Skip to main content

Assessment of Neurocognitive Functioning in Clinical Practice and for Trial Purposes

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Neurorehabilitation in Neuro-Oncology
  • 647 Accesses

Abstract

Patient-oriented outcome measures, such as symptoms, physical functioning, and health-related quality of life, are pertinent outcome measures for patients who cannot be cured of their disease. This is the case for virtually all patients with primary or metastatic brain tumors for whom palliation of symptoms and the maintenance or improvement of health-related quality of life are important goals of treatment earlier or later in the disease trajectory. Brain tumors greatly impact on an individual, as well as their family members and friends. The tumor or its treatment (i.e., chemotherapy, radiation, pharmacological treatment) may directly or indirectly cause neurological impairments that affect the physical, social, vocational, and emotional capabilities of the individual. The available treatment options for both primary and metastatic brain tumors have improved and brought with them modest improved patient survival. Evaluation of treatment in brain tumor patients should therefore not only focus on survival improvement, but should also aim at determining neurological functioning and adverse treatment effects on the normal brain. In this respect, neurocognitive functioning (NCF) is a highly critical outcome measure for brain tumor patients [1]. Apart from a prognostic significance of baseline NCF [2, 3], deterioration in NCF in brain tumor patients may herald tumor progression, even before signs of disease recurrence are evident on CT or MRI [4–6].

