Depressed patients with incurable cancer: Which depressive symptoms do they experience?

Factor Structures in the Depressive Symptoms Domains in the 9Q for Northern Thai Adults and Their Association with Chronic Diseases

Most of the common models to examine depression are one-factor models; however, previous studies provided several-factor structure models on each depressive symptom using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). The Nine-Questions Depression-Rating Scale (9Q) is an alternative assessment tool that was developed for assessing the severity of depressive symptoms in Thai adults. This study aimed to examine the factor structure of this tool based on the factor structure models for the PHQ-9 provided in previous studies using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). We also examined the association of chronic diseases and depressive symptoms using the Multiple Indicators Multiple Causes model among 1346 participants aged 19 years old or more without psychiatric disorders. The results show that the two-factor CFA model with six items in the cognitive-affective domain and three items in the somatic domain provided the best fit for depressive symptoms in the study population (RMSEA = 0.077, CFI = 0.953, TLI = 0.936). Dyslipidemia was positively associated with both cognitive-affective symptoms (β = 0.120) and somatic depressive symptoms (β = 0.080). Allergies were associated with a higher level of cognitive-affective depressive symptoms (β = 0.087), while migraine (β = 0.114) and peptic ulcer disease (β = 0.062) were associated with a higher level of somatic symptoms. Increased age was associated with a lower level of somatic symptoms (β = -0.088). Our findings suggested that considering depressive symptoms as two dimensions yields a better fit for depressive symptoms. The co-occurrence of chronic diseases associated with depressive symptoms should be monitored.

Quality of life beyond measure: Advanced cancer patients, wellbeing and medicinal cannabis

Experiences of advanced cancer are assembled and (re)positioned with reference to illness, symptoms and maintaining 'wellbeing'. Medical cannabis is situated at a borderline in this and the broader social domain: between stigmatised and normalised; recreational and pharmaceutical; between perception, experience, discourse and scientific proof of benefit. Yet, in the hyper-medicalised context of randomised clinical trials (RCTs), cancer, wellbeing and medical cannabis are narrowly assessed using individualistic numerical scores. This article attends to patients' perceptions and experiences at this borderline, presenting novel findings from a sociological sub-study embedded within RCTs focused on the use of medical cannabis for symptom relief in advanced cancer. Through a Deleuzo-Guattarian-informed framework, we highlight the fragmentation and reassembling of bodies and propose body-situated experiences of wellbeing in the realm of advanced cancer. Problematising 'biopsychosocial' approaches that centre an individualised disconnected patient body in understandings of wellbeing, experiences of cancer and potential treatments, our findings foreground relational affect and embodied experience, and the role of desire in understanding what wellbeing is and can be. This also underpins and enables exploration of the affective reassembling ascribed to medical cannabis, with particular focus on how it is positioned within RCTs.

Challenges and opportunities for improvement when people with an intellectual disability or serious mental illness also need palliative care: A qualitative meta-ethnography

BACKGROUND

People with diagnoses of intellectual disability or serious mental illness have higher mortality rates due to physical comorbidities; better understanding is needed to guide best practice in provision of palliative care for these populations.

AIMS

To identify multivoiced perspectives, drawn from lived experience of: what works, and what does not, in palliative care for people with intellectual disability or serious mental illness; challenges in, and opportunities to improve, palliative care.

DESIGN

A systematically constructed qualitative meta-ethnography. Protocol published (PROSPERO: CRD42021236616).

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PsychINFO, CINAHL PLUS and Embase used without date limitations. Papers published in English, containing qualitative data on palliative care provision for people with a diagnosis of intellectual disability or serious mental illness were included. Global five-point strength score applied for relevance/quality appraisal.

RESULTS

Familiarity (of location, people and/or things) is important for good palliative care. Assumptions and misunderstandings about the role of mental capacity assessment to appropriately involve the patient in decision-making are common. Adapting training for palliative care staff to address concerns and beliefs about mental illness is one of the methods that helps avoid diagnostic overshadowing. Proactive identification of service arrangements to meet needs of persons with personality, psychotic, delusional and bipolar affective disorders will help optimise care.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence, including the voices of people with intellectual disability or serious mental illness is urgently needed to guide efforts to improve their access to and experience of palliative care. More evidence is especially needed to understand, develop and implement best practice for people with psychosis, bipolar affective disorder, mania and personality disorder.

