Scientists have discovered that infants and young children who receive treatment for brain tumors tend to fall behind in their academic readiness, which may lead to continued struggles in their later school years.
Children who survive brain tumors often face lingering challenges from both the disease and its treatment long after their therapy has ended. Researchers at St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital found that very young children who were treated for brain tumors scored lower in academic readiness compared to their peers, and this lack of readiness continued as these survivors entered formal education. Interestingly, children from families with higher socioeconomic status showed some protection against these effects, indicating that providing early developmental support could help bridge the academic achievement gap. The results of this study were published today in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.
“We found that even in very young children, academic readiness was lagging behind that of healthy children,” said Heather Conklin, PhD, the study’s corresponding author and a member of the St. Jude Department of Psychology and Biobehavioral Sciences. “These kids were gradually falling behind their same-age peers in essential academic skills like recognizing letters, numbers, and colors.”
While previous studies have centered on school-aged children, this research is among the first to assess academic readiness in infants and young kids (under 3 years old) after brain tumor treatments. The researchers tracked a cohort of 70 patients treated for brain tumors over time. They noticed an increasing readiness gap between these young patients and their typically developing counterparts at six months post-diagnosis and annually over five years. “We found that their academic readiness skills weren’t developing as quickly,” Conklin explained.
Although the researchers noticed these gaps as the children grew older, the discrepancies were apparent early on with predictive implications. “Early academic readiness was an indicator of future reading and math success,” Conklin said. “This effect isn’t short-lived; these children aren’t likely to catch up on their own.”
Early interventions may safeguard academic readiness and success
While the findings present a challenge, they also suggest a way to tackle it: early intervention. Since differences in academic readiness become apparent soon after treatment, providing support at that stage—instead of waiting until elementary school (when interventions usually commence)—could improve outcomes.
“We now recognize that we don’t need to wait until students struggle with math and reading; we can start helping them earlier,” Conklin stated. “The variability we observe early on can predict longer-term academic performance, indicating that earlier interventions are likely to be effective and beneficial.”
For early interventions to succeed, they should be guided by the factors that either heighten the risk or provide protection against the academic readiness gap. The researchers examined aspects like treatment type and demographics, ultimately finding that only one factor was significant.
Socioeconomic status offers some protection, indicating that early interventions could be effective
“The only clinical or demographic factor associated with academic readiness we discovered was socioeconomic status,” Conklin shared. “Children from families with higher socioeconomic status had a protective effect regarding academic readiness.”
This discovery suggests that investing in resources to compensate for lost early enrichment experiences could help narrow the readiness gap. Increasing access to such opportunities could benefit more children.
“It’s evident that being away from their home environment, caregivers, daycare, playdates, parks, and early intervention services during these crucial developmental years likely negatively impacts very young patients,” Conklin noted. “Our findings imply that families can enhance play experiences, and by making small adjustments in how they engage with their child—with support from their medical team and suitable resources—they could positively influence their child’s cognitive and academic outcomes.”
Study Authors and Funding
Melanie Somekh, previously of St. Jude, is the first author of the study. Other contributors include Michelle Swain from Queensland Children’s Hospital; Lana Harder from Children’s Medical Center Dallas; Bonnie Carlson-Green from Children’s Minnesota; Joanna Wallace from Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital Stanford; Ryan Kaner from Rady Children’s Hospital San Diego; Jeanelle S. Ali from The Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario; and Jason Ashford, Jennifer Harman, Catherine Billups, Arzu Onar-Thomas, Thomas Merchant, and Amar Gajjar from St. Jude.
This study was funded through grants from the National Cancer Institute (St. Jude Cancer Center Support [CORE] Grant (P30 CA21765)) and ALSAC, the fundraising and awareness organization for St. Jude.
