P.023 Review of imaging changes, cognitive decline, and dementia risk in cancer survivors after chemotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cancer survival rates in Canada have been improving, leading to a steady increase in the number of survivors entering the typical ages of dementia onset. Yet, some cancer treatments (e.g. chemotherapy) are neurotoxic and adversely affect normal brain functioning. We conducted a review to examine changes observed in brain imaging and cognitive measures in survivorship, and long-term risk of dementia among cancer survivors. Methods: 91 Primary studies were selected from PubMed. Inclusion criteria were studies investigating the changes in brain imaging, cognition, and future dementia risk among adult survivors who received chemotherapy. Study quality was assessed based on 1) prospective, controlled design, 2) sample size, and 3) validated imaging and cognitive metrics. Results: Imaging studies identified MRI-based structural grey and white matter changes and functional network changes among survivors. Cognitive studies reported heterogeneous impairments in attention, memory, and executive function. In studies that examined dementia risk among cancer survivors, 67% reported lower risk of dementia, while 33% reported no association or a higher risk. Conclusions: While short-term cognitive impairment with associated changes on brain imaging is widely reported, findings concerning future or long-term cognitive impairment are mixed. Studies are warranted to identify potential connections between short-term and long-term cognitive function after cancer treatment.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".