Psychosocial Factors and the Need for Multidisciplinary Support in Nutrition Counselling for Cancer Chemotherapy Patients

This study aims to identify the background factors and experiences of patients with cancer with eating-related problems who require nutrition counselling. Using a mixed-methods approach, this secondary analysis study was conducted on patients with head and neck, oesophageal, gastric, colorectal, or lung cancers who were receiving outpatient chemotherapy. They completed a questionnaire measuring nutrition impact symptoms, eating-related distress, and quality of life (QOL). Patients who required nutrition counselling were interviewed to identify the specific issues they experienced. We reported on nutritional status and nutrition impact symptoms in a previous study. Of the 151 participants, 42 required nutrition counselling. Background factors associated with nutrition counselling were related to the following psychosocial variables: small number of people in the household, undergoing treatment while working, low QOL, and eating-related distress. Four themes were extracted from the specific issues experienced by patients: motivation for self-management, distress from symptoms, seeking understanding and sympathy, and anxiety and confusion. The desire for nutrition counselling was attributable to 'anxiety caused by the symptoms' and 'confusion about the information on eating'. Healthcare professionals should promote multidisciplinary collaboration after considering the factors associated with the required nutrition counselling to provide nutritional support.

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 a negative impact in terms of quality of life, compliance with anticancer treatment, suicide risk and possibly 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 evaluate 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 used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was November 2022.

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

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome was 1. efficacy as a continuous outcome. Our secondary outcomes were 2. efficacy as a dichotomous outcome, 3. Social adjustment, 4. health-related quality of life and 5. dropouts. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 14 studies (1364 participants), 10 of which contributed to the meta-analysis for the primary outcome. Six of these compared antidepressants and placebo, three compared two antidepressants, and one three-armed study compared two antidepressants and placebo. In this update, we included four additional studies, three of which contributed data for the primary outcome. For acute-phase treatment response (six to 12 weeks), antidepressants may reduce depressive symptoms when compared with placebo, even though the evidence is very uncertain. This was true when depressive symptoms were measured as a continuous outcome (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.92 to -0.12; 7 studies, 511 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and when measured as a proportion of people who had depression at the end of the study (risk ratio (RR) 0.74, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.96; 5 studies, 662 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported data on follow-up response (more than 12 weeks). In head-to-head comparisons, we retrieved data for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) and for mirtazapine versus TCAs. There was no difference between the various classes of antidepressants (continuous outcome: SSRI versus TCA: SMD -0.08, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.18; 3 studies, 237 participants; very low-certainty evidence; mirtazapine versus TCA: SMD -4.80, 95% CI -9.70 to 0.10; 1 study, 25 participants). There was a potential beneficial effect of antidepressants versus placebo for the secondary efficacy outcomes (continuous outcome, response at one to four weeks; very low-certainty evidence). There were no differences for these outcomes when comparing two different classes of antidepressants, even though the evidence was very uncertain. In terms of dropouts due to any cause, we found no difference between antidepressants compared with placebo (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.38; 9 studies, 889 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and between SSRIs and TCAs (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.22; 3 studies, 237 participants). We downgraded the certainty of the evidence because of the heterogeneous quality of the studies, imprecision arising from small sample sizes and wide CIs, and inconsistency due to statistical or clinical heterogeneity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Despite the impact of depression on people with cancer, the available studies were few and of low quality. This review found a potential beneficial effect of antidepressants against placebo in depressed participants with cancer. However, the certainty of evidence is very low and, on the basis of these results, it is difficult to draw clear implications for practice. 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 drug to prescribe may be based on the data on antidepressant efficacy in the general population of people with major depression, also taking into account that data on people with other serious medical conditions suggest a positive safety profile for the SSRIs. Furthermore, this update shows that the usage of the newly US Food and Drug Administration-approved antidepressant esketamine in its intravenous formulation might represent a potential treatment for this specific population of people, since it can be used both as an anaesthetic and an antidepressant. However, data are too inconclusive and further studies are needed. We conclude that 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.

