The Relationship Between Insomnia and Cognitive Impairment in Breast Cancer Survivors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Cancer-related cognitive impairment is an emerging public health burden. Growing research suggests that sleep disturbances contribute to poor cognition. Our study aimed to evaluate the association between insomnia and cognitive impairment in breast cancer survivors. Methods We analyzed cross-sectional data from a cohort study of postmenopausal women with stage 0–III hormone receptor-positive breast cancer on aromatase inhibitor therapy. The study was conducted between November 2011 and April 2015 at an academic cancer center (Philadelphia, PA). Insomnia was assessed with the Insomnia Severity Index. Perceived cognitive impairment was assessed with the cognitive subscale of the Breast Cancer Prevention Trial Symptom Checklist. We used linear regression to evaluate the association between insomnia and perceived cognitive impairment. Results Among 1072 patients, 556 (51.9%) reported insomnia and 847 (79.0%) were bothered by cognitive symptoms (forgetfulness, difficulty concentrating, distractibility). Greater perceived cognitive impairment was reported by patients with mild insomnia (regression coefficient [β] = 0.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.23 to 0.46, P < .001), moderate insomnia (β = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.36 to 0.65, P < .001), and severe insomnia (β = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.67 to 1.21, P < .001), compared with those without insomnia. Greater perceived cognitive impairment was also associated with patients younger than 55 years (β = 0.30, 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.45, P < .001), taxane-based chemotherapy (β = 0.11, 95% CI = 0.004 to 0.22, P = .04), anxiety (β = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.30 to 0.64, P < .001), and depression (β = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.35 to 0.94, P < .001). Conclusions Among postmenopausal breast cancer survivors receiving aromatase inhibitor therapy, insomnia and cognitive impairment are prevalent and characterized by a graded association, in which severity of perceived cognitive impairment increases as insomnia severity increases. Our findings warrant further research to determine whether addressing sleep is a strategy to improve management of cancer-related cognitive impairment.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".