The Effects of Chemotherapy on Cognitive Function in a Mouse Model: A Prospective Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Clinical studies indicate that up to 70% of patients with cancer who receive chemotherapy experience cognitive impairment. The present study used a prospective longitudinal design to assess short- and long-term effects of commonly used anticancer drugs on cognitive performance in a mouse model. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Normal mice received three weekly injections of a combination of methotrexate + 5-fluorouracil (CHEMO group) or an equal volume of saline (SAL group). Cognitive tests, measuring different aspects of learning and memory, were administered before treatment, immediately after treatment, and three months later. Structural MRI scanning was conducted at each stage of cognitive testing. RESULTS: The CHEMO group exhibited deficits on cognitive tasks acquired pretreatment [spatial memory, nonmatching-to-sample (NMTS) learning, and delayed NMTS], as well as impaired new learning on two tasks (conditional associative learning, discrimination learning) introduced posttreatment. Consistent with clinical evidence, cognitive deficits were pronounced on tests that are sensitive to hippocampal and frontal lobe dysfunction, but the CHEMO group's poor performance on the discrimination learning problem suggests that impairment is more widespread than previously thought. Cognitive deficits persisted for at least three months after treatment but some recovery was noted, particularly on tests thought to be under frontal lobe control. The MRI tests did not detect brain changes that could be attributed to treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapeutic agents can have adverse effects on information acquired pretreatment as well as new learning and memory and, despite some recovery, impairment is long lasting.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it