ArticleJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2025
Cancer-related cognitive impairment: a review of National Institutes of Health‑Funded grants (2017-2024).
Article in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Efficacy of Cognitive Training for Treating Cancer-related Cognitive Impairment: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis by Cognitive Domain.Neuropsychology review · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCancer-related cognitive impairment (CRCI) adversely affects cancer survivors' academic, occupational, and psychosocial functioning. Analyzing the National Institutes of Health (NIH) portfolio of funded research provides insight into current efforts, trends, and gaps in CRCI research.
methodsWe queried the internal NIH iSearch database to identify awards focused on CRCI. A total of 185 grants met inclusion criteria. Data were extracted from grant specific aims and methods. Awards were characterized by research stage (preclinical, clinical), cancer types, and treatments. Preclinical studies were coded for model type and cognitive assessments. Clinical studies were coded for trial design, inclusion criteria, cognitive outcomes, and biomarkers.
resultsOf 185 grants, 67% involved clinical, 30% preclinical, and 3% both human and animal studies. Commonly studied cancer types were breast (31%), central nervous system (25%), and hematological (22%). Chemotherapy (34%) and radiotherapy (23%) were the most examined therapies, while biologic (8%) and hormonal (6%) therapies were less frequently studied. Among 130 clinical studies, 64% had observational and 38% had interventional components. The 48 interventional studies focused on behavioral/complementary (73%), pharmacologic (25%), and/or device (10%) interventions. Most clinical studies assessed cognition with objective (88%) and patient-reported outcomes (76%) measures.
conclusionSignificant gaps persist in CRCI research related to high-incidence cancers such as prostate, lung, and colorectal, as well as in studies of emerging treatments like immunotherapy and hormonal therapy. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Findings highlight unmet needs and opportunities to advance mechanistic and interventional research that supports cognitive health and quality of life for all cancer survivors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40911144What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.