Literature DB >> 30476945

Risk of Suicide After Cancer Diagnosis in England.

Katherine E Henson1, Rachael Brock2, James Charnock1, Bethany Wickramasinghe1,3, Olivia Will4, Alexandra Pitman5,6,7.   

Abstract

Importance: A diagnosis of cancer carries a substantial risk of psychological distress. There has not yet been a national population-based study in England of the risk of suicide after cancer diagnosis.
Objectives: To quantify suicide risk in patients with cancers in England and identify risk factors that may assist in needs-based psychological assessment. Design, Setting, and Participants: Population-based study using data from the National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service in England linked to death certification data of 4 722 099 individuals (22 million person-years at risk). Patients (aged 18-99 years) with cancer diagnosed from January 1, 1995, to December 31, 2015, with follow-up until August 31, 2017, were included. Exposures: Diagnosis of malignant tumors, excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer. Main Outcomes and Measures: All deaths in patients that received a verdict of suicide or an open verdict at the inquest. Standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) and absolute excess risks (AERs) were calculated.
Results: Of the 4 722 099 patients with cancer, 50.3% were men and 49.7% were women. A total of 3 509 392 patients in the cohort (74.3%) were aged 60 years or older when the diagnosis was made. A total of 2491 patients (1719 men and 772 women) with cancer died by suicide, representing 0.08% of all deaths during the follow-up period. The overall SMR for suicide was 1.20 (95% CI, 1.16-1.25) and the AER per 10 000 person-years was 0.19 (95% CI, 0.15-0.23). The risk was highest among patients with mesothelioma, with a 4.51-fold risk corresponding to 4.20 extra deaths per 10 000 person-years. This risk was followed by pancreatic (3.89-fold), esophageal (2.65-fold), lung (2.57-fold), and stomach (2.20-fold) cancer. Suicide risk was highest in the first 6 months following cancer diagnosis (SMR, 2.74; 95% CI, 2.52-2.98). Conclusions and Relevance: Despite low absolute numbers, the elevated risk of suicide in patients with certain cancers is a concern, representing potentially preventable deaths. The increased risk in the first 6 months after diagnosis may indicate an unmet need for psychological support. The findings of this study suggest a need for improved psychological support for all patients with cancer, and attention to modifiable risk factors, such as pain, particularly in specific cancer groups.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30476945      PMCID: PMC6583458          DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2018.3181

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Psychiatry        ISSN: 2168-622X            Impact factor:   21.596


Introduction

A diagnosis of cancer can cause substantial psychological distress.[1] Patients may fear death; pain; adverse effects of treatment, such as disfigurement or loss of function; or alterations in their family and community roles.[1] This distress may have a role in the development of suicide ideation: previous evidence from systematic reviews has shown an increased risk of suicide among patients with cancer.[2,3] In the United Kingdom, the prevalence of patients with a cancer diagnosis is growing, driven by increased survival, improved cancer treatments, and expanding cancer screening programs.[4] Despite political and financial prioritization of diagnostic and therapeutic cancer services and public health campaigns aimed at facilitating earlier diagnosis of cancer, there are substantial historical resource constraints for mental health services. In addition, acute care hospitals and mental health services remain disconnected.[5,6] Although the absolute risk of suicide may be low compared with the risks for other causes of death in patients with cancer, these deaths are potentially preventable. They are also a proxy marker of substantial psychological distress in patients with cancer. In 2015, the Cancer Taskforce report highlighted that better management of depression could improve patient outcomes, affecting quality of life as well as adherence to treatment, thereby having an influence on survival.[7] To target psychological screening and support for the patients in greatest psychological distress and at risk of suicide, we need to understand variation in risk of suicide by patient group as defined by, for example, age, sex, and cancer type. To our knowledge, this study is the first national population-level analysis of suicide among patients with cancer in England. Using longitudinal data from the National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, linked to Office for National Statistics death certification data, we examined the risk of suicide in patients with a cancer diagnosis compared with that of the general population. We further analyzed the risk in terms of cancer type and stage, time since diagnosis, and sociodemographic factors.

