Author, Year Country | Study Design and comparator group(s) | Study Aims | Primary outcome | Sample Size and % females | Mean Age (SD) | Cancer Type | Depression | Setting | Collaborative care protocol |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Dwight-Johnson [35] (2005) USA | Randomised pilot study comparing collaborative care intervention with usual care | Determine whether primary care collaborative depression be adapted and implemented in public sector oncology clinics serving low-income Latino patients | ≥50% improvement in depression score (PHQ9) at 8 months | 55 (100% female) | 47.2 (11.3) | Breast or cervical, mixed stage | MDD dysthymia or had persistent depressive symptoms at baseline & 1 month | Cancer centre | IMPACT |
Strong [36] (2008), Scotland | Single centre proof of concept RCT comparing collaborative care intervention with usual care | Investigate whether usual care plus depression care for people with cancer (intervention) could achieve a greater reduction in depressive symptoms at 3 months compared to usual care alone, and whether this would be sustained at 6 and 12 months. (SMART1) | self-reported depressive symptoms (SCL-20D) at 3 months | 200 (71% female) | 56.6 (11.8) | Heterogeneous stage not reported | MDD | Cancer care centre | Depression Care for People with Cancer |
Ell [37] (2008; 2011) USA | Single centre efficacy RCT comparing collaborative care intervention with Enhanced usual care (standard oncology care plus psycho-educational pamphlets; list of center/community financial, social services, transportation, and childcare resources) | Determine the effectiveness of the Alleviating Depression Among Patients With Cancer (ADAPt-C) collaborative care management for major depression or dysthymia | Treatment response at 12 months; defined as 50% or a 5-point reduction of PHQ-9 score | 472 (85% female) | TBC | Heterogeneous stage mixed | MDD or dysthymia | Cancer centre | IMPACT |
Fann [38] (2009 USA) | Multicentre RCT comparing collaborative care intervention with usual care | Examine the effectiveness of collaborative care (IMPACT) for depression in in older primary care patients | treatment response defined ≥50% reduction in SCL-20 score at 12 months | 215 (60% female) | 71.75 (0.5) | Mixed type and stage | MDD or dysthymia | Primary Care | IMPACT |
Kroenke [39] (2010) USA | RCT comparing collaborative care intervention with usual care | To determine whether centralized telephone-based care management coupled with automated symptom monitoring can improve depression and pain in patients with cancer. | Reduction of ≥50% in depression severity; (HSCL-20) at 12 months. | 405 (309 depression; 68% female) | 58.8 (10.8) | Mixed type and stage | depressed mood, anhedonia; or both. Moderately severe based on PHQ9 | Telephone | Study specific |
Sharpe [40] (2014) Scotland | multicentre effectiveness and cost effectiveness RCT comparing collaborative care intervention with usual care | Establish whether depression care for people with cancer (intervention) is better than usual care in achieving a clinically useful improvement in depression (SMART 2) | ‘treatment response’ measured at 24 weeks; defined as a reduction of ≥50% baseline depression score, measured via Symptom Checklist (SCL-20D) | 500 (90% female) | 56.3 (10.1) | Breast, gynaecological, genitourinary; ‘good prognosis’ | MDD | Cancer care centre or primary care clinic | Depression Care for People with Cancer |
Walker [33] (2014) Scotland | Multicentre efficacy RCT comparing collaborative care intervention with usual care | Assess the efficacy of an integrated treatment programme (depression care for people with cancer) for major depression in patients with lung cancer compared with usual care. (SMART 3) | average depression severity during trial participation: participant’s depression severity averaged over the time from randomisation up to a maximum of 32 weeks | 142 (65% female) | 63.7 (8.8) | Lung; ‘poor prognosis’ | MDD | Patient’s home or cancer centre/hospice | Depression Care for People with Cancer |
Steel [34] (2016) USA | Multicentre efficacy RCT comparing collaborative care intervention Enhanced usual care (usual care + if a patient scored high on the CES-D care coordinator provided education about the symptoms and referrals to a mental health professional/ GP) | Examine the efficacy of a collaborative care intervention in reducing depression, pain, and fatigue and improve quality of life | Reduction in depression (CES-D) at 6 months | 261 (82 depression; 27% female) | 61 (11) | Upper GI cancer or other primary cancers with liver mets | No specific eligibility criteria for depression; subgroup analysis of patients with CES-D > 16 at baseline | Telephone and oncology outpatient clinic | Study specific |