Environmental enrichment protects against cognitive impairment following chemotherapy in an animal model.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clinical studies indicate that up to 70% of cancer patients who receive chemotherapy experience cognitive impairment. The present study investigated environmental enrichment as a protective factor against the adverse effects of anticancer drugs on cognitive and biological processes in an animal model. Adult rats were housed in group cages with environmental stimulation or in standard cages for 3 months, before receiving 3 weekly injections of methotrexate + 5-fluorouracil, or equal volumes of saline. Rats were then administered tests of learning and memory that are sensitive to hippocampal or frontal lobe dysfunction. The relationship between cognitive performance and hippocampal neurogenesis was examined through sensitive time-dependent measures of neuronal maturation. Chemotherapy-treated rats in the standard environment were impaired on tests of spatial memory, nonmatching-to-sample (NMTS) rule learning, and delayed-NMTS. Chemotherapy-treated rats in the enriched environment performed at or near normal levels. The performance of the chemotherapy groups on the hippocampus-sensitive, spatial memory and delayed-NMTS tests correlated with neurogenesis levels. The results show that environmental enrichment can reduce the risk of chemotherapy-induced cognitive impairment, in part by promoting neuronal differentiation and growth during cell maturation. As well, they point to the importance of lifestyle factors in treating or preventing adverse effects of anticancer drugs on cognitive function. (PsycINFO Database Record
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".