Oral Propolis, Nutritional Status and Quality of Life with Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer: A Randomized, Double-Blind Clinical Trial

Chemotherapy-induced side effects include an impaired nutritional status and reduced quality of life in patients. The contribution of propolis, as a co-adjuvant nutritional supplement in cancer treatment, is suggested due to its functional characteristics and biological activities such as antitumoral activity, DNA protection, free radicals scavenging, and immune stimulation; however, clinical trials to support these effects in cancer patients are necessary. This is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial to assess the effect of propolis vs. placebo on the nutritional status and quality of life in patients diagnosed with breast cancer who are receiving chemotherapy (No. IRCT2016062828679N1). A total of 60 patients from the Oncology Clinic at Tohid Hospital, Sanandaj, Iran were randomized to receive propolis (250 mg/two times per day for three months) or a placebo. After three months of intervention, energy intake of patients who received propolis increased significantly compared to placebo group (p = 0.000). The quality of life also showed significant improvements in patients receiving propolis, particularly with regards to emotional functioning (p = 0.03), global QoL functioning (p = 0.04), and financial difficulties (p = 0.01) compared to the control group. Propolis is suggested an adequate and safe therapeutic option to improve the nutritional status and quality of life in patients diagnosed with breast cancer receiving chemotherapy. However, more trials are needed in order to draw robust conclusions with regard to its efficacy in chemotherapy-induced side effects.

Forgiveness facilitation in palliative care: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review is to map the nature and extent of forgiveness facilitation intervention implemented and evaluated in palliative care contexts.

INTRODUCTION

Spiritual beliefs often include reconciliation and forgiveness, which are critical to patients and families in palliative care. Forgiveness facilitation can represent a valuable response as a multidisciplinary and non-pharmacological intervention to reduce suffering.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Studies including palliative care patients aged 18 years or over and assisted by palliative care teams, including all healthcare professionals, chaplains, and volunteers, were included in this review.

METHODS

This scoping review is based on JBI methodology. The search was conducted in June 2017 and updated in December 2018 using international databases and gray literature in English, Spanish, German, Italian, and Portuguese.

RESULTS

A total of 23 articles were included in this review. The results suggest a growing interest in forgiveness facilitation in palliative care in different spiritual and religious traditions. Most studies are based on a psychological perspective. Several activities related to the intervention have been identified, but few details or characteristics are described. Social workers, nurses, doctors, and psychologists were most identified as healthcare staff involved in forgiveness facilitation. The outcomes related to the intervention are mental, physical, and relational well-being; quality of life, decision-making and communication; self-esteem and hope; depression, anger, and anxiety; and inner peace.

CONCLUSIONS

Forgiveness facilitation is critical in palliative care and is grounded in a multidisciplinary approach, but further evidence is needed to inform clinical implementation. These results open new perspectives for research and training on palliative healthcare staff.

Associated factors of distress in patients with advanced cancer: A retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the psychosocial distress and associated factors in advanced cancer patients consulting at the outpatient Palliative Care Unit at the National Cancer Institute in Mexico City.

DESIGN

A retrospective study was conducted using electronic records (June 2015 to December 2016).

SAMPLE

A total of 646 patients with advanced cancer during their first visit to the outpatient palliative care unit at the National Cancer Institute in Mexico were evaluated using the Distress Thermometer (DT) and ECOG performance status scores.

FINDINGS

Overall, 62% were women, with a median age of 57 years, and married (54.8%). The most frequent diagnosis was gastrointestinal cancer (28.6%), and 38.9% had a functional performance status of ECOG 2. The median DT score was 4.0 (IQR = 2-6), with 56% reporting DT scores ≥4. The three most frequent problems ≥4 were sadness (82.6%), feeling weak (81.2%), worry (79.6%), and <4 were feeling weak (57.7%), fatigue (55.6%), and financial security (52.1%). The variables associated with distress according to the multiple logistic regression analysis were problems with housing (OR = 2.661, 95% CI = 1.538-4.602), sadness (OR = 2.533, 95% CI = 1.615-3.973), transportation (OR = 1.732, 95% CI = 1.157-2.591), eating (OR = 1.626, 95% CI = 1.093-2.417), nervousness (OR = 1.547, 95% CI = 1.014-2.360), and sleep (OR = 1.469, 95% CI = 1.980-2.203).

CONCLUSION

The principal factors were related to distress levels, housing problems, transportation issues, and emotional problems such as sadness, nervousness, lower functionality, and younger age. Therefore, psychosocial support is of considerable relevance in palliative care. These findings will help clinicians understand the distress of patients with advanced cancer in palliative care in Latin American countries.

