Comparison of four brief depression screening instruments in ovarian cancer patients: Diagnostic accuracy using traditional versus alternative cutpoints

Objectives We compared the diagnostic accuracy of 4 depression screening scales, using traditional and alternative scoring methods, to the gold standard Structured Clinical Interview-DSM IV major depressive episode (MDE) in ovarian cancer patients on active treatment. Methods At the beginning of a new chemotherapy regimen, ovarian cancer patients completed the following surveys on the same day: the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), the Beck Depression Inventory Fast-Screen for Primary Care (BDI-FastScreen), the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), and a 1-item screener (“Are you depressed?”). Each instrument's sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value were calculated with respect to major depression. To control for antidepressant use, the analyses were re-run for a subsample of patients who were not on antidepressants. Results One hundred fifty-three ovarian cancer patients were enrolled into the study. Only fourteen participants met SCID criteria for current MDE (9%). When evaluating all patients regardless of whether they were already being treated with antidepressants, the two-phase scoring approach with an alternate cutpoint of 6 on the PHQ-9 had the best positive predictive value (PPV = 32%). Using a traditional cutpoint of 16 on the CES-D resulted in the lowest PPV (5%); using a more stringent cutpoint of 22 resulted in a slightly improved but still poor PPV, 7%. Conclusions Screening with a two-phase PHQ-9 proved best overall, and its accuracy was improved when used with patients who were not already being treated with antidepressants.