Neurocognitive functions in adults treated with radiation for primary brain tumors: A longitudinal study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
2097 Background: Cranial radiation is associated with progressive declines in processing speed, attention, memory and executive functions, presumably due to deleterious effects on white matter growth in children and accelerated cognitive aging in older adults. However, little is known about the longitudinal effects of radiation in the adult brain tumor population. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we conducted neurocognitive assessments in 21 adults diagnosed with a primary brain tumor (12 male; mean age 44 years, range 21-66) within a year of radiation (baseline mean ± SD: 0.17 ± 0.36 years, range -0.15 to 1.1 years), and 3.05 ± 1.83 years later (range 0.51 to 6.77 years). Patients who required additional surgery, or developed tumor progression prior to neurocognitive follow up were excluded from analyses. Neurocognitive test scores were converted to scaled scores according to published criteria, and transformed to z-scores (mean 0, SD 15). Tests measuring the same construct were averaged to provide 4 cognitive domains: Speed, Attention, Memory, and Executive Functions. Results: At baseline, Memory, Attention, and Executive Function were below population norms, and Speed was within normal limits (one-sample t-tests, respective means ±SD: -0.66±0.84;-0.40±0.74; -0.70±1.12; -0.30±0.94; all p<0.05). At follow-up, only Attention was below average (-0.40±0.81). Moreover, there was no difference in performance at baseline compared to follow-up across domains, nor was there an interaction between time and domain (time x domain repeated measures ANOVA, all p>0.1). There was also no difference in the number of tests that were impaired (defined as one standard deviation below the population mean) at baseline compared to follow up. Conclusions: Adult brain tumor patients showed deficits in cognitive functions that did not appear to decline over time after radiation in the absence of tumor progression. Longitudinal assessments of neurocognitive functions following radiation treatment in a larger sample is warranted to identify factors contributing to neurocognitive decline across the lifespan in this population.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".