Methods

Study Population

Patients diagnosed with a malignant tumor (International Statistical Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision [ICD-10] codes C00-C97, excluding C44, nonmelanoma skin cancer, using an internal mapping system for all ICD revisions) during January 1, 1995, to December 31, 2015, and aged 18 to 99 years at diagnosis, were identified from Public Health England’s national cancer registration database. All patients were residents of England at the time of their diagnosis. Patients identified as having cancer on their death certificate alone were excluded as these patients were not aware of their diagnosis. Individuals diagnosed on the same day as their death contributed 1 day to the risk period. For individuals with more than 1 cancer diagnosis, the date and diagnosis of their most recent cancer was selected using the groupings available in eTable 1 in the Supplement. The study was exempt from gaining individual consent to participate having obtained approval from the UK Patient Information Advisory Group (now the Confidentiality Advisory Group, under Section 251 of the National Health Service Act 2006 [PIAG 03(a)/2001]). Ethical approval was not applicable. Cause of death was ascertained through tracing by the Office for National Statistics. All deaths in patients with cancer that received a verdict of suicide or an open verdict at the inquest were selected. An open verdict is a legal decision that records a death, but does not state the cause. These were identified using ICD-10 codes for suicide (X60-X84 and Y87.0) and open verdicts (Y10-Y34 [excluding Y33.9, which is now called U309] and Y87.2 [event of undetermined intent]) and their International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) equivalents: E950-E959 for suicide and self-inflicted injury and E980-E989 (excluding E988.8) for undetermined death. Deaths were selected using the final underlying cause of death, as per the World Health Organization guidelines.[8] The income deprivation quintile was derived by linking each patient’s postcode at diagnosis (at the Lower Super Output Area geography) to the income domain of the Index of Multiple Deprivation.[9] Equal population quintiles were derived across England from the income domain score, and each patient with cancer was assigned the income deprivation quintile of their local geography. Ethnicity was self-reported, recorded in hospital patient administration systems, and submitted to the cancer registry. If a patient’s ethnicity was unknown, it was supplemented by information on self-reported ethnicity as recorded in the Hospital Episode Statistics data set. As ethnicity may be recorded differently during each hospital admission, the modal value was used in cases of discrepancy, preferring the most recent ethnicity documented in the event of a tied modal value. The cancer registry operates on a benchmark of 70% completeness for stage. Completeness of stage has been deemed sufficient for analysis since 2012[10]; thus, stage at cancer diagnosis was selected for a subgroup analysis.

Statistical Analysis

Each patient was entered into the analysis on their date of cancer diagnosis and was censored at the date of death, date when lost to follow-up, or August 31, 2017. Standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) and absolute excess risks (AERs) were calculated using standard cohort techniques.[11] The SMR was defined as the number of deaths by suicide observed in the cancer population / number of expected deaths by suicide. The AER was defined as the ([number observed − number expected] / [person-years at risk]) × 10 000. These measures estimate the proportional increase in the suicide rate compared with rates in the general population and the absolute excess suicide rate compared with the general population, respectively. Population-based expected deaths were derived from age (5-year groups), sex, and calendar-year (1-year groups) specific death rates for England.[12] Tests for heterogeneity were performed using likelihood ratio tests based on Poisson regression models. This test compared the deviance of a model including the factor of interest to the deviance of a model without the factor of interest. Statistical significance was defined as 2-sided with significance level set at P < .05. Multivariable Poisson regression models were used to evaluate the simultaneous effect of the factors of interest. All factors were fitted in the regression model with no interaction terms. These factors were sex, cancer type, deprivation, race/ethnicity, age at cancer diagnosis, year of diagnosis, attained age, and follow-up period. Attained age and follow-up period were never fitted in the same model due to strong collinearity. These multivariable models produced relative risks (with an offset of the log of the expected number of deaths), which were the ratio of SMRs adjusted for all factors, and relative excess risks (with an offset of the log of the person-years and a link function[13]), which were the ratio of AERs adjusted for all factors.[11] The heterogeneity tests from the multivariable models are presented herein, and the estimates are presented in eTable 2 in the Supplement. All calculations were performed using Stata, version 13 (StataCorp).

Results

Patient Characteristics and Overall Findings

A total of 4 722 099 individuals (50.3% men and 49.7% women) aged 18 to 99 years received a diagnosis of cancer during the study period. A total of 3 509 392 patients in the cohort (74.3%) were aged 60 years or older at the time of diagnosis. A total of 2491 patients (1719 men and 772 women) with cancer were recorded to have died by suicide over a follow-up period up to 22 years. This number represented 0.08% of all deaths. The cohort characteristics are summarized in Table 1. The cohort contributed a total of 22 036 669 person-years, and the mean (SD) and median follow-up were 4.67 (5.33) and 2.52 years, respectively. The SMR for all cancers combined was 1.20 (95% CI, 1.16-1.25) and the AER per 10 000 person-years at risk was 0.19 (95% CI, 0.15-0.23) (Table 2). An elevated risk was demonstrated in each deprivation quintile, where no significant heterogeneity was observed (Table 3). There were variations in the association between suicide risk and attained age, with significant heterogeneity overall (Table 3 and eTable 3 in the Supplement).
Table 1.

