Back

Complexity of baseline cognitive and psychological status in haematology patients planned for chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy

Kuznetsova, V.; Rosenfeld, H.; Sales, C.; van der Linde, S.; Roos, I.; Roberts, S.; D'Aprano, F.; Loi, S. M.; Dowling, M.; Dickinson, M.; Kalincik, T.; Harrison, S. J.; Anderson, M. A.; Malpas, C. B.

2023-06-05 neurology
10.1101/2023.06.03.23290918 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundImmune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) is a relatively common consequence of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy, with a wide range of possible cognitive presentations. The aim of this study was to characterise a real-word cognitive and psychological status of patients with advanced haematologic and solid organ malignancies planned for CAR-T. We also aimed to examine utility of two cognitive screening approaches. MethodsPatients underwent specialist cognitive assessment, including a self-report questionnaire of psychopathology and subjective cognitive function. A subset of individuals also completed the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). ResultsOf 60 patients included, 15-16 (25%-27%) presented with evidence of cognitive impairment, with six unique patterns of dysfunction. Impaired patients were more likely to have B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (BF10=9.30), be younger (BF10=7.76), have bone marrow involvement (BF10=5.18), report history of anxiety (BF10=4.85), or have evidence of psychopathology (BF10=31.30). Analyses did not support the utility of cognitive screening. Of those patients who completed a self-report measure of psychopathology, nine (15.8%) were elevated on at least one symptom domain. ConclusionsThe findings demonstrate a broad spectrum of dysfunction and psychopathology in this cohort, emphasising the importance of baseline evaluation for detecting cognitive neurotoxicity symptoms that might arise after CAR-T infusion.

Matching journals

The top 12 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.