Patient-reported functional executive challenges and caregiver confirmation in adult brain tumor survivors

Abstract

Purpose

The main objective of this study was to provide further information concerning the validity of patient-reported executive function (EF) in survivors of primary brain tumor (PBT) compared with a report provided by each patient’s caregiver.

Methods

Forty survivors of PBT, 40 non-cancer controls and their proxies completed an assessment of functional executive disorders (e.g., planning, inhibition, shifting, action initiation). Comparisons of self and informant EF reports were examined, for both patients and non-cancer controls. The extent of the concordance between patients’ reports and their caregivers’ reports was also determined.

Results

PBT survivors and their caregivers reported more problems related to EF in contrast with the non-cancer comparison group (significant differences). There was a high level of agreement between patients’ and caregivers’ ratings within the patient group.

Conclusions

This study provides evidence suggesting that at an average of 3.67 (SD = 2.31) years following treatment for a PBT, EF difficulties are reported by patients and their caregivers. This study establishes a consistency between what is reported by survivors and what is reported by those who frequently interact with them. Further research investigating the link between these ratings and quality of life as well as other functions is encouraged.

Implications for Cancer Survivors

This study’s results demonstrate the importance of listening to PBT survivors’ perception of EF difficulties. While not confirmed by neuropsychological evaluations, the functional executive challenges reported by these survivors’ close relatives reflect what PBT survivors themselves report. Specialists should pay close attention to these difficulties to guarantee optimal post-cancer care.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. 1.

    McNeill KA. Epidemiology of brain tumors. Neurol Clin. 2016;34(4):981–98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Petruzzi A, Finocchiaro CY, Lamperti E, Salmaggi A. Living with a brain tumor. Support Care Cancer. 2013;21(4):1105–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Darlix A, Zouaoui S, Rigau V, Bessaoud F, Figarella-Branger D, Mathieu-Daudé H, et al. Epidemiology for primary brain tumors: a nationwide population-based study. J Neuro-Oncol. 2017;131:525–46.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Barnholtz-Sloan JS, Ostrom QT, Cote D. Epidemiology of brain tumors. Neurol Clin. 2018;36(3):395–419.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Abu-Hegazy M, El-Hadaad HA. Neurocognitive effects of primary brain tumors. Neurooncology - newer developments. In Tech. 2016. 241-265.

  6. 6.

    Meyers CA, Hess KR. Multifaceted end points in brain tumor clinical trials: Cognitive deterioration precedes MRI progression. Neuro Oncol. 2003;5(2):89–95.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Gehrke AK, Baisley MC, Sonck ALB, Wronski SL, Feuerstein M. Neurocognitive deficits following primary brain tumor treatment: systematic review of a decade of comparative studies. J Neuro-Oncol. 2013;115(2):135–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Godefroy O, Azouvi P, Robert P, Roussel M, LeGall D, Meulemans T. Dysexecutive syndrome: Diagnostic criteria and validation study. Ann Neurol. 2010;68(6):855–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Lezak P of NP and NMD, Lezak MD, Howieson AP of N and PDB, Howieson DB, Loring P of NDW, Loring DW, et al. Neuropsychological assessment. New York: Oxford University Press; 2004.

  10. 10.

    Ng JCH, See AAQ, Ang TY, Tan LYR, Ang BT, King NKK. Effects of surgery on neurocognitive function in patients with glioma: a meta-analysis of immediate post-operative and long-term follow-up neurocognitive outcomes. J Neuro-Oncol. 2019;141(1):167–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Abrey LE. The impact of chemotherapy on cognitive outcomes in adults with primary brain tumors. J Neuro-Oncol. 2012;108(2):285–90.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Lezak MD. The problem of assessing executive functions. Int J Psychol. 1982;17(1-4):281–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Miyake A, Friedman NP. The nature and organization of individual differences in executive functions: four general conclusions. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2012;21(1):8–14.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Baddeley A. The episodic buffer: a new component of working memory? Trends Cogn Sci. 2000;4(11):417–23.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Lieberman MD. Social: Why our brains are wired to connect. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013.

  16. 16.