Characteristics of Study Cohort

CharacteristicPatients With Cancer, No. Deaths
Suicide, No.Total, No.% Suicide of Total% Suicide of Category
Total4 722 09924913 078 8430.08
Sex
Male2 376 90817191 652 2980.1069.01
Female2 345 1917721 426 5450.0530.99
Time from cancer diagnosis
0-5 mo1 253 6825401 238 8000.0421.68
6-11 mo398 010241396 9360.069.67
12-23 mo487 700329430 2040.0813.21
24-35 mo394 513261234 1980.1110.48
3-4 y556 897316274 6530.1212.69
5-9 y846 352521323 0210.1620.92
≥10 y784 945283181 0310.1611.36
Age at death (attained age), y
18-2919 2711582600.180.60
30-49265 245267114 8310.2310.72
50-59493 004422259 9110.1616.94
60-69956 714585578 1610.1023.48
70-791 451 587647954 1590.0725.97
≥801 536 2785551 163 5210.0522.28
Last primary cancer
Bladder172 359120127 2910.094.82
Breast744 817339293 6060.1213.61
Cancer of unknown primary177 74729170 0040.021.16
CNS (including brain)70 9062862 2760.041.12
Cervix50 6962320 2580.110.92
Colorectal578 270349392 9590.0914.01
Head and neck167 30717689 7130.207.07
Hodgkin lymphoma25 1552573070.341.00
Kidney and unspecified urinary organs122 9747278 6930.092.89
Leukemia116 7075382 2390.062.13
Liver51 8001047 9000.020.40
Lung613 772184577 9110.037.39
Melanoma161 7349749 8080.193.89
Mesothelioma36 0622035 0590.060.80
Multiple myeloma73 1914155 8360.071.65
Non-Hodgkin lymphoma170 764113101 2640.114.54
Esophagus122 13257111 5530.052.29
Other malignant neoplasms133 1867893 3640.083.13
Ovary112 3843376 7630.041.32
Pancreas121 20733117 2980.031.32
Prostate594 521444302 5840.1517.82
Sarcoma28 7121415 9510.090.56
Stomach128 96559117 7630.052.37
Testis34 6305828352.052.33
Uterus112 1013648 6080.071.45
Deprivation
1, Least 922 123505533 1570.0920.27
2999 928558620 4580.0922.40
3984 525518645 2940.0820.79
4940 242492648 2310.0819.75
5, Most 875 281418631 7030.0716.78
Race/ethnicity
White3 087 92215211 913 9600.0861.06
Mixed7654530900.160.20
Asian55 9551626 0070.060.64
Black46 0391122 2130.050.44
Other35 1481918 2470.100.76
Not stated703 527435535 1810.0817.46
Unknown785 854484560 1450.0919.43
Age at cancer diagnosis, y
18-2963 0594912 0480.411.97
30-49465 201368151 3160.2414.77
50-59684 447492318 1690.1519.75
60-691 167 097630676 8270.0925.29
70-791 354 7266241 032 5330.0625.05
≥80987 569328887 9500.0413.17
Year of cancer diagnosis
1995-1999995 756486836 5430.0619.51
2000-20041 056 151736795 9710.0929.55
2005-20091 149 793681734 5190.0927.34
2010-20151 520 399588711 8100.0823.60

Abbreviation: CNS, central nervous system.

Table 2.

Suicide SMRs and AERs per 10 000 Person-Years at Risk According to Last Primary Cancer

Last Primary CancerObserved/ExpectedSMR (95% CI)AER per 10 000 (95% CI)
Total2491/20721.20 (1.16 to 1.25)0.19 (0.15 to 0.23)
Significantly Increased Suicide Rate Among Patients With Cancers vs General Population
Mesothelioma20/44.51 (2.91 to 7.00)4.20 (1.84 to 6.57)
Pancreas33/83.89 (2.77 to 5.48)2.89 (1.56 to 4.22)
Esophagus57/222.65 (2.04 to 3.43)1.83 (1.07 to 2.60)
Lung184/722.57 (2.23 to 2.97)1.56 (1.19 to 1.93)
Stomach59/272.20 (1.71 to 2.84)1.35 (0.72 to 1.98)
Cancer of unknown primary29/151.98 (1.38 to 2.85)1.00 (0.26 to 1.74)
Head and neck176/1051.67 (1.44 to 1.94)0.74 (0.46 to 1.01)
CNS (including brain)28/171.61 (1.11 to 2.33)0.74 (0.01 to 1.48)
Multiple myeloma41/261.57 (1.15 to 2.13)0.58 (0.09 to 1.08)
Other malignant neoplasms78/541.46 (1.17 to 1.82)0.44 (0.13 to 0.76)
Colorectal349/2741.28 (1.15 to 1.42)0.28 (0.14 to 0.41)
Significantly Increased Proportional SMR Among Patients With Cancers vs General Population
Non-Hodgkin lymphoma113/931.22 (1.01 to 1.47)0.23 (−0.01 to 0.46)
Significantly Decreased Suicide Rate Among Patients With Cancers vs General Population
Prostate444/4940.90 (0.82 to 0.99)−0.14 (−0.25 to −0.02)
Melanoma97/1210.80 (0.66 to 0.98)−0.20 (−0.35 to −0.04)
No Significant Difference in the Suicide Rate Among Patients With Cancers vs General Population
Liver10/61.56 (0.84 to 2.90)0.64 (−0.47 to 1.75)
Ovary33/271.23 (0.87 to 1.73)0.12 (−0.10 to 0.34)
Kidney and unspecified urinary organs72/591.22 (0.96 to 1.53)0.24 (−0.07 to 0.55)
Bladder120/1061.13 (0.95 to 1.36)0.16 (−0.08 to 0.41)
Breast339/3131.08 (0.97 to 1.21)0.04 (−0.02 to 0.11)
Cervix23/221.05 (0.69 to 1.57)0.03 (−0.22 to 0.27)
Leukemia53/521.02 (0.78 to 1.34)0.02 (−0.28 to 0.32)
Hodgkin lymphoma25/260.95 (0.64 to 1.41)−0.06 (−0.52 to 0.40)
Uterus36/390.92 (0.67 to 1.28)−0.04 (−0.19 to 0.11)
Testis58/710.81 (0.63 to 1.05)−0.36 (−0.76 to 0.04)
Sarcoma14/180.77 (0.45 to 1.30)−0.26 (−0.72 to 0.19)
P value for heterogeneity<.001 <.001
Adjusted (follow-up) P value for heterogeneitya<.001 <.001

