Pain Intensity and Pain Interference in People With Progressive Multiple Sclerosis Compared With People With Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis.

OBJECTIVE: To describe pain intensity and interference in people with progressive multiple sclerosis (MS), compare these with people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), and identify common and unique factors associated with pain intensity in people with progressive MS and RRMS. DESIGN: Observational, cross-sectional analysis using baseline data from a longitudinal survey on quality of life in participants with MS. SETTING: Community. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 573 adults with MS (N=573; progressive MS, n=142; RRMS, n=431). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Average pain intensity was measured by an 11-point numeric rating scale, and pain interference was measured by the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Interference Short Form. RESULTS: Participants with progressive MS reported moderate average pain intensity (3.22±2.50) and elevated pain interference (T score of 55.55±9.13). They did not differ significantly from those with RRMS in average pain intensity or pain interference. Common factors associated with higher average pain intensity were more severe disability, lower education level, unemployment, and current smoking. In those with progressive MS, older age was associated with lower average pain intensity. CONCLUSIONS: Pain intensity and interference are similar across MS types. In addition to assessing and treating pain, it is important to screen for modifiable pain-related factors, such as smoking cessation, in this population.

Depressive symptoms predict head and neck cancer survival: Examining plausible behavioral and biological pathways.

BACKGROUND: Head and neck cancers are associated with high rates of depression, which may increase the risk for poorer immediate and long-term outcomes. Here it was hypothesized that greater depressive symptoms would predict earlier mortality, and behavioral (treatment interruption) and biological (treatment response) mediators were examined. METHODS: Patients (n = 134) reported depressive symptomatology at treatment planning. Clinical data were reviewed at the 2-year follow-up. RESULTS: Greater depressive symptoms were associated with significantly shorter survival (hazard ratio, 0.868; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.819-0.921; P < .001), higher rates of chemoradiation interruption (odds ratio, 0.865; 95% CI, 0.774-0.966; P = .010), and poorer treatment response (odds ratio, 0.879; 95% CI, 0.803-0.963; P = .005). The poorer treatment response partially explained the depression-survival relation. Other known prognostic indicators did not challenge these results. CONCLUSIONS: Depressive symptoms at the time of treatment planning predict overall 2-year mortality. Effects are partly influenced by the treatment response. Depression screening and intervention may be beneficial. Future studies should examine parallel biological pathways linking depression to cancer survival, including endocrine disruption and inflammation. Cancer 2018;124:1053-60. © 2018 American Cancer Society.