Search

PURPOSE: The Distress Thermometer (DT) includes a measure of cancer-related distress and a list of self-reported problems. This study evaluated the utility of the DT problem list in identifying concerns most associated with distress and poorer quality of life (QOL) in survivors of gynecologic cancer. METHODS: Demographic, clinical, psychosocial functioning, and DT data were described among 355 women participating in a gynecologic cancer cohort. Problems from the DT list were ranked by prevalence, distress, and QOL. Logistic regression models explored factors associated with problems that were common (≥ 25% prevalence) and associated with distress and QOL. RESULTS: The average age of participants was 59.9 years (standard deviation [SD], 10.8 years). Most participants were non-Hispanic white (97%) and had ovarian (44%) or uterine (42%) cancer. The mean DT score was 2.7 (SD, 2.7); participants reported a mean of 7.3 problems (SD, 5.9 problems). The most common problems were fatigue (53.6%), worry (49.9%), and tingling (46.3%); least common problems were childcare (2.1%), fevers (2.1%), and substance abuse (1.1%). Report of some common problems, including tingling, sleep, memory, skin issues, and appearance, was not associated with large differences in distress or QOL. In contrast, some rarer problems such as childcare, treatment decisions, eating, housing, nausea, and bathing/dressing were associated with worse distress or QOL. Younger age, lower income, and chemotherapy were risk factors across common problems that were associated with worse distress or QOL (fatigue, nervousness, sadness, fears, and pain). CONCLUSION: The DT problem list did not easily identify concerns most associated with distress and low QOL in patients with gynecologic cancer. Adaptations that enable patients to report their most distressing concerns would enhance clinical utility of this commonly used tool.

Objective: This article reports on the development, implementation, and evaluation of an integrative clinical oncology massage program for patients undergoing chemotherapy for breast cancer in a large academic medical center. Materials and Methods: We describe the development and implementation of an oncology massage program embedded into chemoinfusion suites. We used deidentified program evaluation data to identify specific reasons individuals refuse massage and to evaluate the immediate impact of massage treatments on patient-reported outcomes using a modified version of the Distress Thermometer delivered via iPad. We analyzed premassage and postmassage data from the Distress Thermometer using paired t test and derived qualitative data from participants who provided written feedback on their massage experiences. Results: Of the 1,090 massages offered, 692 (63%) were accepted. We observed a significant decrease in self-reported anxiety (from 3.9 to 1.7), nausea (from 2.5 to 1.2), pain (from 3.3 to 1.9), and fatigue (from 4.8 to 3.0) premassage and postmassage, respectively (all P < .001). We found that 642 survey participants (93%) were satisfied with their massage, and 649 (94%) would recommend it to another patient undergoing treatment. Spontaneous patient responses overwhelmingly endorsed the massage as relaxing. No adverse events were reported. Among the 398 patients (36%) who declined a massage, top reasons were time concerns and lack of interest. Conclusion: A clinical oncology massage program can be safely and effectively integrated into chemoinfusion units to provide symptom control for patients with breast cancer. This integrative approach overcomes patient-level barriers of cost, time, and travel, and addresses the institutional-level barrier of space.

e24200 Background: The Distress Thermometer (DT) is a tool used to evaluate distress among cancer patients. The DT can provide information for intervention recommendations such as social work, psychological, and other ancillary services. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) recommends recurrent use of the tool. The DT is widely used as a standard of care for an initial screening of cancer patients, but data on subsequent use is lacking. The aim of this research was to evaluate repeat DT scores in a heterogeneous cancer patient population. Methods: Clinical investigators conducted a longitudinal study of DT ratings for cancer patients receiving outpatient care at a community-based oncology subspecialty practice in a mid-sized city from 2018 to 2019. Study objectives included reviewing referrals and evaluating the relationship between the initial screening and the screening at the 6-month checkup. The Distress Thermometer was used (i.e., 0-10; zero is “no distress” and ten “extreme distress”) with scores of four or greater regarded as a signal of greater risk for patient distress. Results: The study sample included 79 patients with an average score of 4.3 and 4.0 at baseline and the 6-month screening, respectively. Patient referrals included physical and emotional therapy (n=1) or social/psychosocial worker assessment (n=26). Patients with a documented referral had a crude 1.7 (95% CI: 0.6, 3.3) greater point decrease in scores compared to patients not offered a service referral. When adjusting for baseline scores and the time between scores, referral accounted for 1% (95% CI: 0%, 14%) of variability in score changes, while baseline scores accounted for 40% (95% CI: 22%, 52%) and time accounted for 3% (95% CI: 0%, 14%). Conclusions: Study results reveal a possible decrease in higher scores from the initial screening to the 6-month check-up. Patients with a referral did not have their service utilization confirmed and this study failed to show an additional decrease in scores based on referrals when controlling for baseline score and time. Most previous research has focused on one specific cancer type. This study revealed the possible importance in understanding DT scores in a heterogenous cancer patient population. Furthermore, large scale research is needed to confirm preliminary data and further expound on distress at initial and subsequent screenings after interventions. A better understanding of this content area may function to improve future care and patient well-being.

