Network analysis used to investigate the interplay among somatic and psychological symptoms in patients with cancer and cancer survivors: a scoping review.

PURPOSE: Patients with cancer often experience multiple somatic and psychological symptoms. Somatic and psychological symptoms are thought to be connected and may reinforce each other. Network analysis allows examination of the interconnectedness of individual symptoms. The aim of this scoping review was to examine the current state of knowledge about the associations between somatic and psychological symptoms in patients with cancer and cancer survivors, based on network analysis. METHODS: This scoping review followed the five-stage framework of Arksey and O'Malley. The literature search was conducted in May, 2023 in PubMed, APA PsycINFO, Embase Cochrane central, and CINAHL databases. RESULTS: Thirty-two studies were included, with eleven using longitudinal data. Seventeen studies reported on the strength of the associations: somatic and psychological symptoms were associated, although associations among somatic as well as among psychological symptoms were stronger. Other findings were the association between somatic and psychological symptoms was stronger in patients experiencing more severe symptoms; associations between symptoms over time remained rather stable; and different symptoms were central in the networks, with fatigue being among the most central in half of the studies. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Although the associations among somatic symptoms and among psychological symptoms were stronger, somatic and psychological symptoms were associated, especially in patients experiencing more severe symptoms. Fatigue was among the most central symptoms, bridging the somatic and psychological domain. These findings as well as future research based on network analysis may help to untangle the complex interplay of somatic and psychological symptoms in patients with cancer.

Defining and operationalizing personalized psychological treatment - a systematic literature review.

This systematic literature review aimed to propose a definition of personalized psychological treatment and to suggest how the definition can be operationalized. PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched up to 11 December 2023 for studies in which a definition of personalized psychological treatment was included or a systematic operationalization of personalized psychological treatment was described. Based on a narrative synthesis of the collected definitions, summary categories were developed that informed the proposed definition. Operationalizations were described according to what aspect of treatment, how and when treatment was personalized. The extent to which the operationalizations deviated from the proposed definition was assessed. Thirty-four studies with definitions and 200 with operationalizations were included. The following definition was proposed: personalized psychological treatment aims to optimize treatment outcome for the individual patient by tailoring treatment to unique or specific needs, preferences or other characteristics and includes a systematic adaptation of treatment or a differentiation between treatment strategies. Based on the operationalizations, timing of personalization, specification of the systematic approach and treatment elements that could be personalized were added to the proposed definition. Evidence-based personalization of psychological treatments can be enhanced by clear operationalization based on a comprehensive definition of personalization.

Insomnia and sleep characteristics in post COVID-19 fatigue: A cross-sectional case-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: Following COVID-19 many patients report persistent fatigue and insomnia. Given the overlapping features, insomnia can be underdiagnosed in post-COVID-19 fatigue patients. This study aimed to determine insomnia severity, prevalence of clinical insomnia and sleep characteristics of post-COVID-19 fatigue patients. Data of post-COVID-19 fatigue patients were compared with those of patients with chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), a condition resembling post-COVID-19 fatigue. METHODS: In this cross-sectional case-controlled study, insomnia severity, assessed with the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), and prevalence of clinical insomnia (ISI score ≥ 10), were determined in patients with post-COVID-19 fatigue (n = 114) and compared with ME/CFS (n = 59) using ANCOVA and logistic regression, respectively. Linear regression analyses were used to evaluate whether mood, concentration problems, pain, fatigue (assessed with questionnaires) and diagnosis were associated with insomnia. Sleep characteristics were determined with a sleep diary and accelerometer in post-COVID-19 fatigue and compared with ME/CFS using ANCOVA. RESULTS: In patients with post-COVID-19 fatigue mean (SD) insomnia severity was 11.46 (5.7) and 64% reported clinical insomnia. Insomnia severity was significantly associated with depressive symptoms (ß = 0.49, p = 0.006) and age (ß = 0.08, p = 0.04). The mean (SD) subjective sleep duration was 7.4 (1.0) hours with a sleep efficiency of 82 (11)%. Several subjective sleep characteristics of the post-COVID-19 fatigue patients differed from ME/CFS patients; only sleep duration, being significantly shorter in post-COVID-19 fatigue patients (p = 0.003), seemed clinically relevant (d = 0.58). CONCLUSION: Insomnia severity and prevalence of clinical insomnia are high in patients with post-COVID-19 fatigue. Insomnia should be assessed and if present treated with insomnia focused therapy.

