QOL-26. GLIOMA PATIENTS’ COGNITION AND THEIR CAREGIVERS: THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE BURDEN

Abstract BACKGROUND Cognitive decline, common in patients with gliomas, can contribute to reduced independence in daily functioning. Patients with gliomas often rely on informal caregivers for functional support, evidenced to cause distress in other caregiver populations (e.g., Alzheimer’s, terminal cancer, dementia). Few studies have investigated this relationship in neuro-oncology; thus, we explored whether patients’ neurocognitive function was associated with aspects of caregiver burden. METHODS Patients with glioma underwent neurocognitive testing including Auditory Verbal Learning Test-Delayed Recall (AVLT), Trail Making Test-Part B (TMT-B), Stroop Color-Word Interference (CWI), Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWA), and the Grooved Pegboard (GPB). Caregiver burden was assessed using the schedule burden and self-esteem subscales of the Caregiver Reaction Assessment (CRA). Hierarchical regressions and independent samples t-tests evaluated whether neurocognitive performance predicted caregiver burden and differences in caregiver burden between patients with intact versus impaired (AVLT; ≥ -1.5 SD) memory. RESULTS Seventy-eight dyads were included for analyses (Patient: Mage=53.4, 65.4% male, 97.4% Non-Hispanic/White; Caregiver: Mage =52.5, 71.8% female, 96.2% Non-Hispanic/White). AVLT performance was significantly related to both caregiver schedule burden (β = -.63, p =.003) and self-esteem (β =.26, p =.046). Performance on TMT-B, COWA, GPB, and CWI and patient age were not related to caregiver burden in any model (ps>.05). There was a significant difference in caregiver schedule burden between those with (M=15.17, SD=5.84) and without memory impairment (M=18.50, SD=5.60) [t(72)=-2.44, p=.017] but not for self-esteem (p>.05). CONCLUSIONS Patient performance on verbal memory was sensitive to the changes that may contribute to increased caregiver burden. An amnestic profile may be the most salient cognitive predictor of strain on neuro-oncology caregivers. Our findings speak to the interdependence of patient outcomes and caregiver quality of life. Supporting patients’ neurocognitive capabilities, such as implementing individualized cognitive rehabilitation programs, may improve caregiver burden.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Neuro-Oncology
Published
2024-11-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/noae165.1061
Primary Topic
Cancer-related cognitive impairment studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

QOL-26. GLIOMA PATIENTS’ COGNITION AND THEIR CAREGIVERS: THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE BURDEN

Giuliana Zarrella, Farah Aslanzadeh, Sarah Braun, Amber M Fox et al.
Neuro-Oncology
Cancer-related cognitive impairment studies
article

QOL-26. GLIOMA PATIENTS’ COGNITION AND THEIR CAREGIVERS: THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE BURDEN

Giuliana Zarrella, Farah Aslanzadeh, Sarah Braun, Amber M Fox, Autumn Lanoye, Ashlee R. Loughan, Paula R. Sherwood
article en

Abstract

Abstract BACKGROUND Cognitive decline, common in patients with gliomas, can contribute to reduced independence in daily functioning. Patients with gliomas often rely on informal caregivers for functional support, evidenced to cause distress in other caregiver populations (e.g., Alzheimer’s, terminal cancer, dementia). Few studies have investigated this relationship in neuro-oncology; thus, we explored whether patients’ neurocognitive function was associated with aspects of caregiver burden. METHODS Patients with glioma underwent neurocognitive testing including Auditory Verbal Learning Test-Delayed Recall (AVLT), Trail Making Test-Part B (TMT-B), Stroop Color-Word Interference (CWI), Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWA), and the Grooved Pegboard (GPB). Caregiver burden was assessed using the schedule burden and self-esteem subscales of the Caregiver Reaction Assessment (CRA). Hierarchical regressions and independent samples t-tests evaluated whether neurocognitive performance predicted caregiver burden and differences in caregiver burden between patients with intact versus impaired (AVLT; ≥ -1.5 SD) memory. RESULTS Seventy-eight dyads were included for analyses (Patient: Mage=53.4, 65.4% male, 97.4% Non-Hispanic/White; Caregiver: Mage =52.5, 71.8% female, 96.2% Non-Hispanic/White). AVLT performance was significantly related to both caregiver schedule burden (β = -.63, p =.003) and self-esteem (β =.26, p =.046). Performance on TMT-B, COWA, GPB, and CWI and patient age were not related to caregiver burden in any model (ps>.05). There was a significant difference in caregiver schedule burden between those with (M=15.17, SD=5.84) and without memory impairment (M=18.50, SD=5.60) [t(72)=-2.44, p=.017] but not for self-esteem (p>.05). CONCLUSIONS Patient performance on verbal memory was sensitive to the changes that may contribute to increased caregiver burden. An amnestic profile may be the most salient cognitive predictor of strain on neuro-oncology caregivers. Our findings speak to the interdependence of patient outcomes and caregiver quality of life. Supporting patients’ neurocognitive capabilities, such as implementing individualized cognitive rehabilitation programs, may improve caregiver burden.

Neuro-OncologyVol. 26(Supplement_8)
University of Pittsburgh (US), Virginia Commonwealth University (US), Providence College (US), Butler Hospital (US), Virginia Cancer Institute (US), VCU Massey Comprehensive Cancer Center (US)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 62%
Cancer-related cognitive impairment studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.