47 Background: Treatment strategies for advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) have improved over the past 15 years. Durable responses are now achievable, giving rise to the possibility of cure in a small proportion of this population. However, it is not clear how patients are coping with more protracted courses of treatment. We sought to determine sources of frustration among patients diagnosed with aRCC. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of data derived from an online survey distributed via social media from April to June, 2017. We assessed source of frustration using an open-ended question: “In your own words, what has frustrated you most about your medical care related to your diagnosis?”. We assessed distress using the Distress Thermometer. Qualitative content analysis was performed to characterize responses related to frustration. Descriptive statistics was generated and the Kruskal-Wallis test was used to explore the relationship between clinical characteristics and sources of frustration. Results: We enrolled 217 patients with aRCC. The majority were male (52.3%), and white (93.5%). Clear cell histology (84.2%) was the most common diagnosis. Patients reported high levels of distress (M = 6.4; SD = 2.8). Sources of frustration were documented in 71.9% of patients, and were most commonly related to distrust of the cancer care system (12.4%), fear of progression (11.5%), lack of information (11.1%), financial concerns (9.7%), communication between patient and physician (7.8%), treatment side effects (4.6%), lack of available research (4.1%), mistrust of physician’s knowledge (4.1%), and access to supportive care (2.8%). Higher levels of frustration were associated with higher levels of distress (P = 0.01). Patients with non-clear cell RCC more commonly reported an emotional source of frustration (P = 0.02). Conclusions: Patients with aRCC report high levels of distress and frustration with their diagnosis and treatment. The most frequent drivers of frustration can suggest opportunities to maximize support to patients and their families. A better understanding of their disease and prognosis, addressing financial concerns and offering psychosocial support may alleviate frustration amongst patients with aRCC.

Background: Distress is the 6th vital sign in cancer yet it is only assessed in an ad hoc way in most cancer services. The Distress Thermometer (DT) and the associated Problem Checklist (PC) are the most widely available tools although few studies report on how they are used to effectively triage services. Aim: To explore the link between distress assessment, problem identification, referral to specific supportive care services by staff, and service uptake by cancer patients and survivors among a sample of people attending a major cancer hospital in Victoria Australia. Methods: A secondary analysis of quality assurance audit data were undertaken using data collected from patient medical records between January 2013 and June 2014. Data extracted were; age, sex, post code, language spoken, disease and treatment information, distress as measured by the DT and problems as identified by the PC. For the current study the focus was on the number of referrals offered and the number accepted or declined. The type of services referred to was also examined. Results: Data were collected for 877 patients although missing data resulted in a final sample size of 853. Only data associated with the first DT of each patient are presented. 729 patients (86%) participated in distress screening. The distress threshold of 4 was reported by 50% of participants, highlighting the prevalence of distress requiring support. This 50% reported an average of 9 problems on the PC, many of which came from the physical domain, with 91% reporting at least 1 physical problem. Other problems reported were emotional (74% of the sample); practical (24%), family (14%) and spiritual (2%). Referral data, which was available for 614 people, indicated that over 60% (372) were offered at least one referral. Referral offer was significantly predicted by DT score, and number of problems reported. Acceptance was significantly related to total number of problems, treatment type, and type of referral; referral for physical treatment was most likely to be accepted (87%) whereas referral for emotional support was least likely (53%). Conclusion: Routine distress screening and problem identification are critical to triaging to supportive care services. In a tertiary care setting, not all people will be screened or will want to be screened; not all people will be referred to services; and not all people will accept referral. Nonetheless, problems are extensive with most survivors reporting experiencing several problems. Despite a focus on the physical, these problems extend to other domains, including the emotional, and it is important that services are available to support these needs.

