Cost-effectiveness of combining systematic identification and treatment of co-morbid major depression for people with chronic diseases: the example of cancer

Economic evaluations of interventional opportunities for the management of mental-physical multimorbidity: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Economic evaluations of interventions for people with mental-physical multimorbidity, including a depressive disorder, are sparse. This study examines whether such interventions in adults are cost-effective.

DESIGN

A systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, CINAHL Plus, PsycINFO, Cochrane CENTRAL, Scopus, Web of Science and NHS EED databases were searched until 5 March 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included studies involving people aged ≥18 with two or more chronic conditions (one being a depressive disorder). Economic evaluation studies that compared costs and outcomes of interventions were included, and those that assessed only costs or effects were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two authors independently assessed risk of bias in included studies using recommended checklists. A narrative analysis of the characteristics and results by type of intervention and levels of healthcare provision was conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 19 studies, all undertaken in high-income countries, met inclusion criteria. Four intervention types were reported: collaborative care, self-management, telephone-based and antidepressant treatment. Most (14 of 19) interventions were implemented at the organisational level and were potentially cost-effective, particularly, the collaborative care for people with depressive disorder and diabetes, comorbid major depression and cancer and depression and multiple long-term conditions. Cost-effectiveness ranged from £206 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for collaborative care programmes for older adults with diabetes and depression at primary care clinics (USA) to £79 723 per QALY for combining collaborative care with improved opportunistic screening for adults with depressive disorder and diabetes (England). Conclusions on cost-effectiveness were constrained by methodological aspects of the included studies: choice of perspectives, time horizon and costing methods.

CONCLUSIONS

Economic evaluations of interventions to manage multimorbidity with a depressive disorder are non-existent in low-income and middle-income countries. The design and reporting of future economic evaluations must improve to provide robust conclusions.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022302036.

Implementing collaborative care for major depression in a cancer center: An observational study using mixed-methods

OBJECTIVES

To describe the implementation of a collaborative care (CC) screening and treatment program for major depression in people with cancer, found to be effective in clinical trials, into routine outpatient care of a cancer center.

METHOD

A mixed-methods observational study guided by the RE-AIM implementation framework using quantitative and qualitative data collected over five years.

RESULTS

Program set-up took three years and required more involvement of CC experts than anticipated. Barriers to implementation were uncertainty about whether oncology or psychiatry owned the program and the hospital's organizational complexity. Selecting and training CC team members was a major task. 90% (14,412/16,074) of patients participated in depression screening and 61% (136/224) of those offered treatment attended at least one session. Depression outcomes were similar to trial benchmarks (61%; 78/127 patients had a treatment response). After two years the program obtained long-term funding. Facilitators of implementation were strong trial evidence, effective integration into cancer care and ongoing clinical and managerial support.

CONCLUSION

A CC program for major depression, designed for the cancer setting, can be successfully implemented into routine care, but requires time, persistence and involvement of CC experts. Once operating it can be an effective and valued component of medical care.

Community delivery of brief therapy for depressed older adults impacted by Hurricane Sandy

Older adults frequently under-report depressive symptoms and often fail to access services after a disaster. To address unmet mental health needs, we developed a service delivery program (SMART-MH) that combines outreach, assessment, and therapy and implemented it in New York City after Hurricane Sandy. This study aimed to examine the feasibility, effectiveness, and patients' engagement of our brief psychotherapy ("Engage"). We predicted that Engage would result in reductions of depression, and that the benefits would be comparable to those of a historical comparison group who received Engage in a controlled experimental setting. A total of 2,831 adults (age ≥ 60) impacted by Hurricane Sandy were screened for depression. Assessments and therapy were conducted in English, Spanish, Cantonese, and Russian. Depressed individuals (PHQ-9 ≥ 10) who were not in treatment were offered Engage therapy in their native language at local senior center/nutrition sites. Twelve percent of the participants reported depression (N = 333). Of these 333 participants, 201 (60%) were not receiving treatment and 143 agreed to receive Engage therapy. Linear mixed-effects model showed that depression severity decreased significantly over time. More than two thirds had a five-point reduction in PHQ-9 scores and post-treatment scores ≤9. Post-hoc comparison of standardized slopes of change found patterns of depression reductions equivalent to Engage provided in a controlled setting. Partnerships to integrate mental health care into community settings can increase detection of mental-health needs and access to services in patients' native language. Brief reward exposure-based psychotherapy delivered in the community can provide comparable benefits to those achieved in research settings.

