User login
Certain diabetes drugs may thwart dementia
COPENHAGEN – Selected antidiabetes medications appear to blunt the increased risk of dementia associated with type 2 diabetes, according to a Danish national case control registry study.
This benefit applies to the newer antidiabetic agents – specifically, the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4) inhibitors, the glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP1) analogs, and the sodium-glucose transport protein 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors – and metformin as well, Merete Osler, MD, PhD, reported at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
In contrast, neither insulin nor the sulfonylureas showed any signal of a protective effect against development of dementia. In fact, the use of sulfonylureas was associated with a small but statistically significant 7% increased risk, added Dr. Osler, of the University of Copenhagen.
Elsewhere at the meeting, investigators tapped a Swedish national registry to demonstrate that individuals with type 1 diabetes have a sharply reduced risk of developing schizophrenia.
Type 2 diabetes medications and dementia
Dr. Osler and colleagues are among several groups of investigators who have previously shown that patients with type 2 diabetes have an increased risk of dementia.
“This has raised the question of the role of dysregulated glucose metabolism in the development of this neurodegenerative disorder, and the possible effect of antidiabetic medications,” she noted.
To further explore this issue, which links two great ongoing global epidemics, Dr. Osler and coinvestigators conducted a nested case-control study including all 176,250 patients with type 2 diabetes in the comprehensive Danish National Diabetes Register for 1995-2012. The 11,619 patients with type 2 diabetes who received a dementia diagnosis were matched with 46,476 type 2 diabetes patients without dementia. The objective was to determine associations between dementia and ever-use and cumulative dose of antidiabetes drugs, alone and in combination, in logistic regression analyses adjusted for demographics, comorbid conditions, marital status, diabetic complications, and year of dementia diagnosis.
Patients who had ever used metformin had an adjusted 6% reduction in the likelihood of dementia compared with metformin nonusers, a modest but statistically significant difference. Those on a DPP4 inhibitor had a 20% reduction in risk. The GLP1 analogs were associated with a 42% decrease in risk. So were the SGLT2 inhibitors. A dose-response relationship was evident: The higher the cumulative exposure to these agents, the lower the odds of dementia.
Combination therapy is common in type 2 diabetes, so the investigators scrutinized the impact of a variety of multidrug combinations. Combinations including a DPP4 inhibitor or GLP1 analog were also associated with significantly reduced dementia risk.
Records of glycemic control in the form of hemoglobin A1c values were available on only 1,446 type 2 diabetic dementia patients and 4,003 matched controls. An analysis that incorporated this variable showed that the observed anti-dementia effect of selected diabetes drugs was independent of glycemic control, according to Dr. Osler.
The protective effect appeared to extend to both Alzheimer’s disease and vascular dementias, although firm conclusions can’t be drawn on this score because the study was insufficiently powered to address that issue.
Dr. Osler noted that the Danish study confirms a recent Taiwanese study showing an apparent protective effect against dementia for metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes (Aging Dis. 2019 Feb 1;10(1):37-48).
“Ours is the first study on the newer diabetic drugs, so our results need to be confirmed,” she pointed out.
If confirmed, however, it would warrant exploration of these drugs more generally as potential interventions to prevent dementia. That could open a whole new chapter in the remarkable story of the SGLT2 inhibitors, a class of drugs originally developed for treatment of type 2 diabetes but which in major randomized clinical trials later proved to be so effective in the treatment of heart failure that they are now considered cardiology drugs first.
Asked if she thinks these antidiabetes agents have a general neuroprotective effect or, instead, that the observed reduced risk of dementia is a function of patients being treated better early on with modern drugs, the psychiatrist replied, “I think it might be a combination of both, especially because we find different risk estimates between the drugs.”
Dr. Osler reported having no financial conflicts of interest regarding the study, which was funded by the Danish Diabetes Foundation, the Danish Medical Association, and several other foundations.
The full study details were published online shortly before her presentation at ECNP 2019 (Eur J Endocrinol. 2019 Aug 1. pii: EJE-19-0259.R1. doi: 10.1530/EJE-19-0259).
Type 1 diabetes and schizophrenia risk
Kristina Melkersson, MD, PhD, presented a cohort study that utilized Swedish national registries to examine the relationship between type 1 diabetes and schizophrenia. The study comprised 1,745,977 individuals, of whom 10,117 had type 1 diabetes, who were followed for a median of 9.7 and maximum of 18 years from their 13th birthday. During follow-up, 1,280 individuals were diagnosed with schizophrenia and 649 others with schizoaffective disorder. The adjusted risk of schizophrenia was 70% lower in patients with type 1 diabetes. However, there was no difference in the risk of schizoaffective disorder in the type 1 diabetic versus nondiabetic subjects.
The Swedish data confirm the findings of an earlier Finnish national study showing that the risk of schizophrenia is reduced in patients with type 1 diabetes (Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2007 Aug;64(8):894-9). These findings raise the intriguing possibility that autoimmunity somehow figures into the etiology of the psychiatric disorder. Other investigators have previously reported a reduced prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis in patients with schizophrenia, noted Dr. Melkersson of the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm.
She reported having no financial conflicts regarding her study.
SOURCE: Osler M. ECNP Abstract P180. Melkersson K. Abstract 81.
COPENHAGEN – Selected antidiabetes medications appear to blunt the increased risk of dementia associated with type 2 diabetes, according to a Danish national case control registry study.
This benefit applies to the newer antidiabetic agents – specifically, the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4) inhibitors, the glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP1) analogs, and the sodium-glucose transport protein 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors – and metformin as well, Merete Osler, MD, PhD, reported at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
In contrast, neither insulin nor the sulfonylureas showed any signal of a protective effect against development of dementia. In fact, the use of sulfonylureas was associated with a small but statistically significant 7% increased risk, added Dr. Osler, of the University of Copenhagen.
Elsewhere at the meeting, investigators tapped a Swedish national registry to demonstrate that individuals with type 1 diabetes have a sharply reduced risk of developing schizophrenia.
Type 2 diabetes medications and dementia
Dr. Osler and colleagues are among several groups of investigators who have previously shown that patients with type 2 diabetes have an increased risk of dementia.
“This has raised the question of the role of dysregulated glucose metabolism in the development of this neurodegenerative disorder, and the possible effect of antidiabetic medications,” she noted.
To further explore this issue, which links two great ongoing global epidemics, Dr. Osler and coinvestigators conducted a nested case-control study including all 176,250 patients with type 2 diabetes in the comprehensive Danish National Diabetes Register for 1995-2012. The 11,619 patients with type 2 diabetes who received a dementia diagnosis were matched with 46,476 type 2 diabetes patients without dementia. The objective was to determine associations between dementia and ever-use and cumulative dose of antidiabetes drugs, alone and in combination, in logistic regression analyses adjusted for demographics, comorbid conditions, marital status, diabetic complications, and year of dementia diagnosis.
Patients who had ever used metformin had an adjusted 6% reduction in the likelihood of dementia compared with metformin nonusers, a modest but statistically significant difference. Those on a DPP4 inhibitor had a 20% reduction in risk. The GLP1 analogs were associated with a 42% decrease in risk. So were the SGLT2 inhibitors. A dose-response relationship was evident: The higher the cumulative exposure to these agents, the lower the odds of dementia.
Combination therapy is common in type 2 diabetes, so the investigators scrutinized the impact of a variety of multidrug combinations. Combinations including a DPP4 inhibitor or GLP1 analog were also associated with significantly reduced dementia risk.
Records of glycemic control in the form of hemoglobin A1c values were available on only 1,446 type 2 diabetic dementia patients and 4,003 matched controls. An analysis that incorporated this variable showed that the observed anti-dementia effect of selected diabetes drugs was independent of glycemic control, according to Dr. Osler.
The protective effect appeared to extend to both Alzheimer’s disease and vascular dementias, although firm conclusions can’t be drawn on this score because the study was insufficiently powered to address that issue.
Dr. Osler noted that the Danish study confirms a recent Taiwanese study showing an apparent protective effect against dementia for metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes (Aging Dis. 2019 Feb 1;10(1):37-48).
“Ours is the first study on the newer diabetic drugs, so our results need to be confirmed,” she pointed out.
If confirmed, however, it would warrant exploration of these drugs more generally as potential interventions to prevent dementia. That could open a whole new chapter in the remarkable story of the SGLT2 inhibitors, a class of drugs originally developed for treatment of type 2 diabetes but which in major randomized clinical trials later proved to be so effective in the treatment of heart failure that they are now considered cardiology drugs first.
Asked if she thinks these antidiabetes agents have a general neuroprotective effect or, instead, that the observed reduced risk of dementia is a function of patients being treated better early on with modern drugs, the psychiatrist replied, “I think it might be a combination of both, especially because we find different risk estimates between the drugs.”
Dr. Osler reported having no financial conflicts of interest regarding the study, which was funded by the Danish Diabetes Foundation, the Danish Medical Association, and several other foundations.
The full study details were published online shortly before her presentation at ECNP 2019 (Eur J Endocrinol. 2019 Aug 1. pii: EJE-19-0259.R1. doi: 10.1530/EJE-19-0259).
Type 1 diabetes and schizophrenia risk
Kristina Melkersson, MD, PhD, presented a cohort study that utilized Swedish national registries to examine the relationship between type 1 diabetes and schizophrenia. The study comprised 1,745,977 individuals, of whom 10,117 had type 1 diabetes, who were followed for a median of 9.7 and maximum of 18 years from their 13th birthday. During follow-up, 1,280 individuals were diagnosed with schizophrenia and 649 others with schizoaffective disorder. The adjusted risk of schizophrenia was 70% lower in patients with type 1 diabetes. However, there was no difference in the risk of schizoaffective disorder in the type 1 diabetic versus nondiabetic subjects.
The Swedish data confirm the findings of an earlier Finnish national study showing that the risk of schizophrenia is reduced in patients with type 1 diabetes (Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2007 Aug;64(8):894-9). These findings raise the intriguing possibility that autoimmunity somehow figures into the etiology of the psychiatric disorder. Other investigators have previously reported a reduced prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis in patients with schizophrenia, noted Dr. Melkersson of the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm.
She reported having no financial conflicts regarding her study.
SOURCE: Osler M. ECNP Abstract P180. Melkersson K. Abstract 81.
COPENHAGEN – Selected antidiabetes medications appear to blunt the increased risk of dementia associated with type 2 diabetes, according to a Danish national case control registry study.
This benefit applies to the newer antidiabetic agents – specifically, the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4) inhibitors, the glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP1) analogs, and the sodium-glucose transport protein 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors – and metformin as well, Merete Osler, MD, PhD, reported at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
In contrast, neither insulin nor the sulfonylureas showed any signal of a protective effect against development of dementia. In fact, the use of sulfonylureas was associated with a small but statistically significant 7% increased risk, added Dr. Osler, of the University of Copenhagen.
Elsewhere at the meeting, investigators tapped a Swedish national registry to demonstrate that individuals with type 1 diabetes have a sharply reduced risk of developing schizophrenia.
Type 2 diabetes medications and dementia
Dr. Osler and colleagues are among several groups of investigators who have previously shown that patients with type 2 diabetes have an increased risk of dementia.
“This has raised the question of the role of dysregulated glucose metabolism in the development of this neurodegenerative disorder, and the possible effect of antidiabetic medications,” she noted.
To further explore this issue, which links two great ongoing global epidemics, Dr. Osler and coinvestigators conducted a nested case-control study including all 176,250 patients with type 2 diabetes in the comprehensive Danish National Diabetes Register for 1995-2012. The 11,619 patients with type 2 diabetes who received a dementia diagnosis were matched with 46,476 type 2 diabetes patients without dementia. The objective was to determine associations between dementia and ever-use and cumulative dose of antidiabetes drugs, alone and in combination, in logistic regression analyses adjusted for demographics, comorbid conditions, marital status, diabetic complications, and year of dementia diagnosis.
Patients who had ever used metformin had an adjusted 6% reduction in the likelihood of dementia compared with metformin nonusers, a modest but statistically significant difference. Those on a DPP4 inhibitor had a 20% reduction in risk. The GLP1 analogs were associated with a 42% decrease in risk. So were the SGLT2 inhibitors. A dose-response relationship was evident: The higher the cumulative exposure to these agents, the lower the odds of dementia.
Combination therapy is common in type 2 diabetes, so the investigators scrutinized the impact of a variety of multidrug combinations. Combinations including a DPP4 inhibitor or GLP1 analog were also associated with significantly reduced dementia risk.
Records of glycemic control in the form of hemoglobin A1c values were available on only 1,446 type 2 diabetic dementia patients and 4,003 matched controls. An analysis that incorporated this variable showed that the observed anti-dementia effect of selected diabetes drugs was independent of glycemic control, according to Dr. Osler.
The protective effect appeared to extend to both Alzheimer’s disease and vascular dementias, although firm conclusions can’t be drawn on this score because the study was insufficiently powered to address that issue.
Dr. Osler noted that the Danish study confirms a recent Taiwanese study showing an apparent protective effect against dementia for metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes (Aging Dis. 2019 Feb 1;10(1):37-48).
“Ours is the first study on the newer diabetic drugs, so our results need to be confirmed,” she pointed out.
