Psychological distress and unmet supportive care needs in melanoma-survivors and high-risk patients for melanoma: A Swiss cross-sectional study.

BackgroundPsychological distress is prevalent in patients with cancer, negatively affecting their treatment and quality of life. Clinical guidelines recommended screening all cancer patients routinely for psychological problems using simple measures such as the Distress Thermometer (DT) and Problem List (PL). This study is the first research in Vietnam to identify the optimal DT cutoff point to screen distress and the relationship with PL items among cancer patients.Methods300 cancer patients were recruited from 10 departments at Vietnam National Cancer Hospital (K hospital) and completed the DT and PL. Participants also completed the Patient Health Questionnaire‐9 (PHQ‐9) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder‐7 (GAD‐7) with standard cutoff scores for identifying significant depression and anxiety.ResultsReceiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses showed that a DT cutoff score of 4 had an area under the ROC curve of 0.81 and 0.82 using the PHQ‐9 and GAD‐7 cutoff scores of 10 as the criterion, respectively. This indicated good overall accuracy. This cutoff also showed a sensitivity of 0.87 and 0.92 for PHQ‐9 and GAD‐7 total score defined cases, respectively. Both specificity values were 0.58. In terms of the PL, 164 distressed patients (54.7%) reported significantly more emotional problems, family issues, and practical and physical problem, implying various causes contribute to psychological distress among cancer patients.ConclusionsThe study showed that the DT with a cutoff of 4 accompanied with PL is a simple and effective instrument compared to previous, longer measures commonly used to detect psychosocial distress in Vietnamese cancer patients. This cutoff point also identified patients with problems contributing towards distress.

Unrecognised psychological distress among cancer survivors may be identified using short screening tools. We validated the accuracy of the distress thermometer (DT) to detect psychological distress on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) among early stage gynaecological cancer survivors and whether the women's DT and HADS scores were associated with the need of an individualised supportive intervention. One hundred sixty-five gynaecological cancer survivors answered DT and HADS before randomisation in a trial testing a nurse-led, person-centred intervention using supportive conversations. The number of conversations was decided in the woman-nurse dyad based on the woman's perceived need. Nurses were unaware of the women's DT and HADS scores. We validated DT's accuracy for screening using HADS as gold standard and receiver operating characteristic curves. Associations between DT and HADS scores and the number of conversations received were investigated. For screening of distress (HADS ≥15), a DT score ≥2, had a sensitivity of 93% (95% CI 82-98%), a specificity of 40% (32-49%), and positive and negative predictive values of 36% (28-45%), and 94% (84-98%), respectively; area under curve was 0.73 (0.64-0.81). Higher DT and HADS scores were associated with more interventional conversations. In gynaecological cancer survivors, DT may perform fairly well as a first stage screening tool for distress, but a second stage is likely needed due to a high number of false positives. DT and HADS scores may predict the number of supportive conversations needed in an individualised intervention in gynaecological cancer survivors.

PurposeThis study aimed to assess the association between the Distress Thermometer (DT) score and risk of suicide in patients with cancer. In addition, we aimed to determine the best cutoff score to predict patients at risk of suicide.MethodsFrom 2015 to 2016, we retrospectively collected data on patients with cancer. DT scores were collected, and the association between DT score and risk of suicide (suicide ideation or death ideation) was analyzed. Furthermore, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to identify the appropriate cutoff score for predicting risk of suicide.ResultsA total of 260 patients with cancer were included, and suicidal ideation was identified in 33 cases referred for psychological intervention. The DT scores of the patients with suicidal ideation were significantly higher than those of patients without suicidal ideation (6.30±2.11 vs. 4.29±1.72, p<0.05). In addition, the area under the ROC curve for predicting risk for suicide was 0.758. The cutoff DT score of 3 had the highest sensitivity of 1.00 to rule out suicidal ideation, while 9 had the highest specificity of 1.00 to rule in suicidal ideation. Moreover, the appropriate cutoff DT score to predict patients with suicidal ideation was 5, with a sensitivity of 0.52, specificity of .84, positive likelihood ratio of 3.24, and negative likelihood ratio of 0.58.ConclusionThe DT score may be a helpful clinical tool to evaluate emotional distress and risk of suicide in patients with cancer. Clinically, for DT scores greater than 5 in patients with cancer, the risk of suicide greatly increases. In view of the DT’s widespread use internationally by non-mental health clinicians in cancer to guide the need for specialist mental health interventions, its potential utility in also predicting suicide risk is of great interest.

