4.4 Article

Dexamethasone Exposure and Memory Function in Adult Survivors of Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: A Report From the SJLIFE Cohort

期刊

PEDIATRIC BLOOD & CANCER
卷 60, 期 11, 页码 1778-1784

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pbc.24644

关键词

fMRI; glucocorticoid; leukemia; memory; retrosplenium; survivors

资金

  1. National Cancer Institute [CA21765]
  2. ALSAC

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundDexamethasone is used in acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) treatment, though long-term impact on central nervous system (CNS) function is unclear. As glucocorticoids influence hippocampal function, we investigated memory networks in survivors of childhood ALL treated with dexamethasone or prednisone. ProcedureNeurocognitive assessment and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) were conducted in 38 adult survivors randomly recruited from cohorts treated on one of two standard treatment protocols, which differed primarily in the glucocorticoid administered during continuation therapy (dexamethasone [n=18] vs. prednisone [n=20]). Groups did not differ in age at diagnosis, age at evaluation, or cumulative intravenous or intrathecal methotrexate exposure. ResultsSurvivors treated with dexamethasone demonstrated lower performance on multiple memory-dependent measures, including story memory (P=0.01) and word recognition (P=0.04), compared to survivors treated with only prednisone. Dexamethasone treatment was associated with decreased fMRI activity in the left retrosplenial brain region (effect size=1.3), though the small sample size limited statistical significance (P=0.08). Story memory was associated with altered activation in left inferior frontal-temporal brain regions (P=0.007). ConclusionsResults from this pilot study suggest that adult survivors of ALL treated with dexamethasone are at increased risk for memory deficits and altered neural activity in specific brain regions and networks associated with memory function. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2013;60:1778-1784. (c) 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据