If confirmed, however, it would warrant exploration of these drugs more generally as potential interventions to prevent dementia. That could open a whole new chapter in the remarkable story of the SGLT2 inhibitors, a class of drugs originally developed for treatment of type 2 diabetes but which in major randomized clinical trials later proved to be so effective in the treatment of heart failure that they are now considered cardiology drugs first.
Asked if she thinks these antidiabetes agents have a general neuroprotective effect or, instead, that the observed reduced risk of dementia is a function of patients being treated better early on with modern drugs, the psychiatrist replied, “I think it might be a combination of both, especially because we find different risk estimates between the drugs.”
Dr. Osler reported having no financial conflicts of interest regarding the study, which was funded by the Danish Diabetes Foundation, the Danish Medical Association, and several other foundations.
The full study details were published online shortly before her presentation at ECNP 2019 (Eur J Endocrinol. 2019 Aug 1. pii: EJE-19-0259.R1. doi: 10.1530/EJE-19-0259).
Type 1 diabetes and schizophrenia risk
Kristina Melkersson, MD, PhD, presented a cohort study that utilized Swedish national registries to examine the relationship between type 1 diabetes and schizophrenia. The study comprised 1,745,977 individuals, of whom 10,117 had type 1 diabetes, who were followed for a median of 9.7 and maximum of 18 years from their 13th birthday. During follow-up, 1,280 individuals were diagnosed with schizophrenia and 649 others with schizoaffective disorder. The adjusted risk of schizophrenia was 70% lower in patients with type 1 diabetes. However, there was no difference in the risk of schizoaffective disorder in the type 1 diabetic versus nondiabetic subjects.
The Swedish data confirm the findings of an earlier Finnish national study showing that the risk of schizophrenia is reduced in patients with type 1 diabetes (Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2007 Aug;64(8):894-9). These findings raise the intriguing possibility that autoimmunity somehow figures into the etiology of the psychiatric disorder. Other investigators have previously reported a reduced prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis in patients with schizophrenia, noted Dr. Melkersson of the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm.
She reported having no financial conflicts regarding her study.
SOURCE: Osler M. ECNP Abstract P180. Melkersson K. Abstract 81.
REPORTING FROM ECNP 2019
Psychodiagnostic testing services: The elusive quest for clinicians
Assessment psychologists should be colocated in specialty practices
Imagine the clinical care consequences if patients seen in specialty or primary care practices did not have ready access to laboratory, other medical tests, and/or consultative services deemed critical to quickly establishing diagnostic status and the development of an appropriate treatment plan. For instance, what would be the implications if a dentistry practice did not employ a dental hygienist; an otolaryngology group was not staffed with an audiologist; or a gastroenterology practice had no one available for digestive/nutritional consultation support.
Consider a neurologist who suspects that a patient has a potentially life-threatening brain condition, but the patient has to wait months for brain imaging or – even worse – is tasked to find their own provider for this diagnostic test only to be told that the neuroimaging service does not take their insurance and/or there are no available appointments for several months.
Situations of this kind would not be – and should not be – tolerated by medical professionals or their patients.
A common “real-world” scenario: After evaluation, a psychiatrist needs clarification regarding a possible subtle psychotic process, or, in another instance, suspects that there is an early degenerative cognitive change underlying recent changes in mood and personality. However, the psychiatrist has no dependable access to an assessment psychologist to assist in cases of this kind.
Patients are frequently told by psychiatrists and other physicians that they should have psychodiagnostic testing to arrive at a clearer picture of their clinical status and treatment needs. However, most medical practices, in particular, psychiatry, pediatrics, neurology, and neurosurgery, who see substantial numbers of patients who could benefit from testing, do not employ psychologists. When they do, many do not possess the requisite assessment skills to address the reason(s) for referral.
If the patient needing testing services is fortunate enough, he/she is referred to a well-trained psychologist within commuting distance who takes the patient’s insurance and is able to set up a timely appointment – an unlikely set of circumstances in today’s health care environment.
Some state psychological associations allow for a “matching service” of sorts in the form of announcements in the organization’s listserv, which reviews the referral and includes a back channel for psychologists to contact the patient regarding their availability for testing.
Over the past 2 decades, significant advancements have been made in the integration of primary and mental health care. Those need to continue to include colocating assessment psychologists in medical specialty practices, such as psychiatry, which make frequent referrals for psychodiagnostic testing or would like to but have no place to turn.
Dr. Pollak is affiliated with the Seacoast Mental Health Center in Portsmouth, N.H.
Assessment psychologists should be colocated in specialty practices
Assessment psychologists should be colocated in specialty practices
Imagine the clinical care consequences if patients seen in specialty or primary care practices did not have ready access to laboratory, other medical tests, and/or consultative services deemed critical to quickly establishing diagnostic status and the development of an appropriate treatment plan. For instance, what would be the implications if a dentistry practice did not employ a dental hygienist; an otolaryngology group was not staffed with an audiologist; or a gastroenterology practice had no one available for digestive/nutritional consultation support.
Consider a neurologist who suspects that a patient has a potentially life-threatening brain condition, but the patient has to wait months for brain imaging or – even worse – is tasked to find their own provider for this diagnostic test only to be told that the neuroimaging service does not take their insurance and/or there are no available appointments for several months.
Situations of this kind would not be – and should not be – tolerated by medical professionals or their patients.
A common “real-world” scenario: After evaluation, a psychiatrist needs clarification regarding a possible subtle psychotic process, or, in another instance, suspects that there is an early degenerative cognitive change underlying recent changes in mood and personality. However, the psychiatrist has no dependable access to an assessment psychologist to assist in cases of this kind.
Patients are frequently told by psychiatrists and other physicians that they should have psychodiagnostic testing to arrive at a clearer picture of their clinical status and treatment needs. However, most medical practices, in particular, psychiatry, pediatrics, neurology, and neurosurgery, who see substantial numbers of patients who could benefit from testing, do not employ psychologists. When they do, many do not possess the requisite assessment skills to address the reason(s) for referral.
If the patient needing testing services is fortunate enough, he/she is referred to a well-trained psychologist within commuting distance who takes the patient’s insurance and is able to set up a timely appointment – an unlikely set of circumstances in today’s health care environment.
Some state psychological associations allow for a “matching service” of sorts in the form of announcements in the organization’s listserv, which reviews the referral and includes a back channel for psychologists to contact the patient regarding their availability for testing.
Over the past 2 decades, significant advancements have been made in the integration of primary and mental health care. Those need to continue to include colocating assessment psychologists in medical specialty practices, such as psychiatry, which make frequent referrals for psychodiagnostic testing or would like to but have no place to turn.
Dr. Pollak is affiliated with the Seacoast Mental Health Center in Portsmouth, N.H.
Imagine the clinical care consequences if patients seen in specialty or primary care practices did not have ready access to laboratory, other medical tests, and/or consultative services deemed critical to quickly establishing diagnostic status and the development of an appropriate treatment plan. For instance, what would be the implications if a dentistry practice did not employ a dental hygienist; an otolaryngology group was not staffed with an audiologist; or a gastroenterology practice had no one available for digestive/nutritional consultation support.
Consider a neurologist who suspects that a patient has a potentially life-threatening brain condition, but the patient has to wait months for brain imaging or – even worse – is tasked to find their own provider for this diagnostic test only to be told that the neuroimaging service does not take their insurance and/or there are no available appointments for several months.
Situations of this kind would not be – and should not be – tolerated by medical professionals or their patients.
A common “real-world” scenario: After evaluation, a psychiatrist needs clarification regarding a possible subtle psychotic process, or, in another instance, suspects that there is an early degenerative cognitive change underlying recent changes in mood and personality. However, the psychiatrist has no dependable access to an assessment psychologist to assist in cases of this kind.
Patients are frequently told by psychiatrists and other physicians that they should have psychodiagnostic testing to arrive at a clearer picture of their clinical status and treatment needs. However, most medical practices, in particular, psychiatry, pediatrics, neurology, and neurosurgery, who see substantial numbers of patients who could benefit from testing, do not employ psychologists. When they do, many do not possess the requisite assessment skills to address the reason(s) for referral.
If the patient needing testing services is fortunate enough, he/she is referred to a well-trained psychologist within commuting distance who takes the patient’s insurance and is able to set up a timely appointment – an unlikely set of circumstances in today’s health care environment.
Some state psychological associations allow for a “matching service” of sorts in the form of announcements in the organization’s listserv, which reviews the referral and includes a back channel for psychologists to contact the patient regarding their availability for testing.
Over the past 2 decades, significant advancements have been made in the integration of primary and mental health care. Those need to continue to include colocating assessment psychologists in medical specialty practices, such as psychiatry, which make frequent referrals for psychodiagnostic testing or would like to but have no place to turn.
Dr. Pollak is affiliated with the Seacoast Mental Health Center in Portsmouth, N.H.
Accounting for sex may improve diagnosis of amnestic MCI
, according to an investigation published Oct. 9 in Neurology. Using sex-specific cut scores to define verbal memory impairment improves diagnostic accuracy and “may result in earlier detection of memory impairment in women and avoid false diagnoses in men,” wrote Erin E. Sundermann, PhD, assistant project scientist in psychiatry at the University of California, San Diego, and colleagues.
A diagnosis of aMCI generally requires a verbal memory deficit. Ample research demonstrates a female advantage on verbal memory tests, but normative data for these tests usually do not adjust for sex. Dr. Sundermann and colleagues previously showed that among men and women with aMCI and similar disease burden, women perform better on tests of verbal memory. Given these results, the investigators initiated a new study to test the hypothesis that using sex-specific norms and cut scores to identify memory impairment improves the accuracy of aMCI diagnosis, compared with non–sex-specific norms and cut scores.
An examination of ADNI data
Dr. Sundermann’s group extracted cross-sectional data from the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database in October 2016. They included participants without dementia for whom neuropsychologic and Alzheimer’s disease pathologic marker data were available at baseline. They excluded patients with a non-aMCI diagnosis based on typical and sex-specific criteria.
The researchers’ primary outcome was the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT). They also determined the presence or absence of the APOE e4 allele for each participant. Biomarker outcomes included the CSF ratio of hyperphosphorylated tau (p-tau) to beta-amyloid (A-beta), and cortical A-beta deposition.
Dr. Sundermann and colleagues applied the Jak/Bondi actuarial neuropsychologic diagnostic method to baseline data. This method relies on six neuropsychologic tests, including the RAVLT Learning and Delayed Recall. They subsequently derived two sets of normative data for the RAVLT outcomes in a normative sample of 1,620 patients enrolled in the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (MCSA). The latter patients were considered normal controls at baseline and at least two follow-up visits at 15 months apart. One set of normative data was specific for age and education, and the other was specific for age, education, and sex. Dr. Sundermann’s group next applied the typical Jak/Bondi method and the sex-specific Jak/Bondi method to all ADNI participants’ data.
Biomarker analysis supported the hypothesis
The researchers included 985 participants (453 women) in their final sample. Approximately 94% of the population was white. Mean age was 72.9 years, and mean education duration was 16.3 years. Overall, women had a significantly lower mean age (71.9 years vs. 73.6 years), significantly fewer mean years of education (15.7 years vs. 16.7 years), and a significantly higher mean Mini-Mental State Examination score (28 vs. 28.1) compared with men. Compared with men’s scores, women’s scores on the RAVLT Learning (mean 42.3 vs. mean 35.6) and Delayed Recall (mean 6.2 vs. mean 4.5) were significantly higher.
When Dr. Sundermann and colleagues used typical cut scores, the frequency of aMCI diagnosis was significantly higher in men. Using sex-specific cut scores eliminated this sex difference, however. Among men, 184 (35%) were categorized as true positive, 293 (55%) as true negative, and 55 (10%) as false positive. No men were categorized as false negative. Among women, 120 (26%) were categorized as true positive, 288 (64%) as true negative, and 45 (10%) as false negative. No women were categorized as false positive.
The likelihood of cortical amyloid positivity in false negative women was 3.6 times greater than in true negative women but did not differ from that in true positive women. The likelihood of positivity for the CSF p-tau/A-beta ratio in false negative women was more than two times higher than in true negative women but did not differ from that in true positive women. The likelihood of having an APOE e4 allele in false negative women was almost fivefold higher than in true negative women but did not differ from that in true positive women.
The likelihood of cortical amyloid positivity in false positive men was less than that in true positive men (odds ratio [OR], 0.45) but did not differ from that in true negative men. The likelihood of positivity for CSF p-tau/A-beta ratio in false positive men was significantly less than in true positive men (OR, 0.47) but did not differ from that in true negative men. The likelihood of having the APOE e4 allele in false positive men was lower than that in true positive men (OR, 0.63) and higher than that in true negative men (OR, 1.50), but not significantly.
Results have implications for treatment
“If these results are confirmed, they have vital implications,” Dr. Sundermann said in a press release. “If women are inaccurately identified as having no problems with memory and thinking skills when they actually have MCI, then treatments are not being started, and they and their families are not planning ahead for their care or their financial or legal situations. And for men who are inaccurately diagnosed with MCI, they can be exposed to unneeded medications along with undue stress for them and their families.”
