Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Apr;30(4):493-503.
doi: 10.1002/pon.5594. Epub 2020 Dec 7.

Hostility in cancer patients as an underexplored facet of distress

Affiliations
Free article

Hostility in cancer patients as an underexplored facet of distress

Luigi Grassi et al. Psychooncology. 2021 Apr.
Free article

Abstract

Objective: In the present study, we aimed to assess hostility and to examine its association with formal psychiatric diagnosis, coping, cancer worries, and quality of life in cancer patients.

Methods: The World Health Organization (WHO) Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) to make an ICD-10 (International Classification of Disease) psychiatric diagnosis was applied to 516 cancer outpatients. The patients also completed the Brief Symptom Inventory-53 to assess hostility (BSI-HOS), and the Mini-Mental Adjustment to cancer scale (Mini-MAC). A subset of patients completed the Cancer Worries Inventory (CWI), the Openness Scale, and the Quality of Life Index.

Results: By analyzing the distribution of the responses 25% of the patients had moderate and 11% high levels of hostility, with about 20% being BSI-HOS "cases." Hostility was higher in patients with a formal ICD-10 psychiatric diagnosis (mainly major depression, other depressive disorders, anxiety disorders) than patients without ICD-10 diagnosis. However, about 25% of ICD-10-non cases also had moderate-to-high hostility levels. Hostility was associated with Mini-MAC hopelessness and anxious preoccupation, poorer quality of life, worries (mainly problems sin interpersonal relationships), and inability to openly discuss these problems within the family.

Conclusions: Hostility and its components should be considered as dimensions to be more carefully explored in screening for distress in cancer clinical settings for its implications in negatively impacting on quality of life, coping and relationships with the family, and possibly the health care system.

Keywords: cancer; emotional distress; hostility; psycho-oncology; screening.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

REFERENCES

    1. Caruso R , Breitbart W . Mental health care in oncology. Contemporary perspective on the psychosocial burden of cancer and evidence-based interventions. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci. 2020;29:e86.
    1. Mitchell AJ , Chan M , Bhatti H , et al. Prevalence of depression, anxiety, and adjustment disorder in oncological, haematological, and palliative-care settings: a meta-analysis of 94 interview-based studies. Lancet Oncol 2011;12(2):160-174.
    1. Tang PL , Wang HH , Chou FH . A systematic review and meta-analysis of demoralization and depression in patients with cancer. Psychosomatics. 2015;56(6):634-643.
    1. Mitchell AJ . Pooled results from 38 analyses of the accuracy of distress thermometer and other ultra-short methods of detecting cancer-related mood disorders. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(29):4670-4681.
    1. Mitchell AJ , Meader N , Davies E , et al. Meta-analysis of screening and case finding tools for depression in cancer: evidence based recommendations for clinical practice on behalf of the Depression in Cancer Care consensus group. J Affect Disord. 2012;140(2):149-160.

Publication types