Is poor sleep quality associated with poor neurocognitive outcome in cancer survivors? A systematic review

PURPOSE

Cancer-related neurocognitive impairment and poor sleep are prevalent in cancer survivors and have a negative impact on their quality of life. This systematic review studies the association between sleep disturbance and neurocognitive functioning, as well as the potential positive effects of sleep interventions on neurocognitive functioning in cancer survivors. In addition, we aimed at determining the potential positive effects of sleep interventions on neurocognitive functioning in this population.

METHODS

Following PRISMA guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses, a comprehensive PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL search was performed. Inclusion criteria were adult cancer survivors, self-reported or objective measures of neurocognitive functioning and sleep quality, or reports on the association between sleep and neurocognitive functioning.

RESULTS

Of the 4,547 records retrieved, 17 studies were retained for this review. Twelve studies were correlational, and five reported on interventions aimed at improving sleep quality. All studies that included self-reported neurocognitive functioning found that poorer sleep was associated with worse neurocognitive functioning. In four out of eight studies, poorer sleep was associated with objective neurocognitive impairment. Three out of five interventional studies showed neurocognitive functioning improved with improved sleep.

CONCLUSIONS

While poor sleep in cancer survivors is associated with self-reported neurocognitive impairment, the association between poor sleep and objective neurocognitive impairment is less evident.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

It is important that care providers are aware of the association between sleep and neurocognitive functioning and that improving sleep quality can be a way to decrease neurocognitive impairment in cancer survivors.

PL02.4.A International validation study of an EORTC instrument measuring instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) in patients with brain tumours: EORTC IADL-BN32

Background

Brain tumour patients often have neurocognitive deficits which can result in problems with activities in daily living that are cognitively complex. Currently, no valid and reliable brain tumour-specific instrument to measure these instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) is available, but such an instrument is being developed. This study aimed to validate the EORTC IADL-BN32 questionnaire, comprising five multi-item and two single item scales, in a large set of international brain tumour patients.

Material and Methods

This international study was conducted in 10 countries worldwide. Primary and metastatic brain tumour patients and their proxies were requested to complete the EORTC IADL-BN32 and a subjective cognitive questionnaire (MOS COG-R) at multiple time points. Several psychometric properties were evaluated with baseline data, including the structural validity (bi-factor confirmatory factor analysis [CFA]), reliability (internal consistency), construct validity (known groups comparisons) and patient-proxy congruency (intra-class correlation coefficients [ICC], Spearman's correlation).

Results

At baseline, 326 patients ( 30% low-grade glioma, 37% high-grade glioma (HGG) and 33% brain metastases) and 311 proxies completed the EORTC IADL-BN32. The bi-factor CFA was found to have a satisfactory model fit (CFI=0.92 and TLI=0.90), and other parameters indicated a good fit (RMSEA=0.08 and SRMR=0.05), thereby validating the preliminary scale structure, but also an IADL sum score. The multi-item scales showed good (0.9>α≥0.8) to excellent (α≥0.9) internal consistency (range α=0.86-0.97). Known groups comparisons analyses regarding patient’s cognitive status (indications vs. no cognitive impairment), subjective cognitive complaints (MOS COG-R ≤30 vs. >30), basic ADL (Barthel Index <100 vs. 100) and performance status (KPS <70 vs. ≥70) showed significant differences on all IADL outcome measures in line with a priori defined hypotheses. On a group level, patient and proxy ratings had moderate to strong correlations, however, proxies tended to report more problems on all scales. The ICCs showed moderate to good congruency between patients and proxies (range ICC: 0.63-0.81).

Conclusion

The evaluated psychometric properties support the current scale structure of the EORTC IADL-BN32. Additional psychometric properties with longitudinal data are needed, such as test-retest reliability and responsiveness, to further validate the EORTC-IADL BN32 questionnaire.

Do neurocognitive impairments explain the differences between brain tumour patients and their proxies when assessing the patient’s IADL?

