ArticleComprehensive psychoneuroendocrinology2026
Longitudinal trajectories of cancer-related cognitive impairment and influential factors among patients with lung cancer.
Article in Comprehensive psychoneuroendocrinology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Trial
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to investigate longitudinal cognitive changes and identify factors associated with cancer-related cognitive impairment (CRCI) among lung cancer survivors. Methods: Cognitive function was assessed using the FACT-Cog (subjective) and TICS-M (objective). The baseline assessment was completed before the use of chemotherapy drugs and recorded as T0. After completing the first cycle of chemotherapy, it was recorded as T1; after the second cycle, as T2; after the third cycle, as T3; after the fourth cycle, as T4; and after the fifth cycle, as T5. Linear mixed-effect models evaluated associations between clinical/sociodemographic factors and cognitive outcomes. Results: Higher education level and later treatment progression were correlated with increased TICS-M scores. In contrast, Rural residence (β = -1.89, p = 0.021) and more comorbidities (β = -2.15, p = 0.033) were associated with reduced FACT-Cog scores. Treatment progression correlated with improved TICS-M scores (β = 0.716, p = 0.001). No significant differences were observed between the chemotherapy and chemoimmunotherapy groups (p > 0.05). A key finding was the observed discordance between stable subjective reports and modestly improving objective scores over time. There was a discrepancy between subjective and objective cognitive evaluations, as FACT-Cog scores remained consistent over time (mean 129.8 ± 20.2), while TICS-M scores showed a slight improvement (from 23.4 ± 4.9 to 24.4 ± 3.7). Discussion: The influence of education, residence, and comorbidities on CRCI trajectories in lung cancer patients highlights the need for integrated evaluation tools. This longitudinal analysis not only identifies distinct risk profiles for CRCI but also underscores the critical need for proactive screening and tailored supportive care programs. These priorities provide a guide for improving cognitive health outcomes in lung cancer survivorship care.
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.