Abbreviations: AERs, absolute excess risks; CNS, central nervous system; SMRs, standardized mortality ratios.

Fully adjusted for sex, cancer type, deprivation, race/ethnicity, age at cancer diagnosis, year of diagnosis (5-year groups), and follow-up period.

Table 3.

Suicide SMRs and AERs per 10 000 Person-Years at Risk According to Key Patient Characteristics for All Cancers Combined

CharacteristicObserved/ExpectedSMR (95% CI)AER per 10 000 (95% CI)
Sex
Men1719/14331.20 (1.14 to 1.26)0.29 (0.21 to 0.37)
Women772/6391.21 (1.13 to 1.30)0.11 (0.06 to 0.15)
P value for heterogeneity.88<.001
Adjusted (follow-up) P value for heterogeneityb.52<.001
Age at death (attained age), y
18-2915/220.69 (0.42 to 1.15)−0.30 (−0.64 to 0.05)
30-49267/2681.00 (0.88 to 1.12)0.00 (−0.14 to 0.13)
50-59422/3481.21 (1.10 to 1.33)0.22 (0.10 to 0.34)
60-69585/4471.31 (1.21 to 1.42)0.25 (0.16 to 0.33)
70-79647/5021.29 (1.19 to 1.39)0.24 (0.15 to 0.32)
≥80555/4851.15 (1.05 to 1.24)0.16 (0.06 to 0.27)
P value for heterogeneity<.001.01
Adjusted (attained age) P value for heterogeneityc<.001<.001
Deprivation
1, Least 505/4641.09 (1.00 to 1.19)0.08 (−0.01 to 0.17)
2558/4661.20 (1.10 to 1.30)0.18 (0.09 to 0.28)
3518/4311.20 (1.10 to 1.31)0.19 (0.09 to 0.29)
4492/3841.28 (1.17 to 1.40)0.27 (0.16 to 0.37)
5, Most 418/3271.28 (1.16 to 1.41)0.27 (0.15 to 0.38)
P value for heterogeneity.07.06
Adjusted (follow-up) P value for heterogeneityb.32.43
Race/ethnicity
White1521/13691.11 (1.06 to 1.17)0.10 (0.05 to 0.16)
Mixed5/41.38 (0.57 to 3.31)d0.37 (−0.81 to 1.55)d
Asian16/260.62 (0.38 to 1.01)−0.36 (−0.65 to −0.07)
Black11/240.45 (0.25 to 0.81)−0.57 (−0.85 to −0.29)
Other19/161.16 (0.74 to 1.82)0.15 (−0.34 to 0.64)
Not stated435/3091.41 (1.28 to 1.55)0.39 (0.26 to 0.52)
Unknown484/3241.49 (1.37 to 1.63)0.46 (0.34 to 0.59)
P value for heterogeneity<.001<.001
Adjusted (follow-up) P value for heterogeneityb<.001<.001

Abbreviations: AER, absolute excess risk; CNS, central nervous system; SMR, standardized mortality ratio.

Sex, follow-up period, age at death, deprivation, and ethnicity.

Fully adjusted for sex, cancer type, deprivation, race/ethnicity, age at cancer diagnosis, year of diagnosis, and follow-up period.

Fully adjusted for sex, cancer type, deprivation, ethnicity, age at cancer diagnosis, year of diagnosis, and attained age (age at death).

Estimate is based on a low number (<10) of observed events, and must be interpreted with caution.

