Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100. Cognitive tests and assessment

Topic: Drug trials: efficacy and safety

It has been suggested that patients undergoing treatment with recombinant interleukin-2 (rIL-2) may develop cognitive impairment. To evaluate these effects, 17 patients with advanced colorectal cancer took part in a randomised, parallel group study of rIL-2 with chemotherapy (5-fluorouracil and leucovorin) and chemotherapy alone. Assessments were carried out daily whilst patients were in hospital and regularly between cycles of treatment using state-of-the-art computerised cognitive assessment, as well as traditional psychometric tests. Rigorous discontinuation criteria were applied to ensure that the effect of time-related variables did not influence the results. One patient developed repeated transient psychotic episodes associated with rIL-2 infusions and another regularly became confused. Computerised cognitive assessments revealed that immunochemotherapy produced significant impairment in various tasks, especially reaction time, picture recognition and vigilance. These effects were not due to sleep deprivation or pyrexia. For most patients, cognitive functioning was restored to the baseline level within 10 days following the cessation of rIL-2. In conclusion, during infusions of rIL-2, some patients experience severe confusion and amnesia which resembles some of the major cognitive impairments associated with dementias such as Alzheimer's disease. Computerised cognitive assessment using the Cognitive Drug Research system provides a feasible, sensitive and reliable method of evaluating cognitive changes in patients with cancer. It could usefully be included in quality of life assessments in clinical trials where treatment-related cognitive changes need to be evaluated.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Walker, L. G., Wesnes, K. P., Heys, S. D., Walker, M. B., Lolley, J., & Eremin, O. (1996). The cognitive effects of recombinant interleukin-2 (rIL-2) therapy: a controlled clinical trial using computerised assessments. European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990). https://doi.org/10.1016/s0959-8049(96)00300-0

Vancouver

Walker LG, Wesnes KP, Heys SD, Walker MB, Lolley J, Eremin O. The cognitive effects of recombinant interleukin-2 (rIL-2) therapy: a controlled clinical trial using computerised assessments. European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990). 1996. doi:10.1016/s0959-8049(96)00300-0. PMID: 9038610.

BibTeX

@article{walker1996-9038610,
  author  = {Walker, L. G. and Wesnes, K. P. and Heys, S. D. and Walker, M. B. and Lolley, J. and Eremin, O.},
  title   = {{The cognitive effects of recombinant interleukin-2 (rIL-2) therapy: a controlled clinical trial using computerised assessments}},
  journal = {European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990)},
  year    = {1996},
  doi     = {10.1016/s0959-8049(96)00300-0},
  pmid    = {9038610},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/s0959-8049(96)00300-0}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 71/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 11 of 12; Strength of evidence 5 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 1 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 1 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 41 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 71 of 100. Total 71 of 100.41 of the 58 points we could judge = 71 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a randomised controlled trial. Scored zero for effect reported because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 41 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 71 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990))
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 11 / 12 A randomised controlled trial (from PubMed type “Randomized Controlled Trial”)
Strength of evidence 5 / 5 Rated “high” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 1 / 5 1996 — older than 20 years, still counted
Sample size 1 / 4 17 participants
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 1 / 2 Randomised (as stated in the record)
Times cited — / 7 No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year — / 5 No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year — / 6 No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here — / 6 Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited — / 4 No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 9038610)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 41 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 41 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 71 out of 100.
Total 71 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Related studies in Cognitive tests and assessment

Also tagged “galantamine”

271 studies in the library carry the topic tag “galantamine”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 271 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Cognitive tests and assessment

See all studies in Cognitive tests and assessment →