Alexis L Michaud1, Eric S Zhou2, Grace Chang3, Christopher J Recklitis4. 1. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA, USA. 2. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA, USA; Harvard Medical School, 25 Shattuck Street, Boston, MA, USA. 3. Harvard Medical School, 25 Shattuck Street, Boston, MA, USA. 4. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA, USA; Harvard Medical School, 25 Shattuck Street, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: Christopher_Recklitis@dfci.harvard.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Insomnia is a common problem affecting young adult cancer survivors (YACS) even years after treatment, yet it often goes unidentified and untreated. The Insomnia Severity Index is a widely-used insomnia measure, but has not been studied as an insomnia screener for YACS. The goal of this study was to validate the ISI in YACS by determining its utility in identifying YACS with insomnia disorder diagnosed with the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-5 (SCID-5). METHODS: 250 YACS completed the ISI and SCID-5 Insomnia Module. Area under the curve (AUC) was calculated to reflect the ISI's discrimination between YACS with and without SCID-5 insomnia disorder. An ISI cut-off score with sensitivity ≥0.85 and specificity ≥0.75 was deemed acceptable. RESULTS: Of 250 participants, 52 met criteria for SCID-5 insomnia disorder diagnosis. The ISI had excellent discrimination, with an AUC = 0.91. A cut-off score ≥8 met study clinical screening criteria with sensitivity of 0.85 and specificity of 0.77. A cut-off score ≥7 with a higher sensitivity (0.96) but lower specificity (0.70) was noted as a potential alternative. Cut-off scores ≥12 and ≥ 14 were recommended for applications prioritizing overall accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: Results support validity of the ISI for identifying YACS with insomnia disorder. For clinical screening, data support the use of an ISI cut-off score ≥8 in YACS, and additional cut-off scores were found for research purposes or higher sensitivity. Results of this study and prior studies of the ISI offer important reminders that cut-off scores derived from different populations are not generalizable.
OBJECTIVES: Insomnia is a common problem affecting young adult cancer survivors (YACS) even years after treatment, yet it often goes unidentified and untreated. The Insomnia Severity Index is a widely-used insomnia measure, but has not been studied as an insomnia screener for YACS. The goal of this study was to validate the ISI in YACS by determining its utility in identifying YACS with insomnia disorder diagnosed with the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-5 (SCID-5). METHODS: 250 YACS completed the ISI and SCID-5 Insomnia Module. Area under the curve (AUC) was calculated to reflect the ISI's discrimination between YACS with and without SCID-5 insomnia disorder. An ISI cut-off score with sensitivity ≥0.85 and specificity ≥0.75 was deemed acceptable. RESULTS: Of 250 participants, 52 met criteria for SCID-5 insomnia disorder diagnosis. The ISI had excellent discrimination, with an AUC = 0.91. A cut-off score ≥8 met study clinical screening criteria with sensitivity of 0.85 and specificity of 0.77. A cut-off score ≥7 with a higher sensitivity (0.96) but lower specificity (0.70) was noted as a potential alternative. Cut-off scores ≥12 and ≥ 14 were recommended for applications prioritizing overall accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: Results support validity of the ISI for identifying YACS with insomnia disorder. For clinical screening, data support the use of an ISI cut-off score ≥8 in YACS, and additional cut-off scores were found for research purposes or higher sensitivity. Results of this study and prior studies of the ISI offer important reminders that cut-off scores derived from different populations are not generalizable.
Keywords:
Cancer survivors; Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders; Sensitivity and specificity; Sleep; Sleep initiation and maintenance disorders; Young adult
Authors: Eric S Zhou; Ann H Partridge; Karen L Syrjala; Alexis L Michaud; Christopher J Recklitis Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2016-08-05 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Ingrid Tonning Olsson; Margaret M Lubas; Chenghong Li; Belinda N Mandrell; Pia Banerjee; Carrie R Howell; Kirsten K Ness; Deokumar Srivastava; Leslie L Robison; Melissa M Hudson; Kevin R Krull; Tara M Brinkman Journal: JNCI Cancer Spectr Date: 2020-02-19
Authors: J Perrier; M Duivon; P Clochon; S Rehel; F Doidy; J M Grellard; C Segura-Djezzar; J Geffrelot; G Emile; D Allouache; C Levy; S Polvent; F Viader; F Eustache; F Joly; B Giffard Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-02-15 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Shosha H M Peersmann; Martha A Grootenhuis; Annemieke van Straten; Wim J E Tissing; Floor Abbink; Andrica C H de Vries; Jacqueline Loonen; Helena J H van der Pal; Gertjan J L Kaspers; Raphaële R L van Litsenburg Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-07-07 Impact factor: 6.575
Authors: Emma Vaughan; Maria Ftanou; Jeremy Lewin; Andrew Murnane; Ilana Berger; Joshua F Wiley; Martha Hickey; Dani Bullen; Michael Jefford; Jeremy Goldin; Jeremy Stonehouse; Kate Thompson Journal: Pilot Feasibility Stud Date: 2022-07-28