Abbreviation: CNS, central nervous system. Abbreviations: AERs, absolute excess risks; CNS, central nervous system; SMRs, standardized mortality ratios. Fully adjusted for sex, cancer type, deprivation, race/ethnicity, age at cancer diagnosis, year of diagnosis (5-year groups), and follow-up period. Abbreviations: AER, absolute excess risk; CNS, central nervous system; SMR, standardized mortality ratio. Sex, follow-up period, age at death, deprivation, and ethnicity. Fully adjusted for sex, cancer type, deprivation, race/ethnicity, age at cancer diagnosis, year of diagnosis, and follow-up period. Fully adjusted for sex, cancer type, deprivation, ethnicity, age at cancer diagnosis, year of diagnosis, and attained age (age at death). Estimate is based on a low number (<10) of observed events, and must be interpreted with caution.

Variation in Suicide Risk by Last Primary Cancer

There was evidence of heterogeneity by cancer type for both SMRs and AERs (Table 2). This finding remained after adjustment for all factors of interest. The highest SMR and AER were observed among patients with mesothelioma, with a 4.51-fold risk compared with the general population, which corresponded to 4.20 extra deaths per 10 000 person-years. This risk was followed by pancreatic (SMR, 3.89; 95% CI, 2.77-5.48), esophageal (SMR, 2.65; 95% CI, 2.04-3.43), lung (SMR, 2.57; 95% CI, 2.23-2.97), and stomach (SMR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.71-2.84) cancers. These excess risks resulted in between 1.35 and 2.89 extra deaths per 10 000 person-years for each cancer type. Patients with 6 further cancer types (including other malignant neoplasms) experienced a significantly increased risk of suicide in both absolute and relative terms. In contrast, patients with melanoma and prostate cancer had a significantly reduced risk of death by suicide compared with the general population.

Variation in Suicide Risk by Sex

There were more than double the number of men who died by suicide compared with women (Table 1). The association with sex varied by cancer type and was greater when expressed in AERs (Table 4, eTable 4 in the Supplement). The AER for men was significantly greater than for women for 6 cancer types, namely, pancreas (men, 4.41; women, 1.37), esophagus (men, 2.40; women, 0.72), lung (men, 2.15; women, 0.86), stomach (men, 2.11; women, −0.05), head and neck (men, 1.08; women, 0.29), and colorectal (men, 0.47; women, 0.05). Significant heterogeneity (P = .03) was observed in the SMRs by sex among patients with stomach cancer (men, 2.46; women, 0.91).
Table 4.

Suicide SMRs and AERs per 10 000 Person-Years at Risk According to Last Primary Cancer and Sex for the Primary Cancer Groupings With a Significantly Elevated SMR, Excluding Other Malignant Neoplasms

Last Primary CancerSex
SMR (95% CI)AER per 10 000 (95% CI)
MenWomenP Value for HeterogeneityMenWomenP Value for Heterogeneity
Mesothelioma3.95 (2.42 to 6.45)10.53 (3.95 to 28.05)b.114.04 (1.39 to 6.70)4.82 (−0.40 to 10.04)b.79
Pancreas3.99 (2.70 to 5.90)3.62 (1.81 to 7.23)b.814.41 (2.10 to 6.72)1.37 (0.06 to 2.68)b.02
Esophagus2.69 (2.03 to 3.56)2.41 (1.21 to 4.82)b.772.40 (1.33 to 3.47)0.72 (−0.13 to 1.57)b.02
Lung2.53 (2.14 to 2.99)2.72 (2.03 to 3.64).682.15 (1.56 to 2.75)0.86 (0.46 to 1.26)<.001
Stomach2.46 (1.89 to 3.20)0.91 (0.34 to 2.42)b.032.11 (1.17 to 3.05)−0.05 (−0.52 to 0.42)b<.001
Cancer of unknown primary1.79 (1.14 to 2.81)2.47 (1.33 to 4.59).421.23 (−0.02 to 2.48)0.79 (−0.03 to 1.61).56
Head and neck1.70 (1.45 to 2.01)1.54 (1.10 to 2.15).581.08 (0.65 to 1.50)0.29 (0.01 to 0.56).002
CNS (including brain)1.50 (0.98 to 2.30)2.04 (0.97 to 4.29)b.490.88 (−0.25 to 2.01)0.57 (−0.26 to 1.40)b.67
Multiple myeloma1.42 (0.99 to 2.05)2.08 (1.18 to 3.67).280.61 (−0.14 to 1.36)0.55 (−0.05 to 1.15).90
Colorectal1.33 (1.18 to 1.50)1.09 (0.86 to 1.38).130.47 (0.25 to 0.70)0.05 (−0.09 to 0.18).001

Abbreviations: AER, absolute excess risk; CNS, central nervous system; SMR, standardized mortality ratio.

Observed and expected values are available in eTable 4 in the Supplement.

Estimate is based on a low number (<10) of observed events and must be interpreted with caution.

Abbreviations: AER, absolute excess risk; CNS, central nervous system; SMR, standardized mortality ratio. Observed and expected values are available in eTable 4 in the Supplement. Estimate is based on a low number (<10) of observed events and must be interpreted with caution.

