Purpose Distress has been recognized as the sixth vital sign in cancer care and several guidelines recommend routine screening. Despite this, screening for distress is rarely conducted and infrequently evaluated. Methods A program of routine online screening for distress was implemented for new patients with breast and lung cancer. Patients were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: (1) minimal screening: the distress thermometer (DT) only plus usual care; (2) full screening: DT, problem checklist, Psychological Screen for Cancer part C measuring anxiety and depression, a personalized report summarizing concerns and the report on the medical file; or (3) triage: full screening plus optional personalized phone triage with referral to resources. Patients in all conditions received an information packet and were reassessed 3 months later with the full screening battery. Results Five hundred eighty-five patients with breast cancer and 549 patients with lung cancer were assessed at baseline (89% of all...

Screening for Distress in Lung and Breast Cancer Outpatients: A Randomized Controlled Trial

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lanpsy/PIIS2215-0366(14)70313-X.pdf

Prevalence, associations, and adequacy of treatment of major depression in patients with cancer: a cross-sectional analysis of routinely collected clinical data.

A systematic review of the scales used for the measurement of cancer-related fatigue (CRF)

Risk factors, prevalence, and course of severe fatigue after breast cancer treatment: a meta-analysis involving 12 327 breast cancer survivors

Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is the most prevalent and distressing symptom among cancer patients and survivors. However, research on its prevalence and related disability in the post-treatment survivorship period remains limited. We sought to describe the occurrence of CRF within three time points in the post-treatment survivorship trajectory. A self-administered mail-based questionnaire which included the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Fatigue (FACT-F) and the World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 was sent to three cohorts of disease-free breast, prostate or colorectal cancer survivors (6–18 months; 2–3 years; and 5–6 years post-treatment). Clinical information was extracted from chart review. Frequencies of significant fatigue by diagnostic group and time cohorts were studied and compared. Multivariate logistic regressions were conducted to examine the associations between CRF and demographic, clinical, and psychosocial variables. One thousand two hundred ninety-four questionnaire packages were returned (63 % response rate). A total of 29 % (95 % CI [27 % to 32 %]) of the sample reported significant fatigue (FACT-F ≤34), and this was associated with much higher levels of disability (p < 0.0001). Breast (40 % [35 % to 44 %]) and colorectal (33 % [27 % to 38 %]) cancer survivors had significantly higher rates of fatigue compared with the prostate group (17 % [14 % to 21 %]) (p < 0.0001). Fatigue levels did not differ between the three time cohorts. The main factors associated with CRF included physical symptom burden, depression, and co-morbidity (AUC, 0.919 [0.903 to 0.936]). Clinically relevant levels of CRF are present in approximately 1/3 of cancer survivors up to 6 years post-treatment, and this is associated with high levels of disability. Clinicians need to be aware of the chronicity of CRF and assess for it routinely in medical practice. While there is no gold standard treatment, non-pharmacological interventions with established efficacy can reduce its severity and possibly minimize its disabling impact on patient functioning. Attention must be paid to the co-occurrence and need for possible treatment of depression and other co-occurring physical symptoms as contributing factors.

Cancer-related fatigue and associated disability in post-treatment cancer survivors.

To: (1) estimate the prevalence of clinically significant emotional distress in patients attending a cancer outpatient department and (2) determine the associations between distress and demographic and clinical variables, we conducted a survey of outpatients attending selected clinics of a regional cancer centre in Edinburgh, UK. Patients completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) on touch-screen computers and the scores were linked to clinical variables on the hospital database. Nearly one quarter of the cancer outpatients 674 out of 3071 (22%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 20–23%) met our criterion for clinically significant emotional distress (total HADS score 15 or more). Univariate analysis identified the following statistically significant associations: age <65, female gender, cancer type and extent of disease. Multivariate analysis indicated that age <65 (odds ratio 1.41; 95% CI 1.18–1.69), female gender (odds ratio 1.58; 95% CI 1.31–1.92) and active disease (odds ratio 1.72; 95% CI 1.43–2.05) but not cancer diagnosis, were the independent predictors of clinically significant emotional distress. Services to treat distress in cancer patients should be organised to target patients by characteristics other than their cancer diagnosis.

/pdf/emotional-distress-in-cancer-patients-the-edinburgh-cancer-1zydg8g534.pdf

Rachael A. Waters

Papers

Emotional distress in cancer patients: the Edinburgh Cancer Centre symptom study

Clinically relevant fatigue in cancer outpatients: the Edinburgh Cancer Centre symptom study