Randomized controlled trial of an individual blended cognitive behavioral therapy to reduce psychological distress among distressed colorectal cancer survivors: The COloRectal canceR distrEss reduCTion trial.

OBJECTIVE: Colorectal cancer survivors (CRCS) often experience high levels of distress. The objective of this randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the effect of blended cognitive behavior therapy (bCBT) on distress severity among distressed CRCS. METHODS: CRCS (targeted N = 160) with high distress (Distress Thermometer ≥5) between 6 months and 5 years post cancer treatment were randomly allocated (1:1 ratio) to receive bCBT, (14 weeks including five face-to-face, and three telephone sessions and access to interactive website), or care as usual (CAU). Participants completed questionnaires at baseline (T0), four (T1) and 7 months later (T2). Intervention participants completed bCBT between T0 and T1. The primary outcome analyzed in the intention-to-treat population was distress severity (Brief Symptom Inventory; BSI-18) immediately post-intervention (T1). RESULTS: 84 participants were randomized to bCBT (n = 41) or CAU (n = 43). In intention-to-treat analysis, the intervention significantly reduced distress immediately post-intervention (-3.86 points, 95% CI -7.00 to -0.73) and at 7 months post-randomization (-3.88 points, 95% CI -6.95 to -0.80) for intervention compared to CAU. Among secondary outcomes, at both time points, depression symptoms, anxiety symptoms, cancer worry, and cancer-specific distress were significantly lower in the intervention arm. Self-efficacy scores were significantly higher. Overall treatment satisfaction was high (7.4/10, N = 36) and 94% of participants would recommend the intervention to other colorectal cancer patients. CONCLUSIONS: The blended COloRectal canceR distrEss reduCTion intervention seems an efficacious psychological intervention to reduce distress severity in distressed CRCS. Yet uncertainty remains about effectiveness because fewer participants than targeted were included in this trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NTR6025.

Which symptom to address in psychological treatment for cancer survivors when fear of cancer recurrence, depressive symptoms, and cancer-related fatigue co-occur? Exploring the level of agreement between three systematic approaches to select the focus of treatment.

PURPOSE: To investigate the extent to which three systematic approaches for prioritizing symptoms lead to similar treatment advices in cancer survivors with co-occurring fear of cancer recurrence, depressive symptoms, and/or cancer-related fatigue. METHODS: Psychological treatment advices were was based on three approaches: patient preference, symptom severity, and temporal precedence of symptoms based on ecological momentary assessments. The level of agreement was calculated according to the Kappa statistic. RESULTS: Overall, we found limited agreement between the three approaches. Pairwise comparison showed moderate agreement between patient preference and symptom severity. Most patients preferred treatment for fatigue. Treatment for fear of cancer recurrence was mostly indicated when based on symptom severity. Agreement between temporal precedence and the other approaches was slight. A clear treatment advice based on temporal precedence was possible in 57% of cases. In cases where it was possible, all symptoms were about equally likely to be indicated. CONCLUSIONS: The three approaches lead to different treatment advices. Future research should determine how the approaches are related to treatment outcome. We propose to discuss the results of each approach in a shared decision-making process to make a well-informed and personalized decision with regard to which symptom to target in psychological treatment. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: This study contributes to the development of systematic approaches for selecting the focus of psychological treatment in cancer survivors with co-occurring symptoms by providing and comparing three different systematic approaches for prioritizing symptoms.

Reasons for non-participation in a psychological intervention trial for distress in colorectal cancer survivors.

OBJECTIVE: High psychological distress is reported by one third of colorectal cancer survivors (CRCS). However, intervention studies for CRCS have reported low participation rates. In this study, reasons for non-participation and low uptake in a psychological intervention trial were investigated. METHODS: CRCS were recruited for a randomized clinical trial on the efficacy of blended cognitive behavior therapy for psychological distress via databases, follow-up consultations, advertisements and an ongoing population-based study. The recruitment flow and reasons for non-participation were analyzed for patients recruited between 2016 and 2020. Subgroups were compared based on demographic, clinical and screening data. High distress as study entry criterion was measured with the Distress Thermometer (DT ≥ 5) and the problem list (PL). RESULTS: From all recruitment methods together, 1326 CRCS responded to the invitation letter of whom 510 (38%) were interested in receiving a screening questionnaire. Interested CRCS were significantly younger than non-interested CRCS (p < 0.001). Most non-interested CRCS reported having no complaints. Of interested CRCS, 448 (88%) completed screening with the DT of which 213 (48%) CRCS scored above the DT cutoff for high distress. The majority expressed no need for help resulting in 84 (4% of eligible) CRCS included in the trial. Younger age, shorter time since diagnosis and more problems on the PL were positively related to participation. CONCLUSIONS: In this study a low participation rate was found. However, patients with high distress and most in need for help were included in the trial. For future research it is recommended to perform pilot- and feasibility studies to optimize recruitment.

