Search

Your search keyword '"Peviani G"' showing total 3 results
Start Over Author "Peviani G" Search Limiters Full Text
3 results on '"Peviani G"'

1. Cancer diagnosis and suicide outcomes: prevalence and risk meta-analysis

Author

Peviani, G, Casu, D, Mansi, W, De Prisco, M, Madeddu, F, López-Castroman, J, Fornaro, M, Calati, R, Peviani G, Casu D, Mansi W, De Prisco M, Madeddu F, López-Castroman J, Fornaro M, Calati R, Peviani, G, Casu, D, Mansi, W, De Prisco, M, Madeddu, F, López-Castroman, J, Fornaro, M, Calati, R, Peviani G, Casu D, Mansi W, De Prisco M, Madeddu F, López-Castroman J, Fornaro M, and Calati R

Published
2022

2. Cancer diagnosis and suicide outcomes: Umbrella review and methodological considerations

Author

Calati, R, Filipponi, C, Mansi, W, Casu, D, Peviani, G, Gentile, G, Tambuzzi, S, Zoja, R, Fornaro, M, Lopez-Castroman, J, Madeddu, F, Calati R., Filipponi C., Mansi W., Casu D., Peviani G., Gentile G., Tambuzzi S., Zoja R., Fornaro M., Lopez-Castroman J., Madeddu F., Calati, R, Filipponi, C, Mansi, W, Casu, D, Peviani, G, Gentile, G, Tambuzzi, S, Zoja, R, Fornaro, M, Lopez-Castroman, J, Madeddu, F, Calati R., Filipponi C., Mansi W., Casu D., Peviani G., Gentile G., Tambuzzi S., Zoja R., Fornaro M., Lopez-Castroman J., and Madeddu F.

Abstract

Background: Suicide outcomes in cancer patients represent a major public health concern. We performed an umbrella review (UR) including all meta-analyses (MAs) and systematic reviews (SRs) published on the association between cancer and suicide outcomes. Methods: Eligible studies were searched in the main scientific databases up to January 23rd, 2021. Eligible MAs/SRs focused on all suicide phenotypes among cancer patients. Evidence of the association was extracted; the credibility and quality of the included studies were evaluated using ad-hoc tools, including “A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews-2-Revised” (AMSTAR-2-R). Results: Six MAs and 6 SRs were included. The standardized mortality ratio of suicide in cancer patients was 1.5 to 1.7-fold higher than in the general population. Risk factors for suicide outcomes among cancer patients were male sex and older age, a cancer diagnosis within the prior year, and some specific cancer sites. Among 107 associations, 90 (84.1%) were supported by high credibility of evidence (class II). However, all studies reported a large heterogeneity (I2> 50%) and the majority of them reported considerable heterogeneity (I2> 75%). All MAs used random-effects measures. All MAs but one assessed publication bias and only one disclosed it. The majority of MAs/SRs showed critically low quality based on AMSTAR-2-R. Limitations: We could not perform additional analyses due to the limited number of MAs. Conclusions: This UR underlines the inflated risk for suicide among cancer patients. Upcoming, well-designed studies are needed to account for a broader set of variables. Several methodological issues likewise warrant attention.

Published
2021

3. Cancer diagnosis and suicide outcomes: prevalence and risk meta-analysis

Author

Peviani G, Casu D, Mansi W, De Prisco M, Madeddu F, López-Castroman J, Fornaro M, Calati R, Peviani, G, Casu, D, Mansi, W, De Prisco, M, Madeddu, F, López-Castroman, J, Fornaro, M, and Calati, R

Subjects
Psychiatry and Mental health, Cancer, suicide, meta-analysis
Abstract

Introduction Available meta-analytic evidence suggests an increased risk of suicide among cancer patients, although most of the reports focused on the sole suicide death (SD) outcome and they are usually hampered by significant between-study heterogeneity. Objectives The present meta-analysis aimed at assessing the prevalence and risk rates of SD, suicide attempt (SA), and suicidal ideation (SI) among cancer patients. Methods Systematic search up to April 2021 of observational studies documenting cancer and suicide outcomes associations. Pooled prevalence estimates, odd ratios (ORs), risk ratios (RRs), and hazard ratios (HRs) of SD, SA, and SI were computed according to the random-effects model. SD prevalence underwent cumulative and sub-group analyses for different variables. Risk estimates underwent sensitivity analysis for study design. Results Overall, thirty-nine studies were included. A higher risk of SD based on HR, SA based on OR and HR, and SI based on each measure was recorded among cancer patients versus controls. OR and RR of SD were not significant. Pooled prevalence rates of SD, SA and SI among cancer patients were 1.9% (1.1-3.1%), 1.4% (0.3-7.1%), and 9.1% (5.8-14.0%), respectively. Although high between-study heterogeneity held upon sensitivity and sub-group analyses, the overall message brought by risk analyses likewise held true. Age, country, study design, cancer type, sample size, cases type and comparison affected SD prevalence estimates in cancer patients. SD prevalence decreased over time. Conclusions Cancer patients face higher risk for SA and SI versus controls. SD’ results were controversial. Cancer patients have higher prevalence rates of suicide outcomes compared to the general population. Disclosure No significant relationships.

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results