Prevalence of depression in patients with cancer in Iran: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
pp. bmjspcare-2018-001724 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aidin Aryankhesal ◽  
Ahmad Ghashghaee ◽  
Elnaz Sardari ◽  
Sara Mahmoudi ◽  
Samira Alihosseini ◽  
...  

IntroductionIt is generally accepted that depression, affecting the quality of life, is a serious and common complication in patients with cancer. Given that there is no integrated study on this topic in Iran, the present study sought to investigate the prevalence of depression in patients with cancer by a systematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsTo meet the study objectives, all English and Persian papers published from 2000 to January 2018 were systematically collected and the data were extracted for analysis.ResultsThere were 14 studies which were selected on the basis of the inclusion and exclusion criteria. A total number of 2831 patients with cancer had participated in the studies. The prevalence of depression among Iranian patients with cancer was 35% (95% CI 16% to 70%) based on random effects model. Among various types of cancer, the highest prevalence of depression appeared to patients suffering from breast cancer.ConclusionThe prevalence of depression among patients with cancer in Iran was higher than the developed countries. As depression affects the quality of life of patients with cancer, the results can help policymakers and service providers in planning to reduce the prevalence of depression.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Margareta Pertl ◽  
Perez ◽  
Sonya Collier ◽  
Emer Guinan ◽  
Garret Monahan ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Depression is common among patients with cancer and is associated with lower treatment participation, lower satisfaction with care, poorer quality of life, greater symptom burden, and higher healthcare costs. Various types of interventions (e.g., pharmacological, psychotherapy) are used for the treatment of depression. However, evidence for these among patients with cancer is limited. Furthermore, the relative effectiveness and acceptability of different approaches is unknown because a direct comparison between all available treatments has not been carried out. We will address this by conducting a network meta-analysis (NMA) of interventions for depression among people with cancer using a hybrid overview of reviews and systematic review methodology. Methods: We will search for and extract data from systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of depression interventions for patients with cancer from inception, before performing a supplemental search for more recent RCTs. We will include RCTs comparing pharmacological, psychotherapy, exercise, combination therapy, collaborative care, or complementary and alternative medicine interventions with pill placebo, no treatment, waitlist, treatment as usual, or minimal treatment control groups, or directly in head-to-head trials, among adults who have a current or previous diagnosis of cancer and elevated depressive symptoms (scores above a cut-off on validated scales or meeting diagnostic criteria). Our primary outcomes will be change in depressive symptoms (standardised mean difference) and intervention acceptability (% who withdrew). Our secondary outcomes will be 6-month change in depressive symptoms, health-related quality of life, adverse events and mortality. We will independently screen for eligibility, extract data, and assess risk of bias using the RoB2 tool. We will use frequentist random-effects multivariate NMA in Stata, Rankograms and surface under the cumulative ranking curves to synthesize evidence and obtain a ranking of intervention groups. We will explore heterogeneity and inconsistency using local and global measures and evaluate the credibility of results using the Confidence in NEtwork Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) framework.Discussion: Our findings will provide the best available evidence for managing depression among patients with cancer. Such information will help to inform clinical guidelines, evidence-based treatment decisions and future research by identifying gaps in the current literature. Systematic review registration: Submitted to PROSPERO (record number: 290145), awaiting registration


2021 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
pp. 101290
Author(s):  
Takuya Fukushima ◽  
Jiro Nakano ◽  
Kaori Hashizume ◽  
Kazumi Ueno ◽  
Emi Matsuura ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 12 (13) ◽  
pp. 1240-1248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Luckett ◽  
David Goldstein ◽  
Phyllis N Butow ◽  
Val Gebski ◽  
Lynley J Aldridge ◽  
...  

BMC Cancer ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Miao Wan ◽  
Xianggui Luo ◽  
Juan Wang ◽  
Louis. B Mvogo Ndzana ◽  
Chen Chang ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document