24 Background: Previous research has suggested that clinical assessment of emotions in patients with cancer is suboptimal. Since well-trained and experienced doctors and nurses may differentiate between emotions that do or do not necessitate professional mental health care, we hypothesized that clinical assessment may be more accurate than previously concluded. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of clinical assessment of emotions. Methods: The study was designed as a retrospective cohort study at a department of medical oncology. The clinical assessment of emotions by medical oncologists and nurses was derived from the patient file. Emotional distress and need for emotional care was assessed using the Distress Thermometer and Problem List. The sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio of clinical assessment was calculated, with either (i) emotional distress or (ii) need for professional mental health care as a reference standard. Results: Clinical assessment resulted in notes on emotions in 42.2% of the patient files (n =185), with 36.2% of patients experiencing emotional distress and 10.8% expressing a need for professional mental health care. As expected, the sensitivity of clinical assessment of emotions was higher with ‘need for professional mental health care’ as reference standard, compared to ‘emotional distress’ as reference standard (0.85 versus 0.54, p < 0.001). The diagnostic odds ratio showed a similar pattern (9.66 versus 2.10, p = 0.02). For specificity, equivalent results were obtained with the two reference standards (0.63 versus 0.64, p =0.63). Conclusions: Medical oncologists and nurses seem to differentiate between emotions that do or do not necessitate professional mental health care, resulting in a high sensitivity of clinical assessment of emotions in patients with cancer.

86 Background: We piloted the Quality of Life at the End of Life (QUAL-E) in Australian palliative care in-patients (N=52) and demonstrated feasibility, acceptability and face validity. An unexpected finding was the potential for the QUAL-E to prompt psycho-social-spiritual discussion when conducted as an interview, indicating opportunities for enhanced support. For this study, we compared a 17-item QUAL-E-Cancer (QUAL-EC) to the Distress Thermometer Screening Tool (DT) and participants’ experience when the QUAL-EC was conducted as an interview. Methods: A cross-sectional, mixed methods design was used. Convenience sampling recruited patients (N=50) with advanced cancer and a prognosis of less than 12 months from a tertiary hospital. Participants completed the DT, followed by the QUAL-EC which was digitally recorded as an interview. Results: Correlational and thematic analysis found that 39.6% of participants reported severe distress (score ≥7) while 40% reported moderate distress (score 4-6) on the DT. Levels of distress significantly correlated with two QUAL-EC domains: symptom control (r=0.52, p

195 Background: Research has shown cancer patients are at increased risk for distress during their cancer treatment. Distress screening is required for cancer programs seeking accreditation from the American College of Surgeons, Commission on Cancer and certification from the American Society of Clinical Oncology Quality Oncology Practice Initiative. Developing a successful distress screening program is essential for cancer programs. Methods: The purpose of this project was to create a comprehensive distress screening program utilizing the electronic health record (EHR) to identify patients requiring screening and document interventions. A multidisciplinary team was established to develop a distress screening process for our cancer program. The team developed a screening tool based on the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Distress Thermometer. The distress screening tool was built into the EHR. An alert was created to notify staff at visit check-in to provide the distress screening tool. Once completed, the score and any areas of distress indicated by the patient are entered into the EHR by the medical assistant. When a score is documented, the nurse case manager (CM) receives a “Distress Score” alert when accessing the patient’s chart, indicating the need for nursing review. The CM reviews the score, assesses patient needs and documents any needed interventions or referrals. A specific score does not require a specific intervention, rather the CM is required to determine the needs of the individual patient and take appropriate action. Results: In 2015, 8069 patients were offered distress screening with 13,527 distress screenings completed. This resulted in 629 referrals to social work. 803 distress screens had a score of seven or greater (6%). Conclusions: The multidisciplinary team continues to evaluate the process and make changes. Auditing reveals compliance with documenting a distress score of 95% or greater across all oncology areas and review by the CM of at least 93% on a consistent basis. In many instances, the physician and/or the CM address distress related to the patient’s disease or symptom management. Use of the EHR has facilitated the workflow and allowed information to be visible to the care team.