Based on evidence that psychologic distress often goes unrecognized although it is common among cancer patients, clinical practice guidelines recommend routine screening for distress. For this study, the authors sought to determine whether the single-item Distress Thermometer (DT) compared favorably with longer measures currently used to screen for distress. Patients (n = 380) who were recruited from 5 sites completed the DT and identified the presence or absence of 34 problems using a standardized list. Participants also completed the 14-item Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and an 18-item version of the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI-18), both of which have established cutoff scores for identifying clinically significant distress. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses of DT scores yielded area under the curve estimates relative to the HADS cutoff score (0.80) and the BSI-18 cutoff scores (0.78) indicative of good overall accuracy. ROC analyses also showed that a DT cutoff score of 4 had optimal sensitivity and specificity relative to both the HADS and BSI-18 cutoff scores. Additional analyses indicated that, compared with patients who had DT scores < 4, patients who had DT scores > or = 4 were more likely to be women, have a poorer performance status, and report practical, family, emotional, and physical problems (P < or = 0.05). Findings confirm that the single-item DT compares favorably with longer measures used to screen for distress. A DT cutoff score of 4 yielded optimal sensitivity and specificity in a general cancer population relative to established cutoff scores on longer measures. The use of this cutoff score identified patients with a range of problems that were likely to reflect psychologic distress.

e24138 Background: Distress has a negative impact on the patient experience of cancer. We previously demonstrated that patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) face significant and sustained distress during first-line treatment. However, the association between distress and unplanned healthcare utilization (HCRU) is not well understood. Here we examine this association. Methods: We conducted secondary analyses of data from 152 adult patients with mNSCLC treated at Duke Cancer Institute who were part of a retrospective chart review study (3/15-6/20). For the original investigation, demographic, clinical, and distress data were abstracted. NCCN Distress Thermometer (DT) scores were recorded at each clinic visit from start of first-line therapy to end of first year, change in therapy or death. The DT is an 11-point ordinal scale, with a 39-item Problem List, assessing overall distress. DT scores of &gt; = 4 indicate actionable distress. Further HCRU data were analyzed, including unplanned hospitalizations, 30-day readmissions, length of stay, clinic visits, infusion center visits, emergency department (ED) visits, and death. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed for sources of distress and HCRU. To examine the association between distress and HCRU, we utilized an adjusted frailty model (for baseline demographics, metastatic site, and National Cancer Institute Index). This Cox proportional hazards model allowed for multiple HCRU events per patient and included actionable distress as a time-dependent covariate. Results: First, the proportion of actionable DT scores (423/1652, 25.6%) was strikingly high. Most DTs included report of at least one physical problem (n = 1593, 96.4%), regardless of distress level. However, emotional problems (e.g., worry, nervousness, depression) were reported much more frequently when the DT score was actionable (61.9% vs. 20.8%). At the patient level (n = 152), actionable distress was associated with increased HCRU. For example, a larger proportion of those with an average DT score &gt; = 4 had at least one hospitalization (n = 22, 53.7%), infusion center visit (n = 11, 26.8%) or ED visit (n = 28, 68.3%) compared to patients with a non-actionable average DT score. Furthermore, HCRU was 54% more likely to occur after a patient reporting actionable distress compared to a patient reporting lower distress levels any time during treatment (adjusted HR 1.54; CI 1.20, 1.97). A one-point increase in distress was associated with an 8% increase in risk of HCRU (HR 1.08; CI 1.03, 1.13) at any point during treatment. Conclusions: Patients with mNSCLC experience high levels of distress, with actionable distress appearing to be driven significantly by emotional problems. Patient-reported distress is also associated with HCRU. Intervention development and testing is needed to address the unmet psychological needs in lung cancer care and their potential impact on unplanned HCRU.

The distress thermometer (DT), a one-item measure for distress, provides a means for rapidly and effectively screening psychological distress in cancer patients. In this pilot study, a screening efficacy of the DT was investigated in a mixed cohort of 108 Korean cancer patients. Participants completed the DT, the problem list (PL), and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and answered questions regarding supportive needs and their degree of satisfaction with several aspects of care. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses indicated that a DT cutoff score of 4 yielded an area under the ROC curve of 0.75 with a sensitivity of 0.83 and a specificity of 0.59 for HADS-total score defined cases (> or =15). HADS--Anxiety and Depression subscale scores explained 27% of the variability in the DT scores, implying that 'distress' is a broader concept that includes anxiety and depressive symptoms but has a more comprehensive meaning that encompasses multiple contributory factors. Regarding the PL, distressed patients (DT> or =4) reported significantly more problems (23 of 35) in all categories, suggesting, although degrees differ, that a wide variety of problems contribute to distress in cancer patients. Distress as defined by DT and HADS subscale scores was also significantly associated with higher supportive needs, a poor ECOG performance status (both physician and patient-rated), and a reduced level of satisfaction with treatment, staff, and communications. In conclusion, the DT and the PL were found to be simple yet effective screening instruments for detecting psychosocial distress in Korean cancer patients, and for identifying problems that warrant intervention.