Psychiatric comorbidities in cancer patients: acute interventions by the psychiatric consultation liaison service

AIM

The aim of this study was to explore the psychiatric comorbidities in cancer patients examined by the psychiatric consultation liaison services (CLP) in a general hospital. Furthermore, we intended to examine associations between certain cancers types and psychiatric disorders as well as to give an overview of the psychiatric treatments options that were recommended by the CLP.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis investigated 119 psychiatric consultations for cancer patients in a one year period. The assessment covered demographics and cancer diagnosis, psychiatric diagnosis and proceedings.

RESULTS

One third of all patients were treated for hematological cancer, followed by lung cancer. Depression was the most common psychiatric disorder. One third of all patients with hematological cancer were diagnosed with depression, followed by delirium. Inpatient psychiatric treatment and psychotherapy were most commonly recommended by the consultant psychiatrist. Furthermore, 80.2% of all patients received recommendations for medication with antidepressants.

CONCLUSION

Our data showed that the CLP provides an important service of detecting and initiating early and appropriate treatment for cancer patients with comorbid psychiatric disorders by directing patients to the relevant treatment procedure or facility.

Transforming End-of-Life Care by Implementing a Patient-Centered Care Model: Findings From an Action Research Project

Patient-centered care is valued by health care professionals working in palliative care settings. However, studies have revealed the difficulty of adopting patient-centered care in daily practice and of sharing its meaning within the interdisciplinary team. The aim of this study was to report the process of transforming end-of-life care by implementing a patient-centered model of care in an Italian hospice. An action research process was conducted between June 2012 and June 2014. The following phases were performed: (a) "looking" phase: the diagnosis was established by collecting data through semistructured interviews in the field study and through the administration of the Frommelt Attitude Toward the Care of the Dying Scale Form B-Italian Version; (b) "thinking" phase: staff members, guided by a research team, redesigned practice by identifying priorities in improvements and actions through multiprofessional focus groups; (c) "acting" phase: actions identified in the previous phase were implemented; and (d) "relooking" phase: the same data collection processes used in the looking phase were applied to evaluate the outcomes achieved. Three areas of improvement have been established: (1) symptoms were intensively audited through patient self-reports by using validated tools; (2) patients' family needs were also regularly collected, documented in clinical records, and addressed; (3) patients' family members were involved in the plan of care through support and education. Inpatient hospice health carers in this study were aware of the concept of patient-centered care. However, its actual implementation was lacking. An action research approach helped them to implement expected changes.

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.

Impact of chemotherapy on perceptions related to food intake in women with breast cancer: A prospective study

Breast cancer (BC) treatment includes mostly chemotherapy (CT), which can cause side effects like nausea, taste changes, early satiety, slow gastric emptying and xerostomia. In this way, the individual’s relationship with food may change during the treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of chemotherapy on perceptions related to food intake of women with BC. Fifty-five women with BC were followed, and data were collected at three periods during first-line CT: beginning (T0), intermediate (T1) and end (T2). A visual analogue scale (VAS) (0 to 10 cm) for hunger, appetite for various food categories and meal enjoyment was investigated. The frequency and intensity of side effects were evaluated using a 4 cm scale. The results showed a higher prevalence of taste changes in T1 (p = 0.044) and more nausea in T1 and T2 (p = 0.018). Furthermore, the intensity of nausea was higher in T2 (p = 0.01) than in the other periods. We observed moderate hunger in T0, T1 and T2 (p = 0.113), but the overall appetite increased between T0 and T2 (p = 0.003). Meal enjoyment was reduced from T0 to T1and returned back to the initial value in T2 (p = 0.021). The appetite for salty (p = 0.004) and spicy (p = 0.03) foods was increased in T1. There was an increase of body weight (p = 0.008), body mass index (BMI) (p = 0.009) and waist circumference (WC) (p = 0.03) during CT. CT changes food hedonism, increasing the overall appetite and the appetite for salty and spicy foods. Moreover, we observed the negative impact of CT on meal enjoyment and an increase in side effects and anthropometric parameters.

The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) as screening instruments for depression in patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

Depression screening in patients with cancer is recommended by major clinical guidelines, although the evidence on individual screening tools is limited for this population. Here, the authors assess and compare the diagnostic accuracy of 2 established screening instruments: the depression modules of the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-D), in a representative sample of patients with cancer.

