4.7 Article

Brain structure and function differences in monozygotic twins: Possible effects of breast cancer chemotherapy

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 25, Issue 25, Pages 3866-3870

Publisher

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2007.10.8639

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [R01 CA101318, R03 CA090151, R03 CA90151, R01 CA087845, R01 CA87845, R01 CA101318-04] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose Adjuvant chemotherapy has been associated with mild cognitive decline among a subset of breast cancer survivors. Late cognitive effects after chemotherapy can have a deleterious impact on survivor quality of life and functional health; however, the etiology of chemotherapy- related cognitive dysfunction remains unknown. Patients and Methods We present a case of monozygotic twins who are discordant for breast cancer and chemotherapy exposure ( ie, one twin contracted breast cancer and underwent chemotherapy, and the other had no breast cancer). As part of a larger study, each was evaluated with standardized, self- report measures of cognitive function, standard neuropsychological tests, and structural and functional magnetic resonance imaging ( MRI). Results Results indicated small differences in neuropsychological test performance but striking contrasts in self- reported cognitive complaints and structural and functional MRI images. Specifically, the twin who underwent chemotherapy had substantially more subjective cognitive complaints, more white matter hyperintensities on MRI, and an expanded spatial extent of brain activation during working memory processing than her nonaffected twin. Conclusion This case illustrates possible physiologic mechanisms that could produce long- term cognitive complaints among chemotherapy recipients and help formulate hypotheses for further empirical study in the area of chemotherapy- associated cognitive dysfunction.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available