Silvana Sabato

Use of the Diagnostic Criteria for Psychosomatic Research in Oncology

Background: Psycho-oncology literature has shown that 30–50% of cancer patients meet the criteria for a psychiatric diagnosis, according to the usual nosographic classification (e.g. DSM). The Diagnostic Criteria for Psychosomatic Research (DCPR) have been shown to be useful in identifying psychological constellations in patients with medical illness. The aims of the study were to compare the DSM-IV and the DCPR in their application to cancer patients. Method: One hundred and forty-six patients with cancer underwent semistructured interviews to assess psychiatric morbidity and psychosocial syndromes according to the DSM-IV and the DCPR, respectively. The Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) was also used to assess psychological stress symptoms. Results: Sixty-five subjects (44.5%) met the criteria for a DSM-IV diagnosis (DSM cases), while 104 patients (71.2%) presented symptoms meeting the criteria for at least one DCPR syndrome. Three DCPR dimensions were more frequent than others, specifically Health Anxiety (37.7%), Demoralization (28.8%) and Alexithymia (26%). Among the subjects with no formal DSM-IV diagnosis (n = 81), 58% had at least one DCPR syndrome. DSM-IV cases had higher scores on several BSI subscales in comparison with patients with only one DCPR syndrome, while no difference was found in patients with more than one DCPR diagnosis. Conclusions: The DCPR system was found to be useful in oncology in investigating psychological conditions which are not identified by the DSM-IV alone. Assessment of more specific constructs, other than intensity of general stress symptoms, may give more specific information and help in tailoring psychological intervention for patients with cancer.

Affective syndromes and their screening in cancer patients with early and stable disease: Italian ICD-10 data and performance of the Distress Thermometer from the Southern European Psycho-Oncology Study (SEPOS)

BACKGROUND The assessment of mood and anxiety disorders secondary to cancer by using easy-to-administer instruments has been the object of recent research. METHODS The aim of this study was to examine the accuracy of the short screening tool developed by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Clinical Practice Guidelines for Distress Management, (0-10 point-scale Distress Thermometer) (DT) in detecting affective syndrome disorders in Italian cancer patients. The sample consisted of 109 cancer outpatients who were administered the ICD-10 psychiatric interview (CIDI), the DT and the Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS). RESULTS Forty-four patients (40.4%) met the criteria for an ICD-10 diagnosis of affective syndromes. The DT was significantly associated with HADS-Total score (r=0.66, p=0.001). A cut-off > or = 4 on the DT showed a sensitivity of 79.5% and a specificity of 75.4% (positive predictive value--PPV = 68.6%; negative predictive value--NPV = 84.5%). The cut-off score > or = 10 on the HADS was associated with a sensitivity of 86% and a specificity of 81.5% (PPV = 76%; NPV = 89.9%). A cut-off score > or = 5 on DT and > or = 15 on HADS maximized sensitivity (78.6% and 85%, respectively) and specificity (83.1% and 96%, respectively) for patients with more severe affective syndromes (major depression, persistent depressive disorders). CONCLUSIONS The results suggest that simple instruments can be used as feasible tools in the screening of mood and anxiety disorders among cancer patients.

Educational intervention in cancer outpatient clinics on routine screening for emotional distress: an observational study

Purpose: To examine the possible effect of an educational model on distress screening in newly diagnosed cancer patients referred to Psycho‐oncology service (POS).