Cost-Effectiveness of Providing the Depression Care for People With Cancer Program to Patients With Prostate Cancer in the United States

OBJECTIVES

The Depression Care for People with Cancer program (DCPC) is a cost-effective depression care model for UK patients with cancer. However, DCPC's cost-effectiveness in the United States is unknown, particularly for patients with prostate cancer in the United States. This study evaluates the health and economic impact of providing DCPC to patients with prostate cancer.

METHODS

DCPC was compared with usual care in a mathematical model that simulates depression and its outcomes in a hypothetical cohort of US patients with prostate cancer. DCPC was modeled as a sequential combination of universal depression screening, post-screening evaluations, and first-line combination therapy. Primary outcomes were lifetime direct costs of depression care, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Secondary outcomes included life expectancy, number of depression-free months and lifetime depressive episodes, duration of depressive episodes, cumulative incidence of depression, lifetime depression diagnoses/misdiagnoses, and the cumulative incidence of maintenance therapy for depression. Sensitivity analyses were used to examine uncertainty.

RESULTS

In the base case, DCPC dominated usual care by offering 0.11 more QALYs for $2500 less per patient (from averted misdiagnoses). DCPC also offered 5 extra depression-free months, shorter depressive episodes, and a lower chance of maintenance therapy. DCPC's trade-offs were a higher cumulative incidence of depression and more lifetime depressive episodes. Life expectancy was identical under usual care and DCPC. Sensitivity analyses indicate that DCPC was almost always preferable to usual care.

CONCLUSION

Compared with usual care, DCPC may offer more value to US patients with prostate cancer. DCPC should be considered for inclusion in prostate cancer survivorship care guidelines.

Barriers to accepting mental health care in cancer patients with depression

This study aimed to determine barriers to accepting mental health care among depressed cancer patients. Cancer patients who screened positive for depression were referred for mental health treatment and sent a validated questionnaire designed to assess barriers to receiving mental health care. Responses were compared between patients who accepted their referral and those who did not. Among 75 patients who agreed to participate, 51 (68%) completed the questionnaire. Reported barriers to accessing mental healthcare were not significantly different between the two groups but patients residing within 50 miles of the clinic had increased odds of attending their appointment.

Ranking Preventive Interventions from Different Policy Domains: What Are the Most Cost-Effective Ways to Improve Public Health?

It is widely acknowledged that in order to promote public health and prevent diseases, a wide range of scientific disciplines and sectors beyond the health sector need to be involved. Evidence-based interventions, beyond preventive health interventions targeting disease risk factors and interventions from other sectors, should be developed and implemented. Investing in these preventive health policies is challenging as budgets have to compete with other governmental expenditures. The current study aimed to identify, compare and rank cost-effective preventive interventions targeting metabolic, environmental, occupational and behavioral risk factors. To identify these interventions, a literature search was performed including original full economic evaluations of Western country interventions that had not yet been implemented in the Netherlands. Several workshops were held with experts from different disciplines. In total, 51 different interventions (including 13 cost saving interventions) were identified and ranked based on their incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and potential averted disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), resulting in two rankings of the most cost-effective interventions and one ranking of the 13 cost saving interventions. This approach, resulting in an intersectoral ranking, can assist policy makers in implementing cost-effective preventive action that considers not only the health sector, but also other sectors.

Predicting future major depression and persistent depressive symptoms: Development of a prognostic screener and PHQ-4 cutoffs in breast cancer patients

OBJECTIVE

Create a brief, self-report screener for recently diagnosed breast cancer patients to identify patients at risk of future depression.

