The Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) and a single screening question as screening tools for depressive disorder in Dutch advanced cancer patients

Item does not contain fulltextPURPOSE: Depression is highly prevalent in advanced cancer patients, but the diagnosis of depressive disorder in patients with advanced cancer is difficult. Screening instruments could facilitate diagnosing depressive disorder in patients with advanced cancer. The aim of this study was to determine the validity of the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) and a single screening question as screening tools for depressive disorder in advanced cancer patients. METHODS: Patients with advanced metastatic disease, visiting the outpatient palliative care department, were asked to fill out a self-questionnaire containing the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) and a single screening question "Are you feeling depressed?" The mood section of the PRIME-MD was used as a gold standard. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients with advanced metastatic disease were eligible to be included in the study. Complete data were obtained from 46 patients. The area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristics analysis of the BDI-II was 0.82. The optimal cut-off point of the BDI-II was 16 with a sensitivity of 90% and a specificity of 69%. The single screening question showed a sensitivity of 50% and a specificity of 94%. CONCLUSIONS: The BDI-II seems an adequate screening tool for a depressive disorder in advanced cancer patients. The sensitivity of a single screening question is poor.1 februari 201

Epidemiologic heterogeneity of common mood and anxiety disorders over the lifecourse in the general population: a systematic review

Background Clinical evidence has long suggested there may be heterogeneity in the patterns and predictors of common mood and anxiety disorders; however, epidemiologic studies have generally treated these outcomes as homogenous entities. The objective of this study was to systematically review the epidemiologic evidence for potential patterns of heterogeneity of common mood and anxiety disorders over the lifecourse in the general population. Methods We reviewed epidemiologic studies examining heterogeneity in either the nature of symptoms experienced ( symptom syndromes ) or in patterns of symptoms over time ( symptom trajectories ). To be included, studies of syndromes were required to identify distinct symptom subtypes, and studies of trajectories were required to identify distinct longitudinal patterns of symptoms in at least three waves of follow-up. Studies based on clinical or patient populations were excluded. Results While research in this field is in its infancy, we found growing evidence that, not only can mood and anxiety disorders be differentiated by symptom syndromes and trajectories, but that the factors associated with these disorders may vary between these subtypes. Whether this reflects a causal pathway, where genetic or environmental factors influence the nature of the symptom or trajectory subtype experienced by an individual, or whether individuals with different subtypes differed in their susceptibility to different environmental factors, could not be determined. Few studies addressed issues of comorbidity or transitions in symptoms between common disorders. Conclusion Understanding the diversity of these conditions may help us identify preventable factors that are only associated with some subtypes of these common disorders

Consensus guidelines for the use and interpretation of angiogenesis assays

The formation of new blood vessels, or angiogenesis, is a complex process that plays important roles in growth and development, tissue and organ regeneration, as well as numerous pathological conditions. Angiogenesis undergoes multiple discrete steps that can be individually evaluated and quantified by a large number of bioassays. These independent assessments hold advantages but also have limitations. This article describes in vivo, ex vivo, and in vitro bioassays that are available for the evaluation of angiogenesis and highlights critical aspects that are relevant for their execution and proper interpretation. As such, this collaborative work is the first edition of consensus guidelines on angiogenesis bioassays to serve for current and future reference

Induction therapy with a combination of DMARDs is better than methotrexate monotherapy: first results of the tREACH trial

Objective To determine the most effective induction disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) strategy in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA), second to compare one single dose of intramuscular glucocorticoids (GCs) with daily oral GCs during the induction phase. Methods The 3-month data of a single-blinded clinical trial in patients with recent-onset arthritis (tREACH) were used. Patients were included who had a high probability (>70%) of progressing to persistent arthritis, based on the prediction model of Visser. Patients were randomised into three induction therapy strategies: (A) combination therapy (methotrexate (MTX) + sulfasalazine + hydroxychloroquine) with GCs intramuscularly; (B) combination therapy with an oral GC tapering scheme and (C) MTX Results The Disease Activity Score (DAS) after 3 months was lower in patients receiving initial combination therapy than in those receiving MTX monotherapy (0.39 (0.67 to 0.11, 95% CI)). DAS did not differ between the different GC bridging treatments. After 3 months 50% fewer biological agents were prescribed in the combination therapy groups. Although the proportion of patients with medication adjustments differed significantly between the treatment arms, no differences were seen in these adjus Conclusion Triple DMARD induction therapy is better than MTX monotherapy in early RA. Furthermore, no differences were seen in medication adjustments due to adverse events after stratification for drug. Intramuscular and oral GCs are equally effective as bridging treatments and both can be used