Clinical judgment of the need for professional mental health care in patients with cancer: a qualitative study among oncologists and nurses.

PURPOSE: In daily practice, oncologists and nurses frequently need to decide whether or not to refer a patient for professional mental health care. We explored the indicators oncologists and nurses use to judge the need for professional mental health care in patients with cancer. METHODS: In a qualitative study, oncologists (n = 8) and nurses (n = 6) were each asked to select patients who were or were not referred for professional mental health care (total n = 75). During a semi-structured interview, they reflected on their decision concerning the possible referral of the patient. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Respondents reported using a strategy when judging whether professional mental health care was needed. They allowed patients time to adjust, while monitoring patients' psychological well-being, especially if patients exhibited specific risk factors. Risk and protective factors for emotional problems included personal, social, and disease- and treatment-related factors. Respondents considered referral for professional mental health care when they noted specific indicators of emotional problems. These indicators included lingering or increasing emotions, a disproportionate intensity of emotions, and emotions with a negative impact on a patient's daily life or treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified the strategy, risk and protective factors, and the indicators of emotional problems used by oncologists and nurses when judging the need for professional mental health care in patients with cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Oncologists and nurses can play an important role in the identification of patients in need of professional mental health care.

TIMELAPSE study-efficacy of low-dose amitriptyline versus cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic insomnia in patients with medical comorbidity: study protocol of a randomized controlled multicenter non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Insomnia is common in people with long-term medical conditions and is related to increased mortality and morbidity. Cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) is first choice treatment and effective for people with insomnia and comorbid long-term medical conditions. However, CBT-I has some limitations as it might not always be available or appeal to patients with medical conditions. Furthermore, a small proportion of patients do not respond to CBT-I. Preliminary evidence and clinical experience suggest that low-dose amitriptyline (AM) might be an effective alternative to treat insomnia in patients with medical comorbidity. In this randomized controlled trial, we will determine whether AM is non-inferior to the first choice treatment for insomnia, CBT-I. METHODS/DESIGN: This study will test if treatment with low-dose amitriptyline for insomnia in patients with medical comorbidity is non-inferior to CBT-I in a multicenter randomized controlled non-inferiority trial. Participants will be 190 adults with a long-term medical condition and insomnia. Participants will be randomly allocated to one of two intervention arms: 12 weeks AM (starting with 10 mg per day, and if ineffective at 3 weeks, doubling this dose) or 12 weeks of CBT-I consisting of 6 weekly sessions and a follow-up session 6 weeks later. The primary outcome is subjective insomnia severity, measured with the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI). The primary endpoint is at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes include sleep quality (e.g., sleep efficiency), questionnaires on daytime functioning (physical functioning and impairment of functioning), and symptoms (e.g., fatigue, pain, anxiety) at 12 weeks and 12 months post treatment and relapse of insomnia until 12 months after treatment. DISCUSSION: Irrespective of the outcome, this study will be a much-needed contribution to evidence based clinical guidelines on the treatment of insomnia in patients with medical comorbidity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register NTR NL7971 . Registered on 18 August 2019.

Personalized versus standard cognitive behavioral therapy for fear of cancer recurrence, depressive symptoms or cancer-related fatigue in cancer survivors: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial (MATCH-study).