Among the limitations that the investigators acknowledged was the study’s cross-sectional, rather than longitudinal, design. In addition, the ADNI population that the researchers examined is a convenience sample of predominantly white and well-educated volunteers. The results therefore may not be generalizable to the broader U.S. population, wrote the authors.
Grants from the National Institutes of Health funded the study. Several of the investigators reported receiving honoraria from various pharmaceutical companies such as Mylan. One investigator sits on the editorial board for Neurology.
, according to an investigation published Oct. 9 in Neurology. Using sex-specific cut scores to define verbal memory impairment improves diagnostic accuracy and “may result in earlier detection of memory impairment in women and avoid false diagnoses in men,” wrote Erin E. Sundermann, PhD, assistant project scientist in psychiatry at the University of California, San Diego, and colleagues.
A diagnosis of aMCI generally requires a verbal memory deficit. Ample research demonstrates a female advantage on verbal memory tests, but normative data for these tests usually do not adjust for sex. Dr. Sundermann and colleagues previously showed that among men and women with aMCI and similar disease burden, women perform better on tests of verbal memory. Given these results, the investigators initiated a new study to test the hypothesis that using sex-specific norms and cut scores to identify memory impairment improves the accuracy of aMCI diagnosis, compared with non–sex-specific norms and cut scores.
An examination of ADNI data
Dr. Sundermann’s group extracted cross-sectional data from the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database in October 2016. They included participants without dementia for whom neuropsychologic and Alzheimer’s disease pathologic marker data were available at baseline. They excluded patients with a non-aMCI diagnosis based on typical and sex-specific criteria.
The researchers’ primary outcome was the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT). They also determined the presence or absence of the APOE e4 allele for each participant. Biomarker outcomes included the CSF ratio of hyperphosphorylated tau (p-tau) to beta-amyloid (A-beta), and cortical A-beta deposition.
Dr. Sundermann and colleagues applied the Jak/Bondi actuarial neuropsychologic diagnostic method to baseline data. This method relies on six neuropsychologic tests, including the RAVLT Learning and Delayed Recall. They subsequently derived two sets of normative data for the RAVLT outcomes in a normative sample of 1,620 patients enrolled in the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (MCSA). The latter patients were considered normal controls at baseline and at least two follow-up visits at 15 months apart. One set of normative data was specific for age and education, and the other was specific for age, education, and sex. Dr. Sundermann’s group next applied the typical Jak/Bondi method and the sex-specific Jak/Bondi method to all ADNI participants’ data.
Biomarker analysis supported the hypothesis
The researchers included 985 participants (453 women) in their final sample. Approximately 94% of the population was white. Mean age was 72.9 years, and mean education duration was 16.3 years. Overall, women had a significantly lower mean age (71.9 years vs. 73.6 years), significantly fewer mean years of education (15.7 years vs. 16.7 years), and a significantly higher mean Mini-Mental State Examination score (28 vs. 28.1) compared with men. Compared with men’s scores, women’s scores on the RAVLT Learning (mean 42.3 vs. mean 35.6) and Delayed Recall (mean 6.2 vs. mean 4.5) were significantly higher.
When Dr. Sundermann and colleagues used typical cut scores, the frequency of aMCI diagnosis was significantly higher in men. Using sex-specific cut scores eliminated this sex difference, however. Among men, 184 (35%) were categorized as true positive, 293 (55%) as true negative, and 55 (10%) as false positive. No men were categorized as false negative. Among women, 120 (26%) were categorized as true positive, 288 (64%) as true negative, and 45 (10%) as false negative. No women were categorized as false positive.
The likelihood of cortical amyloid positivity in false negative women was 3.6 times greater than in true negative women but did not differ from that in true positive women. The likelihood of positivity for the CSF p-tau/A-beta ratio in false negative women was more than two times higher than in true negative women but did not differ from that in true positive women. The likelihood of having an APOE e4 allele in false negative women was almost fivefold higher than in true negative women but did not differ from that in true positive women.
The likelihood of cortical amyloid positivity in false positive men was less than that in true positive men (odds ratio [OR], 0.45) but did not differ from that in true negative men. The likelihood of positivity for CSF p-tau/A-beta ratio in false positive men was significantly less than in true positive men (OR, 0.47) but did not differ from that in true negative men. The likelihood of having the APOE e4 allele in false positive men was lower than that in true positive men (OR, 0.63) and higher than that in true negative men (OR, 1.50), but not significantly.
Results have implications for treatment
“If these results are confirmed, they have vital implications,” Dr. Sundermann said in a press release. “If women are inaccurately identified as having no problems with memory and thinking skills when they actually have MCI, then treatments are not being started, and they and their families are not planning ahead for their care or their financial or legal situations. And for men who are inaccurately diagnosed with MCI, they can be exposed to unneeded medications along with undue stress for them and their families.”
Among the limitations that the investigators acknowledged was the study’s cross-sectional, rather than longitudinal, design. In addition, the ADNI population that the researchers examined is a convenience sample of predominantly white and well-educated volunteers. The results therefore may not be generalizable to the broader U.S. population, wrote the authors.
Grants from the National Institutes of Health funded the study. Several of the investigators reported receiving honoraria from various pharmaceutical companies such as Mylan. One investigator sits on the editorial board for Neurology.
, according to an investigation published Oct. 9 in Neurology. Using sex-specific cut scores to define verbal memory impairment improves diagnostic accuracy and “may result in earlier detection of memory impairment in women and avoid false diagnoses in men,” wrote Erin E. Sundermann, PhD, assistant project scientist in psychiatry at the University of California, San Diego, and colleagues.
A diagnosis of aMCI generally requires a verbal memory deficit. Ample research demonstrates a female advantage on verbal memory tests, but normative data for these tests usually do not adjust for sex. Dr. Sundermann and colleagues previously showed that among men and women with aMCI and similar disease burden, women perform better on tests of verbal memory. Given these results, the investigators initiated a new study to test the hypothesis that using sex-specific norms and cut scores to identify memory impairment improves the accuracy of aMCI diagnosis, compared with non–sex-specific norms and cut scores.
An examination of ADNI data
Dr. Sundermann’s group extracted cross-sectional data from the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database in October 2016. They included participants without dementia for whom neuropsychologic and Alzheimer’s disease pathologic marker data were available at baseline. They excluded patients with a non-aMCI diagnosis based on typical and sex-specific criteria.
The researchers’ primary outcome was the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT). They also determined the presence or absence of the APOE e4 allele for each participant. Biomarker outcomes included the CSF ratio of hyperphosphorylated tau (p-tau) to beta-amyloid (A-beta), and cortical A-beta deposition.
Dr. Sundermann and colleagues applied the Jak/Bondi actuarial neuropsychologic diagnostic method to baseline data. This method relies on six neuropsychologic tests, including the RAVLT Learning and Delayed Recall. They subsequently derived two sets of normative data for the RAVLT outcomes in a normative sample of 1,620 patients enrolled in the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (MCSA). The latter patients were considered normal controls at baseline and at least two follow-up visits at 15 months apart. One set of normative data was specific for age and education, and the other was specific for age, education, and sex. Dr. Sundermann’s group next applied the typical Jak/Bondi method and the sex-specific Jak/Bondi method to all ADNI participants’ data.
Biomarker analysis supported the hypothesis
The researchers included 985 participants (453 women) in their final sample. Approximately 94% of the population was white. Mean age was 72.9 years, and mean education duration was 16.3 years. Overall, women had a significantly lower mean age (71.9 years vs. 73.6 years), significantly fewer mean years of education (15.7 years vs. 16.7 years), and a significantly higher mean Mini-Mental State Examination score (28 vs. 28.1) compared with men. Compared with men’s scores, women’s scores on the RAVLT Learning (mean 42.3 vs. mean 35.6) and Delayed Recall (mean 6.2 vs. mean 4.5) were significantly higher.
When Dr. Sundermann and colleagues used typical cut scores, the frequency of aMCI diagnosis was significantly higher in men. Using sex-specific cut scores eliminated this sex difference, however. Among men, 184 (35%) were categorized as true positive, 293 (55%) as true negative, and 55 (10%) as false positive. No men were categorized as false negative. Among women, 120 (26%) were categorized as true positive, 288 (64%) as true negative, and 45 (10%) as false negative. No women were categorized as false positive.
The likelihood of cortical amyloid positivity in false negative women was 3.6 times greater than in true negative women but did not differ from that in true positive women. The likelihood of positivity for the CSF p-tau/A-beta ratio in false negative women was more than two times higher than in true negative women but did not differ from that in true positive women. The likelihood of having an APOE e4 allele in false negative women was almost fivefold higher than in true negative women but did not differ from that in true positive women.
The likelihood of cortical amyloid positivity in false positive men was less than that in true positive men (odds ratio [OR], 0.45) but did not differ from that in true negative men. The likelihood of positivity for CSF p-tau/A-beta ratio in false positive men was significantly less than in true positive men (OR, 0.47) but did not differ from that in true negative men. The likelihood of having the APOE e4 allele in false positive men was lower than that in true positive men (OR, 0.63) and higher than that in true negative men (OR, 1.50), but not significantly.
Results have implications for treatment
“If these results are confirmed, they have vital implications,” Dr. Sundermann said in a press release. “If women are inaccurately identified as having no problems with memory and thinking skills when they actually have MCI, then treatments are not being started, and they and their families are not planning ahead for their care or their financial or legal situations. And for men who are inaccurately diagnosed with MCI, they can be exposed to unneeded medications along with undue stress for them and their families.”
Among the limitations that the investigators acknowledged was the study’s cross-sectional, rather than longitudinal, design. In addition, the ADNI population that the researchers examined is a convenience sample of predominantly white and well-educated volunteers. The results therefore may not be generalizable to the broader U.S. population, wrote the authors.
Grants from the National Institutes of Health funded the study. Several of the investigators reported receiving honoraria from various pharmaceutical companies such as Mylan. One investigator sits on the editorial board for Neurology.
FROM NEUROLOGY
Functional medicine offers another approach to treating psychiatric illness
The shortage of psychiatrists, other mental health clinicians, and primary care physicians who treat patients with mental illness is a profound problem in the United States and around the world. What would happen to those trends if psychiatrists incorporated a functional medicine approach to treating patients?
In functional medicine, we look for underlying causes, physiological damage that results from those causes, clinical body system imbalances, and ultimately, symptoms that patients are experiencing. By addressing the root causes of chronic problems, treating physiological damage, and creating balance in body systems, psychiatrists and other physicians can help our patients achieve optimal health.
For example, a functional medicine approach to treating a child with ADHD might focus on encouraging behavioral changes such as improving sleep hygiene,1 increasing hydration,2 changing nutrition, or prescribing adjunctive meditation rather than medication alone. A functional medicine approach to Alzheimer’s prevention, for example, could include “prescribing” an increase in the amount of regular physical exercise.3 In other words, functional medicine uses a different lens to prevent, arrest, and in some cases, reverse certain diseases.
Medicine has long recognized the links between inflammation and chronic illness. Autoimmune conditions, asthma, heart disease, stroke, diabetes, obesity, peripheral neuropathy, thyroid problems, joint pain, and cancer all are chronic inflammatory diseases. Because inflammation affects the brain, it has been theorized and is being investigated that psychiatric disorders such as depression, schizophrenia, anxiety, panic attacks, dementia, and autism might result.4,5,6,7
Besides the brain, the GI tract is the only organ system that has its own nervous system, which is called the enteric nervous system, or ENS. The ENS functions independently from the central nervous system, and transmits important messages to and from the brain. When one feels stressed, the brain communicates to the hormonal system and floods the body with stress hormones, such as cortisol, which by themselves, can cause increased intestinal permeability. In addition, the gut produces its own neurotransmitters that affect the brain. In fact, every class of neurotransmitter found in the brain also is found in the GI tract. For example, serotonin is an important neurotransmitter for feeling happy and optimistic. Ninety-five percent of the body’s serotonin is produced in the gut. It is produced from 5-HTP, which is derived from tryptophan. However, in the presence of inflammation in the body, tryptophan is converted into kynurenate and quinolate. Both cause fatigue, and quinolate causes neurotoxicity. The subsequent depletion of serotonin produces symptoms of depression. Problems in the gut can lead to problems in the brain and the whole body.
Other problems affecting patients are tied to toxins in the environment. The air we breathe, food we eat, water we drink, and clothing we wear all are sources of toxins. Toxins include biotoxins, dioxine, phthalates, PCBs, and heavy metals, such as mercury, lead, cadmium, aluminum. About 2,000 new chemicals have been introduced into our environment each year since the 1940s, and it is estimated that we are exposed to more than 80,000 chemicals on a regular basis.8
The Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit organization dedicated to educating the public about the environment, has estimated that average babies are born with 287 chemicals in their body, 217 of which are neurotoxins.9 As children grow up, their body accumulates more toxins. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, every American has hundreds of neurotoxins in their bodies right now.
As we become more aware of the many changes in our environment, functional medicine brings a new way of thinking about and looking at chronic disease. As physicians, we can continue treating symptoms, and we should. But we can look deeper and ask ourselves what has changed in our lives that has caused such a decline in human mental and physical health. I urge psychiatrists to help lead the way.
Dr. Gaitour, a physiatrist, trained at NYU Langone Medical Center in New York. She is a functional medicine practitioner.