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Taphoorn MJB, Klein M. Cognitive deficits in adult patients with brain tumours. Lancet Neurol. 2004;3:159–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Klein M, Postma TJ, Taphoorn MJB, et al. The prognostic value of cognitive functioning in the survival of patients with high-grade glioma. Neurology. 2003;61:1796–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Johnson DR, Sawyer AM, Meyers CA, O’Neill BP, Wefel JS. Early measures of cognitive function predict survival in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Neuro-oncology. 2012;14:808–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Armstrong CL, Goldstein B, Shera D, Ledakis GE, Tallent EM. The predictive value of longitudinal neuropsychologic assessment in the early detection of brain tumor recurrence. Cancer. 2003;97:649–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Brown PD, Jensen AW, Felten SJ, et al. Detrimental effects of tumor progression on cognitive function of patients with high-grade glioma. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:5427–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Meyers CA, Hess KR. Multifaceted end points in brain tumor clinical trials: cognitive deterioration precedes MRI progression. Neuro-oncology. 2003;5:89–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. World Health Organization. International classification of functioning, disability and health: ICF. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. Mini-mental state: a practical method for grading the cognitive state for the clinician. J Psychiatric Res. 1975;12:189–98.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Nasreddine ZS, Phillips NA, Bedirian V, et al. The Montreal cognitive assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatrics Soc. 2005;53:695–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Sikkes SA, de Lange-de Klerk ES, Pijnenburg YA, et al. A new informant-based questionnaire for instrumental activities of daily living in dementia. Alzheimers Dement. 2012;8:536–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Brennan L, Siderowf A, Rubright JD, et al. The Penn Parkinson’s daily activities questionnaire-15: psychometric properties of a brief assessment of cognitive instrumental activities of daily living in Parkinson’s disease. Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2016;25:21–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hohol MJ, Orav EJ, Weiner HL. Disease steps in multiple sclerosis: a simple approach to evaluate disease progression. Neurology. 1995;45:251–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Oort Q, Dirven L, Meijer W, et al. Development of a questionnaire measuring instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) in patients with brain tumors: a pilot study. J Neuro-Oncol. 2017;132:145–53.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Ustun TB, Chatterji S, Kostanjsek N, et al. Developing the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0. Bull World Health Organ. 2010;88:815–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ownsworth T, Hawkes A, Steginga S, Walker D, Shum D. A biopsychosocial perspective on adjustment and quality of life following brain tumor: a systematic evaluation of the literature. Disabil Rehabil. 2009;31:1038–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Lidstone V, Butters E, Seed PT, et al. Symptoms and concerns amongst cancer outpatients: identifying the need for specialist palliative care. Palliat Med. 2003;17:588–95.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Syrjala KL, Stover AC, Yi JC, Artherholt SB, Abrams JR. Measuring social activities and social function in long-term cancer survivors who received hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Psycho-Oncology. 2010;19:462–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Happold C, Felsberg J, Clarke J, et al. Molecular genetic, host-derived and clinical determinants of long-term survival in glioblastoma: first results from the Brain Tumor Funders’ Collaborative Consortium. In: 22nd annual scientific meeting and education day of the society for neuro-oncology. November 16–19 2017, San Francisco, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Gilbert M, Armstrong T, Meyers C. Issues in assessing and interpreting quality of life in patients with malignant glioma. Semin Oncol. 2000;27:20–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Armstrong TS, Vera-Bolanos E, Acquaye AA, et al. The symptom burden of primary brain tumors: evidence for a core set of tumor- and treatment-related symptoms. Neuro Oncology. 2016;18:252–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Makale MT, McDonald CR, Hattangadi-Gluth JA, Kesari S. Mechanisms of radiotherapy-associated cognitive disability in patients with brain tumours. Nat Rev Neurol. 2017;13:52–64.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Vannorsdall TD. Cognitive changes related to cancer therapy. Med Clin N Am. 2017;101:1115–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Bosma I, Vos MJ, Heimans JJ, et al. The course of neurocognitive functioning in high-grade glioma patients. Neuro-oncology. 2007;9:53–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hassler MR, Elandt K, Preusser M, et al. Neurocognitive training in patients with high-grade glioma: a pilot study. J Neuro-Oncol. 2010;97:109–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Gehring K, Sitskoorn MM, Gundy CM, et al. Cognitive rehabilitation in patients with gliomas: a randomized, controlled trial. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:3712–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Gehring K, Aaronson NK, Taphoorn MJ, Sitskoorn MM. Interventions for cognitive deficits in patients with a brain tumor: an update. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2010;10:1779–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Boele FW, Zant M, Heine ECE, et al. The association between cognitive functioning and health-related quality of life in low-grade glioma patients. Neuro-Oncol Pract. 2014;1:40–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Cull A, Hay C, Love SB, et al. What do cancer patients mean when they complain of concentration and memory problems? Br J Cancer. 1996;74:1674–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Stewart AL, Ware JE, editors. Measuring functioning and well-being: the medical outcomes study approach. Durham, NC: Duke University Press; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Ediebah DE, Reijneveld JC, Taphoorn MJ, et al. Impact of neurocognitive deficits on patient-proxy agreement regarding health-related quality of life in low-grade glioma patients. Qual Life Res. 2017;26:869–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Lawton MP, Brody EM. Assessment of older people: self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist. 1969;9:179–86.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Bucks RS, Haworth J. Bristol activities of daily living scale: a critical evaluation. Expert Rev Neurother. 2002;2:669–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Wefel JS, Noll KR, Rao G, Cahill DP. Neurocognitive function varies by IDH1 genetic mutation status in patients with malignant glioma prior to surgical resection. Neuro Oncology. 2016;18:1656–63.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Klein M. Lesion momentum as explanation for preoperative neurocognitive function in patients with malignant glioma. Neuro-oncology. 2016;18:1595–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Correa DD, Maron L, Harder H, et al. Cognitive functions in primary central nervous system lymphoma: literature review and assessment guidelines. Ann Oncol. 2007;18:1145–51.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Klein M, Taphoorn MJ, Heimans JJ, et al. Neurobehavioral status and health-related quality of life in newly diagnosed high-grade glioma patients. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:4037–47.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Brown PD, Buckner JC, O'Fallon JR, et al. Importance of baseline mini-mental state examination as a prognostic factor for patients with low-grade glioma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;59:117–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Meyers CA, Wefel JS. The use of the mini-mental state examination to assess cognitive functioning in cancer trials: no ifs, ands, buts, or sensitivity. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:3557–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Klein M, Heimans JJ. The measurement of cognitive functioning in low-grade glioma patients after radiotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:966–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Benedict RHB, Schretlen D, Groninger L, Brandt J. Hopkins verbal learning test–revised: normative data and analysis of inter-form and test-retest reliability. Clin Neuropsychol. 1998;12:43–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Benton AL, Hamsher K. Multilingual aphasia examination. Iowa City: AJA Associates; 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Lezak MD, Howieson DB, Loring DW. Neuropsychological assessment. New York: Oxford University Press; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Klein .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Klein, M. (2019). Assessment of Neurocognitive Functioning in Clinical Practice and for Trial Purposes. In: Bartolo, M., Soffietti, R., Klein, M. (eds) Neurorehabilitation in Neuro-Oncology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95684-8_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95684-8_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-95683-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-95684-8

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics