ArticleCancer medicine2024
Neurocognitive and psychosocial outcomes in survivors of childhood leukemia with Down syndrome.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating Scoring Mechanisms for Measuring the Stroop Effect in Individuals With Down Syndrome.Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR · 2026Review
- A multicenter observational cohort study in survivors of Down Syndrome-associated acute leukemia (ALTE22C1): a report from the Children's Oncology Group.BMC cancer · 2025Observational
- Neuropsychological function in childhood cancer patients and adult survivors of childhood cancer.Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology · 2025Review
- Diabetes mellitus and neurocognition: A report from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study.Cancer · 2025Article
- Neurocognitive and psychosocial outcomes in survivors of childhood leukemia with Down syndrome.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe primary aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of a developmentally tailored neurocognitive assessment in survivors of childhood acute leukemia with Down syndrome (DS-leukemia). A secondary aim was to compare outcomes in the DS-leukemia group to a historical comparison group of individuals with DS and no history of childhood cancer.
methodsSurvivors of DS-leukemia (n = 43; 56% male, mean [SD] age at diagnosis = 4.3 [4.5] years; age at evaluation = 15 [7.9] years) completed a neurocognitive assessment battery that included direct measures of attention, executive function, and processing speed, and proxy ratings of attention problems and executive dysfunction. Direct assessment outcomes were compared to a historical comparison cohort of individuals with DS and no history of childhood cancer (DS-control; n = 117; 56% male, mean [SD] age at evaluation = 12.7 [3.4] years).
resultsRates of valid task completion ranged from 54% to 95%, suggesting feasibility for most direct assessment measures. Compared to the DS-control group, the DS-leukemia group had significantly lower completion rates on measures of executive function (p = 0.008) and processing speed (p = 0.018) compared to the DS-control group. There were no other significant group differences in completion rates. Compared to the DS-control group, the DS-leukemia group had significantly more accurate performance on two measures of executive function (p = 0.032; p = 0.005). Compared to the DS-control group, the DS-leukemia group had significantly more problems with executive function as identified on proxy ratings (6.5% vs. 32.6%, p = <0.001).
conclusionChildren with Down syndrome (DS) are at increased risk for developing acute leukemia compared to the general population but are systematically excluded from neurocognitive outcome studies among leukemia survivors. This study demonstrated the feasibility of evaluating neurocognitive late effects in leukemia survivors with DS using novel measures appropriate for populations with intellectual developmental disorder.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.