Search

Objective: Children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) are at risk for neurocognitive deficits, and examining individual variability is essential to understand these risks. This study evaluated latent longitudinal trajectories and risk factors of neurocognitive outcomes in childhood ALL.Methods: There were 233 participants with ALL who were enrolled on a phase 3, risk-stratified chemotherapy-only clinical trial (NCT00137111) and who completed protocol-directed neurocognitive assessments [47.6% female, mean (SD) = 6.6 (3.7) years]. Measures of sustained attention, learning/memory, and parent ratings of attention were completed during and after treatment. Longitudinal latent class analyses were used to classify participants into distinct trajectories. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of class membership.Results: Within the overall group, attention performance was below age expectations across time (Conners Continuous Performance Test detectability/variability, p < 0.01); memory performance and parent ratings were below expectations at later phases (California Verbal Learning Test learning slope, p < 0.05; Conners Parent Rating Scale, Revised attention/learning, p < 0.05). Most participants (80-89%) had stable neurocognitive profiles; smaller groups showed declining (3-6%) or improving (3-11%) trajectories. Older age (p = 0.020), female sex (p = 0.018), and experiencing sepsis (p = 0.047) were associated with greater attention problems over time. Lower baseline IQ was associated with improved memory (p = 0.035) and fewer ratings of attention problems (p = 0.013) over time.Conclusions: Most patients with ALL have stable neurocognitive profiles. Smaller groups have significant impairments shortly after diagnosis or have worsening performance over time. A tiered assessment approach, which includes consideration of individual and clinical risk factors, may be useful for monitoring neurocognitive functioning during treatment and survivorship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pediatric brain tumor patients are at risk of developing neurocognitive impairments and associated white matter alterations. In other populations, post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) impact cognition and white matter. This study aims to investigate the effect of PTSS on neurocognitive functioning and limbic white matter in pediatric brain tumor patients., Methods: Sixty-six patients (6-16 years) completed neuropsychological assessment and brain MRI (1-year post-diagnosis) and parents completed PTSS proxy questionnaires (CRIES-13; 1-3 months and 1-year post-diagnosis). Mean Z -scores and percentage impaired (>1SD) for attention, processing speed, executive functioning, and memory were compared to normscores ( t -tests, chi-square tests). Multi-shell diffusion MRI data were analyzed for white matter tractography (fractional anisotropy/axial diffusivity). Effects of PTSS on neurocognition and white matter were explored with linear regression models (FDR correction for multiple testing), including age at diagnosis, treatment intensity, and tumor location as covariates. Neurocognition and limbic white matter associations were explored with correlations., Results: Attention ( M  = -0.49, 33% impaired; P  < .05) and processing speed ( M  = -0.57, 34% impaired; P  < .05) were significantly lower than healthy peers. PTSS was associated with poorer processing speed ( β  = -0.64, P  < .01). Treatment intensity, age at diagnosis, and tumor location, but not PTSS, were associated with limbic white matter metrics. Neurocognition and white matter metrics were not associated., Conclusions: Higher PTSS was associated with poorer processing speed, highlighting the need for monitoring, and timely referrals to optimize psychological well-being and neurocognitive functioning. Future research should focus on longitudinal follow-up and explore the impact of PTSS interventions on neurocognitive performance., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press, the Society for Neuro-Oncology and the European Association of Neuro-Oncology.)