Variation in Suicide Risk by Years Since Cancer Diagnosis

The SMR was greatest in the first 6 months after cancer diagnosis (SMR, 2.74; 95% CI, 2.52-2.98; AER, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.54-2.01), but remained elevated throughout the first 3 years (2-year SMR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.01-1.28; AER, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.00-0.27). The risk decreased over time (P < .001). This association remained after multivariable adjustment (Figure, eTable 5 in the Supplement). The association with years since cancer diagnosis varied by cancer type, although there was a significantly increased risk in the first 6 months for all cancer types with an overall increased risk of suicide (eTable 4 and eTable 6 in the Supplement). Patients with mesothelioma had the highest risk of suicide in the first 6 months after diagnosis, with an 8.61-fold risk compared with the general population, corresponding to 9.36 extra deaths per 10 000 person-years at risk.
Figure.

Suicide Standardized Mortality Ratios (SMRs) and Absolute Excess Risks (AERs) per 10 000 Person-Years at Risk by Follow-up Period

Estimates of SMRs (A) and AERs (B) are presented in eTable 5 in the Supplement. Error bars indicate 95% CIs.

Suicide Standardized Mortality Ratios (SMRs) and Absolute Excess Risks (AERs) per 10 000 Person-Years at Risk by Follow-up Period

Estimates of SMRs (A) and AERs (B) are presented in eTable 5 in the Supplement. Error bars indicate 95% CIs.

Cumulative Risk of Suicide Mortality by Attained Age

The cumulative risk of suicide mortality was greatest for patients with mesothelioma, stomach, and lung cancer. By age 80 years, the cumulative risk was 1.60% for patients with mesothelioma. The corresponding expected cumulative mortality by this age was 0.63% (eFigure in the Supplement).

Subgroup Analyses of Suicide Risk

Among patients with cancer diagnosed since 2012, significant heterogeneity was found by stage at diagnosis (P < .001) (eTable 7 in the Supplement). The SMR and AER were greatest for those with stage IV disease (SMR, 2.79; 95% CI, 2.24-3.47; AER, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.30-2.65).

Discussion

In our nationwide population-based study of 4 722 099 patients, we found that being diagnosed with cancer in England confers a 20% increased risk of suicide compared with the general population, equivalent to 0.08% of all deaths among patients with cancer or 2491 potentially preventable deaths over this period. Our study identified specific factors characterizing those at higher risk, which will assist in the needs-based psychological assessment of these groups. Cancer types associated with particularly elevated risks are mesothelioma, pancreatic, lung, esophageal, and stomach cancers. These tend to be characterized by poor prognosis. We identified the first 6 months after a cancer diagnosis to be the period of highest risk. Although suicide is hard to predict, these findings indicate that all patients, and particularly those with the cancer types at highest risk, require improved psychological support and screening for suicidality in the immediate aftermath of cancer diagnosis. In our cohort, we found only borderline differences by level of deprivation. Although deprivation is commonly understood to be an area-level risk factor for suicide, this is not a consistent association, and the divergent findings are likely to be explained by the size of the area of aggregation.[14]

Findings in the Context of Other Studies

A number of studies have found an elevated risk of suicide in patients with cancer, in settings such as England, Finland, Sweden, Italy, Estonia, Japan, Norway, and the United States.[15] Our findings are consistent with a previous analysis of local cancer registry data in England[16] and European studies reported comparable SMRs, with similar high-risk clinical and demographic groups identified.[17,18] However, an analysis of English primary care data found no elevated risk of suicide in patients with cancers overall or in men, but a 3-fold elevated risk of suicide in women, which was independent of clinical depression.[19] The explanation for this apparent inconsistency in English findings may be that their data were derived from patients in 224 general physician practices, rather than our population coverage, with the validity of diagnoses reliant on quality and completeness of primary care physician records.[20] The findings of cancer-specific analyses concur with ours in that patients with poor prognosis tend to be those at highest risk.[16] More generally, the evidence suggests that suicide risk is associated with cancers with low survival rates[17] and limited treatment options.[15] We found that cancer risk varies by time since diagnosis, and the time bands that we chose suggested that suicide risk is highest in the first 6 months after diagnosis. Other studies have investigated differing time periods, but all found an elevated risk in the initial period defined after diagnosis, whether the first week,[21] first month,[22] or first year.[16]

