Search

Background Operating a motor vehicle involves multiple cognitive and sensorimotor faculties. Neurological conditions pose driving risk, but this has not been examined in patients with primary brain tumors. Methods Sixty-four patients with primary brain tumors (32 left hemisphere; 69% glioblastoma) completed the Cognitive Behavioral Driver’s Inventory (CBDI). A subset also completed broader cognitive testing. Patient characteristics, CBDI measures, and broader neuropsychological test scores were compared between Passing and Nonpassing groups. Follow-up logistic regression analyses identified patient characteristics and CBDI measures predictive of Pass/Nonpass outcome. Point-biserial correlations determined associations between neuropsychological tests and CBDI outcome. Results Sixty-nine percent of patients were classified as passing the CBDI. Nonpassing patients were older and more likely to have WHO grade IV and temporal lobe tumors. Age was the most salient predictor of CBDI performance. CBDI measures of speeded visual search and set-shifting, speeded response inhibition, vigilance and freedom from distractibility, and basic visual scanning speed were predictive of Pass/Nonpass outcome. Neuropsychological tests of memory in particular, but also speeded visual scanning and discrimination, executive function, basic visual attention, visuoconstruction, and manual dexterity (dominant hand), were associated with CBDI outcome. Conclusions A sizeable proportion of patients with primary brain tumors appear at risk of driving difficulty, particularly those with higher-grade tumors and of older age. Memory, visual attention, and executive difficulties appear to contribute most to driving safety risk as determined by the CBDI. These results highlight the importance of driving safety screening in this population.

Background Cancer and treatment-related neurocognitive dysfunction has the potential to significantly disrupt the lives of survivors. While neurocognitive functioning is known to predict aspects of patient-reported quality of life in individuals with glioma, little is known regarding the association between neurocognitive functioning and clinician-rated functional independence. Methods Newly diagnosed patients with glioma in the left (n = 73; 49% glioblastoma) or right (n = 30; 57% glioblastoma) temporal lobe completed comprehensive neuropsychological testing. Clinicians rated patient functional independence using the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) and Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) scale. Correlational and regression analyses were conducted to determine relationships between neurocognitive functioning and functional independence. Results Tests of verbal learning, executive function, and language comprehension were moderately to strongly associated with clinician-rated functional independence, particularly for items pertaining to need for assistance with memory, problem-solving, and language functions. Stepwise linear regression showed that tests of verbal learning, executive functioning, and language comprehension predicted FIM ratings, together accounting for 40% of variance (P < .001). A test of executive functioning also predicted KPS scores and accounted for 19% of variance (P < .001). Conclusions In patients with newly diagnosed temporal lobe glioma, neurocognitive functioning is associated with functional independence. Verbal learning, executive functioning, and language comprehension demonstrated the strongest associations across both measures of functional independence. These findings provide support for the ecological validity of neuropsychological assessment by demonstrating the real-world clinical significance of objectively assessed neurocognitive functioning in glioma patients.

Brain metastases are the most common intracranial tumors, occurring in more than 15% of cancer patients. The treatment of brain metastases involves a multidisciplinary approach that may consist of surgery, radiation therapy (stereotactic radiosurgery or whole-brain radiation therapy), and/or systemic therapy. Unfortunately, all these treatment strategies, as well as the disease process itself, can be associated with debilitating and life-altering neurocognitive adverse effects. Balancing the benefits and toxicities of brain metastasis treatment is a challenging task that medical, radiation, and surgical oncologists face daily. Strategies have been developed to try mitigating these toxicities, such as stereotactic radiosurgery, hippocampal avoidance whole-brain radiation therapy, and “neuroprotective” drugs. Efforts have also been deployed in developing formal instruments/battery of tests to capture neurocognitive changes consistently in patients with brain metastases.

