Cognitive function and fatigue in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients: Baseline assessments prior to chemotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
9557 Background: A subset of women with breast cancer have cognitive impairment &/or fatigue before and after chemotherapy (CTh). We evaluated these symptoms and potential mechanisms prior to CTh in patients with CRC. Methods: Chemo-naïve patients with stage I-III CRC (Group 1) and pts with limited stage IV CRC prior to 1 st line metastatic CTh (Group 2) were evaluated. Neuropsychological (NP) performance was assessed by classical and computerized (CANTAB) test batteries, with cognitive impairment defined using a global deficit score approach, and concurrent questionnaires for fatigue & quality of life (FACT-F), anxiety/depression (GHQ), and perceived cognitive function (FACT-COG). Group 1 had blood tests to evaluate 10 cytokines, clotting factors, sex hormones, CEA and apoE genotype. Primary endpoints were cognitive function (classical tests) and fatigue in group 1. Associations between test results, demographic and disease-related factors were sought. Results: We assessed 326 patients: Group 1, 253 (post-surgery [median 56 days] 174; pre-surgery 79); Group 2, 73. Median age was 59 (23–75); 61% were male. In group 1, 36% had cognitive impairment on classical tests & 29% on CANTAB; 32% and 30% in group 2. No differences were seen by disease stage or surgery status. Men had more cognitive impairment than women on classical tests (p=.001). Self-reported cognitive symptoms was 10%; higher in women (p=.08). Fatigue, QOL, anxiety/depression & self-reported cognitive symptoms were strongly associated with each other (r=.45-.76, p<.0001), but not with NP test performance. Fatigue was 52% in Group 1 vs 66% in Group 2 (p=.03); and greater in women (p=.002). All cytokines were elevated compared to healthy volunteers (p<.001). Cognitive function and fatigue prior to CTh were not associated with cytokines, sex hormones, clotting factors, CEA or apoE genotype. Symptoms of anxiety/depression were reported by 13% of group 1 pts vs 25% in group 2 (p=.02). Conclusions: Cognitive impairment was present in 36% of CRC patients prior to adjuvant CTh, with 10% self-reporting impairment and 52% reporting fatigue. Cytokine levels were elevated but were not associated with cognitive function or fatigue. The etiology of cognitive impairment prior to cancer treatment remains unknown. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".