Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 275

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Chemotherapy‐induced structural changes in cerebral white matter and its correlation with impaired cognitive functioning in breast cancer patients

Open access
Deprez, Sabine, Amant, Frederic, Yigit, Refika, Porke, Kathleen, Verhoeven, Judith, Stock, Jan Van den, Smeets, Ann, Christiaens, Marie‐Rose, Leemans, Alexander, Hecke, Wim Van, Vandenberghe, Joris, Vandenbulcke, Mathieu, Sunaert, Stefan·2011·Human Brain Mapping

Abstract

A subgroup of patients with breast cancer suffers from mild cognitive impairment after chemotherapy. To uncover the neural substrate of these mental complaints, we examined cerebral white matter (WM) integrity after chemotherapy using magnetic resonance diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) in combination with detailed cognitive assessment. Postchemotherapy breast cancer patients (n = 17) and matched healthy controls (n = 18) were recruited for DTI and neuropsychological testing, including the self‐report cognitive failure questionnaire (CFQ). Differences in DTI WM integrity parameters [fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD)] between patients and healthy controls were assessed using a voxel‐based two‐sample‐t‐test. In comparison with healthy controls, the patient group demonstrated decreased FA in frontal and temporal WM tracts and increased MD in frontal WM. These differences were also confirmed when comparing this patient group with an additional control group of nonchemotherapy‐treated breast cancer patients (n = 10). To address the heterogeneity observed in cognitive function after chemotherapy, we performed a voxel‐based correlation analysis between FA values and individual neuropsychological test scores. Significant correlations of FA with neuropsychological tests covering the domain of attention and processing/psychomotor speed were found in temporal and parietal WM tracts. Furthermore, CFQ scores correlated negatively in frontal and parietal WM. These studies show that chemotherapy seems to affect WM integrity and that parameters derived from DTI have the required sensitivity to quantify neural changes related to chemotherapy‐induced mild cognitive impairment. Hum Brain Mapp 32:480–493, 2011. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hbm.21033

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Deprez, S., Amant, F., Yigit, R., Porke, K., Verhoeven, J., Stock, J. V. D., Smeets, A., Christiaens, M., Leemans, A., Hecke, W. V., Vandenberghe, J., Vandenbulcke, M., & Sunaert, S.
Venue
Human Brain Mapping
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-02-14
Volume
32
Issue
3
Pages
480-493
ISSN
  • 1065-9471 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0193
OpenAlex
W1986359861
Cited by
275
References
6
FWCI
17.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.