The impact of mindfulness on working memory-related brain activation in breast cancer survivors with cognitive complaints
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Cancer-related cognitive impairment (CRCI) has been associated with altered brain activation after chemotherapy in areas related to working memory. Hence, improving working memory capacity and associated brain activation might aid in the recovery of CRCI. In this study, we investigated the potential of a mindfulness-based intervention (MBI) to impact working memory-related brain activation. METHODS: Female breast cancer survivors reporting cognitive complaints (N=117) were randomized into a mindfulness (n=43; MBI), physical training (n=36; PT), or waitlist control condition (n=38; WL). Participants completed MRI scans before the intervention, immediately after, and three months post-intervention. Task-based functional MRI was used to measure differences between groups over time in working memory-related brain activation while performing a visual-verbal n-back task. RESULTS: Data of 83 participants (32/26/25 MBI/PT/WL) was included. Compared to the waitlist group, MBI participants showed reduced task-related activation in the right middle frontal and angular gyrus and increased activation in the right dorsal posterior cingulate cortex over time. Compared to the physical training group, MBI participants showed reduced brain activation in the bilateral superior parietal lobule and right dorsal anterior cingulate cortex over time. No differences between physical training and no intervention were identified. CONCLUSION: This study showed that an 8-week mindfulness-based intervention can significantly alter brain activation across brain regions involved in working memory, attentional control, and emotion processing during performance of a working memory task. This might aid in the recovery of CRCI. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Mindfulness might alter brain activation patterns while performing a working memory task, which might ultimately aid in restoring higher order cognitive functions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".