The association of health-related quality of life and cognitive function in patients receiving memantine for the prevention of cognitive dysfunction during whole-brain radiotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the association between health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and cognition in patients receiving memantine for prevention of cognitive dysfunction during whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT). METHODS: Adult patients with brain metastases received WBRT and were randomized to receive placebo or memantine, 20 mg per day, within 3 days of initiating radiotherapy, for 24 weeks. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Brain module (FACT-Br) and Medical Outcomes Scale-Cognitive Functioning Scale (MOS-C) were completed in coordination with serial standardized tests of cognitive function. RESULTS: Of the 508 eligible patients, 442 (87%) consented to participate in the HRQOL portion and contributed to baseline analyses. Evaluable patients at 24 weeks (n = 246) included surviving patients completing FACT-Br, MOS-C, and objective cognitive assessments (n = 146, 59%) and patients alive at time of missed assessment (n = 100, 41%). Baseline cognitive function correlated significantly with FACT-Br and MOS-C self-reports. All domains of objective cognitive function showed declines over time. Neither FACT-Br nor MOS-C differed between the treatment arms. Emotional and functional well-being subscales of the FACT improved over time while the remainder of the FACT-Br domains remained stable. MOS-C scores declined over time. CONCLUSION: Baseline cognitive function correlated significantly with FACT-Br and MOS-C scores. No by-arm differences in HRQOL were observed despite differences in objective cognitive function. Patient attrition and poor testing compliance remain significant problems in studies of cognitive function of brain metastases patients and further effort is needed to improve compliance with testing and sensitivity of patient-reported measures.
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 | 0.004 | 0.042 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".