    Gregg N, Arber A, Ashkan K, Brazil L, Bhangoo R, Beaney R, et al. Neurobehavioural changes in patients following brain tumour: patients and relatives perspective. Support Care Cancer. 2014;22(11):2965–72.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Stroop JR. Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. J Exp Psychol Gen. 1992;121(1):15–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Shallice T, Broadbent DE, Weiskrantz L. Specific impairments of planning. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1982;298(1089):199–209.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Nelson HE. A modified card sorting test sensitive to frontal lobe defects. Cortex. 1976;12(4):313–24.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Buchanan T. Self-report measures of executive function problems correlate with personality, not performance-based executive function measures, in nonclinical samples. Psychol Assess. 2016;28(4):372–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Eslinger PJ, Damasio AR. Severe disturbance of higher cognition after bilateral frontal lobe ablation: Patient EVR. Neurology. 1985;35(12):1731–41. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.35.12.1731.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Goldstein LH, Bernard S, Fenwick PB, Burgess PW, McNeil J. Unilateral frontal lobectomy can produce strategy application disorder. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1993;56(3):274–6.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Salthouse TA. Interrelations of aging, knowledge, and cognitive performance. In: Staudinger UM, Lindenberger U, editors. Understanding Human Development: Dialogues with Lifespan Psychology. Boston: Springer US; 2003. p. 265–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-0357-6_12.

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Burgess PW, Alderman N, Volle E, Benoit RG, Gilbert SJ. Mesulam’s frontal lobe mystery re-examined. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2009;27(5):493–506.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Burgess PW, Alderman N, Evans J, Emslie H, Wilson BA. The ecological validity of tests of executive function. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 1998;4(6):547–58.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Burgess PW, Alderman N, Forbes C, Costello A, Coates LM-A, Dawson DR, et al. The case for the development and use of “ecologically valid” measures of executive function in experimental and clinical neuropsychology. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2006;12(2):194–209.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Roth RM, Isquith PK, Gioia GA. Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function—Adult Version (BRIEF-A). Lutz, FL: Psychological Assesment Resources; 2005.

  28. 28.

    Burgess PW, Alderman N, Wilson BA, Evans JJ, Emslie H. Validity of the battery: Relationship between performance on the BADS and ratings of executive problems. In: Wilson BA, editor. BADS: Behavioural assessment of the dysexecutive syndrome manual. Bury St Edmunds: Thames Valley Test Company; 1996. p. 18–19.

  29. 29.

    Grace J, Malloy PF. Frontal Systems Behavior Scale (FrSBe): Professional manual. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources; 2001.

  30. 30.

    Randolph JJ, Chaytor NS. Promoting the executive functions: Core foundations, assessment considerations, and practical applications. In: Randolph JJ, editor. Positive neuropsychology: Evidence-based perspectives on promoting cognitive health. New York: Springer; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Toplak ME, West RF, Stanovich KE. Practitioner review: Do performance-based measures and ratings of executive function assess the same construct? J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2013;54(2):131–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Barkley RA, Murphy KR. The nature of executive function (EF) deficits in daily life activities in adults with ADHD and their relationship to performance on EF tests. J Psychopathol Behav Assess. 2011;33(2):137–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Chevignard MP, Soo C, Galvin J, Catroppa C, Eren S. Ecological assessment of cognitive functions in children with acquired brain injury: A systematic review. Brain Inj. 2012;26(9):1033–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Collins C, Gehrke A, Feuerstein M. Cognitive tasks challenging brain tumor survivors at work. J Occup Environ Med. 2013;55(12):1426–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Loughan AR, Braun SE, Lanoye A. Executive dysfunction in neuro-oncology: Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function in adult primary brain tumor patients. Appl Neuropsychol Adult. 2019;0(0):1-10.

  36. 36.

    Calvio L, Peugeot M, Bruns GL, Todd BL, Feuerstein M. Measures of cognitive function and work in occupationally active breast cancer survivors. J Occup Environ Med. 2010;52(2):219–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Molinari E, Mendoza TR, Gilbert MR. Opportunities and challenges of incorporating clinical outcome assessments in brain tumor clinical trials. Neurooncol Pract. 2019;6(2):81–92.

    Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Ediebah DE, Reijneveld JC, Taphoorn MJB, Coens C, Zikos E, Aaronson NK, 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(4):869–80.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Jacobs DI, Kumthekar P, Stell BV, Grimm SA, Rademaker AW, Rice L, et al. Concordance of patient and caregiver reports in evaluating quality of life in patients with malignant gliomas and an assessment of caregiver burden. Neurooncol Pract. 2014;1(2):47–54.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    van der Linden SD, Gehring K, Baene WD, Emons WHM, Rutten G-JM, Sitskoorn MM. Assessment of executive functioning in patients with meningioma and low-grade glioma: a comparison of self-report, proxy-report, and test performance. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2020;26(2):187–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Folstein M. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the children. J Psychiatr Res. 1975;12:189–98.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Roy A, Besnard J, Lancelot C, Le Gall D. Adaptation and validation in French of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function- adult version (BRIEF-A). Paris: Hogrefe; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    Ellenberg L, Liu Q, Gioia G, Yasui Y, Packer RJ, Mertens A, et al. Neurocognitive status in long-term survivors of childhood CNS malignancies: A report from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study. Neuropsychology. 2009;23(6):705–17.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Tornås S, Løvstad M, Solbakk A-K, Evans J, Endestad T, Hol PK, et al. Rehabilitation of executive functions in patients with chronic acquired brain injury with goal management training, external cuing, and emotional regulation: A randomized controlled trial. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2016;22:436–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Society for Cognitive Rehabilitation. “What is cognitive rehabilitation?” 2013. www.societyforcognitiverehab.org. Accessed 15 Nov 2019

  46. 46.

    Leeper H, Milbury K. Survivorship care planning and implementation in neuro-oncology. Neuro-Oncology. 2018;20:vii40–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. 47.

    Reijneveld JC, Taphoorn MJB, Coens C, Bromberg JEC, Mason WP, Hoang-Xuan K, et al. Health-related quality of life in patients with high-risk low-grade glioma (EORTC 22033-26033): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 intergroup study. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(11):1533–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. 48.

    Richard NM, Bernstein LJ, Mason WP, Laperriere N, Maurice C, Millar B-A, et al. Cognitive rehabilitation for executive dysfunction in brain tumor patients: a pilot randomized controlled trial. J Neuro-Oncol. 2019;142(3):565–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. 49.

    Tringale KR, Nguyen T, Bahrami N, Marshall DC, Leyden KM, Karunamuni R, et al. Identifying early diffusion imaging biomarkers of regional white matter injury as indicators of executive function decline following brain radiotherapy: A prospective clinical trial in primary brain tumor patients. Radiother Oncol. 2019;132:27–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. 50.

    Nicol C, Ownsworth T, Cubis L, Nguyen W, Foote M, Pinkham MB. Subjective cognitive functioning and associations with psychological distress in adult brain tumour survivors. J Cancer Surviv. 2019;13(5):653–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We wish to thank participants, families, and informants for their useful implication in this study.

We thank Hector Salcedo for his help in proofreading the current manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by the French National Cancer Institute (INCa) (grant number SHSESP14- 14-041).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

JB, PA, and DLG contributed to the study conception and design. PM, VR, RS, and MD recruited participants. Material preparation, data collection, and analysis were performed by NC, AR, and JB. JB supervised the project. NC and JB wrote the first version of the manuscript. All authors commented on the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jérémy Besnard.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

Ethics approval

The present study received French regulatory ethical approval (Comité de Protection des Personnes Ouest II, n°2015/27, ID-RCB n°2015-A01192-47) which includes the International Review Board Authorization (N°NCT02693405).

Consent to participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Consent to publish

Participants signed informed consent regarding publishing their data.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cantisano, N., Menei, P., Roualdes, V. et al. Patient-reported functional executive challenges and caregiver confirmation in adult brain tumor survivors. J Cancer Surviv (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-020-00961-0

Download citation

Keywords

  • Functional executive deficits
  • Cancer survivorship
  • Primary Brain Tumor (PBT)
  • Cognitive late effects
  • BRIEF-A concordance