Bonnie Carlson-Green1, Jennifer Puig1, Anne Bendel1. 1. Psychological Services (B.C.-G), Cancer and Blood Disorders Clinic at Children's of Minnesota, Children's Hospitals & Clinics of Minnesota, 345 North Smith Avenue, St Paul, MN 55102 (A.B); University of Minnesota, Division of Clinical Neuroscience, 2512 S. 7th St., Minneapolis, MN 55454 (J.P).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Impaired working memory appears to play a key role in some of the neurocognitive late effects of pediatric brain tumor treatments, including declines in intellectual and executive functioning. Recent studies of pediatric cancer survivors suggest Cogmed® Working Memory Training is effective at improving working memory, although pediatric brain tumor survivors may demonstrate a less robust response than children with other cancers. The current study sought to determine if an extended course of Cogmed (35 sessions) was both feasible and efficacious for brain tumor survivors and if improvements were observable in near-transfer and far-transfer working memory measures as well as parent rating scores at 6 months post-treatment. METHODS: Twenty pediatric brain tumor survivors ages 8 to 18 years with working memory deficits completed 35 sessions of Cogmed. Assessments of working memory and academic skills were completed at baseline, completion of training, and 6-month follow-up and parents completed questionnaires at baseline and 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: Participants showed significant improvements in working memory at training completion and 6-month follow-up and math achievement at 6-month follow-up. Parents reported executive functioning improvements at follow-up as compared with baseline. Participants' program-based working memory skills did not change significantly between sessions 25 and 35, suggesting that extended training did not provide additional benefit. CONCLUSIONS: This study replicates and extends previous research by: (1) demonstrating that brain tumor survivors at high risk for neurocognitive late effects can complete and benefit from working memory training, (2) identifying a point of diminished returns on training time investment, and (3) demonstrating benefits 6 months post-intervention.
BACKGROUND: Impaired working memory appears to play a key role in some of the neurocognitive late effects of pediatric brain tumor treatments, including declines in intellectual and executive functioning. Recent studies of pediatric cancer survivors suggest Cogmed® Working Memory Training is effective at improving working memory, although pediatric brain tumor survivors may demonstrate a less robust response than children with other cancers. The current study sought to determine if an extended course of Cogmed (35 sessions) was both feasible and efficacious for brain tumor survivors and if improvements were observable in near-transfer and far-transfer working memory measures as well as parent rating scores at 6 months post-treatment. METHODS: Twenty pediatric brain tumor survivors ages 8 to 18 years with working memory deficits completed 35 sessions of Cogmed. Assessments of working memory and academic skills were completed at baseline, completion of training, and 6-month follow-up and parents completed questionnaires at baseline and 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: Participants showed significant improvements in working memory at training completion and 6-month follow-up and math achievement at 6-month follow-up. Parents reported executive functioning improvements at follow-up as compared with baseline. Participants' program-based working memory skills did not change significantly between sessions 25 and 35, suggesting that extended training did not provide additional benefit. CONCLUSIONS: This study replicates and extends previous research by: (1) demonstrating that brain tumor survivors at high risk for neurocognitive late effects can complete and benefit from working memory training, (2) identifying a point of diminished returns on training time investment, and (3) demonstrating benefits 6 months post-intervention.
Authors: S J Thompson; L Leigh; R Christensen; X Xiong; L E Kun; R L Heideman; W E Reddick; A Gajjar; T Merchant; C H Pui; M M Hudson; R K Mulhern Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-03-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Cara B Reeves; Shawna L Palmer; Wilburn E Reddick; Thomas E Merchant; Gray M Buchanan; Amar Gajjar; Raymond K Mulhern Journal: J Pediatr Psychol Date: 2005-03-23
Authors: Wilburn E Reddick; Holly A White; John O Glass; Gregory C Wheeler; Stephen J Thompson; Amar Gajjar; Laurie Leigh; Raymond K Mulhern Journal: Cancer Date: 2003-05-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Pek-Lan Khong; Dora L W Kwong; Godfrey C F Chan; Jonathan S T Sham; Fu-Luk Chan; Gaik-Cheng Ooi Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Heather M Conklin; Raja B Khan; Wilburn E Reddick; Susan Helton; Ronald Brown; Scott C Howard; Melanie Bonner; Robbin Christensen; Shengjie Wu; Xiaoping Xiong; Raymond K Mulhern Journal: J Pediatr Psychol Date: 2007-06-14
Authors: Lonnie K Zeltzer; Qian Lu; Wendy Leisenring; Jennie C I Tsao; Christopher Recklitis; Gregory Armstrong; Ann C Mertens; Leslie L Robison; Kirsten K Ness Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2008-02 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Francesco Sciancalepore; Leonardo Tariciotti; Giulia Remoli; Danilo Menegatti; Andrea Carai; Giuseppe Petruzzellis; Kiersten P Miller; Francesco Delli Priscoli; Alessandro Giuseppi; Roberto Premuselli; Alberto E Tozzi; Angela Mastronuzzi; Nicola Vanacore; Eleonora Lacorte; Allena-Mente Study Group Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-08-11 Impact factor: 6.575