METHODS

Breast cancer patients (N = 410) within 2 ± 1 months after diagnosis provided data on depression vulnerability. Depression outcomes were defined as a high depressive symptom trajectory or a major depressive episode during 16 months after diagnosis. Stochastic gradient boosting of regression trees identified 7 items highly predictive for the depression outcomes from a pool of 219 candidate depression vulnerability items. Three of the 7 items were from the Patient Health Questionnaire 4 (PHQ-4), a validated screener for current anxiety/depressive disorder that has not been tested to identify risk for future depression. Thresholds classifying patients as high or low risk on the new Depression Risk Questionnaire 7 (DRQ-7) and the PHQ-4 were obtained. Predictive performance of the DRQ-7 and PHQ-4 was assessed on a holdout validation subsample.

FINDINGS

DRQ-7 items assess loneliness, irritability, persistent sadness, and low acceptance of emotion as well as 3 items from the PHQ-4 (anhedonia, depressed mood, and worry). A DRQ-7 score of ≥6/23 identified depression outcomes with 0.73 specificity, 0.83 sensitivity, 0.68 positive predictive value, and 0.86 negative predictive value. A PHQ-4 score of ≥3/12 performed moderately well but less accurately than the DRQ-7 (net reclassification improvement = 10%; 95% CI [0.5-16]).

INTERPRETATION

The DRQ-7 and the PHQ-4 with a new cutoff score are clinically accessible screeners for risk of depression in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients. Use of the screener to select patients for preventive interventions awaits validation of the screener in other samples.

Linked symptom monitoring and depression treatment programmes for specialist cancer services: protocol for a mixed-methods implementation study

INTRODUCTION

There is growing awareness that cancer services need to address patients' well-being as well as treating their cancer. We developed systematic approaches to (1) monitoring patients' symptoms including depression using a 'Symptom Monitoring Service' and (2) providing treatment for those with major depression using a programme called 'Depression Care for People with Cancer'. Used together, these two programmes were found to be highly effective and cost-effective in clinical trials. The overall aims of this project are to: (1) study the process of introducing these programmes into routine clinical care in a large cancer service, (2) identify the challenges associated with implementation and how these are overcome, (3) determine their effectiveness in a routine non-research setting and (4) describe patients' and clinicians' experience of the programmes.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a mixed-methods longitudinal implementation study. We will study the process of implementation in three phases (April 2016-December 2018): 'Pre-implementation' (setting up of the new programmes), 'Early Implementation' (implementation of the programmes in a small number of clinics) and 'Implementation and Maintenance' (implementation in the majority of clinics). We will use the following methods of data collection: (1) contemporaneous logs of the implementation process, (2) interviews with healthcare professionals and managers, (3) interviews with patients and (4) routinely collected clinical data.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been reviewed by a joint committee of Oxford University Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust Research and Development Department and the University of Oxford's Clinical Trials and Research Governance Department and judged to be service evaluation, not requiring ethics committee approval. The findings of this study will guide the scaling up implementation of the programmes across the UK and will enable us to construct an implementation toolkit. We will disseminate our findings in publications and at relevant national and international conferences.

Integrated care in cancer: What is it, how is it used and where are the gaps? A textual narrative literature synthesis

Integrated care is an underpinning concept of contemporary health care policy proffered as a strategy to overcome the fragmentations in care encountered by people with complex care needs (Shaw et al. [2011] What is Integrated Care? An Overview of Integrated Care in the NHS). Cancer patients have potential to benefit from such policy, often having needs that extend beyond cancer. This paper seeks to understand how the concept of integrated care is used in the cancer literature. A search of leading databases was conducted for original research relating to integrated care or an integration intervention aiming to improve outcomes of cancer patients, and analysed using textual narrative synthesis. 38 papers were included, each with a focus on improving cancer-specific aspects of care enhancing the capabilities of the cancer multidisciplinary team. Of the eight studies involving integration between the cancer service and other care providers, all focused on utilising the external provider to deliver aspects of cancer care or placed them in a passive role, as survey participant, a recipient of cancer-related clinical information or as the comparator "usual care" arm. Within the cancer literature, integration is predominantly used to describe initiatives to improve cancer-related aspects of care. Less attention is given to integration initiatives that enhance coordination across levels of the healthcare system or service providers.

