Objective: Impairment in the ability to provide informed consent is common in persons with brain metastasis. However, little is known about what factors contribute to this impairment in the patient group. Our objective is to determine if the associations between demographic, cognitive, and clinical variables correlate with the ability to provide informed consent in persons with brain metastasis. Methods: We administered a comprehensive neuropsychological battery to a group of 61 persons with brain metastasis. Demographic and clinical information was also collected. All diagnoses were made by board-certified oncologists and were verified histologically. Statistical analyses included Pearson's product-moment correlations, point biserial correlations, and linear regression. Results: Results indicated that combinations of education, verbal memory, executive function, whole brain radiation therapy, and chemotherapy affected various aspects of the ability to provide informed consent. Subsequent regression models demonstrated that these variables contributed a significant amount of shared variance to the ability to provide informed consent. Conclusion: We found that the ability of persons with brain metastasis to provide informed consent is a cognitively complex ability that is also affected by education and treatment variables. This information can help clinical researchers in identifying persons with brain metastasis at risk of an impaired ability to provide informed consent and aid in the consenting process.
ObjectiveNeurocognitive functioning (NCF), mood disturbances, physical functioning, and social support all share a relationship with health‐related quality of life (HRQOL). However, investigations into these relationships have not been conducted in persons with brain metastases (BM).Patients and methodsNinety‐three newly diagnosed persons with BM were administered various cognitive batteries. Data were collected across a wide range of categories (ie, cognitive, demographic, disease/treatment, mood, social support, physical functioning). The Functional Assessment of Cancer Treatment (FACT) scale was used to measure HRQOL.ResultsMood and physical function correlated with lower HRQOL in every measured domain. Verbal learning and memory correlated with every FACT subscale except emotional quality of life. Social support also correlated with several HRQOL domains. Stepwise linear regression revealed that mood predicted general well‐being and several FACT subscales, including physical, emotional and cognitive well‐being. Social support and physical health were predictive of general well‐being. Verbal learning and memory predicted cognitive well‐being.ConclusionHRQOL is a complex construct affected by numerous variables. In particular, mood, physical functioning, and learning and memory were important predictors of HRQOL, and clinicians are encouraged to obtain information in these areas during baseline assessments in persons with BM.
Objective: To determine if cognition can be used to identify persons with cancer at high risk for the impaired ability to understand treatment decisions. Methods:The association between understanding treatment decisions and cognition was examined using data from 181 participants across four groups: 67 with brain metastasis, 41 with metastatic cancer that has not spread to the brain, 27 with malignant glioma, and 46 healthy controls. All diagnoses were made by board-certified oncologists and were verified histologically.Results: Results indicated that numerous cognitive functions were associated with the ability to understand treatment decisions in persons with cancer. The following proportion of participants demonstrated impaired understanding of treatment decisions in our three patient groups: approximately 51% malignant glioma, approximately 46% brain metastasis, and approximately 24% metastatic cancer. In a combined brain cancer group, we were able to use cognitive performance to predict the impaired ability to understand treatment decisions.Conclusions: An impaired ability to understand treatment decisions is prevalent in persons with brain cancer and persons with metastatic cancer. Performance on a brief cognitive battery can be used to help clinicians identify patients at particular risk for impaired medical decision making.
Background To evaluate the ability of individuals with metastatic cancer to provide informed consent to research participation, we used a structured vignette-based interview to measure 4 consenting standards across 3 participant groups. Methods Participants included 61 individuals diagnosed with brain metastasis, 41 individuals diagnosed with non-CNS metastasis, and 17 cognitively intact healthy controls. All groups were evaluated using the Capacity to Consent to Research Instrument (CCRI), a performance-based measure of research consent capacity. The ability to provide informed consent to participate in research was evaluated across 4 consent standards: expressing choice, appreciation, reasoning, and understanding. Capacity performance ratings (intact, mild/moderate impairment, severe impairment) were identified based on control group performance. Results Results revealed that the brain metastasis group performed significantly lower than healthy controls on the consent standard of understanding, while both metastatic cancer groups performed below controls on the consent standard of reasoning. Both metastatic cancer groups performed similar to controls on the standards of appreciation and expressing choice. Approximately 60% of the brain metastasis group, 54% of the non-CNS metastasis group, and 18% of healthy controls showed impaired research consent capacity. Conclusions Our findings, using a performance-based assessment, are consistent with other research indicating that the research consent process may be overly cumbersome and confusing. This, in turn, may lead to research consent impairment not only in patient groups but also in some healthy adults with intact cognitive ability.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.