Lisa Wiens1, Norbert Schäffeler2, Thomas Eigentler1, Claus Garbe1, Andrea Forschner1. 1. Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Tübingen, 72076 Tübingen, Germany. 2. Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Tübingen, 72076 Tübingen, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) provide effective treatment options for advanced melanoma patients. However, they are associated with high rates of immune-related side effects. There are no data on the distress of melanoma patients during their ICI treatment. We, therefore, conducted a prospective longitudinal study to assess distress and the need for psycho-oncological support in these patients. METHODS: Questionnaires were completed before initiation of ICI (T0), after 6-8 weeks (T1), and after 12-14 weeks (T2). We furthermore included the Hornheide Screening Instrument (HSI), distress thermometer (DT), and patients' self-assessment. Binary logistic regression was performed to identify factors indicating a need for psychooncological support. RESULTS: 36.3%/55.8% (HSI / DT) of the patients were above the threshold, indicating a need for psychooncological support at T0, and 7.8% of the patients reported practical problems. In contrast, at T2, the distress values had decreased to 29.0%/40.2% (HSI/DT), respectively. Female gender and occurrence of side effects significantly correlated to values above the threshold. The strongest factor was the patient's self-assessment. CONCLUSION: With the beginning of ICI, psychooncological support should be offered. Furthermore, practical problems should be considered, e.g., transport to therapy. Female patients and patients with side effects should be given special attention, as well as the patient self-assessment.
BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) provide effective treatment options for advanced melanomapatients. However, they are associated with high rates of immune-related side effects. There are no data on the distress of melanomapatients during their ICI treatment. We, therefore, conducted a prospective longitudinal study to assess distress and the need for psycho-oncological support in these patients. METHODS: Questionnaires were completed before initiation of ICI (T0), after 6-8 weeks (T1), and after 12-14 weeks (T2). We furthermore included the Hornheide Screening Instrument (HSI), distress thermometer (DT), and patients' self-assessment. Binary logistic regression was performed to identify factors indicating a need for psychooncological support. RESULTS: 36.3%/55.8% (HSI / DT) of the patients were above the threshold, indicating a need for psychooncological support at T0, and 7.8% of the patients reported practical problems. In contrast, at T2, the distress values had decreased to 29.0%/40.2% (HSI/DT), respectively. Female gender and occurrence of side effects significantly correlated to values above the threshold. The strongest factor was the patient's self-assessment. CONCLUSION: With the beginning of ICI, psychooncological support should be offered. Furthermore, practical problems should be considered, e.g., transport to therapy. Female patients and patients with side effects should be given special attention, as well as the patient self-assessment.
Authors: Caroline Robert; Georgina V Long; Benjamin Brady; Caroline Dutriaux; Michele Maio; Laurent Mortier; Jessica C Hassel; Piotr Rutkowski; Catriona McNeil; Ewa Kalinka-Warzocha; Kerry J Savage; Micaela M Hernberg; Celeste Lebbé; Julie Charles; Catalin Mihalcioiu; Vanna Chiarion-Sileni; Cornelia Mauch; Francesco Cognetti; Ana Arance; Henrik Schmidt; Dirk Schadendorf; Helen Gogas; Lotta Lundgren-Eriksson; Christine Horak; Brian Sharkey; Ian M Waxman; Victoria Atkinson; Paolo A Ascierto Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-11-16 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: James Larkin; Vanna Chiarion-Sileni; Rene Gonzalez; Jean-Jacques Grob; Piotr Rutkowski; Christopher D Lao; C Lance Cowey; Dirk Schadendorf; John Wagstaff; Reinhard Dummer; Pier F Ferrucci; Michael Smylie; David Hogg; Andrew Hill; Ivan Márquez-Rodas; John Haanen; Massimo Guidoboni; Michele Maio; Patrick Schöffski; Matteo S Carlino; Céleste Lebbé; Grant McArthur; Paolo A Ascierto; Gregory A Daniels; Georgina V Long; Lars Bastholt; Jasmine I Rizzo; Agnes Balogh; Andriy Moshyk; F Stephen Hodi; Jedd D Wolchok Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2019-09-28 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jacob Schachter; Antoni Ribas; Georgina V Long; Ana Arance; Jean-Jacques Grob; Laurent Mortier; Adil Daud; Matteo S Carlino; Catriona McNeil; Michal Lotem; James Larkin; Paul Lorigan; Bart Neyns; Christian Blank; Teresa M Petrella; Omid Hamid; Honghong Zhou; Scot Ebbinghaus; Nageatte Ibrahim; Caroline Robert Journal: Lancet Date: 2017-08-16 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Caroline Robert; Antoni Ribas; Jacob Schachter; Ana Arance; Jean-Jacques Grob; Laurent Mortier; Adil Daud; Matteo S Carlino; Catriona M McNeil; Michal Lotem; James M G Larkin; Paul Lorigan; Bart Neyns; Christian U Blank; Teresa M Petrella; Omid Hamid; Shu-Chih Su; Clemens Krepler; Nageatte Ibrahim; Georgina V Long Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2019-07-22 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Sandra A Mitchell; Amy J Hoffman; Jane C Clark; Regina M DeGennaro; Patricia Poirier; Carolene B Robinson; Breanna L Weisbrod Journal: Clin J Oncol Nurs Date: 2014 Impact factor: 1.027
Authors: Carmen Loquai; Vera Scheurich; Nils Syring; Irene Schmidtmann; Stephan Rietz; Andreas Werner; Stephan Grabbe; Manfred E Beutel Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-07-05 Impact factor: 3.240