References
1. Peppers KH et al. J Pediatr Health Care. 2016 Nov-Dec;30(6):e43-8.
2. Martin EB and PG Hammerness. ADHD, stimulant medication, and dehydration. CHADD.org. 2014 Aug.
3. Guitar NA et al. Ageing Res Rev. 2018 Nov;47:159-67.
4. Mørch RH et al. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2017 Oct;136(4):400-8.
5. Dooley LN et al. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2018 Nov;94:219-37.
6. Yang L et al. Brain Behav Immun. 2016 Aug;56:352-62.
7. Doenyas C. Neuroscience. 2018 Mar 15;374:271-86.
8. PBS News Hour. 2016 Jun 22.
9. Houlihan J. Environmental Working Group. 2005 Jul 14.
The shortage of psychiatrists, other mental health clinicians, and primary care physicians who treat patients with mental illness is a profound problem in the United States and around the world. What would happen to those trends if psychiatrists incorporated a functional medicine approach to treating patients?
In functional medicine, we look for underlying causes, physiological damage that results from those causes, clinical body system imbalances, and ultimately, symptoms that patients are experiencing. By addressing the root causes of chronic problems, treating physiological damage, and creating balance in body systems, psychiatrists and other physicians can help our patients achieve optimal health.
For example, a functional medicine approach to treating a child with ADHD might focus on encouraging behavioral changes such as improving sleep hygiene,1 increasing hydration,2 changing nutrition, or prescribing adjunctive meditation rather than medication alone. A functional medicine approach to Alzheimer’s prevention, for example, could include “prescribing” an increase in the amount of regular physical exercise.3 In other words, functional medicine uses a different lens to prevent, arrest, and in some cases, reverse certain diseases.
Medicine has long recognized the links between inflammation and chronic illness. Autoimmune conditions, asthma, heart disease, stroke, diabetes, obesity, peripheral neuropathy, thyroid problems, joint pain, and cancer all are chronic inflammatory diseases. Because inflammation affects the brain, it has been theorized and is being investigated that psychiatric disorders such as depression, schizophrenia, anxiety, panic attacks, dementia, and autism might result.4,5,6,7
Besides the brain, the GI tract is the only organ system that has its own nervous system, which is called the enteric nervous system, or ENS. The ENS functions independently from the central nervous system, and transmits important messages to and from the brain. When one feels stressed, the brain communicates to the hormonal system and floods the body with stress hormones, such as cortisol, which by themselves, can cause increased intestinal permeability. In addition, the gut produces its own neurotransmitters that affect the brain. In fact, every class of neurotransmitter found in the brain also is found in the GI tract. For example, serotonin is an important neurotransmitter for feeling happy and optimistic. Ninety-five percent of the body’s serotonin is produced in the gut. It is produced from 5-HTP, which is derived from tryptophan. However, in the presence of inflammation in the body, tryptophan is converted into kynurenate and quinolate. Both cause fatigue, and quinolate causes neurotoxicity. The subsequent depletion of serotonin produces symptoms of depression. Problems in the gut can lead to problems in the brain and the whole body.
Other problems affecting patients are tied to toxins in the environment. The air we breathe, food we eat, water we drink, and clothing we wear all are sources of toxins. Toxins include biotoxins, dioxine, phthalates, PCBs, and heavy metals, such as mercury, lead, cadmium, aluminum. About 2,000 new chemicals have been introduced into our environment each year since the 1940s, and it is estimated that we are exposed to more than 80,000 chemicals on a regular basis.8
The Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit organization dedicated to educating the public about the environment, has estimated that average babies are born with 287 chemicals in their body, 217 of which are neurotoxins.9 As children grow up, their body accumulates more toxins. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, every American has hundreds of neurotoxins in their bodies right now.
As we become more aware of the many changes in our environment, functional medicine brings a new way of thinking about and looking at chronic disease. As physicians, we can continue treating symptoms, and we should. But we can look deeper and ask ourselves what has changed in our lives that has caused such a decline in human mental and physical health. I urge psychiatrists to help lead the way.
Dr. Gaitour, a physiatrist, trained at NYU Langone Medical Center in New York. She is a functional medicine practitioner.
References
1. Peppers KH et al. J Pediatr Health Care. 2016 Nov-Dec;30(6):e43-8.
2. Martin EB and PG Hammerness. ADHD, stimulant medication, and dehydration. CHADD.org. 2014 Aug.
3. Guitar NA et al. Ageing Res Rev. 2018 Nov;47:159-67.
4. Mørch RH et al. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2017 Oct;136(4):400-8.
5. Dooley LN et al. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2018 Nov;94:219-37.
6. Yang L et al. Brain Behav Immun. 2016 Aug;56:352-62.
7. Doenyas C. Neuroscience. 2018 Mar 15;374:271-86.
8. PBS News Hour. 2016 Jun 22.
9. Houlihan J. Environmental Working Group. 2005 Jul 14.
The shortage of psychiatrists, other mental health clinicians, and primary care physicians who treat patients with mental illness is a profound problem in the United States and around the world. What would happen to those trends if psychiatrists incorporated a functional medicine approach to treating patients?
In functional medicine, we look for underlying causes, physiological damage that results from those causes, clinical body system imbalances, and ultimately, symptoms that patients are experiencing. By addressing the root causes of chronic problems, treating physiological damage, and creating balance in body systems, psychiatrists and other physicians can help our patients achieve optimal health.
For example, a functional medicine approach to treating a child with ADHD might focus on encouraging behavioral changes such as improving sleep hygiene,1 increasing hydration,2 changing nutrition, or prescribing adjunctive meditation rather than medication alone. A functional medicine approach to Alzheimer’s prevention, for example, could include “prescribing” an increase in the amount of regular physical exercise.3 In other words, functional medicine uses a different lens to prevent, arrest, and in some cases, reverse certain diseases.
Medicine has long recognized the links between inflammation and chronic illness. Autoimmune conditions, asthma, heart disease, stroke, diabetes, obesity, peripheral neuropathy, thyroid problems, joint pain, and cancer all are chronic inflammatory diseases. Because inflammation affects the brain, it has been theorized and is being investigated that psychiatric disorders such as depression, schizophrenia, anxiety, panic attacks, dementia, and autism might result.4,5,6,7
Besides the brain, the GI tract is the only organ system that has its own nervous system, which is called the enteric nervous system, or ENS. The ENS functions independently from the central nervous system, and transmits important messages to and from the brain. When one feels stressed, the brain communicates to the hormonal system and floods the body with stress hormones, such as cortisol, which by themselves, can cause increased intestinal permeability. In addition, the gut produces its own neurotransmitters that affect the brain. In fact, every class of neurotransmitter found in the brain also is found in the GI tract. For example, serotonin is an important neurotransmitter for feeling happy and optimistic. Ninety-five percent of the body’s serotonin is produced in the gut. It is produced from 5-HTP, which is derived from tryptophan. However, in the presence of inflammation in the body, tryptophan is converted into kynurenate and quinolate. Both cause fatigue, and quinolate causes neurotoxicity. The subsequent depletion of serotonin produces symptoms of depression. Problems in the gut can lead to problems in the brain and the whole body.
Other problems affecting patients are tied to toxins in the environment. The air we breathe, food we eat, water we drink, and clothing we wear all are sources of toxins. Toxins include biotoxins, dioxine, phthalates, PCBs, and heavy metals, such as mercury, lead, cadmium, aluminum. About 2,000 new chemicals have been introduced into our environment each year since the 1940s, and it is estimated that we are exposed to more than 80,000 chemicals on a regular basis.8
The Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit organization dedicated to educating the public about the environment, has estimated that average babies are born with 287 chemicals in their body, 217 of which are neurotoxins.9 As children grow up, their body accumulates more toxins. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, every American has hundreds of neurotoxins in their bodies right now.
As we become more aware of the many changes in our environment, functional medicine brings a new way of thinking about and looking at chronic disease. As physicians, we can continue treating symptoms, and we should. But we can look deeper and ask ourselves what has changed in our lives that has caused such a decline in human mental and physical health. I urge psychiatrists to help lead the way.
Dr. Gaitour, a physiatrist, trained at NYU Langone Medical Center in New York. She is a functional medicine practitioner.
References
1. Peppers KH et al. J Pediatr Health Care. 2016 Nov-Dec;30(6):e43-8.
2. Martin EB and PG Hammerness. ADHD, stimulant medication, and dehydration. CHADD.org. 2014 Aug.
3. Guitar NA et al. Ageing Res Rev. 2018 Nov;47:159-67.
4. Mørch RH et al. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2017 Oct;136(4):400-8.
5. Dooley LN et al. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2018 Nov;94:219-37.
6. Yang L et al. Brain Behav Immun. 2016 Aug;56:352-62.
7. Doenyas C. Neuroscience. 2018 Mar 15;374:271-86.
8. PBS News Hour. 2016 Jun 22.
9. Houlihan J. Environmental Working Group. 2005 Jul 14.
Would you recognize this ‘invisible’ encephalopathy?
Mr. Z, an obese adult with a history of portal hypertension and cirrhosis from alcoholism, visits your clinic because he is having difficulty sleeping and concentrating at work. He recently reduced his alcohol use and has improved support from his spouse. He walks into your office with an unremarkable gait before stopping to jot down a note in crisp, neat handwriting. He sits facing you, making good eye contact and exhibiting no involuntary movements. As has been the case at previous visits, Mr. Z is fully oriented to person, place, and time. You can follow one another’s train of thought and collaborate on treatment decisions. You’ve ruled out hepatic encephalopathy. Could you be missing something?
Hepatic encephalopathy is a neuropsychiatric condition caused by metabolic changes secondary to liver dysfunction and/or by blood flow bypassing the portal venous system. Signs and symptoms of hepatic encephalopathy range from subtle changes in cognition and affect to coma.Pathophysiologic mechanisms involved in hepatic encephalopathy include inflammation, neurotoxins, oxidative stress, permeability changes in the blood-brain barrier, and impaired brain energy metabolism.1
Patients with poor liver function commonly have psychometrically detectable cognitive and psychomotor deficits that can substantially affect their lives. When such deficits are undetectable by
Approximately 22% to 74% of patients with liver dysfunction develop MHE.2 Prevalence estimates vary widely because of the poor standardization of diagnostic criteria and potential underdiagnosis due to a lack of obvious symptoms.2
How is MHE diagnosed?
The most commonly administered psychometric test to assess for MHE is the Psychometric Hepatic Encephalopathy Score, a written test that measures motor speed and accuracy, concentration, attention, visual perception, visual-spatial orientation, visual construction, and memory.3,4 Other methods for evaluating MHE, including EEG, MRI, single-photon emission CT, positron emission tomography, and determining a patient’s frequency threshold of perceiving a flickering light, have predictive power, but they do not have a well-defined, standardized role in the diagnosis of MHE.2 Although ammonia levels can correlate with severity of impairment in episodic hepatic encephalopathy, they are not well correlated with the deficits in MHE, and often it is not feasible to properly measure ammonia concentrations in outpatient settings.2
Limited treatment options
Few studies have investigated interventions specifically for MHE. The beststudied treatments are lactulose5 and rifaximin.6 Lactulose reduces the formation of ammonia and the absorption of both ammonia and glutamine in the colonic lumen.5 In addition to improving MHE, lactulose helps prevent the recurrence of episodic overt hepatic encephalopathy.5 The antibiotic rifaximin kills ammonia-producing gut bacteria because it is minimally absorbed in the digestive system. No studies investigating rifaximin have observed antibiotic resistance, even with prolonged use. Rifaximin improves cognitive ability, driving ability, and quality of life in patients with MHE. Adding rifaximin to a treatment regimen that includes lactulose also can reduce the recurrence of overt hepatic encephalopathy.6 Branched chain amino acids, L-carnitine, L-ornithine aspartate, treating a comorbid zinc deficiency, probiotics, and increasing vegetable protein intake relative to animal protein intake may also have roles in treating MHE.2
1. Hadjihambi A, Arias N, Sheikh M, et al. Hepatic encephalopathy: a critical current review. Hepatol Int. 2018;12(suppl 1):S135-S147.
2. Zhan T, Stremmel W. The diagnosis and treatment of minimal hepatic encephalopathy. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2012;109(10):180-1877.
3. Weissenborn K, Ennen JC, Schomerus H, et al. Neuropsychological characterization of hepatic encephalopathy. J Hepatol. 2001;34(5):768-773.
4. Nabi E, Bajaj J. Useful tests for hepatic encephalopathy in clinical practice. Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 2014;16(1):362.
5. Sharma BC, Sharma P, Agrawal A, et al. Secondary prophylaxis of hepatic encephalopathy: an open-label randomized controlled trial of lactulose versus placebo. Gastroenterology. 2009;137(3):885-891.
6. Bass NM, Mullen KD, Sanyal A et al. Rifaximin treatment in hepatic encephalopathy. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1071-1081.
Mr. Z, an obese adult with a history of portal hypertension and cirrhosis from alcoholism, visits your clinic because he is having difficulty sleeping and concentrating at work. He recently reduced his alcohol use and has improved support from his spouse. He walks into your office with an unremarkable gait before stopping to jot down a note in crisp, neat handwriting. He sits facing you, making good eye contact and exhibiting no involuntary movements. As has been the case at previous visits, Mr. Z is fully oriented to person, place, and time. You can follow one another’s train of thought and collaborate on treatment decisions. You’ve ruled out hepatic encephalopathy. Could you be missing something?
