Abstract
Background: Cognitive function in patients with diffuse glioma is frequently impaired and can have a profound impact on quality of life. Accurate, reproducible and accessible tools to assess cognition are mandatory to understand the effects of the tumour and treatment. Our hypothesis was that an app-based assessment would be complementary to traditional neuropsychological testing, thereby aiding in defining cognitive profiles and trajectories during early treatment of diffuse glioma. Methods: Seventeen subjects with diffuse low-grade gliomas completed a traditional neuropsychological assessment battery before and after surgery. In addition an app-based tablet assessment (OCS-Bridge) was administered pre- and post-operatively as well as longitudinally at 3- and 12-month follow-up. Deficit rates, mean performance, and changes over time were compared using standardized z-scores between the two testing methods. Unsupervised k-means clustering was performed on individual cognitive tests in each battery. Results: Preoperative testing showed an average of 2.88 deficits and 1.18 deficits per patient on neuropsychological testing and the tablet-based OCS-Bridge assessment, respectively. Digit span testing demonstrated agreement between testing modalities, but otherwise there was no significant correlation (Pearson's correlation: p=0.7723, r-value = 0.0758, df = 16). Longitudinal assessment revealed dynamic changes in attention and nonverbal skills. Traditional assessment was more sensitive to memory deficits, showing 22 preoperative deficits within the cohort vs. 1 for the app-based assessment, while app-based assessment was more sensitive to nonverbal skills, showing 8 deficits preoperatively vs. none in the traditional assessment. Clustering analysis did not create clusters along the predetermined domains, indicating that certain individual tests may test more than one cognitive function. Conclusions: These data suggest app-based assessment is reliable and complementary to data obtained from traditional neuropsychological testing. Advantages include efficiency, facilitation of longitudinal testing, and increased sensitivity in domains of non-verbal skills and attention. Patients with diffuse glioma show subtle neuropsychological impairments, unique cognitive profiles, and discrete trajectories during early treatment, therefore judicious assessment is imperative.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
MA is funded by the Cambridge Trust - Yousef Jameel Scholarship. RRG is funded by a Guarantors of Brain Post-Doctoral Fellowship award. YE is funded by a Royal Society Dorothy Hodgkin Research Fellowship. SJP is supported by the National Institute for Health Career Development Fellowship (CDF-2018-11-ST2-003). This report is independent research supported by the National Institute of Research (NIHR Career Development Fellowship, Mr Stephen Price, CDF-2018-11-ST2-003). The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health and Social Care. MGH received an award from The Brain Tumour Charity (ref: RG86218) to fund this work.
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 Cambridge Central Research Ethics Committee (protocol number 16/EE/0151).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
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
Data Availability
In accordance with ethics requirements, data will be made available to collaborating centres upon reasonable request.