BACKGROUND: Fear of cancer recurrence, depressive symptoms, and cancer-related fatigue are prevalent symptoms among cancer survivors, adversely affecting patients' quality of life and daily functioning. Effect sizes of interventions targeting these symptoms are mostly small to medium. Personalizing treatment is assumed to improve efficacy. However, thus far the empirical support for this approach is lacking. The aim of this study is to investigate if systematically personalized cognitive behavioral therapy is more efficacious than standard cognitive behavioral therapy in cancer survivors with moderate to severe fear of cancer recurrence, depressive symptoms, and/or cancer-related fatigue. METHODS: The study is designed as a non-blinded, multicenter randomized controlled trial with two treatment arms (ratio 1:1): (a) systematically personalized cognitive behavioral therapy and (b) standard cognitive behavioral therapy. In the standard treatment arm, patients receive an evidence-based diagnosis-specific treatment protocol for fear of cancer recurrence, depressive symptoms, or cancer-related fatigue. In the second arm, treatment is personalized on four dimensions: (a) the allocation of treatment modules based on ecological momentary assessments, (b) treatment delivery, (c) patients' needs regarding the symptom for which they want to receive treatment, and (d) treatment duration. In total, 190 cancer survivors who experience one or more of the targeted symptoms and ended their medical treatment with curative intent at least 6 months to a maximum of 5 years ago will be included. Primary outcome is limitations in daily functioning. Secondary outcomes are level of fear of cancer recurrence, depressive symptoms, fatigue severity, quality of life, goal attainment, therapist time, and drop-out rates. Participants are assessed at baseline (T0), and after 6 months (T1) and 12 months (T2). DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this is the first randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy of personalized cognitive behavioral therapy to standard cognitive behavioral therapy in cancer survivors. The study has several innovative characteristics, among which is the personalization of interventions on several dimensions. If proven effective, the results of this study provide a first step in developing an evidence-based framework for personalizing therapies in a systematic and replicable way. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Dutch Trial Register (NTR) NL7481 (NTR7723). Registered on 24 January 2019.

Fatigue in patients with chronic disease: results from the population-based Lifelines Cohort Study.

(1) To evaluate the prevalence of severe and chronic fatigue in subjects with and without chronic disease; (2) to assess to which extent multi-morbidity contributes to severe and chronic fatigue; and (3) to identify predisposing and associated factors for severe and chronic fatigue and whether these are disease-specific, trans-diagnostic, or generic. The Dutch Lifelines cohort was used, including 78,363 subjects with (n = 31,039, 53 ± 12 years, 33% male) and without (n = 47,324, 48 ± 12 years, 46% male) ≥ 1 of 23 chronic diseases. Fatigue was assessed with the Checklist Individual Strength-Fatigue. Compared to participants without a chronic disease, a higher proportion of participants with ≥ 1 chronic disease were severely (23% versus 15%, p < 0.001) and chronically (17% versus 10%, p < 0.001) fatigued. The odds of having severe fatigue (OR [95% CI]) increased from 1.6 [1.5-1.7] with one chronic disease to 5.5 [4.5-6.7] with four chronic diseases; for chronic fatigue from 1.5 [1.5-1.6] to 4.9 [3.9-6.1]. Multiple trans-diagnostic predisposing and associated factors of fatigue were found, explaining 26% of variance in fatigue in chronic disease. Severe and chronic fatigue are highly prevalent in chronic diseases. Multi-morbidity increases the odds of having severe and chronic fatigue. Several trans-diagnostic factors were associated with fatigue, providing a rationale for a trans-diagnostic approach.

Personalizing cognitive behavioral therapy for cancer-related fatigue using ecological momentary assessments followed by automated individual time series analyses: A case report series.

INTRODUCTION: A common approach to personalizing psychological interventions is the allocation of treatment modules to individual patients based on cut-off scores on questionnaires, which are mostly based on group studies. However, this way, intraindividual variation and temporal dynamics are not taken into account. Automated individual time series analyses are a possible solution, since these can identify the factors influencing the targeted symptom in a specific individual, and associated modules can be allocated accordingly. The aim of this study was to illustrate how automated individual time series analyses can be applied to personalize cognitive behavioral therapy for cancer-related fatigue in cancer survivors and how this procedure differs from allocating modules based on questionnaires. METHODS: This study was a case report series (n = 3). Patients completed ecological momentary assessments at the start of therapy, and after three treatment modules (approximately 14 weeks). Assessments were analyzed with AutoVAR, an R package that automates the process of finding optimal vector autoregressive models. The results informed the treatment plan. RESULTS: Three cases were described. From the ecological momentary assessments and automated time series analyses three individual treatment plans were constructed, in which the most important predictor for cancer-related fatigue was treated first. For two patients, this led to the treatment ending after the follow-up ecological momentary assessments. One patient continued treatment until six months, the standard treatment time in regular treatment. All three treatment plans differed from the treatment plans informed by questionnaire scores. DISCUSSION: This study is one of the first to apply time series analyses in systematically personalizing psychological treatment. An important strength of this approach is that it can be used for every modular cognitive behavioral intervention where each treatment module addresses specific maintaining factors. Whether or not personalized CBT is more efficacious than standard, non-personalized CBT remains to be determined in controlled studies comparing it to usual care.

