Neurocognitive function and psychological distress in young adults (YA) with cancer.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
199 Background: Cancer treatment is associated with neurocognitive sequelae and changes in structural and functional brain imaging in older adults, even if they do not receive central nervous system directed therapy. Because the brain continues to develop into the 3rd decade of life, YA (age 18-39 yrs) may also be vulnerable to neurocognitive dysfunction. In YA, cancer disrupts acquisition of developmental milestones and is associated with psychological distress. This study aims to characterize neurocognitive functions and its relation to psychological distress in YA. Here we present baseline results of our longitudinal study. Methods: In this prospective, inception-cohort study, we recruited 3 groups of YA from ambulatory oncology clinics: YA with cancers (YAC; lymphoma, breast, gynecology, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, sarcoma) who required chemotherapy (YAC + , n = 55), YAC who do not require it (YAC - , n = 31), and healthy YA (HYA, n = 54). Participants completed a 2-hr battery of standardized neurocognitive tests and validated self-report questionnaires. YAC were assessed within 3 months of diagnosis, and YAC + prior to chemotherapy. Test scores were converted to age-corrected scaled scores and transformed to z-scores (mean 0, SD 1). A global neurocognitive function score and 6 domain scores were evaluated. Results: There were no group differences in neurocognitive domains (ANOVA, all p-values > .1), or in the number of impaired test scores (defined as z < -1). YAC + reported greater symptoms of somatic distress (p = .001) and anxiety (p = .004) than both HYA and YAC - . Symptoms were unrelated to neurocognitive performance (ρ < .16 for all). However, each group had poorer memory compared to population norms (1-sample t-tests: YAC + p = .007; YAC - p = .047; HYA p = .023). Conclusions: Prior to treatment, neurocognitive functions of YAC were not different from HYA, suggesting that cancer itself is not a neurocognitive risk factor in YA. It is important to use appropriate control groups, rather than relying on normative data for comparison. We continue to follow this cohort to document neurocognitive function and distress over time, and to identify risk factors that contribute to outcomes in YA.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".