Brain metastases are the most common intracranial tumors, with an incidence rate ranging from 7 to 14 per 100,000. Both the disease process itself and its treatments can be associated with debilitating and life-altering neurocognitive adverse effects. The treatment of brain metastases involves a multidisciplinary team that aims to maximize the benefits and minimize the toxicities of treatment, which may include surgical resection, radiation therapy (stereotactic radiosurgery or whole-brain radiation therapy), and/or systemic therapy. Additionally, strategies have been investigated to prevent and treat these toxicities, such as stereotactic radiosurgery, hippocampal avoidance whole-brain radiation therapy, and “neuroprotective” drugs, respectively. In order to better detect and measure treatment toxicity, efforts have also been deployed in tracking neurocognitive changes consistently in patients with brain metastases.

A detailed characterization of the nature of neurocognitive impairment in patients with brain tumors is provided, as well as considerations for clinical practice regarding neuropsychological assessment throughout the disease course. Neurocognitive impairment is common in patients with brain tumors and may result from the tumor itself, as a consequence of treatment, including surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation, or in association with supportive care medications (e.g., anticonvulsant and pain medications). Serial surveillance of neurocognitive functioning in this population can facilitate medical decision-making and inform recommendations to improve patient daily functioning and quality of life. Neuropsychological assessment is increasingly recognized as a critical component of the multidisciplinary care of patients with brain tumors and has already had practice-changing effects. Further understanding of genetic risk factors for neurocognitive decline along with the development of novel assessment and intervention strategies may further enhance functioning and general well-being in this patient population.

Oncology has experienced positive shifts in survival curves for many cancers largely due to the development of earlier diagnostics and better therapeutics. This has increased the visibility and need for survivorship services, including clinical neuropsychology. Patients with cancer frequently experience cognitive dysfunction related to the presence of cancer itself and treatment neurotoxicity. These cognitive difficulties can profoundly impact patient functioning and autonomy with accompanying declines in quality of life. Clinical neuropsychologists are uniquely positioned to evaluate the cognitive and affective sequelae of cancer and treatment and provide interventions and recommendations that can benefit well-being and potentially alter the disease course. Despite increasing recognition of the importance of neuropsychological issues to cancer survivorship, many neuropsychologists have limited training and guidance regarding navigating and implementing services within the oncology setting. This article provides the basic rationale for neuropsychological practice and research activities in oncology, as well as the experience of the Section of Neuropsychology at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.

BACKGROUND: BT survivors commonly have impairments in attention/memory that adversely impact independence, home, school and work roles, mood and quality of life. Adults produce new brain cells, replace dead brain cells, and adaptively recruit new brain regions to perform certain tasks. We sought to determine the feasibility, acceptability, and early efficacy signals of an at-home, internet accessible, adaptive, brain-plasticity based computerized intervention designed to enhance attention/memory processes (Plasticity-based Adaptive Cognitive Remediation, PACR). METHODS: Adult BT survivors with self-reported and tested attention/memory impairment, status post surgery and radiation were enrolled (n = 34) into a longitudinal, single-arm study. Patients completed neuropsychological testing before and after intervention. Patients were instructed to complete 40 PACR sessions (1 hour/day, 5 days/week for 8 weeks). A priori feasibility was defined as >80% of patients completing >10 sessions in the first month and not skipping >10 consecutive sessions thereafter. Secondary objectives were to assess improvement on trained tasks (near transfer), unrelated cognitive tests (far transfer), and acceptability. RESULTS: PACR was considered feasible in 40% of patients; 77% reported being "somewhat" or "very satisfied" with PACRs "usefulness in helping to minimize the impact of cognitive symptoms on ability to function effectively in daily activities"; and 100% of subjects would recommend PACR to others. Near transfer of training effects were significant (P < 0.05) on most trained tasks with effect sizes ranging from 0.32 to 1.29. Far transfer of training effects were only seen on the COWA (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Only 40% of BT survivors completed the PACR intervention as it was prescribed in this study. Near transfer of training but not far transfer of training was observed. Most participants found the intervention useful and all would recommend it to other patients. Consideration of dose-response curves, alternative treatment delivery, and patient selection appears warranted if PACR is to be a viable intervention.