Anxiety, depression and quality of life in people with pancreatic cancer and their carers

BACKGROUND

People with pancreatic cancer have high levels of anxiety and depression and reduced quality of life (QoL), but few studies have assessed these outcomes for patient-carer dyads. We therefore investigated these issues in an Australian population-based study.

METHODS

Patients with pancreatic cancer (n = 136) and many of their carers (n = 84) completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy QoL questionnaire at a median of three months after diagnosis. Overall QoL and well-being subscales (physical, social, emotional, functional) were compared with general population norms. Intraclass correlation coefficients were used to compare anxiety, depression and QoL scores of patients and their respective carers.

RESULTS

Fifteen percent of patients and 39% of carers had HADS scores indicative of anxiety and 15% of patients and 14% of carers of depression, respectively. Overall, 70% of patients and 58% of carers had QoL scores below the Queensland population average. Patients' anxiety, depression, overall QoL, social, emotional and functional wellbeing scores were significantly related to those scores in their carers. Among patients and carers, accessing psychological help was associated with elevated anxiety. Not receiving chemotherapy was associated with elevated depression among patients and younger age was associated with poorer outcomes in carers.

CONCLUSIONS

More carers had symptoms of anxiety than patients with pancreatic cancer, but symptoms of depression were similarly common in patients and carers. Further research is needed to assess whether interventions to reduce patients' distress could also improve QoL among carers, or whether carer-focussed interventions are required.

Screening Medical Patients for Depression: Lessons From a National Program in Cancer Clinics

BACKGROUND

Screening has been recommended to improve the identification of depression in medical patients. There is, therefore, a need for useful practical information on how to successfully implement large-scale depression screening in medical clinics.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the practical lessons learned from our experience of implementing a large-scale depression screening program in cancer clinics throughout Scotland, UK.

METHOD

Reflective review based on the experience of the screening team and records of the iterative development of the program.

FINDINGS

Systematic screening for depression in patients with medical illnesses can be delivered in clinics as long as the program is well designed. Design issues include ensuring the engagement of staff and patients, implementing efficient 2-stage screening processes and effectively managing workflow and quality assurance.

DISCUSSION

Screening has the potential to offer a solution to the well-documented problem of missed depression and other psychiatric diagnoses, thereby improving patient care if closely linked to treatment provision.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of collaborative care interventions for depression in patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

Previous systematic reviews have found limited evidence for the effectiveness of pharmacological and psychological interventions for the management of depression in patients with cancer. This paper provides the first meta-analysis of newer collaborative care interventions, which may include both types of treatment, as well as integrated delivery and follow-up. Meta-analyses of pharmacological and psychological interventions are included as a comparison.

METHODS

A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library from July 2005 to January 2015 for randomized controlled trials of depression treatments for cancer patients diagnosed with a major depressive disorder, or who met a threshold on a validated depression rating scale was conducted. Meta-analyses were conducted using summary data.

RESULTS

Key findings included eight reports of four collaborative care interventions, eight pharmacological, and nine psychological trials. A meta-analysis demonstrated that collaborative care interventions were significantly more effective than usual care (standardized mean difference = -0.49, p = 0.003), and depression reduction was maintained at 12 months. By comparison, short-term (up to 12 weeks), but not longer-term effectiveness was demonstrated for both pharmacological and psychological interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Collaborative care interventions have newly emerged as multidisciplinary care delivery models, which may result in more long-term depression remission. This review also updates previous findings of modest evidence for the effectiveness of both pharmacological and psychological interventions for threshold depression in cancer patients. Research designs focusing on combined treatments and delivery systems may best further the limited evidence-base for the management of depression in cancer.

Long-term cost-effectiveness of collaborative care (vs usual care) for people with depression and comorbid diabetes or cardiovascular disease: a Markov model informed by the COINCIDE randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of collaborative care (vs usual care) for treating depression in patients with diabetes and/or coronary heart disease (CHD).

SETTING

36 primary care general practices in North West England.

