Literature DB >> 17879108

Screening for depressive symptoms in patients with unresectable lung cancer.

S Néron1, J A Correa, E Dajczman, G Kasymjanova, H Kreisman, D Small.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Early identification of psychological distress and depression is important to optimise the quality of life in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The prevalence of depression may vary, depending on the time since diagnosis of cancer, results of the treatment and the prognosis. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of a self-administered screening tool (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)) with a health professional administered tool (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)) and to explore the variability of major affective symptoms in patients with unresectable lung cancer during the initial 7-8 weeks of chemotherapy treatment for their illness.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed unresectable lung cancer were screened on four occasions for anxiety and depressive symptoms simultaneously using the self-rated HADS and the MADRS administered by a psycho-oncologist or a trained research associate. The first assessment was done within 1 week of diagnosis and was repeated on 3 occasions during the initial 2 cycles of chemotherapy.
RESULTS: Forty-nine patients, aged 38-82 years (median age 63 years) were enrolled. All patients had advanced NSCLC (stages 3A, 3B and 4) and 61% (30 patients) had an ECOG performance status (PS) of 1 or greater. The point prevalence of depression measured by an interviewer using the MADRS at visits 1-4 was 49%, 51%, 47%, and 41%, respectively. The point prevalence of self-reported depression (HADS) was significantly (p < 0.001) lower at each assessment point (18%, 20%, 6%, 12%) compared to health professional detected depression (MADRS). Although MADRS and HADS showed very strong (Pearson's correlation = 0.8) and significant (p < 0.001) correlation, the concordance rate in identifying the same cases of depression was only 54%. CLINICAL IMPLICATION AND
CONCLUSION: The prevalence of depression among advanced lung cancer patients is high and varies very little during the first 2 cycles of chemotherapy. Among a variety of tools available for the screening of depression, a semi-structured interview is more effective at identifying clinically significant depression than a self-administered questionnaire.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17879108     DOI: 10.1007/s00520-007-0225-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Support Care Cancer        ISSN: 0941-4355            Impact factor:   3.603


  37 in total

1.  Assessing and managing depression in the terminally ill patient. ACP-ASIM End-of-Life Care Consensus Panel. American College of Physicians - American Society of Internal Medicine.

Authors:  S D Block
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2000-02-01       Impact factor: 25.391

2.  Screening for psychiatric illness in the palliative care inpatient setting: a comparison between the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and the General Health Questionnaire-12.

Authors:  P Le Fevre; J Devereux; S Smith; S M Lawrie; M Cornbleet
Journal:  Palliat Med       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 4.762

Review 3.  Consensus statement on depression, anxiety, and oncology.

Authors:  J C Ballenger; J R Davidson; Y Lecrubier; D J Nutt; R D Jones; R M Berard
Journal:  J Clin Psychiatry       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 4.384

4.  Depressive disorders in an out-patient oncology setting: prevalence, assessment, and management.

Authors:  R M Berard; F Boermeester; G Viljoen
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  1998 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.894

5.  Are we using appropriate self-report questionnaires for detecting anxiety and depression in women with early breast cancer?

Authors:  A Hall; R A'Hern; L Fallowfield
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 9.162

6.  An attempt to employ the Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale as a "lab test" to trigger follow-up in ambulatory oncology clinics: criterion validity and detection.

Authors:  S D Passik; K L Kirsh; K B Donaghy; D E Theobald; J C Lundberg; E Holtsclaw; W M Dugan
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 3.612

Review 7.  Depression in cancer patients.

Authors:  H M Chochinov
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 41.316

8.  A comparison of depression rating scales.

Authors:  N P Kearns; C A Cruickshank; K J McGuigan; S A Riley; S P Shaw; R P Snaith
Journal:  Br J Psychiatry       Date:  1982-07       Impact factor: 9.319

9.  Derivation of a definition of remission on the Montgomery-Asberg depression rating scale corresponding to the definition of remission on the Hamilton rating scale for depression.

Authors:  Mark Zimmerman; Michael A Posternak; Iwona Chelminski
Journal:  J Psychiatr Res       Date:  2004 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.791

10.  Rating scales for depression and anxiety: a current perspective.

Authors:  R P Snaith; C M Taylor
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 4.335

View more
  8 in total

1.  Symptoms, psychological distress, and supportive care needs in lung cancer patients.

Authors:  Yu-Chien Liao; Wei-Yu Liao; Shiow-Ching Shun; Chong-Jen Yu; Pan-Chyr Yang; Yeur-Hur Lai
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2010-10-15       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 2.  Accuracy of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale as a screening tool in cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Andrea Vodermaier; Roanne D Millman
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2011-09-04       Impact factor: 3.603

3.  Depression in lung cancer patients: is the HADS an effective screening tool?

Authors:  Lorys Castelli; Luca Binaschi; Paola Caldera; Riccardo Torta
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2009-03-13       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 4.  Intimacy and relationship processes in couples' psychosocial adaptation to cancer.

Authors:  Sharon Manne; Hoda Badr
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2008-06-01       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Prevalence of emotional distress in newly diagnosed lung cancer patients.

Authors:  Tracy Steinberg; Michelle Roseman; Goulnar Kasymjanova; Sarah Dobson; Lucie Lajeunesse; Esther Dajczman; Harvey Kreisman; Neil MacDonald; Jason Agulnik; Victor Cohen; Zeev Rosberger; Martin Chasen; David Small
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2009-04-03       Impact factor: 3.603

6.  Disease stage predicts post-diagnosis anxiety and depression only in some types of cancer.

Authors:  A Vodermaier; W Linden; R MacKenzie; D Greig; C Marshall
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2011-11-17       Impact factor: 7.640

Review 7.  Screening for emotional distress in cancer patients: a systematic review of assessment instruments.

Authors:  Andrea Vodermaier; Wolfgang Linden; Christopher Siu
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2009-10-13       Impact factor: 13.506

8.  Psychological wellness and health-related stigma: a pilot study of an acceptance-focused cognitive behavioural intervention for people with lung cancer.

Authors:  S K Chambers; B A Morris; S Clutton; E Foley; L Giles; P Schofield; D O'Connell; J Dunn
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Care (Engl)       Date:  2014-07-23       Impact factor: 2.520

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.