Screening for depression in cancer patients receiving radiotherapy: Feasibility and identification of effective tools in the NRG Oncology RTOG 0841 trial.

BACKGROUND: Brief tools are needed to screen oncology outpatients for depressive symptoms. METHODS: Patients starting radiotherapy for the first diagnosis of any tumor completed distress screening tools, including the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), the 2-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2), the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Distress Thermometer (NCCN-DT), and the Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL) (25-item version). Patients exceeding validated cutoff scores and a systematic sample of patients whose screening was negative completed the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID) mood disorder modules via telephone. RESULTS: Four hundred sixty-three patients from 35 community-based radiation oncology sites and 2 academic radiation oncology sites were recruited. Sixty-six percent of the 455 eligible patients (n = 299) were women, and the eligible patients had breast (45%), gastrointestinal (11%), lung (10%), gynecologic (6%), or other cancers (27%). Seventy-five (16.5%) exceeded screening cutoffs for depressive symptoms. Forty-two of these patients completed the SCID. Another 37 patients whose screening was negative completed the SCID. Among the 79 patients completing the SCID, 8 (10.1%) met the criteria for major depression, 2 (2.5%) met the criteria for dysthymia, and 6 (7.6%) met the criteria for an adjustment disorder. The PHQ-2 demonstrated good psychometric properties for screening for mood disorders with a cutoff score of ≥3 (receiver operating characteristic area under the curve [AUC], 0.83) and was comparable to the PHQ-9 ( > 9; AUC = 0.85). The NCCN-DT did not detect depression (AUC = 0.59). CONCLUSIONS: The PHQ-2 demonstrated good psychometric properties for screening for mood disorders, which were equivalent to the PHQ-9 and superior to the NCCN-DT. These findings support using the PHQ-2 to identify patients in need of further assessment for depression, which has a low prevalence but is a clinically significant comorbidity. These findings could inform the implementation of distress screening accreditation standards. Cancer 2017;123:485-493. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Sorafenib in platinum-treated patients with extensive stage small cell lung cancer: a Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG 0435) phase II trial.

INTRODUCTION: Sorafenib is a multikinase inhibitor affecting pathways involved in tumor progression and angiogenesis. We conducted a phase II trial of sorafenib in platinum-treated patients with extensive stage small cell lung cancer to determine the tumor response rate, toxicity, and overall survival. METHODS: Patients with histologically confirmed, measurable disease, Zubrod performance status 0 to 1, and no more than 1 prior platinum-based treatment were eligible. Patients were stratified by platinum-sensitivity status: sensitive (progression >90 days after platinum) or refractory (progression during or ≤90 days after platinum). Patients were treated with sorafenib 400 mg orally twice a day continuously on a 28-day cycle. RESULTS: Of 89 patients registered, 82 were evaluable for toxicity assessment, and 83 were evaluable for response. There were four partial responses seen among the 38 patients in the platinum-sensitive stratum, for an estimated response rate of 11% (95% confidence interval: 3-25%), and one partial response among the 45 patients in the platinum-refractory stratum, for an estimated response rate of 2% (95% confidence interval: 0-12%). The median overall survival estimates were 6.7 months (95% confidence interval: 6.1-9.1 months) for the platinum-sensitive stratum and 5.3 months (95% confidence interval: 3.3-7.5 months) in the platinum-refractory stratum. Nineteen patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events or side effects from therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the lack of disease control seen in our trial, further investigation of single-agent sorafenib in the small cell lung cancer population is not recommended. Combination trials of sorafenib and chemotherapy are ongoing.