Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 958

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Memantine for the prevention of cognitive dysfunction in patients receiving whole-brain radiotherapy: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Open access
Brown, P. D., Pugh, S., Laack, N. N., Wefel, J. S., Khuntia, D., Meyers, C., Choucair, A., Fox, S., Suh, J. H., Roberge, D., Kavadi, V., Bentzen, S. M., Mehta, M. P., Watkins-Bruner, D., for the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG)·2013·Neuro-Oncology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To determine the protective effects of memantine on cognitive function in patients receiving whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT). METHODS: Adult patients with brain metastases received WBRT and were randomized to receive placebo or memantine (20 mg/d), within 3 days of initiating radiotherapy for 24 weeks. Serial standardized tests of cognitive function were performed. RESULTS: Of 554 patients who were accrued, 508 were eligible. Grade 3 or 4 toxicities and study compliance were similar in the 2 arms. There was less decline in delayed recall in the memantine arm at 24 weeks (P = .059), but the difference was not statistically significant, possibly because there were only 149 analyzable patients at 24 weeks, resulting in only 35% statistical power. The memantine arm had significantly longer time to cognitive decline (hazard ratio 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.62-0.99, P = .01); the probability of cognitive function failure at 24 weeks was 53.8% in the memantine arm and 64.9% in the placebo arm. Superior results were seen in the memantine arm for executive function at 8 (P = .008) and 16 weeks (P = .0041) and for processing speed (P = .0137) and delayed recognition (P = .0149) at 24 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Memantine was well tolerated and had a toxicity profile very similar to placebo. Although there was less decline in the primary endpoint of delayed recall at 24 weeks, this lacked statistical significance possibly due to significant patient loss. Overall, patients treated with memantine had better cognitive function over time; specifically, memantine delayed time to cognitive decline and reduced the rate of decline in memory, executive function, and processing speed in patients receiving WBRT. RTOG 0614, ClinicalTrials.gov number CT00566852.

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 · 10.1093/neuonc/not114

Cites

5 of 5 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

Cited by

See all 958

Metadata

Authors
Brown, P. D., Pugh, S., Laack, N. N., Wefel, J. S., Khuntia, D., Meyers, C., Choucair, A., Fox, S., Suh, J. H., Roberge, D., Kavadi, V., Bentzen, S. M., Mehta, M. P., Watkins-Bruner, D., & for the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG)
Venue
Neuro-Oncology
Published
2013-08-16
Volume
15
Issue
10
Pages
1429-1437
ISSN
  • 1522-8517 (ISSN-L)
  • 1523-5866
OpenAlex
W2111406583
Cited by
958
References
5
FWCI
37.76
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.