Comparison of the classification ratios of four depression rating scales commonly used in Turkey

Objective: According to literature more than 20 depression scales are in use in Turkey. Considering that depression is a popular area of study, it may not seem abnormally unusual that there are so many measuring scales available. However, so many measuring instruments may lead to a problem of different sensitivity levels and raise the question of whether or not all the instruments have the same sensitivity in measuring the particular entity. The purpose of this study is to compare the four commonly used self-report scales adapted into Turkish, namely CES-Depression Scale, Beck Depression Inventory, the Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale, and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (depression subscale) by cross-validation. Method: These depression scales had been applied to three hundred and forty-one subjects and total scores of the subjects for each scale have been obtained. Next, the sample group was divided into two according to group averages of total scale scores. Normative scores and cut-off scores have not been considered because the study objective was to compare these scales on a theoretical basis. The groups below and above average for each of the four scales have been compared by the ROC curve analyzes. Results: The results showed that the total score of Beck Depression Inventory had been grouped correctly by the Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale at a ratio of 0.871, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (depression subscale) at a ratio of 0.885, and by CES-Depression Scale at a ratio of 0.874. The total score of CES-Depression Scale had been correctly grouped by Beck Depression Inventory at a ratio of 0.871, the Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale at a ratio of 0.869, and by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (depression subscale) at a ratio of 0.862. The total score of the Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale has been correctly grouped by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale depression subscale at a ratio of 0.848, Beck Depression Inventory at a ratio of 0.872, and by CES-Depression Scale at a ratio of 0.878. The total score of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (depression subscale) has been correctly grouped by the Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale at a ratio of 0.848, Beck Depression Inventory at a ratio of 0.889, and by CES-Depression Scale at a ratio of 0.887. Conclusion: The overall results showed that the scales cross-validated with ratios ranging from 0.85 to 0.89. The classifying ratios obtained by ROC analysis were similar across four depression scales

Talactoferrin alfa versus placebo in patients with refractory advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (FORTIS-M trial)

Background: Talactoferrin alfa is an oral dendritic cell (DC)-mediated immunotherapy (DCMI). We tested whether talactoferrin was superior to placebo in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and methods: An FORTIS-M trial was an international, multicenter, randomized, double-blind comparison of talactoferrin (1.5 g p.o. BID) versus placebo BID, in patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC whose disease had failed two or more prior regimens. Treatment was administered for a maximum of five 14-week cycles. The primary efficacy end point was overall survival (OS); secondary end points included 6- and 12-month survival, progression-free survival (PFS), and disease control rate (DCR). Results: Seven hundred and forty-two patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to talactoferrin (497) or placebo (245). The median OS in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population was 7.66 months in the placebo arm and 7.49 months in the talactoferrin arm [hazard ratio (HR), 1.04; 95% CI, 0.873-1.24; P = 0.6602]. The 6-month survival rates were 59.9% (95% CI, 53.4% to 65.8%) and 55.7% (95% CI, 51.1% to 59.9%), respectively. The 12-month survival rates were 32.2% (95% CI, 26.3% to 38.2%) and 30.9% (95% CI, 26.8% to 35%), respectively. The median PFS rates were 1.64 months and 1.68 months, respectively (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.835-1.16; P = 0.8073). The DCRs were 38.4 and 37.6%, respectively [stratified odds ratio (OR), 0.96; 95% CI, 0.698-1.33; P = 0.8336]. The safety profiles were comparable between arms. Conclusions: There was no improvement in efficacy with talactoferrin alfa in patients with advanced NSCLC whose disease had failed two or more previous regimens. © The Author 2013. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology All rights reserved