Background

Neurocognitive impairments are common among brain tumour patients, and may impact patient’s awareness of performance in instrumental activities in daily life (IADL). We examined differences between patient- and proxy-reported assessments of the patient’s IADL, and whether the level of (dis)agreement is associated with neurocognitive impairments.

Methods

Brain tumour patients and their proxies completed the phase 3 version of the EORTC IADL-BN32 questionnaire measuring IADL, and patients completed six neurocognitive measures. Patient-proxy difference scores in IADL were compared between patients who were defined as neurocognitively impaired (≥2 neurocognitive measures ≥2.0 standard deviations below healthy controls) and non-neurocognitively impaired. With multinomial logistic regression analyses we examined if neurocognitive variables were independently associated with patient-proxy disagreement in IADL ratings.

Results

Patients (n=81) did not systematically (p<0.01) rate IADL outcomes different than their proxies. Proxies did report more problems on 19/32 individual items and all five scales. This effect was more apparent in dyads with a neurocognitively impaired patient (n=37), compared to dyads with non-neurocognitively impaired patients (n=44). Multinomial logistic regression analyses showed that several neurocognitive variables (e.g., cognitive flexibility and verbal fluency) were independently associated with disagreement between patients and proxies on different scales.

Conclusion

Neurocognitive deficits seem to play a role in the discrepancies between brain tumour patients and their proxies assessment of patient’s level of IADL . Although replication of our results is needed, our findings suggests that caution is warranted in interpreting self-reported IADL by patients with neurocognitive impairment, and that such self-reports should be supplemented with proxy ratings.

Is the EORTC QLQ-C30 emotional functioning scale appropriate as an initial screening measure to identify brain tumour patients who may possibly have a mood disorder?

Background

Screening glioma patients regularly for possible mood disorders may facilitate early identification and referral of patients at risk. This study evaluated if the EORTC QLQ‐C30 Emotional Functioning (EF) scale could be used as an initial screening measure to identify patients possibly having a mood disorder.

Methods

EORTC QLQ‐C30 EF and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores were collected as part of a study assessing the impact of timing of patient‐reported outcome assessments on actual health‐related quality of life outcomes (N = 99). Spearman correlations and Mann‐Whitney U tests were used to determine the association between the EF and HADS (sub)scales. Receiver Operating Characteristic analyses were performed to determine optimal cut‐off EF scores to identify patients possibly having a mood disorder (i.e. HADS subscale score ≥8 points).

Results

EF and HADS (sub)scales correlated moderately (HADS‐A: r = −0.65; HADS‐D: r = −0.52). Significant EF score differences were found between patients with HADS ≥8 versus <8 points (HADS‐A: mean difference (MD) = 32 and HADS‐D: MD = 23). The EF scale had excellent (HADS‐A; AUC = 0.88) and borderline excellent (HADS‐D; AUC = 0.78) distinguishing capabilities. A statistically optimal (EF score <80) and a most inclusive (sensitivity of 100%, corresponding to an EF score <97) EF cut‐off score correctly identified 88.0% and 96.0% of patients with a possible mood disorder, respectively.

Conclusion

EORTC QLQ‐C30 EF scale seems to be an appropriate screening measure to identify glioma patients possibly having a mood disorder in need of further assessment.

OS05.4.A Do neurocognitive deficits explain the differences between brain tumour patients and their proxies assessing the patient’s I-ADL?

