Objective:Although “fatigue” and “depression” are well-accepted clinical terms in the English language, they are ill defined in many other languages, including Portuguese. We aimed to investigate the most appropriate words to describe cancer-related fatigue (CRF) and depression in Brazilian cancer patients.
Method:The interviewers read to patients two clinical vignettes describing fatigued patients and two others describing depressed patients. Participants were asked to choose from among “fatigue,” “tiredness,” “weakness,” “depression,” and “sadness” the best and worst terms to explain the vignettes. In addition, they were administered an instrument containing numeric rating scales (NRSs), addressing common symptoms, including the aforementioned terms. Pearson correlation analysis and accuracy diagnostic tests were conducted using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Treatment–Fatigue (FACIT–F) as references.
Results:Among the 80 participants, 40% reported that the best term to explain the concept of CRF was “tiredness,” and 59% chose “sadness” as the best descriptor of depression. Regarding diagnostic accuracy, the areas under the curve (AUCs) for “fatigue,” “weakness,” and “tiredness” were 0.71, 0.81, and 0.76, respectively; the AUCs for “depression” and “sadness” ranged from 0.81 to 0.91 and 0.73 to 0.83, respectively. Negative correlations were found among FACIT–F fatigue subscale scores and NRS scores for “fatigue” (r = –0.58), “tiredness” (r = –0.67), and “weakness” (r = –0.62). Regarding depression, there were positive correlations between HADS–D scores and both NRS for “depression” (r = 0.61) and “sadness” (r = 0.54).
Significance of results:“Tiredness” was considered the best descriptor of CRF. Taking into consideration the clinical correlation with depression scores, the term “depression” was accepted as the best term to explain the concept of depression.