Long-term neurocognitive and psychological outcomes in meningioma survivors: Individual changes over time and radiation dosimetry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background This study investigates long-term changes in neurocognitive performance and psychological symptoms in meningioma survivors and associations with radiation dose to circumscribed brain regions. Methods We undertook a retrospective study of meningioma survivors who underwent longitudinal clinical neurocognitive assessments. Change in neurocognitive performance or psychological symptoms was assessed using reliable change indices. Radiation dosimetry, if prescribed, was evaluated based on treatment-planning computerized tomography co-registered with contrast-enhanced 3D T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Mixed effects analyses were used to explore whether incidental radiation to brain regions outside the tumor influences neurocognitive and psychological outcomes. Results Most (range = 41%–93%) survivors demonstrated stable—albeit often below average—neurocognitive and psychological trajectories, although some also exhibited improvements (range = 0%–31%) or declines (range = 0%–36%) over time. Higher radiation dose to the parietal-occipital region (partial R2 = 0.462) and cerebellum (partial R2 = 0.276) was independently associated with slower visuomotor processing speed. Higher dose to the hippocampi was associated with increases in depression (partial R2 = 0.367) and trait anxiety (partial R2 = 0.236). Conclusions Meningioma survivors experience neurocognitive deficits and psychological symptoms many years after diagnosis, and a proportion of them decline over time. This study offers proof of concept that incidental radiation to brain regions beyond the tumor site may contribute to these sequelae. Future investigations should include radiation dosimetry when examining risk factors that contribute to the quality of survivorship in this growing 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".