Depressive spectrum disorders in cancer: prevalence, risk factors and screening for depression: a critical review

Abstract Background: Although depression and mood-related disorders are common in persons with cancer, these conditions remain frequently overlooked in clinical practice. Negative consequences of depressive disorder spectrum have been reported (e.g. suicidal ideation, increase physical complications and somatic symptoms, negative influence on prognosis), indicating the need for routine screening, assessment and management. Methods: A search of the major databases (Medline, Embase, PsycLIT, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library) was conducted on the reviews and meta-analyses available in order to summarize relevant data concerning depressive disorders spectrum in terms of prevalence, risk factors, and screening and assessment among patients with cancer across the trajectory of the disease. Results: The data show a prevalence of depression and depressive disorders between 5% and 60% according to the different diagnostic criteria, the tools used in the studies (e.g. semi-structured psychiatric interview and psychometric questionnaires), as well as the stage and type of cancer. Furthermore, despite the significant health care resources devoted to cancer care and the importance of addressing depressive symptoms, assessment and management of depressive spectrum disorders in cancer patients remains suboptimal. Conclusions: Routine screening and adequate assessment of depressive spectrum disorders is necessary in patients with cancer in order to effectively manage the multifaceted and complex consequences on cancer care.

Effects of Supportive-Expressive Group Therapy in Breast Cancer Patients with Affective Disorders: A Pilot Study

Background: So far, no study has tested supportive-expressive group therapy (SEGT) in cancer patients with an established psychiatric diagnosis. The aim of this 6-month follow-up study was to evaluate breast cancer patients with an ICD-10 diagnosis of affective syndromes participating in SEGT and a group of breast cancer patients with no ICD-10 diagnosis. Methods: A total of 214 patients were examined in the screening phase (T0) using the ICD-10, the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI), the Mini-Mental Adjustment-to-Cancer Scale (Mini-MAC), the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support, the Openness Scale and the Cancer Worries Inventory (CWI). Those with an ICD-10 diagnosis of affective syndromes received 16–24 sessions of SEGT (90-min sessions, once a week), while those with no ICD-10 diagnosis were followed up. A second assessment for both sam- ples took place 6 months later (T1). Results: Seventy-eight (36.4%) patients were positive for an ICD-10 diagnosis of affective syndromes at T0, while 127 (59.4%) did not meet any ICD-10 diagnosis. Among the former, 54 patients participated in the SEGT. At T1, significant differences were observed in all the dimensions of the BSI, hopelessness and anxious preoccupation subscales of the Mini-MAC, the Openness Scale and the CWI. No variable at T0 was a predictor of BSI distress as measured at T1. Among those with no ICD-10 diagnosis at T0, 8.2% were positive for affective disorders at the 6-month follow-up. Conclusions: This study suggested that SEGT is effective for breast cancer patients with affective disorders, and indicates the need for prospective evaluations in order to identify those who may develop psychopathology over time.

Hopelessness and related variables among cancer patients in the Southern European Psycho-Oncology Study (SEPOS).

Background Although hopelessness has been studied in cancer, no data are available in non-English-speaking countries. Objective The authors sought to amass data from Southern European countries (Italy, Portugal, Spain, and Switzerland) in order to fill this void. Method A group of 312 cancer patients completed the Mini-MAC Hopelessness subscale, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the Cancer Worry Inventory (CWI), and a six-item Visual Analog scale (VAS) to measure intensity of physical symptoms, general well-being, difficulty in coping with cancer, intensity of social support from close relationships, leisure activity, and support from religious beliefs. Results Regression analysis indicated that HADS–Depression, VAS Maladaptive Coping and Well-Being, and the CWI explained 42% of the variance. Conclusion Hopelessness in cancer patients seems not exclusively to correspond to depression, but is related to various other psychosocial factors, such as maladaptive coping, as well.

