ArticleCancer medicine2024
Characterization of cancer survivors clustered by subjective and objective cognitive function scores.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association of social determinants of health and physical functioning among breast cancer survivors.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Correction to "Characterization of Cancer Survivors Clustered by Subjective and Objective Cognitive Function Scores".Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Characterization of cancer survivors clustered by subjective and objective cognitive function scores.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCancer-related cognitive impairment (CRCI) is a prevalent condition that significantly impacts the quality of life of individuals who receive cancer treatment. Clinical management of CRCI presents challenges due to the absence of a standardized assessment. This study identified clinically relevant phenotypic clusters of CRCI based on subjective and objective cognitive function scores.
methodsIn this cross-sectional study, participants were clustered using the VARCLUS™ based on subjective cognitive impairment assessed through the PROMIS® version 1.0 short-form subscales of cognitive abilities and cognitive concerns and the CANTAB Cambridge Cognition® scores, which included measures of visuospatial working memory capacity, visual episodic memory, new learning, working memory, executive function, and sustained attention. Each cluster's characteristics were described using demographics, physical and psychosocial factors (physical function, affect, optimism, and social support), and psychoneurological symptoms (anxiety, depression, fatigue, neuropathic pain, and sleep disturbance).
resultsWe obtained five clusters from a total of 414 participants, where 99% were female, and 93% were self-reported white. Clusters 4 and 5 showed the highest PROMIS® cognitive abilities and the lowest measures of cognitive concern, while Clusters 1 and 2 showed the lowest cognitive abilities and the highest cognitive concerns. Clusters 4 and 5 had higher education, income, employment, and higher scores in physical function, positive affect, optimism, and social support. Additionally, individuals in these clusters were less prone to experience severe cancer-related psychoneurological symptoms.
conclusionOur clustering approach, combining subjective and objective cognitive function information, shows promise in identifying phenotypes that hold clinical relevance for categorizing patient presentation of CRCI and facilitating individualized management strategies.
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.