MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract P4-20-09: Diagnosing cognitive impairment (“chemo brain”) in breast cancer survivors

2017· article· en· W2594446929 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
WA Razaq, Takemi Tanaka, Barbara W. Carlson, Michael J. Wenger, Jacob E. Friedman, Doris M. Benbrook, Melissa Craft

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer-related cognitive impairment studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentMedicineBreast cancerInternal medicineCancerStage (stratigraphy)OncologyDementiaDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Cognitive complaints (“chemo brain”) are reported frequently after breast cancer treatment but little is known about its incidence and causes. Before we can intervene we need to be able to diagnose it properly. Mini Mental state examination (MMSE) can detect advanced Alzheimer's but won't help in detecting mild cognitive disturbances. We used Montreal Cognitive Assessment for Telephone (MoCA-T) and full scale Montreal Cognitive Assessment for Telephone (MoCA) to diagnose mild cognitive impairments in patients having normal MMSE. Methods: 20 breast cancer survivors aged 50 years or older completed MoCA-T and MoCA, a year after they completed their treatment for breast cancer, describing the impact of their treatment regimen on their short term memory and ability to think and concentrate. On Day 5, they underwent a standardized laboratory protocol that assessed both behavioral and electroencephalographic (EEG) indicators of memory consolidation. Results: Patient characteristics: 20 postmenopausal breast cancer survivors aged 50 or above participated in the study a year after they completed their therapy. We are reporting preliminary results of 10 patients. Patients had stage I-III disease (stage I – One patient, Stage II – five patients, and stage III- four patients). All of them received various chemo regimens e.g. Cytoxan, methotrexate, 5-FU (CMF), Taxol, Trastuzumab (TH), Adriamycin (AC), taxotere, carboplatin (TCH). 8/10 patients received adjuvant radiation. 1/10 patient underwent reconstruction later. 7/10 patients received hormonal therapy with aromatase inhibitors. Results of MoCA –T and MoCA: MoCA-T, tests attention and concentration, executive functions, memory, language, conceptual thinking, calculations, and orientation. Possible scores range from 0-22 and scores <18 indicate mild cognitive impairment. The MoCA has possible scores from 0-30 and a score >26 is normal but <19 is indicative of cognitive impairment. 5/10 patients had abnormal MoCA and 3/10 patients had impaired MoCA-T signifying that almost 50%patients develop mild cognitive impairment after breast cancer treatment. During memory consolidation, EEG contained less theta and frequent bursts of alpha waves which is commonly seen in patients with neuropathic pain and insomnia. MoCA-T and MoCA results for the patientsPatient no.MoCA-TMoCAPtient 00817*23*Patient 0102126Patient 0111923*Patient 01216*27Patient 0132027Patient 01517*21*Patient 0161824*Patient 0172025*Patient 0191926Patient 0202129*presents affected patient Conclusions: The study signifies that mild cognitive impairment from breast cancer treatment (or “chemo brain”) was frequently reported and MoCA-T and MoCA tests were able to show even mild cognitive impairment in these patients. We are compiling our full data for EEG but the early results show that the patients had less theta but had frequent bursts of alpha waves, a pattern seen commonly in patients with insomnia and neuropathic pain. They retain fewer items and take more time responding to items as compared to normal people. We need more studies to diagnose and treat mild cognitive impairment (“chemo brain”) in breast survivors as most of these patients are still working and can be a valuable part of the community. Citation Format: Razaq WA, Tanaka T, Carlson B, Wenger M, Friedman J, Benbrook D, Craft M. Diagnosing cognitive impairment (“chemo brain”) in breast cancer survivors [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-20-09.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.366 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicCancer-related cognitive impairment studiesFrench-language works237,207