204 Background: Distressis a frequently endorsed experience by cancer patients.Many organizations advocate formal distress screening as part of clinical care in order to better meet the “psychological, social, and/or spiritual needs of patients that may interfere with the ability to cope effectively with cancer, its physical symptoms, and its treatments.” The primary objective of this study is to characterize distress levels among TCS using electronic PROs via a modified version of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Distress Thermometer (DT) and Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement System (PROMIS). Methods: Eligible TCS ( < 69 years at diagnosis, any treatments, not in active or maintenance stage of exercise behavior) enrolled onto a pilot study of an electronic, self-directed, individually tailored “EXercise for CAncer Patients” (EXCAP) program were offered iPad-based distress screening during routine medical oncology clinic visits. Screening consisted of a modified DT, where patients self-report distress on a scale of 1-10, wherein scores of greater than 4 refer to increased distress, as well as PROMIS domains for anxiety and depression, where scores range from 0-100, 50 is the average for the United States (US) general population, and higher values indicate more anxiety or depression. Results: A total of 18 TCS (median age 44) enrolled in the EXCAP study as of May 31, 2016. Among participants, 56%, 28% and 17% had stage I, II, and III testicular cancer, respectively. Treatment modality and median time from treatment to enrollment were: 78% orchiectomy, 23.5 months (range 1-204); 33% retroperitoneal lymph node dissection, 8 months (range 1-48); and 72% chemotherapy, 22 months (range 3-587). TCS completed a median of 2 distress screenings (range 1-8). The median DT score was 3 (range 1-8). Median PROMIS anxiety and depression scores were 52.88 (32.87-69.36) and 51.02 (34.17-6.65). Conclusions: TCS self-report low levels of distress on the DT and PROMIS scores for anxiety and depression that are comparable to the US general population. Future research will explore associations between patient- and disease-specific factors and distress in TCS.

215 Background: Advances in therapy have led to an increase in survival in women with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer (MBC). However, changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and productivity related to longer survival have not been well studied. Methods: A one-time survey was administered to women recruited through select clinics and advocacy organizations. Inclusion criteria were female sex, age 18+, US residence, and having HER2+ MBC. HRQoL and impact on productivity were assessed using several validated instruments: EQ Visual Analogue Scale (EQ VAS), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B), Rotterdam Symptom Checklist (RSCL), Distress Thermometer (DT), PROMIS Applied Cognition-Abilities-8a, and Work Productivity & Activity Impairment Questionnaire-Specific Health Problem (WPAI-SHP). Regression analyses were conducted to compare differences in measures by years since diagnosis (< 6 vs. ≥ 6 years), adjusting for age. Results: A total of 404 women participated in the survey. Mean age was 54.2 years, 91.6% were white, and 27.5% reported it had been ≥ 6 years since their HER2+ MBC diagnosis. In unadjusted analyses, women living with MBC ≥ 6 years reported significantly greater HRQoL (FACT-B, p=0.01) and emotional well-being (FACT-B EWB, p

764 Background: Psychosocial distress screening and assessment in patients with gastrointestinal (GI) cancers has an established importance due to the distress experienced during and post treatment. GI cancer patients receiving radiotherapy (RT) for curative or palliative measures were reviewed in order to determine if there was a relationship between patient reported distress (PRD) and survival. Methods: Patients at our institution who receive external beam RT for GI cancers completed a 30 question PRD survey that also included a linear analog measure of overall distress, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Distress Thermometer, which ranged from 1 (low overall distress) to 10 (high overall stress) at the start of and/or during treatment. Each question on the PRD questionnaire concentrated on a possible cause of distress. It allowed patients to rate distress levels for each question from 1 to 5 (1 being the least distressed and 5 being the most distressed), and also overall distress according. The reported clinical results of the PRD questionnaire were retrospectively reviewed in patients receiving RT for GI cancers from Jan 2012 to Aug 2015. Patients were considered distressed if their overall PRD score was 5 or greater (PRD+) or not distressed (PRD-) if their score was 4 or under. Overall survival between PRD+ and PRD- was compared using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: PRD surveys were completed by 134 consecutive patients, 67 (50%) male and 67 (50%) female within 30 days of starting RT. The median age was 65 years (range 28 to 93). The top histological finding was adenocarcinoma, 90 patients (60%). 113 (84%) received chemotherapy and 64 (48%) underwent surgery. 102 (75%) treatments were curative and 32 (25%) were palliative. Overall NCCN distress thermometer results ranged from 0 to 10, with a median of 4. Median follow-up was 2.7 years. Distressed patients (PRD+) had inferior survival to those not distressed (PRD-) at 2 years, 52% vs. 72%, p