Hepatic encephalopathy is a neuropsychiatric condition caused by metabolic changes secondary to liver dysfunction and/or by blood flow bypassing the portal venous system. Signs and symptoms of hepatic encephalopathy range from subtle changes in cognition and affect to coma.Pathophysiologic mechanisms involved in hepatic encephalopathy include inflammation, neurotoxins, oxidative stress, permeability changes in the blood-brain barrier, and impaired brain energy metabolism.1
Patients with poor liver function commonly have psychometrically detectable cognitive and psychomotor deficits that can substantially affect their lives. When such deficits are undetectable by
Approximately 22% to 74% of patients with liver dysfunction develop MHE.2 Prevalence estimates vary widely because of the poor standardization of diagnostic criteria and potential underdiagnosis due to a lack of obvious symptoms.2
How is MHE diagnosed?
The most commonly administered psychometric test to assess for MHE is the Psychometric Hepatic Encephalopathy Score, a written test that measures motor speed and accuracy, concentration, attention, visual perception, visual-spatial orientation, visual construction, and memory.3,4 Other methods for evaluating MHE, including EEG, MRI, single-photon emission CT, positron emission tomography, and determining a patient’s frequency threshold of perceiving a flickering light, have predictive power, but they do not have a well-defined, standardized role in the diagnosis of MHE.2 Although ammonia levels can correlate with severity of impairment in episodic hepatic encephalopathy, they are not well correlated with the deficits in MHE, and often it is not feasible to properly measure ammonia concentrations in outpatient settings.2
Limited treatment options
Few studies have investigated interventions specifically for MHE. The beststudied treatments are lactulose5 and rifaximin.6 Lactulose reduces the formation of ammonia and the absorption of both ammonia and glutamine in the colonic lumen.5 In addition to improving MHE, lactulose helps prevent the recurrence of episodic overt hepatic encephalopathy.5 The antibiotic rifaximin kills ammonia-producing gut bacteria because it is minimally absorbed in the digestive system. No studies investigating rifaximin have observed antibiotic resistance, even with prolonged use. Rifaximin improves cognitive ability, driving ability, and quality of life in patients with MHE. Adding rifaximin to a treatment regimen that includes lactulose also can reduce the recurrence of overt hepatic encephalopathy.6 Branched chain amino acids, L-carnitine, L-ornithine aspartate, treating a comorbid zinc deficiency, probiotics, and increasing vegetable protein intake relative to animal protein intake may also have roles in treating MHE.2
Mr. Z, an obese adult with a history of portal hypertension and cirrhosis from alcoholism, visits your clinic because he is having difficulty sleeping and concentrating at work. He recently reduced his alcohol use and has improved support from his spouse. He walks into your office with an unremarkable gait before stopping to jot down a note in crisp, neat handwriting. He sits facing you, making good eye contact and exhibiting no involuntary movements. As has been the case at previous visits, Mr. Z is fully oriented to person, place, and time. You can follow one another’s train of thought and collaborate on treatment decisions. You’ve ruled out hepatic encephalopathy. Could you be missing something?
Hepatic encephalopathy is a neuropsychiatric condition caused by metabolic changes secondary to liver dysfunction and/or by blood flow bypassing the portal venous system. Signs and symptoms of hepatic encephalopathy range from subtle changes in cognition and affect to coma.Pathophysiologic mechanisms involved in hepatic encephalopathy include inflammation, neurotoxins, oxidative stress, permeability changes in the blood-brain barrier, and impaired brain energy metabolism.1
Patients with poor liver function commonly have psychometrically detectable cognitive and psychomotor deficits that can substantially affect their lives. When such deficits are undetectable by
Approximately 22% to 74% of patients with liver dysfunction develop MHE.2 Prevalence estimates vary widely because of the poor standardization of diagnostic criteria and potential underdiagnosis due to a lack of obvious symptoms.2
How is MHE diagnosed?
The most commonly administered psychometric test to assess for MHE is the Psychometric Hepatic Encephalopathy Score, a written test that measures motor speed and accuracy, concentration, attention, visual perception, visual-spatial orientation, visual construction, and memory.3,4 Other methods for evaluating MHE, including EEG, MRI, single-photon emission CT, positron emission tomography, and determining a patient’s frequency threshold of perceiving a flickering light, have predictive power, but they do not have a well-defined, standardized role in the diagnosis of MHE.2 Although ammonia levels can correlate with severity of impairment in episodic hepatic encephalopathy, they are not well correlated with the deficits in MHE, and often it is not feasible to properly measure ammonia concentrations in outpatient settings.2
Limited treatment options
Few studies have investigated interventions specifically for MHE. The beststudied treatments are lactulose5 and rifaximin.6 Lactulose reduces the formation of ammonia and the absorption of both ammonia and glutamine in the colonic lumen.5 In addition to improving MHE, lactulose helps prevent the recurrence of episodic overt hepatic encephalopathy.5 The antibiotic rifaximin kills ammonia-producing gut bacteria because it is minimally absorbed in the digestive system. No studies investigating rifaximin have observed antibiotic resistance, even with prolonged use. Rifaximin improves cognitive ability, driving ability, and quality of life in patients with MHE. Adding rifaximin to a treatment regimen that includes lactulose also can reduce the recurrence of overt hepatic encephalopathy.6 Branched chain amino acids, L-carnitine, L-ornithine aspartate, treating a comorbid zinc deficiency, probiotics, and increasing vegetable protein intake relative to animal protein intake may also have roles in treating MHE.2
1. Hadjihambi A, Arias N, Sheikh M, et al. Hepatic encephalopathy: a critical current review. Hepatol Int. 2018;12(suppl 1):S135-S147.
2. Zhan T, Stremmel W. The diagnosis and treatment of minimal hepatic encephalopathy. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2012;109(10):180-1877.
3. Weissenborn K, Ennen JC, Schomerus H, et al. Neuropsychological characterization of hepatic encephalopathy. J Hepatol. 2001;34(5):768-773.
4. Nabi E, Bajaj J. Useful tests for hepatic encephalopathy in clinical practice. Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 2014;16(1):362.
5. Sharma BC, Sharma P, Agrawal A, et al. Secondary prophylaxis of hepatic encephalopathy: an open-label randomized controlled trial of lactulose versus placebo. Gastroenterology. 2009;137(3):885-891.
6. Bass NM, Mullen KD, Sanyal A et al. Rifaximin treatment in hepatic encephalopathy. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1071-1081.
1. Hadjihambi A, Arias N, Sheikh M, et al. Hepatic encephalopathy: a critical current review. Hepatol Int. 2018;12(suppl 1):S135-S147.
2. Zhan T, Stremmel W. The diagnosis and treatment of minimal hepatic encephalopathy. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2012;109(10):180-1877.
3. Weissenborn K, Ennen JC, Schomerus H, et al. Neuropsychological characterization of hepatic encephalopathy. J Hepatol. 2001;34(5):768-773.
4. Nabi E, Bajaj J. Useful tests for hepatic encephalopathy in clinical practice. Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 2014;16(1):362.
5. Sharma BC, Sharma P, Agrawal A, et al. Secondary prophylaxis of hepatic encephalopathy: an open-label randomized controlled trial of lactulose versus placebo. Gastroenterology. 2009;137(3):885-891.
6. Bass NM, Mullen KD, Sanyal A et al. Rifaximin treatment in hepatic encephalopathy. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1071-1081.
How does alcohol intake affect dementia risk in older adults?
Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) may influence the relationship between alcohol consumption and dementia risk, a study of more than 3,000 adults suggests. In addition, , according to the study, which was published in JAMA Network Open.
“The associations of self-reported alcohol consumption with dementia risk and cognitive decline were more consistently adverse among individuals with MCI than those with normal cognition,” reported Manja Koch, PhD, a researcher in the department of nutrition at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston and colleagues. “This was particularly true for the subset of individuals [with MCI] who drank more than 14.0 servings per week, whose rate of cognitive decline and risk of dementia were the highest of any subgroup.”
Among older adults with normal cognition, the results generally were consistent with those of a recent meta-analysis that found a U-shaped relationship between drinking and dementia, the researchers said (Eur J Epidemiol. 2017 Jan;32[1]:31-42.).
“Our results did not show significant associations and clearly do not suffice to suggest a clinical benefit from even limited alcohol use,” said Dr. Koch and colleagues. “Nonetheless, our findings provide some reassurance that alcohol consumed within recommended limits was not associated with an increased risk of dementia among older adults with normal baseline cognition.”
GEMS data
To study whether alcohol consumption is associated with the risk of dementia and cognitive decline in older adults with and without MCI, the investigators analyzed data from the Ginkgo Evaluation of Memory Study (GEMS). GEMS was a randomized controlled trial conducted between 2000 and 2008 that found no overall association between ginkgo biloba and dementia prevention. During the trial, participants completed the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination, the Clinical Dementia Rating scale, and the cognitive portion of the Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale.
In the present study, the investigators analyzed data from 3,021 participants aged 72 years and older who were free of dementia at baseline and had provided information about their alcohol intake. Their median age was 78 years, and 46.2% were female. Fifty-eight percent consumed alcohol, including 45% of the participants with MCI at baseline.
During follow-up, 512 cases of dementia occurred. Among the 473 participants with MCI at baseline, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for dementia was 1.72 for those who consumed more than 14 drinks per week, compared with light drinkers who consumed less than 1 drink per week. For participants who consumed between 7 and 14 drinks per week, the adjusted HR for dementia was 0.63 among those without MCI and 0.93 among those with MCI, relative to light drinkers who consumed less than 1 drink per week.
Among adults with normal cognition at baseline, daily low-quantity drinking was associated with lower dementia risk, compared with infrequent higher-quantity drinking (HR, 0.45).
Trial excluded adults with excessive alcohol use
Limitations of the study include a lack of data about any changes in alcohol consumption over time. In addition, the original trial excluded people with a known history of excessive alcohol use. Furthermore, it is possible that the “long preclinical phase of dementia” and other health issues affect drinking behavior, the authors said. “At present, our findings cannot be directly translated into clinical recommendations,” the authors said. Nevertheless, the results “suggest that, while caring for older adults, physicians should carefully assess the full dimensions of drinking behavior and cognition when providing guidance to patients about alcohol consumption,” they said.
The study was supported by grants from the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine; the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; the Office of Dietary Supplements of the National Institute on Aging; the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; the University of Pittsburgh Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center; the Roena Kulynych Center for Memory and Cognition Research; and Wake Forest University School of Medicine. In addition, the researchers used plasma samples from the National Cell Repository for Alzheimer’s Disease, which receives support from the National Institute on Aging. Dr. Koch had no conflicts of interest. Coauthors disclosed university and government grants and personal fees from pharmaceutical companies outside the study. One author was an employee of Genentech at the time of publication, but Genentech did not contribute to the study.
SOURCE: Koch M et al. JAMA Network Open. 2019 Sep 27. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.10319.
Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) may influence the relationship between alcohol consumption and dementia risk, a study of more than 3,000 adults suggests. In addition, , according to the study, which was published in JAMA Network Open.
“The associations of self-reported alcohol consumption with dementia risk and cognitive decline were more consistently adverse among individuals with MCI than those with normal cognition,” reported Manja Koch, PhD, a researcher in the department of nutrition at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston and colleagues. “This was particularly true for the subset of individuals [with MCI] who drank more than 14.0 servings per week, whose rate of cognitive decline and risk of dementia were the highest of any subgroup.”
Among older adults with normal cognition, the results generally were consistent with those of a recent meta-analysis that found a U-shaped relationship between drinking and dementia, the researchers said (Eur J Epidemiol. 2017 Jan;32[1]:31-42.).
“Our results did not show significant associations and clearly do not suffice to suggest a clinical benefit from even limited alcohol use,” said Dr. Koch and colleagues. “Nonetheless, our findings provide some reassurance that alcohol consumed within recommended limits was not associated with an increased risk of dementia among older adults with normal baseline cognition.”
GEMS data
To study whether alcohol consumption is associated with the risk of dementia and cognitive decline in older adults with and without MCI, the investigators analyzed data from the Ginkgo Evaluation of Memory Study (GEMS). GEMS was a randomized controlled trial conducted between 2000 and 2008 that found no overall association between ginkgo biloba and dementia prevention. During the trial, participants completed the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination, the Clinical Dementia Rating scale, and the cognitive portion of the Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale.
In the present study, the investigators analyzed data from 3,021 participants aged 72 years and older who were free of dementia at baseline and had provided information about their alcohol intake. Their median age was 78 years, and 46.2% were female. Fifty-eight percent consumed alcohol, including 45% of the participants with MCI at baseline.
During follow-up, 512 cases of dementia occurred. Among the 473 participants with MCI at baseline, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for dementia was 1.72 for those who consumed more than 14 drinks per week, compared with light drinkers who consumed less than 1 drink per week. For participants who consumed between 7 and 14 drinks per week, the adjusted HR for dementia was 0.63 among those without MCI and 0.93 among those with MCI, relative to light drinkers who consumed less than 1 drink per week.
