The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in neuro-oncology: A pilot study of feasibility and utility in telehealth and in-person clinical assessments.

Background: Cognitive impairments are a common burden for patients with primary CNS tumors. Neuropsychological assessment batteries can be too lengthy, which limits their use as an objective measure of cognition during routine care. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and utility of the brief Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in routine in-person and telehealth visits (as a result of the global COVID-19 pandemic) with neuro-oncology patients. Methods: Seventy-one adults with primary CNS tumors completed MoCA testing in person (n = 47) and via telehealth (n = 24). Correlation analysis and patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including symptom burden and interference, perceived cognition, general health status, and anxiety and depression, were included in this study. Feasibility was assessed through a provider satisfaction questionnaire. Results: Patients were primarily White (83%), college-educated (71%) males (54%) with high-grade tumors (66%). The average total score on the MoCA administered in person was 25 (range: 6-30), with 34% classified as abnormal, and the average total score via telehealth was 26 (range: 12-30), with 29% classified as abnormal. Providers reported satisfaction in using the MoCA during routine clinical care, both in person and via telehealth. Lower MoCA scores correlated with worse symptom severity, KPS, age, education, and previous treatment. Conclusions: The MoCA was feasible in clinical and telehealth settings, and its relationship to clinical characteristics and PROs highlights the need for both objective and patient-reported measures of cognition to understand the overall cognitive profile of a patient with a CNS tumor.

Evaluation of the key geriatric assessment constructs in primary brain tumor population - a descriptive study.

INTRODUCTION: Despite an increasing aging population, older adults (≥ 65 years) with primary brain tumors (PBTs) are not routinely assessed for geriatric vulnerabilities. Recent reports of geriatric assessment (GA) in patients with glioblastomas demonstrated that GA may serve as a sensitive prognosticator of overall survival. Yet, current practice does not include routine evaluation of geriatric vulnerabilities and the relevance of GA has not been previously evaluated in broader cohorts of PBT patients. The objective of this descriptive study was to assess key GA constructs in adults with PBT dichotomized into older versus younger groups. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of data collected from 579 participants with PBT recruited between 2016 and 2020, dichotomized into older (≥ 65 years, n = 92) and younger (≤ 64 years, n = 487) from an ongoing observational trial. GA constructs were evaluated using socio-demographic characteristics, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), polypharmacy (>5 daily medications), Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), Neurologic Function Score (NFS), and patient-reported outcome assessments including general health, functional status, symptom burden and interference, and mood. Descriptive statistics, t-tests, chi-square tests, and Pearson correlations were used to evaluate differences between age groups. RESULTS: Older participants were more likely to have problems with mobility (58% vs. 44%), usual activities (64% vs 50%) and self-care (38% vs 26%) compared to the younger participants (odds ratios [ORs] = 1.3-1.4, ps < 0.05), while older participants were less likely to report feeling distressed (OR = 0.4, p < 0.05). Older participants also had higher CCI and were more likely to have polypharmacy (OR = 1.7, ps < 0.05). Increasing age strongly correlated with worse KPS score (r = -0.232, OR = 1.4, p < 0.001) and worse NFS (r = 0.210, OR = 1.5, p < 0.001). No differences were observed in overall symptom burden, symptom interference, and anxiety/depression scores. DISCUSSION: While commonly used GA tools were not available, the study employed patient- and clinician-reported outcomes to identify potential future research directions for the use of GA in the broader neuro-oncology population. Findings illustrate missed opportunities in neuro-oncology practice and underscore the need for incorporation of GA into routine care of this population. Future studies are warranted to further evaluate the prognostic utility of GA and to better understand functional aging outcomes in this patient population.

The state of neuro-oncology during the COVID-19 pandemic: a worldwide assessment.

BACKGROUND: It remains unknown how the COVID-19 pandemic has changed neuro-oncology clinical practice, training, and research efforts. METHODS: We performed an international survey of practitioners, scientists, and trainees from 21 neuro-oncology organizations across 6 continents, April 24-May 17, 2020. We assessed clinical practice and research environments, institutional preparedness and support, and perceived impact on patients. RESULTS: Of 582 respondents, 258 (45%) were US-based and 314 (55%) international. Ninety-four percent of participants reported changes in their clinical practice. Ninety-five percent of respondents converted at least some practice to telemedicine. Ten percent of practitioners felt the need to see patients in person, specifically because of billing concerns and pressure from their institutions. Sixty-seven percent of practitioners suspended enrollment for at least one clinical trial, including 62% suspending phase III trial enrollments. More than 50% believed neuro-oncology patients were at increased risk for COVID-19. Seventy-one percent of clinicians feared for their own personal safety or that of their families, specifically because of their clinical duties; 20% had inadequate personal protective equipment. While 69% reported increased stress, 44% received no psychosocial support from their institutions. Thirty-seven percent had salary reductions and 63% of researchers temporarily closed their laboratories. However, the pandemic created positive changes in perceived patient satisfaction, communication quality, and technology use to deliver care and mediate interactions with other practitioners. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic has changed treatment schedules and limited investigational treatment options. Institutional lack of support created clinician and researcher anxiety. Communication with patients was satisfactory. We make recommendations to guide clinical and scientific infrastructure moving forward and address the personal challenges of providers and researchers.

Symptoms and socio-economic impact of ependymoma on adult patients: results of the Adult Ependymoma Outcomes Project 2.

Ependymoma is a rare central nervous system tumor of adults. Reports of patient symptoms, interference patterns and costs encountered by patients and families are limited. Adult ependymoma patients completed the online Ependymoma Outcomes Questionnaire II. The survey assesses disease and functional status as well as socio-economic factors. Descriptive statistics were used to report disease characteristics as well as economic and social impact. Independent samples t test was used to test if differences exist between high- and low-income groups in terms of symptom severity. Correlations were calculated between symptoms and cost estimates. 86 international patients participated (male = 50 %). The economic analysis focused on 78 respondents from the US. 48 % were employed and 55 % earned ≥$60,000. Tumors were located in the brain (44 %), spine (44 %) or both (12 %). Spine patients compared to brain patients reported significantly worse pain (4.4 versus 2.2, p < .003), numbness (5.3 versus 2.2, p < .001), fatigue (5.1 versus 3.6, p < .03), changes in bowel patterns (3.8 versus 1.4, p < .003) and weakness (4.2 versus 2.1, p < .006). Brain patients compared with spine patients had increased lack of appetite (.4 versus 2, p < .014). Patients with lower income (≤$59,999) had more problems concentrating (p < .024) and worse cognitive module severity scores (p < .024). Estimated average monthly out-of-pocket spending was $168 for medical co-pays and $59 for prescription medication. Patients with ependymoma are highly affected by their symptoms. Spinal patients report higher severity of symptoms. Patients in the lower income group report significantly higher severity of cognitive symptoms independent of disease site.