70 Background: National organizations recommend routine screening for psychosocial distress in cancer patients. American College of Surgeons (ACoS) Commission on Cancer mandates screening for accreditation with requirements for timing/method/tool for screening; assessment/referral; and documentation. Methods: MD Anderson routinely screens patients for distress with policies and algorithms for the process. We sought to enhance this standard process by incorporating a dedicated psychosocial liaison in the clinic to ensure screening based on NCCN guidelines, follow-up with patients at the medical visit, and clear documentation and referral per ACoS standards. This study compared the standard process to the enhanced process (which occurred in parallel) through a 6-month retrospective chart review of Thoracic Center patients identified as distressed by either process. Results: The enhanced process utilized the Distress Thermometer (DT) cut-off > 4 resulting in optimal specificity (.77) and sensitivity (.64) compared to the standard process using > 6 (specificity = .87; sensitivity = .34). In the enhanced process (N = 71), 99% were seen during the clinic visit, compared to 13% in the standard process (N = 92) (Fishers Exact; P < .0001). In the standard process, 18% were contacted by phone, 10% were seen later while in-patient, and 33% received a phone message; for 26%, no note was dictated. In the enhanced process, there were high rates of documentation of assessments of suicide (100%), depressive symptoms (100%) and anxiety symptoms (96%) compared to the standard process where documentation occurred less often (suicide 5%; depressive symptoms 11%; anxiety symptoms 11%) (Fishers Exact; all P’s < .0001). Conclusions: Results support the institution’s recent practice change to > 4 on the DT. The enhanced process utilizing a psychosocial liaison facilitates screening at the clinic visit and can support existing mental health providers who may have competing responsibilities. Findings also suggest having standards for distress documentation. Overall, the enhanced process fully meets ACoS standards in all required areas.

74 Background: In 1999, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network issued guidelines for improving well-being of cancer survivors. Three tools, the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOGPS), the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Distress Thermometer (NCCNDT), and the Subjective Happiness Scale (SHS), are currently being used in a rural oncology survivorship clinic to assess patients’ well-being. The question arose whether all three tools are necessary for adequate patient assessment. Methods: Charts were reviewed on patients seen in a cancer survivorship clinic between January 1, 2015 and January 31, 2016. Well-being measures included the ECOGPS, the NCCNDT, and the SHS, all of which have been validated in prior studies. Patient demographics and well-being measures were captured in a database. Patient identifiers were removed to protect privacy. Data was stratified by age, gender, type and stage of cancer, and treatment type. ECOGPS, NCCNDT, and SHS scores were analyzed using Spearman rho to determine the relationships, if any, among the scores. A strong relationship was present if the correlation coefficient was > ± 0.7. A moderate relationship was present if the correlation coefficient was ± 0.4 to ± 0.7. Results: An analysis of all patient visits (n = 158) showed no strong or moderate correlations between performance and happiness (rs = -0.207), performance and distress (rs = 0.393), or distress and happiness (rs = -0.383). However, in subgroup analyses, a strong correlation was seen between happiness and performance for ages18-39 (rs = 0.830) and for those 6-12 months post-treatment (rs = -0.714). A strong correlation was also seen between distress and happiness for thoracic (rs = -0.801) and head and neck (rs = -0.847) cancer types, as well as those 1-3 years (rs = -0.718) and 3-5 years (rs = -.0754) post-treatment. A positive correlation was seen between performance and happiness for men (rs = 0.341), whereas females saw a negative correlation (rs = -0.349). Conclusions: Results indicate that these tools capture different aspects of patients’ well-being. Continued use of all three is recommended. Results obtained from stratified groups may be used for future studies.

10088Background: Routine screening for distress is a standard of care for all cancer patients. Since the cancer journey of adolescent and young adults (AYA) is different from that of children and a...

