Warren, Emily

AbstractBackgroundPediatric brain tumor survivors are at risk for poor social outcomes. It remains unknown whether cognitive sparing with proton radiotherapy (PRT) supports better social outcomes relative to photon radiotherapy (XRT). We hypothesized that survivors treated with PRT would outperform those treated with XRT on measures of cognitive and social outcomes. Further, we hypothesized that cognitive performance would predict survivor social outcomes.ProcedureSurvivors who underwent PRT (n = 38) or XRT (n = 20) participated in a neurocognitive evaluation >1 year post radiotherapy. Group differences in cognitive and social functioning were assessed using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Regression analyses examined predictors of peer relations and social skills.ResultsAge at evaluation, radiation dose, tumor diameter, and sex did not differ between groups (all p > .05). XRT participants were younger at diagnosis (XRT M = 5.0 years, PRT M = 7.6 years) and further out from radiotherapy (XRT M = 8.7 years, PRT M = 4.6 years). The XRT group performed worse than the PRT group on measures of processing speed (p = .01) and verbal memory (p < .01); however, social outcomes did not differ by radiation type. The proportion of survivors with impairment in peer relations and social skills exceeded expectation; χ2(1) = 38.67, p < .001; χ2(1) = 5.63, p < .05. Household poverty predicted peer relation difficulties (t = 2.18, p < .05), and verbal memory approached significance (t = −1.99, p = .05). Tumor diameter predicted social skills (t = −2.07, p < .05).ConclusionsRegardless of radiation modality, survivors are at risk for social challenges. Deficits in verbal memory may place survivors at particular risk. Results support monitoring of cognitive and social functioning throughout survivorship, as well as consideration of sociodemographic risk factors.

Background: Pediatric brain tumor survivors are at risk for poor social outcomes. It remains unknown whether cognitive sparing with proton radiotherapy (PRT) supports better social outcomes relative to photon radiotherapy (XRT). We hypothesized that survivors treated with PRT would outperform those treated with XRT on measures of cognitive and social outcomes. Further, we hypothesized that cognitive performance would predict survivor social outcomes. Procedure: Survivors who underwent PRT (n=38) or XRT (n=20) participated in a neurocognitive evaluation >1 year post-radiotherapy. Group differences in cognitive and social functioning were assessed using ANCOVA. Regression analyses examined predictors of peer relations and social skills. Results: Age at evaluation, radiation dose, tumor diameter, and sex did not differ between groups (all p>0.05). However, XRT participants were younger at diagnosis (XRT M=5.0 years, PRT M=7.6 years) and further out from radiotherapy (XRT M=8.7 years, PRT M=4.6 years). The XRT group performed worse than the PRT group on measures of processing speed (p=0.01) and verbal memory (p<0.01); however, social outcomes did not differ by radiation type. The proportion of survivors with impairment in peer relations and social skills exceeded expectation (2(1)=38.67, p<0.001; 2(1)=5.63, p<0.05), and verbal memory approached significance as a unique predictor of peer relations (t=-2.01, p=0.05). Total tumor RT dose significantly predicted social skills (t=-2.23, p<0.05). Conclusions: Regardless of radiation modality, survivors are at risk for social challenges, with one-quarter being socially excluded or undervalued. Deficits in verbal memory may place survivors at particular risk. Results support monitoring of cognitive and social functioning throughout survivorship.

Abstract Background Proton radiotherapy (PRT) may be associated with less neurocognitive risk than photon RT (XRT) for pediatric brain tumor survivors. We compared neurocognitive and academic outcomes in long‐term survivors treated with XRT versus PRT. Methods Survivors underwent neurocognitive evaluation >1 year after craniospinal (CSI) or focal PRT or XRT. Groups were compared using separate one‐way analyses of covariance for the CSI and focal groups. Results PRT ( n = 58) and XRT ( n = 30) subgroups were similar on gender (66% male), age at RT (median = 6.5 years), age at follow‐up (median = 14.6 years), and government assistance status (32%). PRT and XRT focal groups differed on follow‐up interval, shunt history, and total RT dose (all p < .05), whereas PRT and XRT CSI groups differed on follow‐up interval, baseline neurocognitive performance score, boost volume, and CSI dose (all p < .05). The PRT focal group outperformed the XRT focal group on inhibition/switching ( p = .04). The PRT CSI group outperformed the XRT CSI group on inattention/impulsivity (both p < .05). Several clinical variables (i.e., RT dose, boost field, baseline performance) predicted neurocognitive outcomes (all p < .05). The PRT focal group performed comparably to population means on most neurocognitive measures, while both CSI groups performed below expectation on multiple measures. The XRT CSI group was most impaired. All groups fell below expectation on processing speed, fine motor, and academic fluency (most p < .01). Conclusions Findings suggest generally favorable neurocognitive and academic long‐term outcomes following focal PRT. Impairment was greatest following CSI regardless of modality. Dosimetry and baseline characteristics are important determinants of outcome alone or in combination with modality.