Clinical management of emotions in patients with cancer: introducing the approach "emotional support and case finding".

The current approach to the management of emotions in patients with cancer is "distress screening and referral for the provision of psychosocial care." Although this approach may have certain beneficial effects, screening and referral programs have shown a limited effect on patient psychological well-being. We argue that this limited effect is due to a mismatch between patient needs and the provision of care, and that a fundamental reconceptualization of the clinical management of emotions in patients with cancer is needed. We describe the rationale and characteristics of "emotional support and case finding" as the approach to the management of emotions in patients with cancer. The two main principles of the approach are: (1) Emotional support: (a) The treating team, consisting of doctors, nurses, and allied health staff, is responsive to the emotional needs of patients with cancer and provides emotional support. (b) The treating team provides information on external sources of emotional support. (2) Case finding: The treating team identifies patients in need of mental health care by means of case finding, and provides a referral to mental health care as indicated. We present a novel perspective on how to organize the clinical management of emotions in patients with cancer. This is intended to contribute to a fruitful discussion and to inform an innovative research agenda on how to manage emotions in patients with cancer.

Self-Reported Sexual Function in Sexually Active Male Hodgkin Lymphoma Survivors.

INTRODUCTION: Unambiguous data on sexual dysfunction after Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) treatment are scarce. AIMS: To form a baseline in this area, we compared patient-reported sexual function in sexually active male HL survivors in complete remission with a sexually active, age-matched, male Dutch sample population. Furthermore, we explored whether sociodemographic and clinical factors were associated with sexual dysfunction in HL survivors and investigated whether reporting to perceive sexual problems was indicative for sexual dysfunction. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included male patients with HL who were treated with chemotherapy and age-matched sexually active males. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcome measures included the internationally validated International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) and self-reported sexual problems by adding 3 items to the study-specific questionnaire. RESULTS: Erectile dysfunction (ED) occurred in 23.3% of the HL survivors vs in 23.0% of controls: respectively 13.3% and 12.3% had moderate to severe ED. However, more HL survivors positively answered the question whether they did perceive sexual problems than controls (20.0% vs 7.0%; P = .087). More patients treated with bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procabazine, and prednisone (BEACOPP) had sexual problems 33.3% vs 8.3% who were treated with doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (P = .057). Importantly, we found that the mean IIEF score for erectile function was 15.7 in HL survivors who reported to perceive sexual problems (moderate ED) vs 28.3 (normal) in those without perceiving sexual problems. CONCLUSION: In general, sexual function of male HL survivors is comparable to that of matched normal controls. Perceiving sexual problems was associated with lower sexual function measured by the IIEF. None of the HL survivors who were treated with doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine perceived sexual problems. However, one-third of HL survivors who were treated with BEACOPP did, including ED in one-third of the cases. This is an important consideration for daily clinical practice as BEACOPP is increasingly used as standard therapy in advanced-stage HL. Eeltink CM, Lissenberg-Witte BI, Incrocci L, et al. Self-Reported Sexual Function in Sexually Active Male Hodgkin Lymphoma Survivors. Sex Med 2020;8:428-435.