Psychosocial screening and assessment in oncology and palliative care settings

Psychiatric and psychosocial disorders among cancer patients have been reported as a major consequence of the disease and treatment. The problems in applying a pure psychiatric approach have determined the need for structuring more defined methods, including screening for distress and emotional symptoms and a more specific psychosocial assessment, to warrant proper care to cancer patients with psychosocial problems. This review examines some of the most significant issues related to these two steps, screening and assessment of psychosocial morbidity in cancer and palliative care. With regard to this, the many different variables, such as the factors affecting individual vulnerability (e.g., life events, chronic stress and allostatic load, well-being, and health attitudes) and the psychosocial correlates of medical disease (e.g., psychiatric disturbances, psychological symptoms, illness behavior, and quality of life) which are possibly implicated not only in “classical” psychiatric disorders but more broadly in psychosocial suffering. Multidimensional tools [e.g., and specific psychosocially oriented interview (e.g., the Diagnostic Criteria for Psychosomatic Research)] represent a way to screen for and assess emotional distress, anxiety and depression, maladaptive coping, dysfunctional attachment, as well as other significant psychosocial dimensions secondary to cancer, such as demoralization and health anxiety. Cross-cultural issues, such as language, ethnicity, race, and religion, are also discussed as possible factors influencing the patients and families perception of illness, coping mechanisms, psychological response to a cancer diagnosis.

Depressive Spectrum Disorders in Cancer: Diagnostic Issues and Intervention. A Critical Review

Depressive spectrum disorders, including major depression, persistent depression, minor and sub-syndromal depression, and other forms of depressive conditions, such as demoralization, are among the most common psychiatric consequences of cancer patients, affecting up to 60% of patients. In spite of the negative effects and the burden for cancer patients and their families, these disorders often remain under-recognized and undertreated. The present review aims at summarizing the relevant data concerning the diagnostic challenges within the depressive spectrum disorders among cancer patients. Also, the most relevant data relative to integrated intervention, including psychopharmacological and psychosocial treatment, for depression in cancer patients are critically evaluated. It is mandatory that health care professionals working in oncology (e.g., oncologists, surgeons, radiation oncologists, primary care physicians, nurses, social workers, psychologists) receive training in the diagnosis and integrated management of the different types of disorder within the spectrum of clinical depression.

The burden of psychosocial morbidity related to cancer: patient and family issues

Abstract With cancer incidence increasing over time, attention to the burden of related psychiatric and psychosocial consequences of the disease and treatment is a major topic for both cancer patients and their caregivers. Among cancer patients, psychiatric (e.g. adjustment, anxiety, depressive disorders) and neuropsychiatric disorders (e.g. cognitive disorders secondary to treatment, delirium) have been shown to affect an average of 30–35% patients, with differences according to stage and type of cancer. Also other psychosocial syndromes (e.g. demoralization, health anxiety, irritable mood) not taken into account in usual nosological systems should be considered for their impact on the patient’s quality-of-life. Also, it has been repeatedly reported that psychological distress reverberates substantially throughout the nuclear family, and that a family approach is necessary in cancer care, with the caregiver–patient dyad as a unit to be the focus and direction of assessment and intervention. In this review the most significant psychosocial disorders causing burden for cancer patients and their caregivers are examined, and the main methods of assessment for more proper referral and treatment are summarized.

Beliefs about medicines, doctor-patient relationship, and coping among European patients with cancer

Luigi Grassi*, Elena Meggiolaro, Maria Alejandra Berardi, Agustina Sirgo, Maria Cristina Colistro, Elisabeth Andritsch, Alessandra Montesi, Tatiana Bertelli, Clemens Farkas, Rosangela Caruso, Silvana Sabato, Sara Massarenti, Eva Juan Linarez and Maria Giulia Nanni Institute of Psychiatry, Department of Biomedical and Specialty Surgical Sciences, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy University Hospital Psychiatry Unit, Program in Psycho-Oncology and Psychiatry in Palliative Care, University S. Anna Hospital and Health Authorities, Ferrara, Italy Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IRST) S.r.l, Meldola, Forlì-Cesena, Italy Psycho-Oncology Unit, Oncology Department, University Hospital Sant Joan de Reus, Reus, Spain Istituto Oncologico Romagnolo (IOR), Forlì, Italy Psycho-Oncology Service, Clinical Department of Oncology, University Medical Center of Internal Medicine, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria Psycho-Oncology Unit, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Barcelona, Spain