Advanced cognitive training for breast cancer survivors: a randomized controlled trial

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the preliminary efficacy and satisfaction/acceptability of training in memory or speed of processing versus wait-list control for improving cognitive function in breast cancer survivors. 82 breast cancer survivors completed a three-group randomized, controll...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Breast cancer research and treatment 2012-10, Vol.135 (3), p.799-809
Main Authors: Von Ah, Diane, Carpenter, Janet S., Saykin, Andrew, Monahan, Patrick, Wu, Jingwei, Yu, Menggang, Rebok, George, Ball, Karlene, Schneider, Bryan, Weaver, Michael, Tallman, Eileen, Unverzagt, Fred
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Anxiety - psychology
Biological and medical sciences
Breast cancer
Breast Neoplasms - mortality
Breast Neoplasms - psychology
Cancer research
Cancer survivors
Cancer therapies
Clinical Trial
Clinical trials
Cognition
Cognition & reasoning
Cognitive Therapy - methods
Comparative analysis
Fatigue - psychology
Female
Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics
Humans
Intervention
Mammary gland diseases
Medical sciences
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Memory
Middle Aged
Neuropsychological Tests
Oncology
Quality of life
Survivor
Survivors - psychology
Tumors
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The purpose of this study was to evaluate the preliminary efficacy and satisfaction/acceptability of training in memory or speed of processing versus wait-list control for improving cognitive function in breast cancer survivors. 82 breast cancer survivors completed a three-group randomized, controlled trial. Primary outcomes were objective neuropsychological tests of memory and speed of processing. Secondary outcomes were perceived cognitive functioning, symptom distress (mood disturbance, anxiety, and fatigue), quality of life, and intervention satisfaction/acceptability. Data were collected at baseline, post-intervention, and 2-month follow-up. Using repeated-measures mixed-linear ANCOVA models, each intervention was compared to wait-list control while adjusting for age, education, and baseline measures. The effect sizes for differences in means and the reliable improvement percentage were reported. The results show that domain-specific effects were seen for both interventions: memory training improved memory performance at 2-month follow-up ( p  = 0.036, d  = 0.59); speed of processing training improved processing speed post-intervention ( p  = 0.040, d  = 0.55) and 2-month follow-up ( p  = 0.016; d  = 0.67). Transfer effects to non-trained domains were seen for speed of processing training with improved memory post-intervention ( p  = 0.007, d  = 0.75) and 2-month follow-up ( p  = 0.004, d  = 0.82). Both interventions were associated with improvements in perceived cognitive functioning, symptom distress, and quality of life. Ratings of satisfaction/acceptability were high for both interventions. It was concluded that while both interventions appeared promising, speed of processing training resulted in immediate and durable improvements in objective measures of processing speed and verbal memory. Speed of processing training may have broader benefits in this clinical population.
ISSN:0167-6806
1573-7217
DOI:10.1007/s10549-012-2210-6