204 Background: Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is a medically complicated treatment modality used for various hematologic malignancies. Patterns and predictors of distress in post- transplant setting in a contemporary cohort of patients are not well-understood. Methods: 67 patients transplanted between 12/5/12- 4/21/15 completed National Comprehensive Cancer Network Distress Thermometer as part of their long term follow up clinic evaluation on day+100 after HCT. Demographic, socioeconomic and clinical outcome data were analyzed. A score ≥ 4 was considered distressed. Results: Mean age of patients was 50.8 years (range 20-72). Most patients were married or living with their significant other (83%), half were college graduates (58%), and half were employed full time (50%). 21 patients (31%) reported a distress score ≥ 4. Distressed patients reported increased problems with treatment decisions (15% vs 2%, p

75 Background: The focus of palliative radiotherapy (RT) is on improving quality of life (QOL) for patients with serious illnesses by eliminating or decreasing physical symptoms. The importance of assessing distress levels in palliative care patients is recognized due to the relevance of QOL, as treatment is given to provide symptom-relief rather than curative results. We sought to identify the most common causes of patient reported distress during palliative RT. Methods: Retrospective review was performed for patients who received palliative RT from 11/1/2012 to 6/4/2015 for various types of metastatic cancer at our institution. All patients completed a Patient Reported Distress (PRD) questionnaire with 30 specific questions and an overall distress thermometer prior to beginning treatment. The PRD survey quantified 30 areas of current concern ranging in patient-reported values from 1 to 5 in addition to a linear analog measure from 0 to 10 of overall reported distress in the last month. Results: Completed PRD surveys were available for a total of 297 patients, 149 (50.2%) female and 148 (49.8%) male. All patients were undergoing external beam radiation therapy for treatment of metastatic disease. 49 (16%) received chemotherapy and 46 (9%) underwent surgery. Overall distress ranged from 0 to 10, with a median of 5.0. The mean distress scores for the top five concerns ranged from 1.4 to 2.7. Top distresses were “Fatigue” (2.7), “Pain that affects daily functioning” (2.6), “How will I feel during treatment” (2.5), “Sleep difficulties” (2.4), and “Out of pocket medical costs” (2.3). Least troubling symptoms were “Transportation” (1.4), “A loved one relying on me for their physical care” (1.5), “My job” (1.5), “Housing during treatment” (1.5), “Spirituality” (1.5), and “Anger” (1.5). Conclusions: Patients demonstrated concern for distress related to interruption of activities of normal life, such as tiredness and insomnia, pain, and overall burdens from treatment. Medical costs were also a major concern. Importantly, housing and transportation were not issues in the current study but could be of concern in other regions. Providers should be aware that patients’ primary concerns may not be directly related to the symptom being palliated.

219 Background: Patient treatment preferences for the management of anxiety and depression influence adherence and treatment outcomes, yet breast cancer patient preferences for provider-specific pharmacologic management of anxiety and depression is unknown. This study examined breast cancer patients’ antidepressant prescriber preferences and their preferences for treatment by a mental health professional. Methods: Breast cancer patients (Stage 0-IV) were asked two questions: 1) “Would you be willing to have your oncologist treat your depression or anxiety with an antidepressant medication if you were to become depressed or anxious at any point during your treatment?”; and 2) “Would you prefer to be treated by a psychiatrist or mental health professional for problems with either anxiety or depression?” Additionally, the Distress Thermometer and Problem List, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Risky Families Questionnaire, and demographic information were assessed. Results: One hundred twenty-five participants completed the study. 60.4% were willing to accept an antidepressant from an oncologist and 26.3% preferred treatment by a mental health professional. 77.3% who were willing to receive an antidepressant from their oncologist reported either no preference or that treatment by a mental health professional didn’t matter (p = 0.01). Participants taking antidepressants (p = 0.02) or reporting high chronic stress (p = 0.03) preferred a mental health professional. Conclusions: The majority of patients accepted antidepressant prescribing by their oncologist; only a minority preferred treatment by a mental health professional. These findings suggest the benefit for promoting education of oncologists to assess psychological symptoms and manage anxiety and depression as a routine part of an outpatient visit.