METHODS

This multicenter study was conducted with a proportional, stratified, random sample of 2141 patients with cancer across all major tumor sites and treatment settings. The PHQ-9 and HADS-D were assessed and compared in terms of diagnostic accuracy and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition diagnosis of major depressive disorder using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview for Oncology as the criterion standard.

RESULTS

The diagnostic accuracy of the PHQ-9 and HADS-D was fair for diagnosing major depressive disorder, with areas under the ROC curves of 0.78 (95% confidence interval, 0.76-0.79) and 0.75 (95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.77), respectively. The 2 questionnaires did not differ significantly in their areas under the ROC curves (P = .15). The PHQ-9 with a cutoff score ≥7 had the best screening performance, with a sensitivity of 83% (95% confidence interval, 78%-89%) and a specificity of 61% (95% confidence interval, 59%-63%). The American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline screening algorithm had a sensitivity of 44% (95% confidence interval, 36%-51%) and a specificity of 84% (95% confidence interval, 83%-85%).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with cancer, the screening performance of both the PHQ-9 and the HADS-D was limited compared with a standardized diagnostic interview. Costs and benefits of routinely screening all patients with cancer should be weighed carefully. Cancer 2017;123:4236-4243. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Differential disgust responding in people with cancer and implications for psychological wellbeing

OBJECTIVES

Evidence suggests that disgust responses, known to negatively affect psychological wellbeing, may differ in people with cancer. We performed the first quantitative investigation of three discrete types of disgust trait - disgust propensity, sensitivity and self-directed disgust - in people diagnosed with a broad range of cancers (versus cancer-free controls), and explored their associations with psychological wellbeing.

DESIGN

In a cross-sectional survey design, 107 participants with heterogeneous cancer diagnoses, recruited from cancer charities and support groups, were matched with cancer-free controls by age and gender.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Measures of the three disgust traits were taken alongside measures of anxiety and depression.

RESULTS

Disgust sensitivity and physical self-disgust were significantly higher in the cancer than control sample, while disgust propensity and behavioural self-disgust were lower. The disgust traits had a different pattern of associations to psychological wellbeing across the two groups, with disgust sensitivity predicting depressive symptoms to a significantly greater extent in the cancer than control group.

CONCLUSIONS

People with cancer differ from matched controls in their disgust responses and these responses have significant predictive relationships with aspects of their psychological wellbeing. The results suggest that emotion-based interventions may be useful for improving psychological wellbeing in people with cancer.

The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System: Poor performance as screener for major depression in patients with incurable cancer

BACKGROUND

Depressive symptoms are prevalent in patients with advanced cancer, sometimes of a severity that fulfil the criteria for a major depressive episode.

AIM

The aim of this study was to investigate how the item on depression in the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System with a 0-10 Numerical Rating Scale performed as a screener for major depressive episode. A possible improved performance by adding the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-Anxiety item was also examined.

DESIGN

An international cross-sectional study including patients with incurable cancer was conducted. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System score was compared against major depressive episode as assessed by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. Screening performance was examined by sensitivity, specificity and the kappa coefficient.

SETTING

Patients with incurable cancer (n = 969), median age 63 years and from eight nationalities provided report. Median Karnofsky Performance Status was 70. Median survival was 229 days (205-255 days).

RESULTS

Patient Health Questionnaire-9 major depressive episode was present in 133 of 969 patients (13.7%). Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-Depression screening ability for Patient Health Questionnaire-9 major depressive episode was limited. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.71 (0.66-0.76). Valid detection or exclusion of Patient Health Questionnaire-9 major depressive episode could not be concluded at any Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-Depression cut-off; by the cut-off Numerical Rating Scale ⩾ 2, sensitivity was 0.69 and specificity was 0.60. By the cut-off Numerical Rating Scale ⩾ 4, sensitivity was 0.51 and specificity was 0.82. Combined mean ratings by Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-Depression and Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-Anxiety revealed similar limited screening ability.

CONCLUSION

The depression and anxiety items of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System, a frequently used assessment tool in palliative care settings, seem to measure a construct other than major depressive episode as assessed by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 instrument.

[Dyspnea, itching and depression in palliative medicine]

Palliative medicine focuses on relieving burdening symptoms to improve quality of life. The most common symptoms are physical weakness, pain, loss of appetite, nausea as well as dyspnea, itching and depression. Frequently, good symptom control can be achieved using the most effective drug combination therapy or non-medicinal interventions. This article specifically addresses the physical symptoms dyspnea, itching and the psychological symptom depression.