Strengths and Limitations

To our knowledge, this study is the first to investigate suicide risk in patients with cancer with entire population-based coverage in England. This strength should support responsive service provision in England. The advantages of complete cause of death ascertainment, national coverage, and precise diagnostic information reduced the biases introduced by missing data. Nevertheless, we acknowledge the limitation of the potential for underreporting of suicide as a cause of death.[23] This lower level of reporting may affect data on patients with cancer more than the general population, with this bias therefore potentially underestimating the overall risk of suicide among patients with cancer. Long-term follow-up over 22 million person-years at risk provided robust estimates of how risk varies by time since diagnosis. Tight definition of time periods clarified that risk concentrates within the first 6 months, providing more fine-grained risk information than the previous analysis of local English cancer registry data.[16] The inclusion of race/ethnicity in cancer registry data allowed us to present the variation in suicide risk by race/ethnicity, unlike national suicide reports.[12] Because the method of standardization could not include race/ethnicity, the observed trends are likely to reflect those in the general population. Given the extent of our population coverage, our findings provide the most representative description of race/ethnicity variation in suicide risk nationally, albeit with 32% missing data. Standardization was also not possible by deprivation quintile. One limitation of the study is that it was not possible, due to current data availability, to adjust for preexisting psychiatric disorders or other potential confounders, such as alcohol or drug misuse diagnostic information. However, it has been demonstrated in a study of national cancer registration data that suicide risk is not explained by preexisting psychiatric conditions.[21] An additional limitation is that, because of the small numbers of deaths, we were unable to perform multivariable regression models for specific cancer types or for the subgroup analysis to assess whether the trends observed could be explained by distributional differences in other variables measured. However, our multivariable model for all cancers combined suggested that variation in the patient characteristics were not explained by differences in the other variables, including cancer type.

Clinical and Policy Implications

Clinically, our results identify specific cancers associated with significantly elevated risk of suicide and the first 6 months after diagnosis as being a critical period requiring greater vigilance for psychological distress and potential suicidality. The combined literature suggests that the first week after diagnosis has the highest risk for suicide, falling thereafter. This early phase is clearly a critical period. The mechanisms of suicide among patients with cancer are likely to be heterogeneous, involving factors beyond diagnosable psychiatric disorder. The shock of a cancer diagnosis and the losses inherent to it may be processed as a psychological threat. In some cases this shock can give rise to psychological symptoms diagnosable as depression or anxiety. The prevalence of major depression in patients with cancers is 15%,[24] exceeding the 2% reported for the general population.[25] However, as diagnostic criteria for depression rely on at least 2 weeks of pervasive low mood, patients who attempt suicide within a week of a cancer diagnosis may have been depressed for some time[26] or enacting a catastrophic reaction to a negative life event.[27] Specific cancers may present insidiously with depressed mood and certain treatments for cancer can also cause depression through their direct neuropsychiatric effects.[1] Awareness of the potential for such biological effects, impulsive catastrophic reactions to diagnosis, and incident or worsening depression are starting points for early identification of suicidal distress. Predicting suicide is difficult, and most people identified as high risk for suicide do not die by suicide.[28] English patients with cancer have a low ratio of self-harm events to suicides compared with those for other physical and psychiatric disorders[29] and the general population,[30] presenting fewer early warning signs for suicide and limiting opportunities for intervention. Nevertheless, our findings identify the timeframe over which health professionals should ensure better monitoring of the psychological health of all patients with cancer, and particularly those with poor prognoses, and address modifiable risk factors, such as pain, substance use disorders, and psychiatric illness. Efforts to address the underdiagnosis and undertreatment of depression and anxiety in patients with cancer are likely to reap benefits in terms of reducing suicide risk, as well as positively influencing quality of life, treatment adherence, and treatment costs.[1] Models that integrate psychological support into cancer care, specifically collaborative screening and treatment, have shown benefits in terms of reduced depression, anxiety, and pain, even if they lack evidence for survival benefits.[31] Access to the means of suicide may influence risk, and restricting access is the suicide prevention intervention with the best evidence for effectiveness.[32] This suggests that, for patients with cancer who are thought to be at higher risk of suicide, there may be scope to consider effective pain management options other than opioids,[33] transdermal administration routes, or to involve caregivers in medication administration and safeguarding.

Future Research

Our study used a lower age limit of 18 years, and the numbers of suicides in patients with cancers younger than 18 years were low. We were therefore unable to investigate suicide risk in teenagers and young adults, among whom evidence is limited. Pooling data could help to address this gap, as could using statistical methods, such as the self-controlled case series approach, to identify the precise points at which suicide risk is elevated.[34] Further research could also consider hospital admissions for suicide attempts or the presence of preexisting or intercurrent psychiatric illness to support the identification of modifiable risk factors.

Conclusions

We found an elevated risk of suicide in patients with cancer, particularly in the first 6 months after diagnosis. Patients with mesothelioma, pancreatic, lung, esophageal, and stomach cancers had the highest risk. The increased risk of suicide persisted for 3 years after diagnosis, identifying a period during which cancer care pathways should pay attention to the psychological health needs of the patients. Suggested responses include addressing the underdiagnosis and undertreatment of depression and anxiety in patients with cancer, improving access to integrated psychological support for all patients with cancers, addressing modifiable risk factors, and restricting access to the means of lethal overdose.
  27 in total

1.  Regression models for relative survival.

Authors:  Paul W Dickman; Andy Sloggett; Michael Hills; Timo Hakulinen
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2004-01-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Coping, catastrophizing and chronic pain in breast cancer.

