The quality of measurement properties of neurocognitive assessment in brain tumor clinical trials over the last 30 years: a COSMIN checklist-based approach

The reliability and validity of brief cognitive screening tools used in traumatic brain injury: A systematic review

Reliable and valid cognitive screening tools are essential in the assessment of those with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Yet, there is no consensus about which tool should be used in clinical practice. This systematic review assessed psychometric properties of cognitive screening tools for detecting cognitive impairment in TBI. Inclusion criteria were: peer-reviewed validation studies of a cognitive screening tool(s); with a sample of adults aged 18-80 diagnosed with TBI (mild-severe); and with psychometrics consistent with COSMIN guidelines. Published literature was retrieved from MEDLINE, Web of Science Core Collection, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO on 27 January 2022. A narrative synthesis was performed. Thirty-four studies evaluated the psychometric properties of a total of 22 cognitive screening tools, in a variety of languages. Properties assessed included structural validity, internal consistency, reliability, criterion validity (or diagnostic test accuracy), convergent/divergent validity, and discriminant validity. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) were the most widely validated cognitive screening tools for use in TBI. The MoCA had the most promising evidence of its psychometric properties, which has implications for clinical practice. Future research should aim to follow standard criteria for psychometric studies to allow meaningful comparisons across the literature.

Study protocol for Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia in patients with primary brain tumor: A single-arm phase 2a proof-of-concept trial

Background

Sleep disturbance is among the most common symptoms endorsed by patients with primary brain tumor (PwPBT), with many reporting clinically elevated insomnia and poor management of their sleep-related symptoms by their medical team. Though Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia (CBT-I) remains the front-line treatment for sleep disturbance, CBT-I has yet to be evaluated in PwPBT. Thus, it is unknown whether CBT-I is feasible, acceptable, or safe for patients with primary brain tumors.

Methods

PwPBT (N = 44) will enroll and participate in a six-week group-based CBT-I intervention delivered via telehealth. Feasibility will be based on pre-determined metrics of eligibility, rates and reasons for ineligibility, enrollment, and questionnaire completion. Acceptability will be measured by participant retention, session attendance, satisfaction ratings, and recommendation to others. Safety will be assessed by adverse event reporting. Sleep will be measured both objectively via wrist-worn actigraphy and subjectively via self-report. Participants will also complete psychosocial questionnaires at baseline, post-intervention, and three-month follow-up.

Conclusion

CBT-I, a non-pharmacological treatment option for insomnia, has the potential to be beneficial for an at-risk, underserved population: PwPBT. This trial will be the first to assess feasibility, acceptability, and safety of CBT-I in PwPBT. If successful, this protocol will be implemented in a more rigorous phase 2b randomized feasibility pilot with the aim of widespread implementation of CBT-I in neuro-oncology clinics.

The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in Neuro-Oncology: A Pilot Study of Feasibility and Utility in Telehealth and In-Person Clinical Assessments

Background

Cognitive impairments are a common burden for patients with primary CNS tumors. Neuropsychological assessment batteries can be too lengthy, which limits their use as an objective measure of cognition during routine care. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and utility of the brief Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in routine in-person and telehealth visits (as a result of the global COVID-19 pandemic) with neuro-oncology patients.

Methods

71 adults with primary CNS tumors completed MoCA testing in-person (n=47) and via telehealth (n=24). Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including symptom burden and interference, perceived cognition, general health status, and anxiety and depression, were and correlation analysis were included in this study. Feasibility was assessed through a provider satisfaction questionnaire.

Results

Patients were primarily White (83%), college-educated (71%) males (54%) with high grade tumors (66%). The average total score on the MoCA administered in-person was 25 (range: 6-30), with 34% classified as abnormal, and the average total score via telehealth was 26 (range: 12-30), with 29% classified as abnormal. Providers reported satisfaction in using the MoCA during routine clinical care, both in-person and via telehealth. Lower MoCA scores correlated with worse symptom severity, KPS, age, education, and previous treatment.

Conclusions

The MoCA was feasible in clinical and telehealth settings, and its relationship to clinical characteristics and PROs highlight the need for both objective and patient-reported measures of cognition to understand the overall cognitive profile of a patient with a CNS tumor.

Levetiracetam Prophylaxis Therapy for Brain Tumor-Related Epilepsy (BTRE) Is Associated With a Higher Psychiatric Burden

Purpose: Brain tumor-related epilepsy (BTRE) is a condition characterized by the development of seizures in the context of an undergoing oncological background. Levetiracetam (LEV) is a third-generation anti-seizure medication (ASM) widely used in BTRE prophylaxis. The study evaluated LEV neuropsychiatric side effects (SEs) in BTRE prophylaxis.

Method: Twenty-eight patients with brain tumors were retrospectively selected and divided into two groups. In one group, we evaluated patients with a BTRE diagnosis using LEV (BTRE-group). The other group included patients with brain tumors who never had epilepsy and used a prophylactic ASM regimen with LEV (PROPHYLAXIS-group). Neuropsychiatric SEs of LEV were monitored using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire (NPI-Q) at the baseline visit and the 6- and 12-month follow-up.

Results: Eighteen patients of the BTRE-group and 10 patients of the PROPHYLAXIS-group were included. Compared to the BTRE-group, the PROPHYLAXIS-group showed a higher severity of neuropsychiatric symptoms. According to Linear Mixed Models (LMM), a multiplicative effect was observed for the interaction between group treatment and time. For the caregiver distress score (CDS), only a time-effect was observed.

Conclusion: Prophylactic ASM with LEV is associated with an increased frequency of neuropsychiatric SE. Accurate epileptological evaluations in patients with brain tumors are mandatory to select who would benefit most from ASM.