Efficacy and acceptability of antidepressants on the continuum of depressive experiences in patients with cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with cancer are particularly vulnerable to depressive experiences, ranging from severe emotional reactions to proper depressive syndromes, including major depression. These experiences may deeply affect the course and outcome of the disease. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy acceptability of antidepressants on the continuum of depressive experiences in patients suffering from cancer.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, as well as websites of regulatory agencies, clinical trial repositories and pharmaceutical companies, were systematically searched for published and unpublished randomised trials assessing the efficacy of antidepressants versus placebo in patients with cancer. Efficacy of antidepressants at the end of the study was the primary outcome. The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42014013440).

RESULTS

A total of 19 studies contributed to the analysis. Antidepressants (particularly the selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors and mianserin) were more effective than placebo in relieving depressive experiences in both patients with major depression or depressive symptoms (standardised mean difference -0.596, 95% confidence interval -1.041 to -0.150), as well as in patients with other cancer-related distressing symptoms (standardised mean difference -0.229, 95% confidence interval -0.419 to -0.039). We found evidence that efficacy was positively associated with length of treatment. No differences between antidepressants and placebo were found in terms of overall acceptability.

CONCLUSIONS

Antidepressants should be considered as one treatment option for relieving the burden of depressive experiences in patients with cancer.

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.

Depression in advanced cancer--assessment challenges and associations with disease load

BACKGROUND

Patients with advanced cancer commonly experience multiple somatic symptoms and declining functioning. Some highly prevalent symptoms also overlap with diagnostic symptom-criteria of depression. Thus, assessing depression in these patients can be challenging. We therefore investigated 1) the effect of different scoring-methods of depressive symptoms on detecting depression, and 2) the relationship between disease load and depression amongst patients with advanced cancer.

METHODS

The sample included 969 patients in the European Palliative Care Research Collaborative-Computer Symptom Assessment Study (EPCRC-CSA). Inclusion criteria were: incurable metastatic/locally advanced cancer and ≥ 18 years. Biomarkers and length of survival were registered from patient-records. Depression was assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and applying three scoring-methods: inclusive (algorithm scoring including the somatic symptom-criteria), exclusive (algorithm scoring excluding the somatic symptom-criteria) and sum-score (sum of all symptoms with a cut-off ≥ 8).

RESULTS

Depression prevalence rates varied according to scoring-method: inclusive 13.7%, exclusive 14.9% and sum-score 45.3%. Agreement between the algorithm scoring-methods was excellent (Kappa = 0.81), but low between the inclusive and sum scoring-methods (Kappa = 0.32). Depression was significantly associated with more pain (OR-range: 1.09-1.19, p < 0.001-0.04) and lower performance status (KPS-score, OR-range = 0.68-0.72, p < 0.001) irrespective of scoring-method.

LIMITATIONS

Depression was assessed using self-report, not clinical interviews.

CONCLUSIONS

The scoring-method, not excluding somatic symptoms, had the greatest effect on assessment outcomes. Increasing pain and poorer than expected physical condition should alert clinicians to possible co-morbid depression. The large discrepancy in prevalence rates between scoring-methods reinforces the need for consensus and validation of depression definitions and assessment in populations with high disease load.

Exploration of depressive symptoms in African American cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Accurately assessing depression in African American cancer patients is difficult because of the similarities of physical symptoms observed in cancer and depression.

AIM

To identify universal and distinctive depressive symptoms in African American cancer patients.

METHODS

Seventy-four cancer patients (34 depressed and 23 non-depressed African Americans, and 17 depressed Whites) were interviewed. Qualitative and quantitative analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Compared to non-depressed African Americans, depressed African Americans reported irritability, social isolation, insomnia, fatigue and crying (p ≤ 0.05) more frequently over time. Compared to depressed Whites, they reported sadness, frustration and intrusive thoughts less frequently (p ≤ 0.05), but insomnia and fatigue more frequently (p ≤ 0.05) during cancer treatment. There was little racial difference at the time of interview.

CONCLUSION

Depressed African American cancer patients may benefit from more culturally sensitive depression measures that consider symptoms of irritability, social isolation and altered expressions of depressive mood.