Among adults with normal cognition at baseline, daily low-quantity drinking was associated with lower dementia risk, compared with infrequent higher-quantity drinking (HR, 0.45).
Trial excluded adults with excessive alcohol use
Limitations of the study include a lack of data about any changes in alcohol consumption over time. In addition, the original trial excluded people with a known history of excessive alcohol use. Furthermore, it is possible that the “long preclinical phase of dementia” and other health issues affect drinking behavior, the authors said. “At present, our findings cannot be directly translated into clinical recommendations,” the authors said. Nevertheless, the results “suggest that, while caring for older adults, physicians should carefully assess the full dimensions of drinking behavior and cognition when providing guidance to patients about alcohol consumption,” they said.
The study was supported by grants from the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine; the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; the Office of Dietary Supplements of the National Institute on Aging; the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; the University of Pittsburgh Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center; the Roena Kulynych Center for Memory and Cognition Research; and Wake Forest University School of Medicine. In addition, the researchers used plasma samples from the National Cell Repository for Alzheimer’s Disease, which receives support from the National Institute on Aging. Dr. Koch had no conflicts of interest. Coauthors disclosed university and government grants and personal fees from pharmaceutical companies outside the study. One author was an employee of Genentech at the time of publication, but Genentech did not contribute to the study.
SOURCE: Koch M et al. JAMA Network Open. 2019 Sep 27. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.10319.
Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) may influence the relationship between alcohol consumption and dementia risk, a study of more than 3,000 adults suggests. In addition, , according to the study, which was published in JAMA Network Open.
“The associations of self-reported alcohol consumption with dementia risk and cognitive decline were more consistently adverse among individuals with MCI than those with normal cognition,” reported Manja Koch, PhD, a researcher in the department of nutrition at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston and colleagues. “This was particularly true for the subset of individuals [with MCI] who drank more than 14.0 servings per week, whose rate of cognitive decline and risk of dementia were the highest of any subgroup.”
Among older adults with normal cognition, the results generally were consistent with those of a recent meta-analysis that found a U-shaped relationship between drinking and dementia, the researchers said (Eur J Epidemiol. 2017 Jan;32[1]:31-42.).
“Our results did not show significant associations and clearly do not suffice to suggest a clinical benefit from even limited alcohol use,” said Dr. Koch and colleagues. “Nonetheless, our findings provide some reassurance that alcohol consumed within recommended limits was not associated with an increased risk of dementia among older adults with normal baseline cognition.”
GEMS data
To study whether alcohol consumption is associated with the risk of dementia and cognitive decline in older adults with and without MCI, the investigators analyzed data from the Ginkgo Evaluation of Memory Study (GEMS). GEMS was a randomized controlled trial conducted between 2000 and 2008 that found no overall association between ginkgo biloba and dementia prevention. During the trial, participants completed the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination, the Clinical Dementia Rating scale, and the cognitive portion of the Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale.
In the present study, the investigators analyzed data from 3,021 participants aged 72 years and older who were free of dementia at baseline and had provided information about their alcohol intake. Their median age was 78 years, and 46.2% were female. Fifty-eight percent consumed alcohol, including 45% of the participants with MCI at baseline.
During follow-up, 512 cases of dementia occurred. Among the 473 participants with MCI at baseline, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for dementia was 1.72 for those who consumed more than 14 drinks per week, compared with light drinkers who consumed less than 1 drink per week. For participants who consumed between 7 and 14 drinks per week, the adjusted HR for dementia was 0.63 among those without MCI and 0.93 among those with MCI, relative to light drinkers who consumed less than 1 drink per week.
Among adults with normal cognition at baseline, daily low-quantity drinking was associated with lower dementia risk, compared with infrequent higher-quantity drinking (HR, 0.45).
Trial excluded adults with excessive alcohol use
Limitations of the study include a lack of data about any changes in alcohol consumption over time. In addition, the original trial excluded people with a known history of excessive alcohol use. Furthermore, it is possible that the “long preclinical phase of dementia” and other health issues affect drinking behavior, the authors said. “At present, our findings cannot be directly translated into clinical recommendations,” the authors said. Nevertheless, the results “suggest that, while caring for older adults, physicians should carefully assess the full dimensions of drinking behavior and cognition when providing guidance to patients about alcohol consumption,” they said.
The study was supported by grants from the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine; the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; the Office of Dietary Supplements of the National Institute on Aging; the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; the University of Pittsburgh Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center; the Roena Kulynych Center for Memory and Cognition Research; and Wake Forest University School of Medicine. In addition, the researchers used plasma samples from the National Cell Repository for Alzheimer’s Disease, which receives support from the National Institute on Aging. Dr. Koch had no conflicts of interest. Coauthors disclosed university and government grants and personal fees from pharmaceutical companies outside the study. One author was an employee of Genentech at the time of publication, but Genentech did not contribute to the study.
SOURCE: Koch M et al. JAMA Network Open. 2019 Sep 27. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.10319.
FROM JAMA NETWORK OPEN
Migraines linked to higher risk of dementia
, according to research published online Sept. 4 in the International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry.
In the Manitoba Study of Health and Aging, a population-based, prospective cohort study, 679 community-dwelling adults with a mean age of 75.9 years were followed for 5 years. Participants screened as cognitively intact at baseline had complete data on migraine history and all covariates at baseline and were assessed for cognitive outcomes 5 years later.
The study showed that a history of migraines was associated with a 2.97-fold greater likelihood of dementia, after adjustment for age, education, and a history of stroke, compared with individuals without a history of migraine. Individuals with Alzheimer’s disease were more than four times more likely to have a history of migraines (odds ratio 4.22).
However, researchers found no significant association between vascular dementia and a history of migraines, either before or after adjusting for confounders but particularly after incorporating a history of stroke into the model.
Lead investigator Suzanne L. Tyas, PhD, associate professor in the School of Public Health and Health Systems at the University of Waterloo, Ont., and coauthors suggested that the association between migraine and dementia was largely driven by the strong association between migraines and Alzheimer’s disease.
“This interpretation is supported by the weaker association for dementia than for Alzheimer’s disease, reflecting a dilution of the association with migraines across all types of dementia including vascular dementia, where a significant association was not found,” the researchers wrote.
The study population was 61.9% female, and no men reporting a history of migraine were diagnosed with dementia. While the study reflected a strong association between migraine and dementia in women, the researchers said they were unable to assess potential gender differences in this association.
Commenting on possible mechanisms behind the association, the authors wrote that there were overlaps underlying the biological mechanisms of migraine and dementia. Vascular risk factors such as diabetes, hypertension, heart attack, and stroke are associated with the development of dementia, and a relationship of these risk factors and migraine also has been seen.
“Many of the mechanisms involved in migraine neurophysiology, such as inflammation and reduced cerebral blood flow, are also underlying causes of dementia,” they wrote. “Repeated activation of these pathways in chronic migraineurs has been shown to cause permanent neurological and vascular damage.”
They also observed that the association could be influenced by genetic factors, as individuals with presenilin-1 mutations, which predispose them to Alzheimer’s disease, are more likely to experience migraines or recurrent headaches.
They suggested their findings could inform preventive strategies and treatments for Alzheimer’s disease, as well as interventions such as earlier screening for cognitive decline in individuals who experience migraines.
The study was funded by Manitoba Health and the National Health Research and Development Program of Health Canada. No conflicts of interest were declared.
SOURCE: Morton R et al. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry, 2019 Sep 4. doi: 10.1002/gps.5180.
, according to research published online Sept. 4 in the International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry.
In the Manitoba Study of Health and Aging, a population-based, prospective cohort study, 679 community-dwelling adults with a mean age of 75.9 years were followed for 5 years. Participants screened as cognitively intact at baseline had complete data on migraine history and all covariates at baseline and were assessed for cognitive outcomes 5 years later.
The study showed that a history of migraines was associated with a 2.97-fold greater likelihood of dementia, after adjustment for age, education, and a history of stroke, compared with individuals without a history of migraine. Individuals with Alzheimer’s disease were more than four times more likely to have a history of migraines (odds ratio 4.22).
However, researchers found no significant association between vascular dementia and a history of migraines, either before or after adjusting for confounders but particularly after incorporating a history of stroke into the model.
Lead investigator Suzanne L. Tyas, PhD, associate professor in the School of Public Health and Health Systems at the University of Waterloo, Ont., and coauthors suggested that the association between migraine and dementia was largely driven by the strong association between migraines and Alzheimer’s disease.
“This interpretation is supported by the weaker association for dementia than for Alzheimer’s disease, reflecting a dilution of the association with migraines across all types of dementia including vascular dementia, where a significant association was not found,” the researchers wrote.
The study population was 61.9% female, and no men reporting a history of migraine were diagnosed with dementia. While the study reflected a strong association between migraine and dementia in women, the researchers said they were unable to assess potential gender differences in this association.
Commenting on possible mechanisms behind the association, the authors wrote that there were overlaps underlying the biological mechanisms of migraine and dementia. Vascular risk factors such as diabetes, hypertension, heart attack, and stroke are associated with the development of dementia, and a relationship of these risk factors and migraine also has been seen.
“Many of the mechanisms involved in migraine neurophysiology, such as inflammation and reduced cerebral blood flow, are also underlying causes of dementia,” they wrote. “Repeated activation of these pathways in chronic migraineurs has been shown to cause permanent neurological and vascular damage.”
They also observed that the association could be influenced by genetic factors, as individuals with presenilin-1 mutations, which predispose them to Alzheimer’s disease, are more likely to experience migraines or recurrent headaches.
They suggested their findings could inform preventive strategies and treatments for Alzheimer’s disease, as well as interventions such as earlier screening for cognitive decline in individuals who experience migraines.
The study was funded by Manitoba Health and the National Health Research and Development Program of Health Canada. No conflicts of interest were declared.
SOURCE: Morton R et al. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry, 2019 Sep 4. doi: 10.1002/gps.5180.
, according to research published online Sept. 4 in the International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry.
In the Manitoba Study of Health and Aging, a population-based, prospective cohort study, 679 community-dwelling adults with a mean age of 75.9 years were followed for 5 years. Participants screened as cognitively intact at baseline had complete data on migraine history and all covariates at baseline and were assessed for cognitive outcomes 5 years later.
The study showed that a history of migraines was associated with a 2.97-fold greater likelihood of dementia, after adjustment for age, education, and a history of stroke, compared with individuals without a history of migraine. Individuals with Alzheimer’s disease were more than four times more likely to have a history of migraines (odds ratio 4.22).
However, researchers found no significant association between vascular dementia and a history of migraines, either before or after adjusting for confounders but particularly after incorporating a history of stroke into the model.
Lead investigator Suzanne L. Tyas, PhD, associate professor in the School of Public Health and Health Systems at the University of Waterloo, Ont., and coauthors suggested that the association between migraine and dementia was largely driven by the strong association between migraines and Alzheimer’s disease.
“This interpretation is supported by the weaker association for dementia than for Alzheimer’s disease, reflecting a dilution of the association with migraines across all types of dementia including vascular dementia, where a significant association was not found,” the researchers wrote.
The study population was 61.9% female, and no men reporting a history of migraine were diagnosed with dementia. While the study reflected a strong association between migraine and dementia in women, the researchers said they were unable to assess potential gender differences in this association.
Commenting on possible mechanisms behind the association, the authors wrote that there were overlaps underlying the biological mechanisms of migraine and dementia. Vascular risk factors such as diabetes, hypertension, heart attack, and stroke are associated with the development of dementia, and a relationship of these risk factors and migraine also has been seen.
“Many of the mechanisms involved in migraine neurophysiology, such as inflammation and reduced cerebral blood flow, are also underlying causes of dementia,” they wrote. “Repeated activation of these pathways in chronic migraineurs has been shown to cause permanent neurological and vascular damage.”
They also observed that the association could be influenced by genetic factors, as individuals with presenilin-1 mutations, which predispose them to Alzheimer’s disease, are more likely to experience migraines or recurrent headaches.
They suggested their findings could inform preventive strategies and treatments for Alzheimer’s disease, as well as interventions such as earlier screening for cognitive decline in individuals who experience migraines.
The study was funded by Manitoba Health and the National Health Research and Development Program of Health Canada. No conflicts of interest were declared.
SOURCE: Morton R et al. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry, 2019 Sep 4. doi: 10.1002/gps.5180.
FROM THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC PSYCHIATRY
Genotype may affect lifestyle’s influence on dementia risk
But among people at high genetic risk for dementia, these potentially modifiable factors – not smoking, not having depression or diabetes, getting regular physical activity, avoiding social isolation, and following a healthy diet – may not have protective associations, according to research published in Nature Medicine.
Recent analyses have indicated that eliminating known modifiable risk factors for dementia at a population level could prevent one-third of dementia cases, but prevention trials “have yielded inconsistent results so far,” wrote first author Silvan Licher, MD, of the department of epidemiology at Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam (the Netherlands) and his colleagues.