BACKGROUND

Neurocognitive deficits are common among brain tumour patients, and may impact on patient awareness of deficits in instrumental activities in daily life (IADL). This study aimed to examine differences between patient-reported and proxy-reported assessments of the patient’s performance of IADL, and whether the level of (dis)agreement is associated with neurocognitive deficits.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A phase III EORTC questionnaire measuring IADL in brain tumour patients (EORTC IADL-BN32) and six neurocognitive test measures were administered as part of a larger multicentre international study designed to develop a brain tumour specific IADL questionnaire. Bland-Altman plots and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to evaluated patient- and proxy-reported IADL on a group level. Subsequently, Mann-Whitney U tests were performed to compare patient-proxy difference scores (patient IADL score - their proxy IADL score) between patients who were considered clearly neurocognitively impaired (≥2 neurocognitive test measures; ≤2.0 SD below healthy controls) and patients who were not. Furthermore, multinomial logistic regression analyses were performed to examined which sociodemgraphic, clinical, and particularly neurocognitive variables were independently associated with patients and proxies differing in their evaluation of patient’s IADL.

RESULTS

Patients (N=81) and proxies (N=81), on group level, did not significantly differ on either the IADL individual item or scale scores. However, significant differences were found on patient-proxy difference scores between patients who were (N=37) and were not (N=44) considered clearly neurocognitively impaired for 10/32 individual items and one of the scales (i.e. Scale 4: Administrative tasks), all showing that the proxies of clearly neurocognitively impaired patients reported more problems relative to the patients themselves, compared to proxies of patients not clearly neurocognitively impaired. Furthermore, for each scale, a neurocognitive variable, either impaired information processing speed, cognitive flexibility, verbal fluency or the number of neurocognitive test measures impaired, was found to be independently associated with proxies reporting more problems. For 4/5 scales, a clinical variable was additionally independently associated with proxies reporting more problems. Only one variable was independently associated with patient reporting more problems, namely being in active treatment was found to be associated with patients reporting more problems on Scale 4: Administrative tasks.

CONCLUSION

Results imply a consistent trend of clearly neurocognitively impaired patients underreporting problems with IADL compared to their proxies. It would therefore be advised to administer both the patient- and proxy-version of the EORTC IADL-BN32, particularly if neurocognitive deficits are presumed.

Development of an EORTC questionnaire measuring instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) in patients with brain tumours: phase I-III

PURPOSE

Being able to function independently in society is an important aspect of quality of life. This ability goes beyond self-care, requires higher order cognitive functioning, and is typically measured with instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) questionnaires. Cognitive deficits are frequently observed in brain tumour patients, however, IADL is almost never assessed because no valid and reliable IADL measure is available for this patient group. Therefore, this measure is currently being developed.

METHODS

This international multicentre study followed European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Group module development guidelines. Three out of four phases are completed: phases (I) generation of items, (II) construction of the item list, and (III) pre-testing. This paper reports the item selection procedures and preliminary psychometric properties of the questionnaire. Brain tumour patients (gliomas and brain metastases), their informal caregivers, and health care professionals (HCPs) were included.

RESULTS

Phase I (n = 44 patient-proxy dyads and 26 HCPs) generated 59 relevant and important activities. In phase II, the activities were converted into items. In phase III (n = 85 dyads), the 59 items were pre-tested. Item selection procedures resulted in 32 items. Exploratory factor analysis revealed a preliminary dimensional structure consisting of five scales with acceptable to excellent internal consistency (α = 0.73-0.94) and two single items. For three scales, patients with cognitive impairments had significantly more IADL problems than patients without impairments.

CONCLUSION

A phase IV validation study is needed to confirm the psychometric properties of the EORTC IADL-BN32 questionnaire in a larger international sample.

OS3.3 Development of an EORTC questionnaire measuring instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) in patients with brain tumours: phase I-III