16 Background: Versions of the Distress Thermometer have been used and validated widely, but studies of ethnically diverse populations has been limited. A modifed version of the Thermometer is used to understand factors affecting an African American(AA), inner-city population in order to improve access and utilization of palliative care services in a large, ethnically diverse metropolitan area. Methods: A cross-sectional study of women recieving cancer therapy in New Orleans, LA in 2013-14 was conducted. Subjects completed modified Distress Thermometer surveys which captured levels of distress and assessed predefined factors that could impact distress.Demographics were collected, and descriptive and comparative analyses were performed. Results: 49 Caucasian and 34 AA subjects were analyzed. Overall distress rating distributions were similar between the two groups. AA subjects cited family factors as a cause of distress more often than Causasians. (p < 0.006) AA subjects were also more likely to indicate difficulty with partners and overall lack of support as stressing factors than Caucasians. In subjects who reported distress scores greater than 4, AA subjects cited emotional and physical factors more frequently than Caucasians as a cause for distress. (p < 0.05) 11.11% AA subjects vs 3.57% Caucasians cited spiritual factors as a cause of distress. Conclusions: AA women with gynecologic cancer are more likely to cite familial, emotional, physical and perhaps spiritual factors as factors affecting distress than Caucasian women. These findings could be used to target Palliative Care resources more effectively in an ethnically diverse population.

68 Background: Distress is a non-stigmatic description of emotional, physical, spiritual or psychiatric stressors experienced by patients (pts) diagnosed with cancer. We sought to determine the prevalence of distress in different cancer population of pts seen in our cancer center as they are commencing chemotherapy. Methods: We retrospectively examined data using the Distress Thermometer (DT) based on the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and assessed a single encounter on 240 consecutive patients undergoing their first chemotherapy session. Univariate associations were examined between specific problems and overall distress levels with a 2-tailed between-group t-test. Problem area scores were computed for each subject by taking the mean number of problems rated positive within each area, and associations between each problem area score and distress was examined using Spearman correlations. Results: Among the 240 patients in the sample, mean age was 60 ± 14, 61% were female, and 82% had solid tumors. The overall mean distress, based on the DT reading, was 3.6 ± 3.0. Specific problems reported by the largest number of patients included worry (n = 85), nervousness (n = 79), fatigue (n = 70), sleep (n = 66), and fears (n = 57). Of these, all but fatigue were significantly associated with global distress in univariate analysis. When mean problems per area were calculated, and correlated with global distress, each problem area (practical, emotional, family, physical) had a significant univariate association with global distress, with emotional problems having the highest correlation (r = .52, p < .0001). The only predictors with significant independent associations to predict global distress in the general linear model were emotional problems (p = .0001) and family problems (p = .0062), independent of age, sex and tumor types. Conclusions: In cancer patients undergoing distress screening as they receive their first chemotherapy, emotional and family problems appear to have the highest correlation with distress. Improvement of supportive care services geared towards the betterment of these symptoms is of paramount importance in improving outcomes.

9575 Background: Distress is defined as an unpleasant emotional experience that may interfere with the ability to cope with cancer or its treatment. Distress screening is recommended during transitions including survivorship. We describe distress in cancer survivors before and after participation in a multidisciplinary survivorship clinic. Methods: All patients participating in the Yale Adult Survivorship Clinic were asked to complete the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Distress Thermometer (DT) immediately before and after a visit. Survivors ranked distress from 0 (none) to 10 (extreme) and indicated associated problems from a 39-item list. A score ≥ 4 was considered clinically significant. Survivors were seen by an MD/APRN, social worker, registered dietitian and physical therapist. Survivors received individual counseling on topics including survivorship care, diet and exercise, and coping. All were offered a follow-up visit approximately 8 weeks later. Distress screening was repeated at the foll...

113 Background: Tumor disease has not only somatic but also psychological impact on patients with complete change of life dimension. This resonates not only to the patients, their relatives and friends, but also to the therapy. A precise screening helps to determine the stress factor, to capture the psychological comorbidity and to initiate an early psycho-social care. Methods: 420 patients with various tumors got since October 2011 in the Urological Clinic of Aachen University Hospital screening using a Distress Thermometer. 410 patients were stationary and 10 patients came to the outpatient (ambulant) chemotherapy. 23 of the 40 questions of the Distress Thermometer depend on somatic complaints of patients. The other 17 questions cover the psycho-social problems. Results: 141 of the 420 patients reported to have a low stress level by the tumor. 139 patients showed, according to the Distress Thermometer, an average and 140 patients significantly higher stress level. This means that 279 of the 420 patients need a psycho-oncological counseling and possibly even further care and treatment. The most common entered symptoms were fears, nervousness, sleep disturbances, fatigue, sadness and worry. Depending on the wishes of the patient the psycho-oncological consultation was initiated. Only completing the Distress Thermometer helps the patient to face their problems and worries and makes perhaps the first great step in the perception of the disease. Since January 2012 a new component was inserted into the discharge reports of the tumor patients. This component contains the recommendation, depending on the result of the Distress Thermometer, to start if necessary the professional psycho-oncological support. That gives the patients a sense of security and a feeling not to fight alone against the disease. Conclusions: A targeted screening and an interdisciplinary, together with psycho-oncologists, care to cancer patients support them and their families at all stages of the disease, helps to deal with the new life situation and can possibly also increase the patient's compliance and the therapeutic response.

