Impact of Propofol Exposure on Neurocognitive Outcomes in Children With High-Risk B ALL: A Children's Oncology Group Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE Many children treated for ALL develop long-term neurocognitive impairments. Increased risk of these impairments is associated with treatment and demographic factors. Exposure to anesthesia is an additional possible risk factor. This study evaluated the impact of cumulative exposure to anesthesia on neurocognitive outcomes among a multicenter cohort of children with ALL. METHODS This study was embedded in AALL1131, a Children's Oncology Group phase III trial for patients with high-risk B-ALL. In consenting patients age 6-12 years, prospective uniform assessments of neurocognitive function were performed during and at 1 year after completion of therapy. Exposure to all episodes of anesthetic agents was abstracted. Multivariable linear regression models determined associations of cumulative anesthetic agents with the primary neurocognitive outcome reaction time/processing speed (age-normed) at 1 year off therapy, adjusting for baseline neurocognitive score, age, sex, race/ethnicity, insurance status (as a proxy for socioeconomic status), and leukemia risk group. RESULTS One hundred and forty-four children, 76 (52.8%) males, mean age of 9.1 (min-max, 6.0-12.0) years at diagnosis, underwent a median of 27 anesthetic episodes (min-max, 1-37). Almost all patients were exposed to propofol (140/144, 97.2%), with a mean cumulative dose of 112.3 mg/kg. One year after therapy, the proportion of children with impairment ( Z-score ≤–1.5) was significantly higher compared with a normative sample. In covariate-adjusted multivariable analysis, cumulative exposure to propofol was associated with a 0.05 Z-score decrease in reaction time/processing speed per each 10 mg/kg propofol exposure ( P = .03). CONCLUSION In a multicenter and uniformly treated cohort of children with B-ALL, cumulative exposure to propofol was an independent risk factor for impairment in reaction time/processing speed 1 year after therapy. Anesthesia exposure is a modifiable risk, and opportunities to minimize propofol use should be considered.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".