| Title |
Role of taxanes in chemotherapy-related cognitive impairment: A prospective longitudinal study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10549-017-4240-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Noemí Cerulla, Àngels Arcusa, José-Blas Navarro, Maite Garolera, Cristina Enero, Glòria Chico, Luís Fernández-Morales |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study is to elucidate the role of taxanes on cognition when they are administered as a part of the treatment with a fluorouracil, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide (FEC) regimen for breast cancer (BC). Two groups of women (n = 51) with a novel diagnostic of BC that were treated with a combination of FEC alone (6 cycles of FEC) or with taxanes (4 cycles of FEC plus 8 cycles of taxanes) were compared at three moments: before chemotherapy, after its completion (short-term evaluation) and at a mean of 74.5 weeks from baseline as a long-term evaluation. Both groups showed worsening in tests of attention and executive functions on the short-term assessment, with the group treated with taxanes showing more number of affected cognitive measures at this time point, including verbal learning and speed measures. At the long-term evaluation, cognitive dysfunction was still found in attention and executive functions in both groups. Our results suggest that chemotherapy for BC with a FEC regimen can have a negative effect on cognition. Acute deficits seem to be larger when taxanes are added, but treatment seems to affect cognition also at long term. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 66 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 14% |
| Researcher | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 11 | 17% |
| Unknown | 21 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 14 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 14% |
| Neuroscience | 9 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Unknown | 23 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 April 2017.
All research outputs
#20,414,746
of 22,965,074 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#4,122
of 4,673 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,995
of 310,294 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#81
of 108 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,965,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,673 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,294 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 108 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.