Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42726439›Full record

ReviewPharmacological reports : PR2026

Cancer therapy-related cognitive impairment, part 2: from bench to bedside-and back: why candidate therapies for cancer therapy-related cognitive impairment fail to translate.

Selene Tertemiz, Jan Detka, Kinga Sałat

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Pharmacological reports : PR, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Selene TertemizDoctoral School of Medical and Health Sciences, Św. Łazarza 16 St., Kraków, 31-530, Poland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-6086-191X
Jan DetkaDepartment of Pharmacodynamics, Chair of Pharmacodynamics, Faculty of Pharmacy, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Medyczna 9 St., Kraków, 30-688, Poland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9866-5777
Kinga SałatDepartment of Pharmacodynamics, Chair of Pharmacodynamics, Faculty of Pharmacy, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Medyczna 9 St., Kraków, 30-688, Poland. kinga.salat@uj.edu.pl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0614-5393

Funding

Uniwersytet Jagielloński Collegium Medicum Grant No. N42/DBS/000457
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although numerous pharmacological and nonpharmacological strategies have been proposed for the prevention or treatment of cancer therapy-related cognitive impairment (CRCI), only a few have achieved robust clinical translation. This review, the second part of a two-part series, first critically summarizes current candidate pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions for CRCI, discussing their biological rationale, mechanisms of action, and the available preclinical and clinical evidence. It then reports why many of these promising approaches fail to translate into effective clinical therapies. We critically analyse the methodological gaps between preclinical models and cancer survivorship, including the use of non-tumour-bearing animals, inadequate modelling of age, sex, and hormonal status, mismatched behavioural and clinical endpoints, poor biomarker alignment, and insufficient assessment of potential interactions between neuroprotective agents and anticancer efficacy. Finally, we propose a translational roadmap for developing mechanism-informed, clinically predictive, and oncologically safe interventions for CRCI and explain why the preclinical efficacy of many candidate therapies has not yet translated into robust clinical benefit.

Indexed as

Cancer survivorshipCancer therapy-related cognitive impairmentClinical translationNeuroprotectionPreclinical modelsTranslational research

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.