PARTICIPANTS

387 participants completed baseline assessment (collaborative care: 191; usual care: 196) and full or partial 4-month follow-up data were captured for 350 (collaborative care: 170; usual care: 180). 62% of participants were male, 14% were non-white. Participants were aged ≥18 years, listed on a Quality and Outcomes Framework register for CHD and/or type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus, with persistent depressive symptoms. Patients with psychosis or type I/II bipolar disorder, actively suicidal, in receipt of services for substance misuse, or already in receipt of psychological therapy for depression were excluded.

INTERVENTION

Collaborative care consisted of evidence-based low-intensity psychological treatments, delivered over 3 months and case management by a practice nurse and a Psychological Well Being Practitioner.

OUTCOME MEASURES

As planned, the primary measure of cost-effectiveness was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY)). A Markov model was constructed to extrapolate the trial results from short-term to long-term (24 months).

RESULTS

The mean cost per participant of collaborative care was £317 (95% CI 284 to 350). Over 24 months, it was estimated that collaborative care was associated with greater healthcare usage costs (net cost £674 (95% CI -30 953 to 38 853)) and QALYs (net QALY gain 0.04 (95% CI -0.46 to 0.54)) than usual care, resulting in a cost per QALY gained of £16 123, and a likelihood of being cost-effective of 0.54 (willingness to pay threshold of £20 000).

CONCLUSIONS

Collaborative care is a potentially cost-effective long-term treatment for depression in patients with comorbid physical and mental illness. The estimated cost per QALY gained was below the threshold recommended by English decision-makers. Further, long-term primary research is needed to address uncertainty associated with estimates of cost-effectiveness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN80309252; Post-results.

Cost-effectiveness of integrated collaborative care for comorbid major depression in patients with cancer

OBJECTIVES

Comorbid major depression is associated with reduced quality of life and greater use of healthcare resources. A recent randomised trial (SMaRT, Symptom Management Research Trials, Oncology-2) found that a collaborative care treatment programme (Depression Care for People with Cancer, DCPC) was highly effective in treating depression in patients with cancer. This study aims to estimate the cost-effectiveness of DCPC compared with usual care from a health service perspective.

METHODS

Costs were estimated using UK national unit cost estimates and health outcomes measured using quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Incremental cost-effectiveness of DCPC compared with usual care was calculated and scenario analyses performed to test alternative assumptions on costs and missing data. Uncertainty was characterised using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. The probability of DCPC being cost-effective was determined using the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence's (NICE) cost-effectiveness threshold range of £ 20,000 to £ 30,000 per QALY gained.

RESULTS

DCPC cost on average £ 631 more than usual care per patient, and resulted in a mean gain of 0.066 QALYs, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £ 9549 per QALY. The probability of DCPC being cost-effective was 0.9 or greater at cost-effectiveness thresholds above £ 20,000 per QALY for the base case and scenario analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with usual care, DCPC is likely to be cost-effective at the current thresholds used by NICE. This study adds to the weight of evidence that collaborative care treatment models are cost-effective for depression, and provides new evidence regarding their use in specialist medical settings.

The expanding role of primary care in cancer control

The nature of cancer control is changing, with an increasing emphasis, fuelled by public and political demand, on prevention, early diagnosis, and patient experience during and after treatment. At the same time, primary care is increasingly promoted, by governments and health funders worldwide, as the preferred setting for most health care for reasons of increasing need, to stabilise health-care costs, and to accommodate patient preference for care close to home. It is timely, then, to consider how this expanding role for primary care can work for cancer control, which has long been dominated by highly technical interventions centred on treatment, and in which the contribution of primary care has been largely perceived as marginal. In this Commission, expert opinion from primary care and public health professionals with academic and clinical cancer expertise—from epidemiologists, psychologists, policy makers, and cancer specialists—has contributed to a detailed consideration of the evidence for cancer control provided in primary care and community care settings. Ranging from primary prevention to end-of-life care, the scope for new models of care is explored, and the actions needed to effect change are outlined. The strengths of primary care—its continuous, coordinated, and comprehensive care for individuals and families—are particularly evident in prevention and diagnosis, in shared follow-up and survivorship care, and in end-of-life care. A strong theme of integration of care runs throughout, and its elements (clinical, vertical, and functional) and the tools needed for integrated working are described in detail. All of this change, as it evolves, will need to be underpinned by new research and by continuing and shared multiprofessional development.

