Objective: To examine the temporal relationships of anxiety and depressive disorders, their risk factors and to explore why people with anxiety develop depression. Method: Data from an original 4±5-year prospective-longitudinal community study (N=3021) of adolescents and young adults with DSM-IV anxiety and depressive disorders identi®ed with the Composite International Diagnostic Interview are used to examine risk factors, as well as course and outcome. Results: (i) Anxiety disorders, except for panic disorder, are almost always primary conditions. (ii) Over the follow-up period, rates of comorbid anxiety-depression increased substantially and resulted in increased impairment and disabilities. (iii) Predictors for ®rst onset of pure' depressive and`pure' anxiety disorders revealed recognizable differences. (iv) Baseline clinical characteristics of anxiety disorders were signi®cantly associated with an increased risk to develop major depression over the follow-up period. Conclusion: Findings suggest that most anxiety disorders are primary disorders that substantially increase the risk for secondary depression.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic is impacting mental health worldwide, particularly among healthcare workers (HCWs). Risk and protective factors for depression and generalized anxiety in healthcare workers need to be identified to protect their health and ability to work. Social support and optimism are known protective psychosocial resources, but have not been adequately studied in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic among healthcare workers in Germany. Methods: Within the first wave of the VOICE study (n = 7765), a longitudinal web-based survey study among healthcare workers in Germany, we assessed symptoms of depression (PHQ-2) and generalized anxiety (GAD-2), social support (ENRICHD Social Support Inventory; ESSI), and generalized optimism as well as sociodemographic, occupational, and COVID-19 related variables. Multiple linear regression analyses were conducted to examine associations between the constructs. Results: The analyses revealed that higher levels of social support and optimism were associated with lower levels of depression and generalized anxiety. They showed a higher association with depression and generalized anxiety than demographic or occupational risk factors such as female gender and direct contact with infected individuals. Conclusion: Psychosocial resources such as social support and optimism appear to contribute to successful coping with the COVID-19 pandemic and should be considered in future studies.

Background: The risk of metastases in uveal melanoma can accurately be estimated through genetic analysis of the tumor. A growing number of patients decide to receive information on their prognosis, although this can be extremely burdensome. Studies on the psychosocial impact of testing are sparse. The objective of this study was to examine traits of patients opting for prognostication, to investigate its psychosocial impact and the use of psychooncological services over time. We further examined characteristics of patients utilizing these services and risk factors of prolonged psychological distress. Design and methods: This study is a non-randomized controlled prospective clinical observational trial. Patients availing for prognostication formed the test group, while those who opted out constituted the observational group. The psychosocial impact of genetic testing was assessed with the following variables: resilience, social support, fear of tumor progression, depression, general distress, health-related quality of life, estimation of the perceived risk, and the utilization of psycho-oncological interventions. Data were assessed at five different time points over a period of 12 months. We applied binary logistic regression analysis, multiple linear regressions and a mixed model. Results: Of 175 patients, 63 decided to obtain prognostic information. Treatment method (enucleation > brachytherapy), lower social support and higher general distress could significantly predict patient's choice for prognostic testing. After result announcement, perceived risk of metastases was significantly increased in patients with poor prognosis, while it decreased in those with good prognosis. Overall, a significant decrease over time appeared concerning fear of progression, general distress, depression and anxiety. Mental quality of life increased over time. The utilization of psycho-oncological interventions increased significantly after prognostication; however, this was equivalent in the test and observational groups. Female sex, higher general distress and higher anxiety predicted greater use of psycho-oncological interventions. Discussion: Availing of prognostic testing is not associated with poorer subsequent psychological well-being. It rather may help to alleviate distress and promote a more realistic risk perception. However, psychological support should be available to all patients, independent of prognosis and treatment, especially considering that patients with low social support and high distress increasingly opt for prognostication.

Background: Non-adherence (NA) to immunosuppressants (IS) among renal transplant recipients (RTRs) is associated with higher risk of allograft rejection, graft loss, and mortality. A precise measurement of NA is indispensable, although its prevalence differs greatly depending on the respective measurement methods. The objective of this study was to assess the accuracy and concordance of different measurement methods of NA in patients after renal transplantation. Design and methods: This was a single-center prospective observational study. At baseline (T0), NA was measured via physicians' estimates (PE), self-reports (SR), and tacrolimus trough level variability (CV%) in 78 RTRs. A Visual Analogue Scale (VAS, 0-100%) was applied both for SR and PE. In addition, we used BAASIS© for SR and a 5-point Likert scale for PE. NA was measured prospectively via electronic monitoring (EM, VAICA©) during a three month period. Meanwhile, all participants received phone calls in a two week interval (T1-T6) during which SRs were given. Results: Seventy-eight RTRs participated in our study. At t0, NA rates of 6.4%, 28.6%, and 15.4% were found for PE, SR, and CV%, respectively. No correlation was found between these methods. During the study, the percentages of self-reported and electronically monitored adherence remained high, with a minimum mean of 91.2% for the strictest adherence measure (Timing Adherence ±30 min). Our results revealed a moderate to high association between SR and EM. In contrast to PE and CV%, SR significantly predicted electronically monitored adherence. Overall, a decreasing effect of electronically monitored adherence was found for both taking and timing adherence (±2 h, ±30 min) over the course of the study.

Objective Aim of the study was to compare working and non‐working patients over a period of 12 months regarding socio‐demographic, cancer‐specific and mental health parameters. Methods This study was conducted as part of a Germany‐wide longitudinal survey among 1398 patients in 13 national Comprehensive Cancer Centers. The sample used for analysis consisted of n = 430 cancer patients younger than 65 years (age M = 52.4 years, SD = 8.1; 67.0% females). Socio‐demographic, cancer‐specific and mental health parameters (Depression: Patient Health Questionnaire, Anxiety: Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale, Distress: Distress Thermometer) were assessed at baseline during hospitalization and at 12 months follow‐up. Results 73.7% of all patients (n = 317) have returned to work after one year. While working and non‐working patients did not differ in socio‐demographic parameters, there were significant differences in the presence of metastases, tumor and treatment status. Mixed analysis of variances revealed significant interactions between working status and time for depression (p = 0.009), anxiety (p = 0.003) and distress (p = 0.007). Non‐working patients reported higher levels of depression, anxiety and distress than working patients over time. A logistic regression showed significant associations between lower depression (p = 0.019), lower distress (p = 0.033) and the absence of a tumor (p = 0.015) with working status. Conclusions The majority of cancer survivors returned to work. Non‐working patients had higher levels of depression, anxiety and distress than working patients. After controlling for cancer‐specific factors, mental health parameters were still independently associated with working status. Return to work can thus be associated with an improved mental health in cancer survivors. In order to establish causality, further research is necessary.