Abstract 1437P
Background
Cancer-related cognitive impairment (CRCI) has severe implications for quality of life and sosio-economic functioning in cervical cancer survivors (CCS). Neurophychological (NP) testing remains the gold standard for assessing cognitive late effects, but data on the association between subjective and objective CRCI in cervical cancer is scarce. This cross-sectional study aimed to examine frequency and severity of objective CRCI in CCS reporting significant subjective cognitive impairment (CI) and explore associations between subjective and objective CRCI.
Methods
Cervical cancer survivors (CCS) reporting significant subjective CI, defined as 1.5 standard deviation (SD) below normative mean, underwent NP testing covering attention/working memory, verbal learning and memory, processing speed, verbal fluency, and executive functions. Patients were compared to healthy, age-matched controls. According to International Cognition and Cancer Task Force recommendations, objective CI was defined as scores of ≥2 SD below the control group mean in one test or ≥1,5 SD in two or more tests.
Results
In total, 65 CCS and 74 controls completed NP testing. The CCS group performed significantly reduced across all cognitive domains compared to healthy controls (all p-values <.001). At domain level 21 women (32,3%) in the CCS group showed objective CI compared to 5 (6,7%) in the control group (p<.001), with processing speed and verbal memory being the most affected domains (26,5% and 21,3% respectively). Correlation analyses between subjective CI and cognitive domain scores revealed significant correlation on verbal memory (p=.009) and attention and working memory (p=.011) only, indicating no strong association between the magnitude of subjective CI and level of cognitive performance.
Conclusions
Almost 1/3 of CCS reporting subjective CI showed proof of objective CI. Although cognitive impairment is evident in CCS, our results also support evidence that objective and subjective CI represent different constructs. Differentiating subjective and objective CI might be important when tayloring effective interventions to improve cognitive function in CCS.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Jan Kåre Heiberg and Marthe Vildåsen.
Disclosure
K. Lindemann: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: MSD, Eisai; Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Speaker: GSK; Financial Interests, Institutional, Research support paid to institution: GSK; Financial Interests, Institutional, Support for clinical study paid to institution: AstraZeneca, MSD, Roche, Nykode; Financial Interests, Institutional, Advisory Board: MSD; Financial Interests, Institutional, Invited Speaker, Consultancy: AstraZeneca; Personal and Institutional, Deputy Medical Director: NSGO; Other, Personal, Member: NSGO, ESGO, ASMO. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.