday life of patients and their partners and can contribute to a decrease in quality of life. While guidelines are available for managing most of these symptoms, these guidelines are often not suitable for the brain tumor patient population, as this population has very specific problems and needs. Obtaining more evidence on the effectiveness of existing and new interventions targeting fatigue, cognitive deficits, depression, and changes in personality and behavior in this population is advised. Screening combined with adequate referral to supportive care professionals has the potential to decrease the disease burden of glioma patients and their partners.

Internet-based guided self-help for glioma patients with depressive symptoms: design of a randomized controlled trial

Background

Among glioma patients, depression is estimated to be more prevalent than in both the general population and the cancer patient population. This can have negative consequences for both patients and their primary informal caregivers (e.g., a spouse, family member or close friend). At present, there is no evidence from randomized controlled trials for the effectiveness of psychological treatment for depression in glioma patients. Furthermore, the possibility of delivering mental health care through the internet has not yet been explored in this population. Therefore, a randomized controlled trial is warranted to evaluate the effects of an internet-based, guided self-help intervention for depressive symptoms in glioma patients.

Methods/design

The intervention is based on problem-solving therapy. An existing 5-week course is adapted for use by adult glioma patients with mild to moderate depressive symptoms (Center for Epidemiology Studies Depression Scale score ≥12). Sample size calculations yield 126 glioma patients to be included, who are randomly assigned to either the intervention group or a waiting list control group. In addition, we aim to include 63 patients with haematological cancer in a non-central nervous system malignancy control group. Assessments take place at baseline, after 6 and 12 weeks, and after 6 and 12 months. Primary outcome measure is the change in depressive symptoms. Secondary outcome measures include health-related quality of life, fatigue, costs and patient satisfaction. In addition, all patients are asked to assign a primary informal caregiver, who does not participate in the intervention but who is asked to complete similar assessments. Their mood, health-related quality of life and fatigue is evaluated as well.

Discussion

This is the first study to evaluate the effects of problem-solving therapy delivered through the internet as treatment for depressive symptoms in glioma patients. If proven effective, this treatment will contribute to the mental health care of glioma patients in clinical practice.

Trial registration

Netherlands Trial Register NTR3223

Pharmacological treatment of depression in patients with a primary brain tumour

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 3, 2010.Patients with a primary brain tumour often experience depression, for which drug treatment may be prescribed. However, these patients are also at high risk of epileptic seizures, cognitive impairment and fatigue, all of which are potential side effects of antidepressants. The benefit, or harm, of pharmacological treatment of depression in brain tumour patients is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of pharmacological treatment of depression in patients with a primary brain tumour.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated the search to include the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 10), MEDLINE to October 2012, EMBASE to October 2012 and PsycINFO to October 2012. We searched the British Nursing Index, LILACS, PSYNDEX, the NHS National Research Register, the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination's Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE) and Web of Knowledge (covering Science Scisearch, Social Sciences Citation Index and Biological Abstracts) for the original review (to July 2009). In the original review we also handsearched Neuro-oncology, the Journal of Neuro-oncology, the Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry and the Journal of Clinical Oncology (July 1999 to June 2009) and wrote to all the pharmaceutical companies manufacturing antidepressants for use in the UK.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for all randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials, cohort studies and case-control studies of any pharmacological treatment of depression in patients with a histologically diagnosed primary brain tumour.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

No studies met the inclusion criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

We found no eligible studies evaluating the benefits of any pharmacological treatment of depression in brain tumour patients.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No high-quality studies have examined the value of pharmacological treatment of depression in patients with a primary brain tumour. RCTs and detailed prospective studies are required to inform the effective pharmacological treatment of this common and important complication of brain tumours. Since the last version of this review none of the new relevant studies have provided additional information to change these conclusions.

Depression in relation to anxiety, obsessionality and phobia among neurosurgical patients with a primary brain tumor: a 1-year follow-up study

Depression is found to be present in up to 44% of brain tumor patients during their illness process. Anxiety as a comorbid psychiatric disorder with depression has formerly been studied, but phobia or obsessive-compulsive symptoms among brain tumor patients have not yet been noticed. By using a clinical prospective database of primary brain tumor patients (n=77) we studied the level of depression, anxiety, obsessionality (traits and symptoms) and phobic anxiety symptoms. Psychiatric symptoms were assessed before tumor operation as well as at three months and at one year after operation. The presence of comorbid anxiety, obsessionality and phobic anxiety symptoms was assessed before operation and at follow-ups in depressed and non-depressed patients, separately. Before tumor operation 16% of the patients had depression according to Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), while 10% had depression at three months and 15% at one year after operation. The depressed patients had statistically significantly higher anxiety scores and phobic scores at all three measurement points compared to corresponding scores among non-depressed brain tumor patients. The mean obsessionality scores among depressed brain tumor patients were significantly higher when measured before operation and at one year after the operation compared to non-depressed patients. To our knowledge, this is the first study so far in which comorbidity of psychiatric symptoms has been shown among depressive brain tumor patients. Concurrent comorbid conditions have been shown to be associated with increased severity, morbidity and chronicity of depression. It is recommended that treatment of depressive patients complicated with comorbid psychiatric disorders be planned by psychiatric units.

Comorbid mental disorders and psychosocial distress in patients with brain tumours and their spouses in the early treatment phase

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to examine the prevalence of comorbid mental disorders as well as the extent of psychosocial distress in patients with intracranial tumours and their partners during the early treatment phase. Moreover, we aimed to identify which events are experienced as most distressing in the context of the early diagnosis of brain cancer by patients and spouses.

METHODS

Structured clinical interviews for DSM-IV (SCID-IV) were conducted with 26 patients and their partners after the first neurosurgical treatment within the first 3 months after the detection of a brain tumour. Screening measures (NCCN distress thermometer, HADS, IES-R) were used to assess the extent of psychosocial distress as well as anxiety, depression and traumatic stress responses. Distressing experiences were assessed via a structured questionnaire and interview.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight per cent of the patients and 47% of the partners suffered from a psychiatric disorder. Most frequent diagnoses were adjustment disorder and acute stress disorder. The majority of the participants suffered from elevated psychosocial distress. Partners were equally or even more affected than the patients. For the patients, the experience most frequently described as distressing was the first detection of the tumour. The majority of the partners reported to be distressed by the fear of surgery outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed that during this very first treatment phase, both brain tumour patients and their spouses show a high prevalence of comorbid mental disorders and psychosocial distress. The findings suggest that research and clinical efforts are needed to address the psychosocial concerns of these populations.