Randomized controlled trial of collaborative care management of depression among low-income patients with cancer.

School of Social Work and Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0411, USA.
Journal of Clinical Oncology (Impact Factor: 17.88). 10/2008; 26(27):4488-96. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2008.16.6371
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To determine the effectiveness of the Alleviating Depression Among Patients With Cancer (ADAPt-C) collaborative care management for major depression or dysthymia.
Study patients included 472 low-income, predominantly female Hispanic patients with cancer age >or= 18 years with major depression (49%), dysthymia (5%), or both (46%). Patients were randomly assigned to intervention (n = 242) or enhanced usual care (EUC; n = 230). Intervention patients had access for up to 12 months to a depression clinical specialist (supervised by a psychiatrist) who offered education, structured psychotherapy, and maintenance/relapse prevention support. The psychiatrist prescribed antidepressant medications for patients preferring or assessed to require medication.
At 12 months, 63% of intervention patients had a 50% or greater reduction in depressive symptoms from baseline as assessed by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) depression scale compared with 50% of EUC patients (odds ratio [OR] = 1.98; 95% CI, 1.16 to 3.38; P = .01). Improvement was also found for 5-point decrease in PHQ-9 score among 72.2% of intervention patients compared with 59.7% of EUC patients (OR = 1.99; 95% CI, 1.14 to 3.50; P = .02). Intervention patients also experienced greater rates of depression treatment (72.3% v 10.4% of EUC patients; P < .0001) and significantly better quality-of-life outcomes, including social/family (adjusted mean difference between groups, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.22 to 4.17; P < .001), emotional (adjusted mean difference, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.26 to 2.22; P = .01), functional (adjusted mean difference, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.08 to 2.59; P = .04), and physical well-being (adjusted mean difference, 2.79; 95% CI, 0.49 to 5.1; P = .02).
ADAPt-C collaborative care is feasible and results in significant reduction in depressive symptoms, improvement in quality of life, and lower pain levels compared with EUC for patients with depressive disorders in a low-income, predominantly Hispanic population in public sector oncology clinics.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The collaborative care model is a systematic approach to the treatment of depression and anxiety in primary care settings that involves the integration of care managers and consultant psychiatrists, with primary care physician oversight, to more proactively manage mental disorders as chronic diseases, rather than treating acute symptoms. While collaborative care has been shown to be more effective than usual primary care in improving depression outcomes in a number of studies, less is known about the factors that support the translation of this evidence-based intervention to real-world program implementation. The purpose of this case study was to examine the implementation of a collaborative care model in a community based primary care clinic that primarily serves a low-income, uninsured Latino population, in order to better understand the interdisciplinary relationships and the specific elements that might facilitate broader implementation.
    Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare 01/2014; 7:503-13.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND Young adult female cancer survivors have unmet reproductive concerns and informational needs that are associated with poorer quality of life. The purpose of this study was to examine the association between current reproductive concerns and moderate to severe depression among young survivors.METHODS This cross-sectional study included 200 female cancer survivors between the ages of 18 and 35 years who completed a Web-based survey measuring reproductive history, parenthood desires, reproductive concerns after cancer, and quality-of-life indicators.RESULTSThe mean age of the participants was 28 years (standard deviation, 4.4 years), and almost two-thirds were diagnosed within 5 years of survey completion. A multivariate logistic regression analysis controlling for education, duration of survivorship, and social support revealed an association between experiencing reproductive concerns and moderate to severe depression (odds ratio for each 5-unit increase in the Reproductive Concerns After Cancer [RCAC] score, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.60). Among those with moderate to severe depression, 23% had high RCAC scores, whereas 6% of those with minimal to mild depression did (P < .001).CONCLUSIONSA higher level of reproductive concerns was associated with greater odds of experiencing moderate to severe depression. Almost a quarter of survivors in this sample reported moderate to severe depression, and addressing reproductive concerns represents one potential area of intervention for improving the psychosocial health of young survivors. Cancer 2014. © 2014 American Cancer Society.
    Cancer 11/2014; · 5.20 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background The management of depression in patients with poor prognosis cancers, such as lung cancer, creates specific challenges. We aimed to assess the efficacy of an integrated treatment programme for major depression in patients with lung cancer compared with usual care. Methods Symptom Management Research Trials (SMaRT) Oncology-3 is a parallel-group, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. We enrolled patients with lung cancer and major depression from three cancer centres and their associated clinics in Scotland, UK. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the depression care for people with lung cancer treatment programme or usual care by a database software algorithm that used stratification (by trial centre) and minimisation (by age, sex, and cancer type) with allocation concealment. Depression care for people with lung cancer is a manualised, multicomponent collaborative care treatment that is systematically delivered by a team of cancer nurses and psychiatrists in collaboration with primary care physicians. Usual care is provided by primary care physicians. The primary outcome was depression severity (on the Symptom Checklist Depression Scale [SCL-20], range 0–4) averaged over the patient's time in the trial (up to a maximum of 32 weeks). Trial statisticians and data collection staff were masked to treatment allocation, but patients and clinicians could not be masked to the allocations. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN75905964. Findings 142 participants were recruited between Jan 5, 2009, and Sept 9, 2011; 68 were randomly allocated to depression care for people with lung cancer and 74 to usual care. 43 (30%) of 142 patients had died by 32 weeks, all of which were cancer-related deaths. No intervention-related serious adverse events occurred. 131 (92%) of 142 patients provided outcome data (59 in the depression care for people with lung cancer group and 72 in the usual care group) and were included in the intention-to-treat primary analysis. Average depression severity was significantly lower in patients allocated to depression care for people with lung cancer (mean score on the SCL-20 1·24 [SD 0·64]) than in those allocated to usual care (mean score 1·61 [SD 0·58]); difference −0·38 (95% CI −0·58 to −0·18); standardised mean difference −0·62 (95% CI −0·94 to −0·29). Self-rated depression improvement, anxiety, quality of life, role functioning, perceived quality of care, and proportion of patients achieving a 12-week treatment response were also significantly better in the depression care for people with lung cancer group than in the usual care group. Interpretation Our findings suggest that major depression can be treated effectively in patients with a poor prognosis cancer; integrated depression care for people with lung cancer was substantially more efficacious than was usual care. Larger trials are now needed to estimate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of this care programme in this patient population, and further adaptation of the treatment will be necessary to address the unmet needs of patients with major depression and even shorter life expectancy. Funding Cancer Research UK and Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government.
    The Lancet Oncology 09/2014; · 24.73 Impact Factor


Available from
May 28, 2014