BACKGROUND

In brain tumour patients, impairments in every day functioning can impact quality of life, and are therefore an important outcome in both clinical trials and practice. One way to measure every day functioning is with an activities of daily living (ADL) questionnaire. Instrumental ADL (IADL) are the cognitively more complex activities, that are essential to function autonomously within society. Cognitive decline may therefore negatively impact IADL, making these activities particularly relevant to brain tumour patients. The aim of this study is to develop a reliable and valid questionnaire to measure IADL in primary malignant and metastatic brain tumour patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The questionnaire development study followed the standard European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) four phase methodology: (I) generation of activities list, (II) construction of item list, (III) pre-testing, and (IV) field testing. This report covers phases I-III. To ensure cross-cultural validity, participants were recruited from different countries (The Netherlands, United Kingdom, Italy, Austria and Japan). In phase I, potential activities were identified based on a literature review and in-depth interviews with patients, proxies and healthcare professionals. In phase II, activities were turned into items, and translated into all required languages by the EORTC Translation Unit. In phase III, the item list was pre-tested in patient-proxy dyads. In accordance with predetermined decision rules to reduce items, final items were selected, and preliminary psychometric properties (i.e. factor structure, validity, reliability) were assessed.

RESULTS

Phase I (N=44 dyads) resulted in 59 IADL activities which were converted into 59 items in phase II. In phase III, N=85 dyads completed and reviewed this item list. The item list was subsequently reduced to 32 items. An exploratory factor analysis indicated several items measuring similar underlying constructs (e.g. domestic life and using computer/smartphone) showing acceptable to good (α≥0.7) internal consistency (range α=0.69–0.89). Seven items were less related to these underlying constructs (e.g. work or managing your own medication), and therefore single items. Construct validity, measured with known-group comparisons analyses between cognitively impaired and unimpaired patients, showed significant differences in scores between the two groups on some scales and several single items.

CONCLUSION

The currently developed EORTC IADL-BN32 questionnaire can be a valuable asset in assessing IADL functioning in brain tumour patients, but further validation in phase IV is required and is planned.

Evaluation of the content coverage of questionnaires containing basic and instrumental activities of daily living (ADL) used in adult patients with brain tumors

Background

Everyday functioning can be assessed using measures of basic activities of daily living (BADL) or instrumental activities of daily living (IADL). The aim of this review was to provide an overview of the scope and specific content of BADL and/or IADL covered by currently used questionnaires in adult brain tumor patient studies.

Methods

Electronic databases were searched up to April 2017 to identify all eligible questionnaires with items regarding BADL/IADL in studies with adult brain tumor patients. Articles were selected using predetermined in- and exclusion criteria. Items with similar content were clustered into domains based on type of activity.

Results

Thirty-one unique questionnaires containing at least one BADL and/or IADL item were identified; 21 and 29 questionnaires containing ≥ 1 BADL or IADL item, respectively. The percentage of ADL items in these questionnaires ranged from 4 to 100%. Only two questionnaires were specifically developed to measure BADL (Barthel Index and Katz-ADL) and two specifically for IADL (Lawton-Brody IADL and preliminary IADL-BN). Content clustering revealed that IADL had a larger variation in content (31 domains, e.g. work or leisure time activities) compared to BADL (15 domains, e.g. mobility or bathing/washing).

Conclusion

Thirty-one questionnaires previously used in brain tumor studies contained items on BADL and/or IADL and covered a wide range of content, in particular for IADL. It is currently unclear which BADL/IADL are most relevant for brain tumor patients, and this should therefore be evaluated. Next, existing questionnaires could be adapted or validated, or new measures can be developed to meet these needs.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s11060-019-03136-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Peripersonal and extrapersonal visuospatial neglect in different frames of reference: A brain lesion-symptom mapping study

INTRODUCTION

Visuospatial neglect can occur in peripersonal and extrapersonal space. The dorsal visual pathway is hypothesized to be associated with peripersonal, and the ventral pathway with extrapersonal neglect. We aimed to evaluate neural substrates of peripersonal versus extrapersonal neglect, separately for egocentric and allocentric frames of reference.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study, including stroke patients admitted for inpatient rehabilitation. Approximately 1 month post-stroke onset, computerized cancellation (egocentric) and bisection tasks (egocentric and allocentric) were administered at 30 cm and 120 cm. We collected CT or MRI scans and performed voxel-based lesion-symptom mapping for the cancellation, and subtraction analyses for the line bisection task.