195 Background: The Commission on Cancer will require distress evaluation in 2015, given growing emphasis on psychosocial care. We report on a novel use of the distress thermometers (DTs) to frame navigator-patient interactions. Methods: Thirty-eight lay (non-clinical) navigators were trained to utilize a comprehensive distress thermometer to evaluate patients in the Patient Care Connect program (PCCP). The PCCP is a 12-center network throughout AL, MS, GA, FL and TN that serves Medicare patients ≥ 65 with cancer. During patient interactions, navigators assess causes of distress and requests for intervention (barrier). Scores ≥ 4/10 trigger intervention. Navigators report symptom-related barriers to providers for proactive management and address non-clinical barriers by empowering patients to connect to available resources. Results: Of the first 3,000 patients with DTs, pain (n=367), fatigue (n=304), and mobility issues (n=217) were the most common sources of distress. Although pain was common, only 32% requested intervention. Intervention was most often requested for distress related to knowledge deficits about treatment (75%), transportation (69%), and insurance/financial (67%). Patients requested intervention in 32.8% of assessments. Over 90% of all barriers were resolved. Conclusions: The PCCP uses the DT as an integral navigation screening across multiple health systems of varying size and structure. This approach provides continuity and structure to extend the workforce using lay navigators. Use of the DT allows for identification of quality of life, informational, and logistical barriers to care. Monitoring patients using navigator administered DTs is a promising tool for future application across multiple health systems. Additionally, data collected by the DT can be used to identify themes in distress for further research and to design comprehensive interventional programs. The project described was supported by Grant Number 1C1CMS331023 from the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. The contents of this abstract are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services or any of its agencies.

81 Background: Effective methods of screening head and neck cancer patients for health risk behaviors are needed. Methods: The present study assessed 452 cancer patients with an assessment that covered the following domains: psychological distress, smoking status, nutritional intake, functional activity level and need for support services. Thirty six out of the 452 patients recruitedfrom radiation oncology carried a diagnosis of head/neck cancer. Results: Patients with head/neck cancer had higher levels of depressive symptoms measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ9) with mean scores of 6.3 (SD=4.8) compared to the scores of patients with other cancer diagnoses (mean PHQ9 score= 4.3, SD=5.4) p=.04. Twenty percent of head/neck patients had PHQ9 scores greater than 12 and 52% had a distress thermometer score of >4. Head/neck patients were more likely to be current smokers or have quit since diagnosis (31%) compared to patients with other diagnoses (16%) p=.02. Head/neck patients were more likely to be male 68% (p

608 Background: Distress is psychological suffering, and DT is its efficient screening scale. Objectives: 1) Translate,culturally adapt,and validate DT to Brazilian Portuguese. 2) Evaluate distress in gastrointestinal cancer patients. Methods: Inclusion: >=200 patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancer, age>=18. Exclusion criteria: uncontrolled psychiatric disorder, not knowing diagnosis, difficulty in understanding informed consent. They answered Brazilian Portuguese translated version of DT, and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Obtained data used to calculate validity and reliability of the DT (cutoff Results: Preliminary relevant results (n=85) shown in the table. Conclusions: Data confirm importance of emotional assistance to patients with oncologic diseases and need of interdisciplinary palliative care. We plan to present updated data in ASCO GI Meeting, and be able to show validation of DT to Brazilian Portuguese. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

8211 Background: The impact of the psychosocial distress in cancer populations is well known and has been amply studied. In the literature of the last five years many papers have shown that the Dis...