Reliability of self-report versus the capacity to consent to treatment instrument to make medical decisions in brain metastasis and other metastatic cancers.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of persons with metastatic cancer to self-assess their medical decision-making capacity (MDC). To investigate this, we compared an objective measure of MDC with self-ratings and evaluated predictors of agreement. METHODS: Data were obtained from a cross-sectional study of metastatic cancer patients at a large academic medical center. Across all standards of MDC, sensitivity, specificity, and reliability using Gwet's AC1 statistic were calculated using the objective measure as the gold standard. Logistic regression was used to evaluate predictors of agreement between the measures across all MDC standards. RESULTS: In those with brain metastases, high sensitivity (greater than 0.7), but low specificity was observed for all standards. Poor reliability was observed across all standards. Higher age resulted in higher odds of disagreement for Standard 3 (appreciation) (OR: 1.07, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.15) and Standard 4 (reasoning) (OR: 1.05, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.10). For Standard 3, chemotherapy use and brain metastases compared to other metastases resulted in higher odds of disagreement (Chemotherapy: OR: 5.62, 95% CI: 1.37, 23.09, Brain Metastases: OR: 5.93, 95% CI: 1.28, 27.55). For Standard 5 (understanding), no predictors were associated with disagreement. CONCLUSIONS: For less cognitively complex standards (e.g., appreciation), self-report may be more valid and reliable than more cognitively complex standards (e.g., reasoning or understanding). However, overall, MDC self-report in the current sample is suboptimal. Thus, the need for detailed assessment of MDC, especially when patients are older or used chemotherapy, is indicated. Other studies should be conducted to assess MDC agreement longitudinally.

Correlates of deep brain stimulation consensus conference decision to treat primary dystonia.

BACKGROUND: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an effective treatment for motor disturbance in people with primary dystonia (PWD). Numerous factors are considered by an interdisciplinary consensus conference before deciding candidacy for DBS surgery (e.g., demographic, medical, cognitive, and behavioral factors). However, little is known about which of these factors are associated with PWD DBS surgery consensus conference decisions. OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to examine whether pre-operative demographic, medical, and cognitive/behavioral variables are associated DBS consensus conference decisions in patients with dystonia. METHODS: Thirty-two PWD completed comprehensive presurgery workup included neurological and neuropsychological exams, and neuroimaging in consideration for DBS surgery. An interdisciplinary conference committee either recommended or did not recommend DBS surgery based upon these data. Demographic and medical data (e.g., dystonia disease characteristics, medical comorbidities, medications) were also collected. We also examined impact from cardiovascular disease factors, using a Revised Cardiac Risk Index. PWD were grouped based on DBS conference decision (eligible: n = 21, ineligible: n = 11) and compared across demographic, medical, and cognitive/behavioral variables. RESULTS: Across clinical variables, PWD who were deemed ineligible for DBS surgery had a higher Revised Cardiac Risk Index. PWD who were classified as ineligible displayed lower global cognitive functioning, working memory, phonemic fluency, memory retrieval, and cognitive flexibility. CONCLUSIONS: Consensus decision making regarding DBS surgery eligibility involves a multifactorial process. We found that deficits in executive functioning were associated with the DBS consensus committee decision. We also observed elevated cardiac risk among these individuals, likely reflecting the relation between vascular health and cognition. Implications, and clinical and scientific applications of these findings are discussed.

Capacity to consent to research participation in adults with metastatic cancer: comparisons of brain metastasis, non-CNS metastasis, and healthy controls.

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.

Relationship between cognitive functioning, mood, and other patient factors on quality of life in metastatic brain cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Neurocognitive 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 METHODS: Ninety-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. RESULTS: Mood 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. CONCLUSION: HRQOL 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.

Clinical correlates of the ability to consent to research participation in brain metastasis.

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.

Using cognition to predict the ability to understand medical treatment in brain and metastatic cancer.

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.