Cancer and quality of life in spousal dyads: spillover in couples with and without cancer-related health problems

PURPOSE

Poor health of one spouse can adversely influence the partner's health outcomes ("spillover"). This study aimed to estimate quality of life spillover among spouses and to determine how presence of cancer influenced these effects.

METHODS

We examined data on husband-wife dyads with cancer-related health problems, medical events, or disabilities (n = 910) and matched comparison dyads from the 2004-2012 Medical Expenditures Panel Survey, a population-based survey of the USA. Mental and physical health-related quality of life and depressed mood were reported at two time points (T1 and T2, 11 months apart on average). Dyadic multilevel models evaluated the cross-lagged impact of HRQoL and depressed mood at T1 on spouses' HRQoL at T2, controlling for sociodemographics and health conditions.

RESULTS

Small but statistically significant spillover was observed for mental and physical HRQoL among couples with cancer. Spillover occurred from both the spouse to the survivor and from survivor to spouse. Depressed mood, in particular, showed stronger spillover effects from the spouse to the survivor than the inverse. Similar effects were not observed in dyads without cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Screening for and treating poor HRQoL and depressed mood concurrently in both cancer survivors, and their spouses may positively influence HRQoL outcomes. Future research is needed to further elucidate these findings and determine whether a concurrent approach to psychosocial care in survivors and their spouses may improve long-term outcomes.

Effective, clinically feasible and sustainable: Key design features of psycho-educational and supportive care interventions to promote individualised self-management in cancer care

As the global burden of cancer increases healthcare services will face increasing challenges in meet the complex needs of these patients, their families and the communities in which they live. This raises the question of how to meet patient need where direct clinical contact may be constrained or not readily available. Patients and families require resources and skills to manage their illness outside of the hospital setting within their own communities.

AIM

To propose a framework for the development and delivery of psycho-educational and supportive care interventions drawing on theoretical principles of behaviour change and evidence-based interventions, and based on extensive experience in developing and testing complex interventions in oncology.

APPROACH

At the core of this intervention framework are considerations of efficiency: interventions are designed to cater for individuals' unique needs; to place minimal demands on the health system infrastructure and to be rapidly disseminated into usual care if successful. There are seven key features: 1) Targeting cancer type and stage; 2) Tailoring to unique individual needs; 3) Promotion of patient self-management of their disease and treatment side effects; 4) Efficient delivery of the intervention; 5) Training and adherence to protocol; 6) Ensuring the intervention is evidence-based; 7) Confirming stakeholder acceptability of the intervention.

APPLICATION

A case study of a randomised controlled trial which tested psycho-educational oncology interventions using this framework is presented. These interventions were designed to cater for individuals' unique needs and promote self-management while placing minimal demands on the acute health care setting.

DISCUSSION

Innovative ways to realise the potentially major impact that psycho-educational and supportive care interventions can have on psychological morbidity, coping, symptoms and quality of life in serious and chronic illness are needed. This framework, which is driven by theory, evidence, and experience, is designed to ensure that interventions are effective, clinically feasible and sustainable.

Integrating psychosocial care into neuro-oncology: challenges and strategies

Approximately 256,000 cases of malignant brain and nervous system cancer were diagnosed worldwide during 2012 and 189,000 deaths, with this burden falling more heavily in the developed world. Problematically, research describing the psychosocial needs of people with brain tumors and their carers and the development and evaluation of intervention models has lagged behind that of more common cancers. This may relate, at least in part, to poor survival outcomes and high morbidity associated with this illness, and stigma about this disease. The evidence base for the benefits of psychosocial care in oncology has supported the production of clinical practice guidelines across the globe over the past decade, with a recent mandate to integrate the psychosocial domain and measurement of distress into routine care. Clinical care guidelines for people with brain tumors have emerged, with a building focus on psychosocial and survivorship care. However, researchers will need to work intensively with health care providers to ensure future practice is evidence-based and able to be implemented across both acute and community settings and likely within existing resources.