“Prior studies have mostly focused on the risk of dementia associated with an individual protective factor, yet the combination of multiple factors may yield more beneficial effects than the individual parts,” they wrote. “Combining data about a number of factors is also important because it takes into account the multifactorial nature of late-life dementia. We used data from the Rotterdam Study to determine to what extent a favorable profile based on modifiable risk factors is associated with a lower risk of dementia among individuals at low, intermediate, or high genetic risk.”
Grouped by APOE genotype
Patients who were apolipoprotein E epsilon-4 allele (APOE4) carriers (i.e., APOE2 and 4, APOE3 and 4, or two APOE4) were classified as having high genetic risk (n = 1,747). Other APOE genotypes were considered intermediate risk (n = 3,718 with two APOE3 alleles) or low risk (n = 887 with either two APOE2 alleles or APOE2 and 3).
The researchers measured six potentially modifiable lifestyle or health factors that “have been implicated in a lower risk of dementia.” Modifiable risk scores ranged from 0 to 6. Participants were classified as having an unfavorable profile (0-2 protective factors), an intermediate profile (3-4 protective factors), or a favorable profile (5-6 factors).
The researchers calculated the relative risk of developing dementia using a Cox proportional hazards model and the absolutely risk using competing risk models.
In all, 56.2% of the participants were women, the average age was about 69 years, and patient characteristics were similar across the categories of APOE risk. APOE4 carriers received dementia diagnoses at a younger age, more often had a parental history of dementia, and had higher total cholesterol levels, compared with noncarriers. In all, 915 people received a dementia diagnosis, of whom 739 received a diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. The other 2,644 participants died free from dementia. The median follow-up was 14.1 years.
“Dementia risk was significantly higher among participants at high or intermediate APOE risk, compared with those at low APOE risk,” the researchers said. In addition, the risk of dementia increased in participants who had fewer protective factors. Those with 0-2 protective factors had a 29% higher risk of dementia, compared with participants with 5 or 6 protective factors, after adjusting for age, sex, level of education, parental history of dementia, history of stroke, systolic blood pressure, and total and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol.
Lifestyle benefits tended to be greater in younger participants
“APOE genotype significantly modified the association between protective factors and dementia,” the authors said. Compared with participants with protective modifiable risk profiles, participants with unfavorable modifiable risk profiles had greater risk for dementia in the low–APOE risk group (hazard ratio, 2.51) and intermediate–APOE risk group (HR, 1.39), but not in the high–APOE risk group.
“Protective associations of favorable risk profiles against dementia tended to be stronger in younger individuals than in older individuals and were most pronounced for younger individuals at low APOE risk,” Dr. Licher and colleagues said. In a sensitivity analysis that used a polygenic risk score for Alzheimer’s disease based on 27 variants other than APOE to determine participants’ genetic risk, the patterns were “attenuated yet largely comparable,” they wrote. Patterns also remained consistent when the researchers used an ideal cardiovascular health score to indicate modifiable health profiles.
“Our results confirm that individuals with a favorable profile have a lower risk of dementia than those with intermediate or unfavorable profiles based on modifiable risk factors,” they said. Unlike in a subgroup analysis of data from the FINGER study, however, “this study found that a favorable profile could not offset high APOE risk.”
The findings may have implications for clinical trial design and suggest that APOE4 carriers may need to be targeted earlier in the disease process to influence their risk for dementia.
“On the positive side, results from this study show that avoiding an unhealthy lifestyle could potentially prevent or postpone the onset of dementia in most individuals in the population (73%), namely those at low and intermediate genetic risk,” the investigators wrote. “Among these, the majority were categorized has having a favorable profile (66%), yet room for improvement is still substantial.”
The study lacked data on hearing impairment and did not capture shifts to more adverse or optimal lifestyles during follow-up. In addition, the results are based on relatively small samples in each risk category, and the estimates had wide confidence intervals. The population was older and mostly of European descent, which limits the generalizability of the findings, the authors noted.
Lifestyle factors may benefit only people with low genetic risk
“The authors’ key finding was that modifiable lifestyle risk factors were able to reduce dementia risk only in people who did not have an APOE4 allele and hence were at lower genetic risk,” said Kenneth Rockwood, MD, professor of geriatric medicine and neurology at Dalhousie University in Halifax, N.S., and his coauthors, in an accompanying editorial.
The findings contrast with those of another recent population-based study using data from the UK Biobank (JAMA. 2019;322[5]:430-7. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.9879), which suggested that modifiable factors affect dementia risk regardless of genetic risk.
Together, these studies “tell us that ... we must better understand outcomes in those most at risk,” they said. “We might begin by recognizing that aging is essential, rather than incidental, to dementia disease expression.” Future research should focus on people living with frailty, who often are excluded from trials and are at high risk for dementia. Older adults who develop delirium also may be an ideal target group of patients at increased risk for dementia.
“Reducing the extent of disease expression in people prone to developing dementia late in life is difficult. Studies investigating whether dementia can be prevented at all, such as the Rotterdam study, and then whether it can be prevented in the people at greatest risk, can be commended for their clear-eyed approach,” Dr. Rockwood and colleagues said.
The Rotterdam Study is funded by Erasmus Medical Center and University, as well as a variety of Dutch organizations, institutes, and government ministries, and the European Commission. The authors had no competing interests.
Dr. Rockwood is president and chief science officer of DGI Clinical, which has contracts with pharmaceutical and device manufacturers related to individualized outcome measurement.
SOURCES: Licher S et al. Nat Med. 2019 Aug 26. doi: 10.1038/s41591-019-0547-7; and Rockwood K et al. Nat Med. 2019 Aug 26. doi: 10.1038/s41591-019-0575-3.
The study by Dr. Licher and associates shows a clinically significant impact of a healthy lifestyle in reducing dementia. But what is surprising is that the effect was not seen in genetically higher-risk people.
If anything, the results strengthen our recommendations to people interested in lowering their risk for dementia with lifestyle modification. Bear in mind that APOE testing is not done routinely, so the vast majority of our patients do not know their APOE genotype. Since a healthy lifestyle can benefit the majority of the population (around 75%), even if it is less or ineffective in the APOE4 carrier group (about 25% of the population), it is certainly something to recommend. Of course, health care professionals already recommend heart healthy habits, which have an equivalent benefit, and sadly, adherence is relatively low. Adding that lifestyle modification may help prevent dementia might improve patient compliance. Starting healthy lifestyles as early in life as possible may be the key. It is less effective if we wait until we already have memory loss.
Finally, the study results regard relative risk, a concept that many fail to fully grasp. A person can still get dementia in any of the categories, including the “best one” (low genetic and lifestyle risk). It’s a matter of the odds being better or worse, but there is no guarantee of a positive or negative outcome.
Richard J. Caselli, MD, is professor of neurology at the Mayo Clinic Arizona in Scottsdale and associate director and clinical core director of the Arizona Alzheimer’s Disease Center, Phoenix. He made these comments in an interview.
The study by Dr. Licher and associates shows a clinically significant impact of a healthy lifestyle in reducing dementia. But what is surprising is that the effect was not seen in genetically higher-risk people.
If anything, the results strengthen our recommendations to people interested in lowering their risk for dementia with lifestyle modification. Bear in mind that APOE testing is not done routinely, so the vast majority of our patients do not know their APOE genotype. Since a healthy lifestyle can benefit the majority of the population (around 75%), even if it is less or ineffective in the APOE4 carrier group (about 25% of the population), it is certainly something to recommend. Of course, health care professionals already recommend heart healthy habits, which have an equivalent benefit, and sadly, adherence is relatively low. Adding that lifestyle modification may help prevent dementia might improve patient compliance. Starting healthy lifestyles as early in life as possible may be the key. It is less effective if we wait until we already have memory loss.
Finally, the study results regard relative risk, a concept that many fail to fully grasp. A person can still get dementia in any of the categories, including the “best one” (low genetic and lifestyle risk). It’s a matter of the odds being better or worse, but there is no guarantee of a positive or negative outcome.
Richard J. Caselli, MD, is professor of neurology at the Mayo Clinic Arizona in Scottsdale and associate director and clinical core director of the Arizona Alzheimer’s Disease Center, Phoenix. He made these comments in an interview.
The study by Dr. Licher and associates shows a clinically significant impact of a healthy lifestyle in reducing dementia. But what is surprising is that the effect was not seen in genetically higher-risk people.
If anything, the results strengthen our recommendations to people interested in lowering their risk for dementia with lifestyle modification. Bear in mind that APOE testing is not done routinely, so the vast majority of our patients do not know their APOE genotype. Since a healthy lifestyle can benefit the majority of the population (around 75%), even if it is less or ineffective in the APOE4 carrier group (about 25% of the population), it is certainly something to recommend. Of course, health care professionals already recommend heart healthy habits, which have an equivalent benefit, and sadly, adherence is relatively low. Adding that lifestyle modification may help prevent dementia might improve patient compliance. Starting healthy lifestyles as early in life as possible may be the key. It is less effective if we wait until we already have memory loss.
Finally, the study results regard relative risk, a concept that many fail to fully grasp. A person can still get dementia in any of the categories, including the “best one” (low genetic and lifestyle risk). It’s a matter of the odds being better or worse, but there is no guarantee of a positive or negative outcome.
Richard J. Caselli, MD, is professor of neurology at the Mayo Clinic Arizona in Scottsdale and associate director and clinical core director of the Arizona Alzheimer’s Disease Center, Phoenix. He made these comments in an interview.
But among people at high genetic risk for dementia, these potentially modifiable factors – not smoking, not having depression or diabetes, getting regular physical activity, avoiding social isolation, and following a healthy diet – may not have protective associations, according to research published in Nature Medicine.
Recent analyses have indicated that eliminating known modifiable risk factors for dementia at a population level could prevent one-third of dementia cases, but prevention trials “have yielded inconsistent results so far,” wrote first author Silvan Licher, MD, of the department of epidemiology at Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam (the Netherlands) and his colleagues.
“Prior studies have mostly focused on the risk of dementia associated with an individual protective factor, yet the combination of multiple factors may yield more beneficial effects than the individual parts,” they wrote. “Combining data about a number of factors is also important because it takes into account the multifactorial nature of late-life dementia. We used data from the Rotterdam Study to determine to what extent a favorable profile based on modifiable risk factors is associated with a lower risk of dementia among individuals at low, intermediate, or high genetic risk.”
Grouped by APOE genotype
Patients who were apolipoprotein E epsilon-4 allele (APOE4) carriers (i.e., APOE2 and 4, APOE3 and 4, or two APOE4) were classified as having high genetic risk (n = 1,747). Other APOE genotypes were considered intermediate risk (n = 3,718 with two APOE3 alleles) or low risk (n = 887 with either two APOE2 alleles or APOE2 and 3).
The researchers measured six potentially modifiable lifestyle or health factors that “have been implicated in a lower risk of dementia.” Modifiable risk scores ranged from 0 to 6. Participants were classified as having an unfavorable profile (0-2 protective factors), an intermediate profile (3-4 protective factors), or a favorable profile (5-6 factors).
The researchers calculated the relative risk of developing dementia using a Cox proportional hazards model and the absolutely risk using competing risk models.
In all, 56.2% of the participants were women, the average age was about 69 years, and patient characteristics were similar across the categories of APOE risk. APOE4 carriers received dementia diagnoses at a younger age, more often had a parental history of dementia, and had higher total cholesterol levels, compared with noncarriers. In all, 915 people received a dementia diagnosis, of whom 739 received a diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. The other 2,644 participants died free from dementia. The median follow-up was 14.1 years.
“Dementia risk was significantly higher among participants at high or intermediate APOE risk, compared with those at low APOE risk,” the researchers said. In addition, the risk of dementia increased in participants who had fewer protective factors. Those with 0-2 protective factors had a 29% higher risk of dementia, compared with participants with 5 or 6 protective factors, after adjusting for age, sex, level of education, parental history of dementia, history of stroke, systolic blood pressure, and total and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol.
Lifestyle benefits tended to be greater in younger participants
“APOE genotype significantly modified the association between protective factors and dementia,” the authors said. Compared with participants with protective modifiable risk profiles, participants with unfavorable modifiable risk profiles had greater risk for dementia in the low–APOE risk group (hazard ratio, 2.51) and intermediate–APOE risk group (HR, 1.39), but not in the high–APOE risk group.
“Protective associations of favorable risk profiles against dementia tended to be stronger in younger individuals than in older individuals and were most pronounced for younger individuals at low APOE risk,” Dr. Licher and colleagues said. In a sensitivity analysis that used a polygenic risk score for Alzheimer’s disease based on 27 variants other than APOE to determine participants’ genetic risk, the patterns were “attenuated yet largely comparable,” they wrote. Patterns also remained consistent when the researchers used an ideal cardiovascular health score to indicate modifiable health profiles.
“Our results confirm that individuals with a favorable profile have a lower risk of dementia than those with intermediate or unfavorable profiles based on modifiable risk factors,” they said. Unlike in a subgroup analysis of data from the FINGER study, however, “this study found that a favorable profile could not offset high APOE risk.”
The findings may have implications for clinical trial design and suggest that APOE4 carriers may need to be targeted earlier in the disease process to influence their risk for dementia.
“On the positive side, results from this study show that avoiding an unhealthy lifestyle could potentially prevent or postpone the onset of dementia in most individuals in the population (73%), namely those at low and intermediate genetic risk,” the investigators wrote. “Among these, the majority were categorized has having a favorable profile (66%), yet room for improvement is still substantial.”