RESULTS

We included 98 patients for the cancellation and 129 for the bisection analyses. The right parahippocampal gyrus, hippocampus, and thalamus were associated with egocentric peripersonal neglect as measured with cancellation. These areas were also associated with extrapersonal neglect, together with the right superior parietal lobule, angular gyrus, supramarginal gyrus, lateral occipital cortex, planum temporale and superior temporal gyrus. Lesions in the right parietal, temporal and frontal areas were associated with both peripersonal and extrapersonal egocentric neglect as measured with bisection. For allocentric neglect no clear pattern of associated brain regions was observed.

DISCUSSION

We found right hemispheric anatomical correlates for peripersonal and extrapersonal neglect. However, no brain areas were uniquely associated with peripersonal neglect, meaning we could not conclusively verify the ventral/dorsal hypothesis. Several areas were uniquely associated with egocentric extrapersonal neglect, suggesting that these brain areas can be specifically involved in extrapersonal, but not in peripersonal, attention processes.

Development of a questionnaire measuring instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) in patients with brain tumors: a pilot study

Both dementia and brain tumor patients exhibit cognitive decline during the course of their disease. They might therefore experience similar problems with cognitively complex daily activities (i.e., instrumental activities of daily living (IADL)). The study's objective is to evaluate if the Amsterdam IADL Questionnaire^© (A-IADL-Q), a 70-item IADL questionnaire developed for and validated in early dementia patients, is also applicable to glioma patients. The evaluation consisted of three steps. Predetermined decision rules defined which activities were retained, altered, added or excluded. In the first step, 6 neuro-oncology health care professionals (HCP) and 10 glioma patient-proxy dyads were asked to evaluate the 70 A-IADL-Q activities. In the second step, in-depth interviews were conducted with 6 HCPs and 6 other patient-proxy dyads to generate relevant activities specific to glioma patients not covered by the A-IADL-Q. In the third step, 6 new patient-proxy dyads were cognitively debriefed with the list of activities constructed in the previous steps. Results indicated that in step 1, after alterations and exclusions, 28/70 activities could be retained. Nine newly generated activities were subsequently added in step 2. In step 3, the 37 activities were presented to the patient-proxy dyads. Based on their input, several additional alterations and exclusions were made resulting in a list of 32 activities. In conclusion, this evaluation of the A-IADL-Q showed that dementia-specific IADL activities are only partly applicable to glioma patients, and that the addition of glioma specific IADL activities is necessary to capture the IADL construct. This underlines the need for a disease-specific IADL questionnaire for brain tumor patients.

The right hemisphere is dominant in organization of visual search-A study in stroke patients

Cancellation tasks are widely used for diagnosis of lateralized attentional deficits in stroke patients. A disorganized fashion of target cancellation has been hypothesized to reflect disturbed spatial exploration. In the current study we aimed to examine which lesion locations result in disorganized visual search during cancellation tasks, in order to determine which brain areas are involved in search organization. A computerized shape cancellation task was administered in 78 stroke patients. As an index for search organization, the amount of intersections of paths between consecutive crossed targets was computed (i.e., intersections rate). This measure is known to accurately depict disorganized visual search in a stroke population. Ischemic lesions were delineated on CT or MRI images. Assumption-free voxel-based lesion-symptom mapping and region of interest-based analyses were used to determine the grey and white matter anatomical correlates of the intersections rate as a continuous measure. The right lateral occipital cortex, superior parietal lobule, postcentral gyrus, superior temporal gyrus, middle temporal gyrus, supramarginal gyrus, inferior longitudinal fasciculus, first branch of the superior longitudinal fasciculus (SLF I), and the inferior fronto-occipital fasciculus, were related to search organization. To conclude, a clear right hemispheric dominance for search organization was revealed. Further, the correlates of disorganized search overlap with regions that have previously been associated with conjunctive search and spatial working memory. This suggests that disorganized visual search is caused by disturbed spatial processes, rather than deficits in high level executive function or planning, which would be expected to be more related to frontal regions.