Abstract 755: The impact of cancer treatment on cognitive function and quality of life in patients undergoing treatment at a tertiary care hospital in New Delhi, India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Cognitive dysfunction is becoming a more well-known complication of cancer and its treatment. Cancer-related cognitive changes and impairment have also been documented in non-central nervous system (non-CNS) cancer patients. The majority of research in this area has discovered that a subset of patients appear to be vulnerable to this complication even after treatment has ended, and they frequently struggle with multitasking, short-term memory, word-finding, attention, or concentration. It is critical to investigate the possible link between cancer and cognitive impairment because it can have a serious impact on quality of life. Methods: This cross-sectional study between May 2022 and October 2022, included patients who were referred to the dental outpatient department as part of a preventive/prophylactic evaluation at the tertiary care centre in New Delhi, India. After receiving informed consent, the oral health impact profile-14 instrument to assess participants' oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA) for cognitive evaluation were used. Results: Out of 283 patients 77% males and 23% females and vast majority had Stage III cancer. All patients' OHRQoL was hampered, but it was higher in those who developed visible oral changes during treatment versus those who did not (P =.001). Taking painkillers, losing sexual interest, difficulty in social contact, loss of taste and smell senses were the main factors affecting oral health related QoL (OHRQoL). A significant relationship was discovered between pain, speech, social eating, dry mouth, sticky saliva, and weight loss in relation to various treatment modalities. Those who were treated surgically alone had better QoL than others, according to the OHRQoL scores. In terms of delayed recall, 55% were found to be cognitively impaired, which was associated with lower OHRQoL. Conclusion: Cognitive impairment is common in cancer patients, which may be caused by the cancer itself. It is also linked to OHRQoL and psychosocial variables. There has been little research into the relationships between cognitive function and quality of life (OHRQoL) in cancer patients. Together with previous research indicating that cognitive function and OHRQoL can influence treatment adherence and outcomes, the findings support the inclusion of cognitive screening and OHRQoL assessment as part of patient pretreatment assessment. Citation Format: Delfin Lovelina Francis. The impact of cancer treatment on cognitive function and quality of life in patients undergoing treatment at a tertiary care hospital in New Delhi, India [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 1 (Regular and Invited Abstracts); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(7_Suppl):Abstract nr 755.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".