癌症相关认知障碍中的功能性脑活动：脑电图研究的范围综述。
完整摘要 · 中文译文
未标注：癌症相关认知障碍（CRCI）在癌症全程中均有报道，但其神经生物学基础仍未完全阐明。脑电图（EEG）提供了一种在静息状态和认知加工过程中评估大脑活动的时间精确方法，但其在CRCI研究中的应用尚未被系统梳理。本范围综述描述了EEG如何被用于研究癌症患者的认知功能，包括所研究的人群、所采用的EEG范式和分析方法以及所评估的认知结局。遵循PRISMA-ScR指南，我们检索了MEDLINE、PsycINFO和Web of Science从建库至2025年2月的文献，纳入使用EEG检查认知功能的研究。共纳入60篇文章。多数研究样本量小且为横断面设计，2015年后发表产出显著增加。基于任务的事件相关电位，尤其是来自oddball和注意力任务的电位，使用最为频繁，而定量EEG方法，包括频谱功率和连接性分析，则较少见。在非中枢神经系统（CNS）癌症人群中，P300潜伏期延长和波幅降低较为常见，但也出现了相反的和阴性的结果。来自原发性CNS及其他颅内肿瘤人群的证据稀少。跨癌症情境，定量EEG发现各文章之间的一致性有限。EEG指标与认知结局之间的关联不一致，且常常未被直接检验。总体而言，EEG提供了一种互补方法用于i 研究癌症患者的认知功能，但证据在方法学上仍存在异质性。需要更大规模的纵向研究、更一致的认知结局选择，以及神经与认知测量的更紧密结合，以确立可重复的研究结果并评估其潜在的临床效用。 系统综述注册：https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251084951。
完整摘要 · 英文原文
UNLABELLED: Cancer-related cognitive impairment (CRCI) is reported across the cancer trajectory, yet its neurobiological basis remains incompletely understood. Electroencephalography (EEG) provides a temporally precise method for assessing brain activity at rest and during cognitive processing, but its application in CRCI research has not been systematically mapped. This scoping review characterized how EEG has been used to study cognitive functioning in people with cancer, including populations studied, EEG paradigms and analytic approaches employed, and cognitive outcomes assessed. Following PRISMA-ScR guidance, we searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science from inception to February 2025 for studies using EEG to examine cognitive functioning. Sixty articles were included. Most were small and cross-sectional, with publication output increasing markedly after 2015. Task-based event-related potentials, particularly from oddball and attention tasks, were used most frequently, whereas quantitative EEG approaches, including spectral power and connectivity analyses, were less common. In populations with cancers outside the central nervous system (CNS), longer P300 latency and lower amplitude were common, but opposite and null findings also occurred. Evidence from primary CNS and other intracranial tumor populations was sparse. Across cancer contexts, quantitative EEG findings showed limited convergence across articles. Associations between EEG measures and cognitive outcomes were inconsistent and often not tested directly. Overall, EEG provides a complementary approach to investigating cognition in people with cancer, but the evidence remains methodologically heterogeneous. Larger longitudinal studies, more consistent cognitive outcome selection, and closer integration of neural and cognitive measures are needed to establish reproducible findings and evaluate their potential clinical utility. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251084951.