Loading
Lung Cancer Research Studies / Cancer Related Cognitive Impairment Studies · Journal article
Pharmacological Reports · September 11, 2026
A consensus or society position rather than new primary data.
This is a critical narrative review identifying why candidate pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions for cancer therapy-related cognitive impairment have failed to translate clinically despite preclinical promise. The authors outline specific methodological gaps—including use of non-tumour-bearing animal models, inadequate modelling of age, sex, and hormonal factors, and mismatched endpoints—and propose a translational roadmap to improve future development of mechanism-informed, oncologically safe interventions.
Journal article.
Only a few of numerous proposed pharmacological and nonpharmacological strategies for CRCI have achieved robust clinical translation Identified methodological gaps include use of non-tumour-bearing animals, inadequate modelling of age, sex, and hormonal status, mismatched behavioural and clinical endpoints, and poor biomarker alignment Preclinical efficacy of many candidate therapies has not translated into robust clinical benefit
Only a few of numerous proposed pharmacological and nonpharmacological strategies for CRCI have achieved robust clinical translation
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
A critical narrative review analyzing why candidate therapies for cancer therapy-related cognitive impairment fail to translate from preclinical to clinical settings, proposing methodological improvements and a translational roadmap rather than reporting original empirical findings.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
What is missing. This record has no reported figures. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Although numerous pharmacological and nonpharmacological strategies have been proposed for the prevention or treatment of cancer therapy-related cognitive impairment (CRCI), only a few have achieved robust clinical translation. This review, the second part of a two-part series, first critically summarizes current candidate pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions for CRCI, discussing their biological rationale, mechanisms of action, and the available preclinical and clinical evidence. It then reports why many of these promising approaches fail to translate into effective clinical therapies. We critically analyse the methodological gaps between preclinical models and cancer survivorship, including the use of non-tumour-bearing animals, inadequate modelling of age, sex, and hormonal status, mismatched behavioural and clinical endpoints, poor biomarker alignment, and insufficient assessment of potential interactions between neuroprotective agents and anticancer efficacy. Finally, we propose a translational roadmap for developing mechanism-informed, clinically predictive, and oncologically safe interventions for CRCI and explain why the preclinical efficacy of many candidate therapies has not yet translated into robust clinical benefit.
Taken from the source record, never inferred. Follow any of these and new work involving them reaches your briefing.