Authors:  Scott R Bishop; David Warr
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2003-06

3.  Coroners' verdicts and suicide statistics in England and Wales.

Authors:  David Gunnell; Keith Hawton; Nav Kapur
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2011-10-05

Review 4.  Self controlled case series methods: an alternative to standard epidemiological study designs.

Authors:  Irene Petersen; Ian Douglas; Heather Whitaker
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2016-09-12

5.  Are cancer patients at higher suicide risk than the general population?

Authors:  Charlotte Björkenstam; Annika Edberg; Shiva Ayoubi; Måns Rosén
Journal:  Scand J Public Health       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 3.021

Review 6.  Statistical methods in cancer research. Volume II--The design and analysis of cohort studies.

Authors:  N E Breslow; N E Day
Journal:  IARC Sci Publ       Date:  1987

7.  Peak window of suicides occurs within the first month of diagnosis: implications for clinical oncology.

Authors:  Timothy V Johnson; Steven J Garlow; Otis W Brawley; Viraj A Master
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2011-01-24       Impact factor: 3.894

8.  How often does deliberate self-harm occur relative to each suicide? A study of variations by gender and age.

Authors:  Keith Hawton; Louise Harriss
Journal:  Suicide Life Threat Behav       Date:  2008-12

9.  Psychiatric disorder as a first manifestation of cancer: a 10-year population-based study.

Authors:  Michael E Benros; Thomas M Laursen; Susanne O Dalton; Preben B Mortensen
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2009-06-15       Impact factor: 7.396

10.  Suicide risk in primary care patients with major physical diseases: a case-control study.

Authors:  Roger T Webb; Evangelos Kontopantelis; Tim Doran; Ping Qin; Francis Creed; Nav Kapur
Journal:  Arch Gen Psychiatry       Date:  2012-03
View more
  34 in total

1.  Suicide Trends in the Italian State Police during the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: A Comparison with the Pre-Pandemic Period.

Authors:  Silvana Maselli; Antonio Del Casale; Elena Paoli; Maurizio Pompili; Sergio Garbarino
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-05-12       Impact factor: 4.614

2.  Cumulative burden of psychiatric disorders and self-harm across 26 adult cancers.

Authors:  Wai Hoong Chang; Alvina G Lai
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2022-03-28       Impact factor: 87.241

3.  Early childhood adversity in adult patients with metastatic lung cancer: Cross-sectional analysis of symptom burden and inflammation.

Authors:  Daniel C McFarland; Christian Nelson; Andrew H Miller
Journal:  Brain Behav Immun       Date:  2020-08-11       Impact factor: 7.217

4.  Magnitude and Associated Factors of Suicidal Ideation Among Cancer Patients at Ayder Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, Mekelle, Ethiopia, 2019: Cross-sectional Study.

Authors:  Haftamu Mamo Hagezom; Tadele Amare; Getahun Hibdye; Wubit Demeke
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 3.989

5.  Cardiovascular mortality among cancer survivors who developed breast cancer as a second primary malignancy.

Authors:  Chengshi Wang; Kejia Hu; Chuanxu Luo; Lei Deng; Katja Fall; Rulla M Tamimi; Unnur A Valdimarsdóttir; Fang Fang; Donghao Lu
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2021-09-27       Impact factor: 9.075

6.  Prevalence and determinants of depression up to 5 years after colorectal cancer surgery: results from the ColoREctal Wellbeing (CREW) study.

Authors:  Lynn Calman; Joshua Turner; Deborah Fenlon; Natalia V Permyakova; Sally Wheelwright; Mubarak Patel; Amy Din; Jane Winter; Alison Richardson; Peter W F Smith; Claire Foster
Journal:  Colorectal Dis       Date:  2021-11-25       Impact factor: 3.917

7.  Prevalence of somatic and psychiatric morbidity across occupations in Switzerland and its correlation with suicide mortality: results from the Swiss National Cohort (1990-2014).

Authors:  M Schmid; L Michaud; N Bovio; I Guseva Canu
Journal:  BMC Psychiatry       Date:  2020-06-22       Impact factor: 3.630

8.  Depression and anxiety among people living with and beyond cancer: a growing clinical and research priority.

Authors:  Claire L Niedzwiedz; Lee Knifton; Kathryn A Robb; Srinivasa Vittal Katikireddi; Daniel J Smith
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2019-10-11       Impact factor: 4.430

9.  Predicting suicidal behavior and self-harm after general hospitalization of adults with serious mental illness.

Authors:  Juliet Beni Edgcomb; Trevor Shaddox; Gerhard Hellemann; John O Brooks
Journal:  J Psychiatr Res       Date:  2020-10-30       Impact factor: 4.791

10.  Firearm suicide mortality among emergency department patients with physical health problems.

Authors:  Sidra Goldman-Mellor; Carlisha Hall; Magdalena Cerdá; Harish Bhat
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2020-09-18       Impact factor: 3.797

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.