Economic evaluation of a combined screening and stepped-care treatment program targeting psychological distress in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: A cluster randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Psychological distress is highly prevalent among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. AIMS: To perform an economic evaluation of a combined screening and treatment program targeting psychological distress in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer in comparison with usual care. DESIGN: Societal costs were collected alongside a cluster randomized controlled trial for 48 weeks. A total of 349 participants were included. SETTING: Participants were recruited from oncology departments at 16 participating hospitals in the Netherlands. METHODS: Outcome measures were the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and quality-adjusted life-years. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation. Uncertainty was estimated using bootstrapping. Cost-effectiveness planes and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were estimated to show uncertainty surrounding the cost-effectiveness estimates. Sensitivity analyses were performed to check robustness of results. RESULTS: Between treatment arms, no significant differences were found in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale score (mean difference: -0.058; 95% confidence interval: -0.13 to 0.011), quality-adjusted life-years (mean difference: 0.042; 95% confidence interval: -0.015 to 0.099), and societal costs (mean difference: -1152; 95% confidence interval: -5058 to 2214). Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves showed that the probability of cost-effectiveness was 0.64 and 0.74 at willingness-to-pay values of €0 and €10,000 per point improvement on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, respectively. The probability that the intervention was cost-effective compared to usual care for quality-adjusted life-years was 0.64 and 0.79 at willingness-to-pay values of €0 and €20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year, respectively. CONCLUSION: The intervention is dominant over usual care, primarily due to lower costs in the intervention group. However, there were no statistically significant differences in clinical effects and the uptake of the intervention was quite low. Therefore, widespread implementation cannot be recommended.

Clinical assessment of emotions in patients with cancer: Diagnostic accuracy compared with two reference standards.

BACKGROUND: Previous research has suggested that clinical assessment of emotions in patients with cancer is suboptimal. However, it is a possibility that well-trained and experienced doctors and nurses do recognize emotions but that they do not evaluate all emotions as necessitating professional mental health care. This implies that the sensitivity of clinical assessment should be tested against the need for professional mental health care as reference standard, instead of emotional distress. We hypothesized that the observed sensitivity of clinical assessment of emotions would be higher when tested against need for professional mental health care as reference standard, compared with emotional distress as reference standard. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A consecutive series of patients starting with chemotherapy were recruited during their routine clinical care, at a department of medical oncology. Clinical assessment of emotions by medical oncologists and nurses was derived from the patient file. Emotional distress and need for professional mental health care were assessed using the Distress Thermometer and Problem List. RESULTS: Clinical assessment resulted in notes on emotions in 42.2% of the patient files with 36.2% of patients experiencing emotional distress and 10.8% expressing a need for professional mental health care (N = 185). As expected, the sensitivity of clinical assessment of emotions was higher with the reference standard "need for professional mental health care" compared with "emotional distress" (P < .001). For specificity, equivalent results were obtained with the two reference standards (P = .63). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical assessment of emotions in patients with cancer may be more accurate than previously concluded.

Screening and Stepped Care Targeting Psychological Distress in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The TES Cluster Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the effectiveness of a screening and stepped care program (the TES program) in reducing psychological distress compared with care as usual (CAU) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer starting with first-line systemic palliative treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this cluster randomized trial, 16 hospitals were assigned to the TES program or CAU. Patients in the TES arm were screened for psychological distress with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and the Distress Thermometer/Problem List (at baseline and 10 and 18 weeks). Stepped care was offered to patients with distress or expressed needs, and it consisted of watchful waiting, guided self-help, face-to-face problem-solving therapy, or referral to specialized mental healthcare. The primary outcome was change in psychological distress over time, and secondary outcomes were quality of life, satisfaction with care, and recognition and referral of distressed patients by clinicians. Linear mixed models and effect sizes were used to evaluate differences. RESULTS: A total of 349 patients were randomized; 184 received the TES program and 165 received CAU. In the TES arm, 60.3% of the patients screened positive for psychological distress, 26.1% of which entered the stepped care program (14.7% used only watchful waiting and 11.4% used at least one of the other treatment steps). The observed low use of the TES program led us to pursue a futility analysis, which showed a small conditional power and therefore resulted in halted recruitment for this study. No difference was seen in change in psychological distress over time between the 2 groups (effect size, -0.16; 95% CI, -0.35 to 0.03; P>.05). The TES group reported higher satisfaction with the received treatment and better cognitive quality of life (all P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: As a result of the low use of stepped care, a combined screening and treatment program targeting psychological distress in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer did not improve psychological distress. Our results suggest that enhanced evaluation of psychosocial concerns may improve aspects of patient well-being.

