Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Assessment of neuropsychological function during early treatment of diffuse glioma

Mallory Owen, Rafael Romero-Garcia, Alexa McDonald, Emma Woodberry, Moataz Assem, Pedro Coelho, Rob C Morris, Stephen J Price, Tom Santarius, John Suckling, Yaara Erez, Michael G Hart
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.03.20119255
Mallory Owen
1University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rafael Romero-Garcia
2Department of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: rr480@cam.ac.uk
Alexa McDonald
3Department of Neuropsychology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Emma Woodberry
3Department of Neuropsychology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Moataz Assem
4MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Pedro Coelho
5Neurophys Limited
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rob C Morris
6Department of Neurosurgery, Addenbrooke’s hospital, Cambridge
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Stephen J Price
6Department of Neurosurgery, Addenbrooke’s hospital, Cambridge
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Tom Santarius
6Department of Neurosurgery, Addenbrooke’s hospital, Cambridge
7Physiology, Development and Neuroscience, University of Cambridge
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
John Suckling
2Department of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge
8Behavioural and Clinical Neuroscience Institute, University of Cambridge
9Cambridge and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Yaara Erez
4MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michael G Hart
6Department of Neurosurgery, Addenbrooke’s hospital, Cambridge
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

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.

Key Points

  • Patients with glioma have subtle cognitive changes requiring judicious testing

  • App-based assessment is effective in understanding neuropsychological function

  • Distinct cognitive profiles and trajectories are demonstrated during treatment

Importance of the Study Understanding cognitive function over time is an essential marker of quality of life and treatment outcomes in patients with diffuse glioma. Because diffuse gliomas are associated with few impairments, careful choice of individual neurocognitive testing is paramount to ensure sufficient sensitivity. Additionally, individuals with similar presentations or seemingly innocuous tumour locations can have profound differences in cognitive outcomes (Romero-Garcia et al., 2020).

Studies have demonstrated that traditional neuropsychological testing can be resource-intensive and unsuitable for administration at multiple time points. New app-based testing modalities aim to address these issues, and theoretically offer advantages in terms of novel interactive paradigms, ease of administration, and efficiency of repeated testing in longitudinal studies. However, they have not been extensively validated for use in this population, nor compared with traditional neuropsychology testing.

This study compares two neurocognitive testing modalities in a single population with diffuse glioma. Our study demonstrated that patients with diffuse glioma had subtle deficits, and the two modalities were complementary in their sensitivity to deficits in different domains of cognitive function. Traditional neuropsychology testing was more sensitive to memory deficits, while app-based assessment was more sensitive nonverbal skills and attention deficits. In addition, the app-based assessment allowed identification of longitudinal cognitive trajectories, while combined analysis identified discrete cognitive profiles specific to patients with diffuse glioma. Overall these data demonstrate the importance of cognitive testing in this population and highlight the complementary role of combined testing.

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

Footnotes

  • Funding

    RRG is funded by a Guarantors of Brain Post-Doctoral Fellowship award.

    YE is funded by a Royal Society Dorothy Hodgkin Research Fellowship.

    MA is funded by the Cambridge Trust – Yousef Jameel Scholarship.

    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.

  • Conflict of Interest

    There are no known conflicts of interest for any author of this manuscript

  • Authorship

    Study design: MGH, RRG, TS, JS, YE, MO, MA, PC, SJP

    Data Acquisition: AM, KC, PC, YE, MA, EW, MGH

    Data Analysis: MO, RRG, MGH

    Manuscript Writing: MO, MGH, RRG

Data Availability

In accordance with ethics requirements, data will be made available to collaborating centres upon reasonable request.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted June 05, 2020.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Assessment of neuropsychological function during early treatment of diffuse glioma
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Assessment of neuropsychological function during early treatment of diffuse glioma
Mallory Owen, Rafael Romero-Garcia, Alexa McDonald, Emma Woodberry, Moataz Assem, Pedro Coelho, Rob C Morris, Stephen J Price, Tom Santarius, John Suckling, Yaara Erez, Michael G Hart
medRxiv 2020.06.03.20119255; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.03.20119255
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Assessment of neuropsychological function during early treatment of diffuse glioma
Mallory Owen, Rafael Romero-Garcia, Alexa McDonald, Emma Woodberry, Moataz Assem, Pedro Coelho, Rob C Morris, Stephen J Price, Tom Santarius, John Suckling, Yaara Erez, Michael G Hart
medRxiv 2020.06.03.20119255; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.03.20119255

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (62)
  • Allergy and Immunology (144)
  • Anesthesia (47)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (419)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (72)
  • Dermatology (49)
  • Emergency Medicine (147)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (173)
  • Epidemiology (4906)
  • Forensic Medicine (3)
  • Gastroenterology (185)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (689)
  • Geriatric Medicine (72)
  • Health Economics (193)
  • Health Informatics (636)
  • Health Policy (322)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (209)
  • Hematology (86)
  • HIV/AIDS (157)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (5408)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (333)
  • Medical Education (96)
  • Medical Ethics (24)
  • Nephrology (77)
  • Neurology (692)
  • Nursing (42)
  • Nutrition (115)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (128)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (211)
  • Oncology (447)
  • Ophthalmology (140)
  • Orthopedics (36)
  • Otolaryngology (91)
  • Pain Medicine (37)
  • Palliative Medicine (18)
  • Pathology (131)
  • Pediatrics (201)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (131)
  • Primary Care Research (88)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (787)
  • Public and Global Health (1832)
  • Radiology and Imaging (328)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (142)
  • Respiratory Medicine (257)
  • Rheumatology (87)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (69)
  • Sports Medicine (63)
  • Surgery (102)
  • Toxicology (23)
  • Transplantation (29)
  • Urology (38)