Distress screening guidelines call for rapid screening for emotional distress at the time of cancer diagnosis. The purpose of this study was to examine the distress thermometer's (DT) ability to screen in patients in treatment for advanced cancer who may be depressed. Using cross-sectional data collected from patients within 30 days of diagnosis with advanced cancer, this study used ROC analysis to determine the optimal-cutoff point of the distress thermometer (DT) for screening for depression as measured by the physician health questionnaire (PHQ)-9; inter-test reliability analysis to compare the DT with the PHQ-2 for screening in possible cases of depression, and multivariate analysis to examine associations among the DT emotional problem list (EPL) items with cases of depression. The average age of the 123 patients in the study was 59.9 (12.9) years. Seventy (56.9%) were female. All had Stage 3 or 4 cancers (40% gastrointestinal, 19% gynecologic, 20% head and neck, 21% lung). The mean DT score was 4 (2.7)/10; and 56 (43%) were depressed as measured by the PHQ-9 ≥ 5. The optimal DT cut-off score to screen in possible cases of depression was ≥ 2/10, with a sensitivity of .96, compared to a sensitivity of .32 of the PHQ-2 ≥ 2. Correlation coefficients for the DT ≥ 2 and the PHQ-2 with the PHQ-9 ≥ 5 were 0.4 and -0.2, respectively. EPL items associated with cases of depression were Depression (OR = 0.15, 0.02-0.85) and Sadness (OR = 0.21, 0.06-0.72). The optimal DT threshold for identifying possible cases of depression at the time of diagnosis is ≥ 2; this threshold is more sensitive than the PHQ-2 ≥ 2. EPL items may be used with the DT score to triage patients for evaluation.

350 Background: The NCCN defines “distress” as a “multifactorial…emotional experience…that may interfere with the ability to cope effectively with cancer, its physical symptoms and its treatment.” NCCN DT scores ≥ 4 on a scale of 1-10 are associated with increased biopsychosocial distress among oncology patients. We piloted the use of an electronic tool for distress screening in an academic GU medical oncology practice to determine feasibility and impact on workflow. Methods: At each clinic visit, patients completed a modified NCCN DT with distress score only and pain interference, depression, and anxiety PROMIS domains on an iPad before meeting the clinician. Results were immediately available in the electronic medical record. Results: Between July 1, and August 31, 2015, 108 assessments were completed by 73 patients; 12% were new patients and 88% were follow-ups. Patients ranged from 30 to 93 years of age. Mean DT score was 3.67 [standard deviation (SD) 2.79]. DT scores of ≥ 4 were reported in 41% of assessments. Mean distress scores based on cancer stage were: stages 1-3, 4.04 (SD 2.96; N = 23); and stage 4, 3.56 (SD 2.75; N = 85). Mean distress scores based on cancer diagnosis were: prostate, 3.20 (SD 2.38; N = 46); urothelial, 3.97 (SD 3.35; N = 33); kidney, 3.92 (SD 2.55; N = 24); and testicular, 4.80 (SD 3.42; N = 5). Mean T scores for each of the PROMIS domains were: pain interference, 54.16 (SD 10.28; N = 103); depression, 49.54 (SD 8.95; N = 101), and anxiety, 50.79 (SD 9.37; N = 101). Median time to assessment completion was 3.77 minutes (mean 6.15 minutes). Mean times by age groups were: 50-59, 7.65 minutes (N = 21); 60-69, 5.57 (N = 48); 70-79, 11.61 (N = 16); and ≥ 80, 10.21 (N = 12). Conclusions: Electronic biopsychosocial distress screening at each clinic visit is feasible and has minimal impact on workflow. Pain interference but neither anxiety nor depression scores were increased in this population. Future research is needed on the influence of cancer stage and type on distress and on the associations between NCCN DT and PROMIS scores.