Predictors for use of psychosocial services in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving first line systemic treatment.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced disease experience high levels of psychological distress, yet there is low uptake of psychosocial services offered to patients who screened positive for distress. In this study we aimed to identify predictors for use of psychosocial services in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) receiving first line chemotherapy enrolled in a prospective cluster randomized trial (CRT). METHODS: Patients completed measures on psychological distress, physical distress, and quality of life at baseline. Demographics, clinical characteristics at baseline and clinical events during treatment (e.g. severe adverse events, clinical benefit) were extracted from patient records. Patients reported psychosocial service utilization in- and outside the hospital after 10, 24 and 48 weeks of treatment. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify predictors for the use of psychosocial services. RESULTS: Out of 349 patients, seventy patients (20.0%) used psychosocial support services during the follow-up period. Use of psychosocial services was associated with younger age, a higher educational level, presence of more pain (at baseline), and the expressed need to talk to a professional (at baseline). In addition, patients without progressive disease within the first ten weeks of treatment were more likely to use psychosocial services . CONCLUSIONS: One in five patients with mCRC receiving first line palliative treatment used psychosocial services during this prospective longitudinal CRT. Sociodemographic factors (age, education), clinical factors (pain and no progressive disease) and the expressed need to talk to a professional predicted use of psychosocial services. Identification of these predictors may contribute to the understanding of factors that determine the need for psychosocial services. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NTR4034 .

Impact of Patient- and Clinician-Reported Cumulative Toxicity on Quality of Life in Patients With Metastatic Castration-Naïve Prostate Cancer.

Background: Current toxicity evaluation is primarily focused on high-grade adverse events (AEs) reported by clinicians. However, the cumulative effect of multiple lower-grade AEs may also impact patients' quality of life (QoL). Further, patient-reported toxicity may be more representative of patients' treatment experiences. This study aimed to determine whether cumulative toxicity comprising all-grade AEs is more associated with QoL than cumulative toxicity comprising high-grade AEs only, and whether patient-reported cumulative toxicity is more associated with QoL than clinician-reported cumulative toxicity. Methods: Patients with metastatic castration-naïve prostate cancer participating in the phase III GETUG-AFU 15 trial completed questionnaires on AEs (at 3 and 6 months) and QoL (at baseline and 3 and 6 months). Clinicians reported AEs during clinical visits. Cumulative toxicity scores were calculated for clinicians and patients in 3 ways: total number of high-grade AEs, total number of all-grade AEs, and total number of all AEs multiplied by their grade (severity score). Relationships between cumulative toxicity scores and QoL were studied using longitudinal regression analyses; unstandardized (B) and standardized regression coefficients (ß) are reported. Results: Of 385 patients, 184 with complete QoL and toxicity data were included. Clinician-reported all-grade AEs (B, -2.2; 95% CI, -3.3 to -1.1; P<.01) and severity score (B, -1.4; 95% CI, -2.2 to -0.7; P<.01) were associated with deteriorated physical QoL, whereas the total number of high-grade AEs was not. All patient-reported scores were significantly (P<.01 for all) associated with deteriorated physical and global QoL. Standardized regression coefficients indicated that patient-reported toxicity scores were more associated with QoL outcomes than clinician-reported scores, with the strongest association found for the all-grade AEs and severity cumulative toxicity scores. Conclusions: Patient- and clinician-based cumulative toxicity scores comprising all-grade AEs better reflect impact on patient QoL than toxicity scores comprising high-grade AEs only. To assess the effect of toxicity on QoL, patient-reported cumulative toxicity scores are preferred.

Screening for sexual dissatisfaction among people with type 2 diabetes in primary care.

AIMS: The identification and discussion of sexual care needs in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in primary care is currently insufficient. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of sexual dissatisfaction, sexual problems and need for help by using a screening instrument among people with T2DM in primary care. METHODS: Data were collected in 45 general practices in the Netherlands from January 2015 to February 2016. The Brief Sexual Symptom Checklist (BSSC) was used to screen among 40-75 year old men and women. RESULTS: In total, 786 people with T2DM (66.5% men) were screened. The prevalence of sexual dissatisfaction was 36.6%, significantly higher among men than among women (41.1% vs. 27.8%). Sexually dissatisfied men most often reported erectile dysfunction (71.6%); for sexually dissatisfied women, low sexual desire (52.8%) and lubrication problems (45.8%) were most common. More than half of all dissatisfied people had a need for care (61.8%), significantly more men than women (66.8% vs. 47.2%). CONCLUSIONS: One third of people with T2DM is sexually dissatisfied and more than half of these people report a need for help. The BSSC could be used a tool to proactively identify sexually dissatisfied people in primary care.