Abstract
Objective Cognitive impairment in primary and metastatic brain cancers has been well-documented. However, there is a lack of research comparing the cognitive profiles of people with non-central nervous system (CNS) metastatic cancer versus metastatic brain cancer.
Methods This cross-sectional study consisted of 40 non-CNS metastasis, 61 brain metastasis, and 37 healthy control (HC) participants completing the same neuropsychological test battery.
Results Both clinical groups had reduced processing speed, verbal learning/memory, and executive functioning. Non-CNS metastasis participants performed below HC participants on processing speed and executive functioning, while brain metastasis participants demonstrated lower performance across all neuropsychological tests. Semantic verbal fluency differentiated the two clinical groups (non-CNS metastasis>brain metastasis). Twenty-five percent of non-CNS metastasis participants and 57% of brain metastasis participants had ≥3 impaired scores (i.e., ≤5th %ile).
Conclusion One-quarter of non-CNS metastasis participants were cognitively impaired on at least three neuropsychological tests, and over half of brain metastasis participants demonstrated the same level of cognitive impairment. The elevated rate of cognitive dysfunction in the non-CNS metastasis participants is possibly attributable to systemic illness and treatment effects, while the cognitive deficits among brain metastasis participants may be associated with the more significant neurologic disease burden posed by brain metastases in conjunction with treatment effects.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by the American Cancer Society [MRSG-14-204-01 to KT]; the National Institutes of Health/National Center for Advanced Translational Sciences [KL2 TR000166 to KT]; the National Cancer Institute [5R25CA076023]; and the University of Alabama at Birmingham Department of Neurology.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was approved by the University of Alabama at Birmingham Institutional Review Board (IRB 141023002)
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Conflict of Interest: None declared
Funding: This work was supported by the American Cancer Society [MRSG-14-204-01 to KT]; the National Institutes of Health/National Center for Advanced Translational Sciences [KL2 TR000166 to KT]; the National Cancer Institute [5R25CA076023]; and the University of Alabama at Birmingham Department of Neurology.
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
