Cognitive impairment in hematology patients planned for chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy is used to treat several types of relapsed and refractory hematological malignancies and is associated with cognitive side-effects. The accurate diagnosis of cognitive impairment following CAR-T requires knowledge of baseline cognitive status prior to the therapy.Research design and methods Adult patients with advanced hematologic or solid organ malignancies underwent cognitive assessment, including a self-report questionnaire of psychopathology and subjective cognitive function, prior to receiving CAR-T. A subset of individuals also completed the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) to examine utility of cognitive screening.Results Of 60 patients included, 16 (27%) had cognitive impairment, with six unique patterns of dysfunction. Memory impairment was the most common finding (15%). Impaired patients were more likely to have B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (p = 0.024, BF10 = 9.30), be younger (p = 0.007, BF10 = 7.76), have bone marrow involvement (p = 0.037, BF10 = 5.18), or have evidence of psychopathology (p = 0.004, BF10 = 31.30). Analyses did not support the utility of cognitive screening. Of those patients who completed a self-report measure of psychopathology, nine (16%) were elevated on at least one symptom domain.Conclusions The findings demonstrate a broad spectrum of cognitive and psychological symptoms, emphasizing the importance of baseline evaluation for detecting cognitive symptoms that might arise after CAR-T.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".