Objective Cancer and its treatment are associated with long‐term cognitive deficits. However, most studies of cancer patients have used traditional, office‐based cognitive evaluations instead of assessing patients in their daily lives. Recent research in cognitive aging suggests that variability in performance may be a sensitive indicator of cognitive decline. Using ecological momentary assessment (EMA), we examined cognitive variability among breast cancer survivors and evaluated whether ratings of fatigue and depressed mood were associated with cognition. Methods Participants were 47 women (M age = 53.3 years) who completed treatment for early stage breast cancer 6 to 36 months previously. Smartphones were preloaded with cognitive tests measuring processing speed, executive functioning, and memory, as well as rating scales for fatigue and depressed mood. Participants were prompted five times per day over a 14‐day period to complete EMA cognitive tasks and fatigue and depressed mood ratings. Results Cognitive variability was observed across all three EMA cognitive tasks. Processing speed responses were slower at times that women rated themselves as more fatigued than their average (P < .001). Ratings of depressed mood were not associated with cognition. Conclusions This study is the first to report cognitive variability in the daily lives of women treated for breast cancer. Performance was worse on a measure of processing speed at times when a woman rated her fatigue as greater than her own average. The ability to identify moments when cognition is most vulnerable may allow for personalized interventions to be applied at times when they are most needed.

Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia (CBT-I) is the gold-standard treatment for insomnia, which is common among breast cancer survivors (BCS). This pilot randomized controlled trial tested the first CBT-I intervention for Spanish-speaking BCS delivered using eHealth. Participants (N = 30) were Spanish-speaking BCS with insomnia symptoms recruited in Puerto Rico and randomized to a 6-week eHealth CBT-I group intervention or a waitlist control. Primary outcomes were acceptability (recruitment, treatment satisfaction) and feasibility (retention, attendance). Secondary outcomes were group differences in sleep outcomes post-treatment (i.e., insomnia symptoms, sleep disturbance, sleep efficiency). Recruitment (95%) and retention (97%) were excellent. All CBT-I participants (100%) attended ≥ 3 of 6 sessions. Satisfaction with CBT-I was acceptable. Post-intervention, there were medium to large group differences for average insomnia symptoms ( d = 1.02), sleep disturbance ( d = 1.25), and sleep efficiency ( d = 0.77) favoring CBT-I. There were small/medium to medium/large group differences for the proportion of participants with clinically significant insomnia symptoms ( d = 0.52), sleep disturbance ( d = 0.67), and low sleep efficiency ( d = 0.33) favoring CBT-I. Spanish-language eHealth CBT-I for BCS was acceptable and feasible and showed preliminary efficacy. ClinicalTrials.gov TRN: NCT04101526 (Posted September 24, 2019).

Interventions to improve the cognitive health of older adults are of critical importance. In the current study, we conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial using a pill-based nutraceutical (NT-020) that contained a proprietary formulation of blueberry, carnosine, green tea, vitamin D3, and Biovin to evaluate the impact on changes in multiple domains of cognitive functioning. One hundred and five cognitively intact adults aged 65-85 years of age (M=73.6 years) were randomized to receive NT-020 (n=52) or a placebo (n=53). Participants were tested with a battery of cognitive performance tests that were classified into six broad domains--episodic memory, processing speed, verbal ability, working memory, executive functioning, and complex speed at baseline and 2 months later. The results indicated that persons taking NT-020 improved significantly on two measures of processing speed across the 2-month test period in contrast to persons on the placebo whose performance did not change. None of the other cognitive ability measures were related to intervention group. The results also indicated that the NT-020 was well tolerated by older adults, and the presence of adverse events or symptoms did not differ between the NT-020 and placebo groups. Overall, the results of the current study were promising and suggest the potential for interventions like these to improve the cognitive health of older adults.

No abstract