Cited by 364Cancer survivorship and careAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Treatment and Access

Mixed anxiety/depression symptoms in a large cancer cohort: prevalence by cancer type

Brintzenhofe-Szoc, Karlynn M., Levin, Tomer T., Li, Yuelin, Kissane, David W., Zabora, James R.·2009·Psychosomatics

Abstract

Background Mixed anxiety/depression is associated with poorer psychosocial and treatment outcomes, worse quality of life, pooreradherence to treatment, slower recovery, greater suicide risk, and highercost-utilization. Objective This study aimed to examine the cancer-specific prevalence of these symptoms. Method Cross-sectional anxiety and depression symptom data were collected with the Brief Symptom Inventory from adult outpatients presenting to a tertiary cancer center (N=8,265). Results Mixed anxiety/depression symptoms were seen in 12.4% of patients; overall depression symptoms in 18.3%, overall anxiety symptoms in 24.0%, pure anxiety symptoms in 11.7%, and pure depression symptoms in 6.0%; 70% had neither. Higher rates of mixed anxiety/depression symptoms were seen with stomach, pancreatic, head and neck, and lung cancers, but lower rates were seen in those with breast cancers. The mixed anxiety/depression phenotype occurs in two-thirds of depressed cancer patients. Discussion The fact that 70% of patients did not meet thresholds for depression or anxiety symptoms can be interpreted as a reflection of the resistance to developing a significant level of these symptoms. However, because stomach, pancreatic, head and neck, and lung cancers have higher levels of mixed anxiety/depression symptoms, the question can be raised as to whether these are associated with a more biological type of anxiety/depression (e.g., due to cytokine release) and whether this phenotype should be…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1176/appi.psy.50.4.383

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brintzenhofe-Szoc, K. M., Levin, T. T., Li, Y., Kissane, D. W., & Zabora, J. R.
Affiliations
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US)
Corresponding author
Levin, Tomer T.
Venue
Psychosomatics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-07
Volume
50
Issue
4
Pages
383-391
ISSN
0033-3182 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1999867088
Cited by
364
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 31 · 2012: 23
FWCI
7.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychosomatics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
mixed anxiety-depressive disorder, cancer patients, prevalence, cancer types, depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, gastric cancer, pancreatic cancer, head and neck cancer, lung cancer, breast cancer, Brief Symptom Inventory, cytokine production, psychosocial outcomes
MeSH terms
Anxiety Disorders, Cross-Sectional Studies, Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Quality of Life, ROC Curve, Cohort Studies, Prevalence, Logistic Models

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review