239 Background: Psychosocial distress is common for those with cancer; new interventions are needed. Pillars4Life is an online educational program that teaches coping skills in a group format. What is the relationship between participation in the LiveStrong-funded Pillars4Life program and personal psychosocial outcomes? Methods: This was a longitudinal observational cohort study. Cancer patients participating in the Pillars4Life program were recruited from the 17 hospitals that received the LiveStrong Community Impact Award. Consenting participants participated in 10 weekly sessions and completed electronic surveys at baseline and 3 months. Patient reported measures included: distress [Distress Thermometer (DT), Patient Care Monitor (PCM)], depression [Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ9)], anxiety [Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 (GAD7)], posttraumatic stress [PTSD Checklist-Civilian (PCLC)], despair (PCM), fatigue [Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)], and cancer-related wellbeing [Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACTG)] outcomes. Results: Patient participants (n=130) were: mean age 56±11 years; 87% female; 89% white; 61% married; 48% employed; 51% had breast cancer; and 63% were receiving treatment. Mean scores significantly improved from baseline to month 3 on all patient-reported outcome measures: DT (-0.9), PCM Distress (-3.0), PHQ9 (-2.3), GAD7 (-2.3), PCLC (-4.3), PCM Despair (-2.9), FACT-G (4.7), all p&lt;.001; and FACIT-Fatigue (3.3, p=.001). Patients who reported distress at baseline (DT≥4; n=70) had clinically significant improvements (moderate to strong effect sizes ranged from 0.5 to 1.0 standard deviation units) in DT; PCM Distress, Quality of Life, and Despair; PHQ9; GAD7; PCLC; FACTG, among others. Conclusions: Participation in Pillars4Life was associated with statistically and clinically significant improvements on key psychosocial and quality of life patient-reported outcomes measures. Importantly, distressed patients experienced meaningful improvement.

Socio-Demographic Parameters Including Race, As Predictors of Depression in Patients with Hematologic Malignancies

Screening for Psychosocial Distress in Patients with Hematological Malignancies and Identifying Specific Factors That Cause Distress throughout Stage of Disease

The objective of this study was to investigate the possible associations between the Distress Thermometer (DT) scores and the brain metabolism of structures involved in stress response. Twenty-one cancer patients were assessed using the DT, Problem Checklist and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). The psychological measures were correlated with [18 F]PET-FDG brain glucose metabolism. Multiple and linear regression and binary logistic regression were run to analyse data. The DT and HADS scores illustrated that 48% of patients were distressed, 19% were depressed and 48% were anxious. Results showed that some subcortical areas activity, such as part of midbrain and of hypothalamus, was correlated with the DT scores. The Problem Checklist scores correlated with the activity of the same areas and included more regions in the limbic forebrain and brainstem. Compared with the DT and Problem Checklist, HADS-Depression scores showed a more extensive pattern of correlation with brain activity, including limbic and cortical areas. The results highlighted that the DT scores correlated with the activity of brain areas typically involved in stress response. Indeed, hypothalamus metabolism was found to be the best predictor of distressed patients.

Use of the Distress Thermometer in a cancer helpline context: Can it detect changes in distress, is it acceptable to nurses and callers, and do high scores lead to internal referrals?

An anti-smoking telephone helpline accelerates smoking cessation

Fear of progression (FoP) is frequent in patients with cancer and of high clinical relevance. Despite the often devastating prognosis of brain cancer, FoP has not yet been assessed in neurooncological patients. The aim of this study was thus the assessment of FoP and its clinical correlates. In an ambulatory setting, 42 patients with a primary brain tumour completed the Fear of Progression questionnaire FoP-Q-12. Clinical correlates of FoP were assessed via a variety of measures, including patients' physical state (Karnofsky Performance Status, KPS), cancer-related psychosocial distress (Distress Thermometer, DT), anxiety (General Anxiety Disorder Scale, GAD-7), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire, PHQ-9), Quality of Life (Short Form Health Survey, SF-8), and unmet supportive care needs (Supportive Care Needs Survey, SCNS). Eighteen patients (42%) suffered from high FoP (i.e. scored ≥ 34 in the FoP-Q-12). According to the 12 items of the FoP-Q-12, the greatest fears were worrying about what would happen to their family and being afraid of severe medical treatments. No sociodemographic variables (e.g. age, gender) or medical tumour characteristics (e.g. tumour malignancy, first or recurrent tumour) were related to FoP. Patients with more severe physical symptoms reported higher FoP. Patients with higher FoP were more anxious, more depressed, reported lower Quality of Life, and suffered from more unmet supportive care needs. Our results demonstrate that FoP is frequent and of high clinical relevance for neurooncological patients. Its assessment is not sufficiently covered by instruments for assessment of other areas of psychological morbidity (e.g. general anxiety). Moreover, FoP cannot be predicted by objective characteristics of the patients and disease. Thus, the routine screening for FoP is recommended in neurooncological patients. Clinicians should bear in mind that patients with high FoP are likely to suffer from high emotional distress and unmet supportive care needs and initiate treatment accordingly.