The study lacked data on hearing impairment and did not capture shifts to more adverse or optimal lifestyles during follow-up. In addition, the results are based on relatively small samples in each risk category, and the estimates had wide confidence intervals. The population was older and mostly of European descent, which limits the generalizability of the findings, the authors noted.
Lifestyle factors may benefit only people with low genetic risk
“The authors’ key finding was that modifiable lifestyle risk factors were able to reduce dementia risk only in people who did not have an APOE4 allele and hence were at lower genetic risk,” said Kenneth Rockwood, MD, professor of geriatric medicine and neurology at Dalhousie University in Halifax, N.S., and his coauthors, in an accompanying editorial.
The findings contrast with those of another recent population-based study using data from the UK Biobank (JAMA. 2019;322[5]:430-7. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.9879), which suggested that modifiable factors affect dementia risk regardless of genetic risk.
Together, these studies “tell us that ... we must better understand outcomes in those most at risk,” they said. “We might begin by recognizing that aging is essential, rather than incidental, to dementia disease expression.” Future research should focus on people living with frailty, who often are excluded from trials and are at high risk for dementia. Older adults who develop delirium also may be an ideal target group of patients at increased risk for dementia.
“Reducing the extent of disease expression in people prone to developing dementia late in life is difficult. Studies investigating whether dementia can be prevented at all, such as the Rotterdam study, and then whether it can be prevented in the people at greatest risk, can be commended for their clear-eyed approach,” Dr. Rockwood and colleagues said.
The Rotterdam Study is funded by Erasmus Medical Center and University, as well as a variety of Dutch organizations, institutes, and government ministries, and the European Commission. The authors had no competing interests.
Dr. Rockwood is president and chief science officer of DGI Clinical, which has contracts with pharmaceutical and device manufacturers related to individualized outcome measurement.
SOURCES: Licher S et al. Nat Med. 2019 Aug 26. doi: 10.1038/s41591-019-0547-7; and Rockwood K et al. Nat Med. 2019 Aug 26. doi: 10.1038/s41591-019-0575-3.
But among people at high genetic risk for dementia, these potentially modifiable factors – not smoking, not having depression or diabetes, getting regular physical activity, avoiding social isolation, and following a healthy diet – may not have protective associations, according to research published in Nature Medicine.
Recent analyses have indicated that eliminating known modifiable risk factors for dementia at a population level could prevent one-third of dementia cases, but prevention trials “have yielded inconsistent results so far,” wrote first author Silvan Licher, MD, of the department of epidemiology at Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam (the Netherlands) and his colleagues.
“Prior studies have mostly focused on the risk of dementia associated with an individual protective factor, yet the combination of multiple factors may yield more beneficial effects than the individual parts,” they wrote. “Combining data about a number of factors is also important because it takes into account the multifactorial nature of late-life dementia. We used data from the Rotterdam Study to determine to what extent a favorable profile based on modifiable risk factors is associated with a lower risk of dementia among individuals at low, intermediate, or high genetic risk.”
Grouped by APOE genotype
Patients who were apolipoprotein E epsilon-4 allele (APOE4) carriers (i.e., APOE2 and 4, APOE3 and 4, or two APOE4) were classified as having high genetic risk (n = 1,747). Other APOE genotypes were considered intermediate risk (n = 3,718 with two APOE3 alleles) or low risk (n = 887 with either two APOE2 alleles or APOE2 and 3).
The researchers measured six potentially modifiable lifestyle or health factors that “have been implicated in a lower risk of dementia.” Modifiable risk scores ranged from 0 to 6. Participants were classified as having an unfavorable profile (0-2 protective factors), an intermediate profile (3-4 protective factors), or a favorable profile (5-6 factors).
The researchers calculated the relative risk of developing dementia using a Cox proportional hazards model and the absolutely risk using competing risk models.
In all, 56.2% of the participants were women, the average age was about 69 years, and patient characteristics were similar across the categories of APOE risk. APOE4 carriers received dementia diagnoses at a younger age, more often had a parental history of dementia, and had higher total cholesterol levels, compared with noncarriers. In all, 915 people received a dementia diagnosis, of whom 739 received a diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. The other 2,644 participants died free from dementia. The median follow-up was 14.1 years.
“Dementia risk was significantly higher among participants at high or intermediate APOE risk, compared with those at low APOE risk,” the researchers said. In addition, the risk of dementia increased in participants who had fewer protective factors. Those with 0-2 protective factors had a 29% higher risk of dementia, compared with participants with 5 or 6 protective factors, after adjusting for age, sex, level of education, parental history of dementia, history of stroke, systolic blood pressure, and total and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol.
Lifestyle benefits tended to be greater in younger participants
“APOE genotype significantly modified the association between protective factors and dementia,” the authors said. Compared with participants with protective modifiable risk profiles, participants with unfavorable modifiable risk profiles had greater risk for dementia in the low–APOE risk group (hazard ratio, 2.51) and intermediate–APOE risk group (HR, 1.39), but not in the high–APOE risk group.
“Protective associations of favorable risk profiles against dementia tended to be stronger in younger individuals than in older individuals and were most pronounced for younger individuals at low APOE risk,” Dr. Licher and colleagues said. In a sensitivity analysis that used a polygenic risk score for Alzheimer’s disease based on 27 variants other than APOE to determine participants’ genetic risk, the patterns were “attenuated yet largely comparable,” they wrote. Patterns also remained consistent when the researchers used an ideal cardiovascular health score to indicate modifiable health profiles.
“Our results confirm that individuals with a favorable profile have a lower risk of dementia than those with intermediate or unfavorable profiles based on modifiable risk factors,” they said. Unlike in a subgroup analysis of data from the FINGER study, however, “this study found that a favorable profile could not offset high APOE risk.”
The findings may have implications for clinical trial design and suggest that APOE4 carriers may need to be targeted earlier in the disease process to influence their risk for dementia.
“On the positive side, results from this study show that avoiding an unhealthy lifestyle could potentially prevent or postpone the onset of dementia in most individuals in the population (73%), namely those at low and intermediate genetic risk,” the investigators wrote. “Among these, the majority were categorized has having a favorable profile (66%), yet room for improvement is still substantial.”
The study lacked data on hearing impairment and did not capture shifts to more adverse or optimal lifestyles during follow-up. In addition, the results are based on relatively small samples in each risk category, and the estimates had wide confidence intervals. The population was older and mostly of European descent, which limits the generalizability of the findings, the authors noted.
Lifestyle factors may benefit only people with low genetic risk
“The authors’ key finding was that modifiable lifestyle risk factors were able to reduce dementia risk only in people who did not have an APOE4 allele and hence were at lower genetic risk,” said Kenneth Rockwood, MD, professor of geriatric medicine and neurology at Dalhousie University in Halifax, N.S., and his coauthors, in an accompanying editorial.
The findings contrast with those of another recent population-based study using data from the UK Biobank (JAMA. 2019;322[5]:430-7. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.9879), which suggested that modifiable factors affect dementia risk regardless of genetic risk.
Together, these studies “tell us that ... we must better understand outcomes in those most at risk,” they said. “We might begin by recognizing that aging is essential, rather than incidental, to dementia disease expression.” Future research should focus on people living with frailty, who often are excluded from trials and are at high risk for dementia. Older adults who develop delirium also may be an ideal target group of patients at increased risk for dementia.
“Reducing the extent of disease expression in people prone to developing dementia late in life is difficult. Studies investigating whether dementia can be prevented at all, such as the Rotterdam study, and then whether it can be prevented in the people at greatest risk, can be commended for their clear-eyed approach,” Dr. Rockwood and colleagues said.
The Rotterdam Study is funded by Erasmus Medical Center and University, as well as a variety of Dutch organizations, institutes, and government ministries, and the European Commission. The authors had no competing interests.
Dr. Rockwood is president and chief science officer of DGI Clinical, which has contracts with pharmaceutical and device manufacturers related to individualized outcome measurement.
SOURCES: Licher S et al. Nat Med. 2019 Aug 26. doi: 10.1038/s41591-019-0547-7; and Rockwood K et al. Nat Med. 2019 Aug 26. doi: 10.1038/s41591-019-0575-3.
FROM NATURE MEDICINE
Two genetic variants modify risk of Alzheimer’s disease
according to research published online August 14 in Science Translational Medicine. The variants affect cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) concentrations of a soluble form of the TREM2 protein (sTREM2), which may be involved in Alzheimer’s disease pathology. “Increasing TREM2 or activating the TREM2 signaling pathway could offer a new therapeutic approach for treating Alzheimer’s disease,” wrote the researchers.
Yuetiva Deming, PhD, of the University of Wisconsin–Madison and colleagues conducted a genome-wide association study to identify genetic modifiers of CSF sTREM2. They analyzed CSF sTREM2 levels in 813 participants in the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). Of this population, 172 participants had Alzheimer’s disease, 169 were cognitively normal, 183 had early mild cognitive impairment (MCI), 221 had late MCI, and 68 had significant memory concerns.
The rs1582763 single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) on chromosome 11 within the MS4A gene region was significantly associated with increased CSF levels of sTREM2. Conditional analyses of the MS4A locus indicated that rs6591561, a missense variant within MS4A4A, was associated with reduced CSF sTREM2. Analyzing 580 additional CSF sTREM2 samples, along with associated genetic data, from six other studies replicated these findings in an independent dataset.
Furthermore, Dr. Deming and colleagues found that rs1582763 was associated with reduced risk for Alzheimer’s disease and older age at Alzheimer’s disease onset. In addition, rs6591561 was associated with increased risk of Alzheimer’s disease and earlier onset of Alzheimer’s disease.
Subsequent analyses showed that rs1582763 modified the expression of the MS4A4A and MS4A6A genes in various tissues. This finding suggests that one or both of these genes are important for influencing the production of sTREM2, wrote Dr. Deming and colleagues. Using human macrophages as a proxy for microglia, the investigators observed that the MS4A4A and TREM2 proteins colocalized on lipid rafts at the plasma membrane. In addition, sTREM2 concentrations increased with MS4A4A overexpression, and silencing of MS4A4A reduced sTREM2 production.
These findings “provide a putative biological connection between the MS4A family, TREM2, and Alzheimer’s disease risk,” wrote the researchers. The data also suggest that MS4A4A is a potential therapeutic target in Alzheimer’s disease. Understanding the role of sTREM2 in Alzheimer’s disease will require additional research, but it may be involved in pathogenesis, wrote Dr. Deming and colleagues.
One of the study’s limitations is that the investigators included only common variants and thus could not determine the effect of genes that only harbor low-frequency or rare functional variants. Another limitation is that the data cannot support conclusions about whether other genes in the MS4A locus also modulate sTREM2, wrote Dr. Deming and colleagues.
Grants from the National Institutes of Health supported this study. The investigators disclosed consulting and other relationships with various pharmaceutical companies.
SOURCE: Deming Y et al. Sci Transl Med. 2019 Aug 14. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aau2291.
according to research published online August 14 in Science Translational Medicine. The variants affect cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) concentrations of a soluble form of the TREM2 protein (sTREM2), which may be involved in Alzheimer’s disease pathology. “Increasing TREM2 or activating the TREM2 signaling pathway could offer a new therapeutic approach for treating Alzheimer’s disease,” wrote the researchers.
Yuetiva Deming, PhD, of the University of Wisconsin–Madison and colleagues conducted a genome-wide association study to identify genetic modifiers of CSF sTREM2. They analyzed CSF sTREM2 levels in 813 participants in the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). Of this population, 172 participants had Alzheimer’s disease, 169 were cognitively normal, 183 had early mild cognitive impairment (MCI), 221 had late MCI, and 68 had significant memory concerns.
The rs1582763 single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) on chromosome 11 within the MS4A gene region was significantly associated with increased CSF levels of sTREM2. Conditional analyses of the MS4A locus indicated that rs6591561, a missense variant within MS4A4A, was associated with reduced CSF sTREM2. Analyzing 580 additional CSF sTREM2 samples, along with associated genetic data, from six other studies replicated these findings in an independent dataset.
Furthermore, Dr. Deming and colleagues found that rs1582763 was associated with reduced risk for Alzheimer’s disease and older age at Alzheimer’s disease onset. In addition, rs6591561 was associated with increased risk of Alzheimer’s disease and earlier onset of Alzheimer’s disease.
Subsequent analyses showed that rs1582763 modified the expression of the MS4A4A and MS4A6A genes in various tissues. This finding suggests that one or both of these genes are important for influencing the production of sTREM2, wrote Dr. Deming and colleagues. Using human macrophages as a proxy for microglia, the investigators observed that the MS4A4A and TREM2 proteins colocalized on lipid rafts at the plasma membrane. In addition, sTREM2 concentrations increased with MS4A4A overexpression, and silencing of MS4A4A reduced sTREM2 production.
These findings “provide a putative biological connection between the MS4A family, TREM2, and Alzheimer’s disease risk,” wrote the researchers. The data also suggest that MS4A4A is a potential therapeutic target in Alzheimer’s disease. Understanding the role of sTREM2 in Alzheimer’s disease will require additional research, but it may be involved in pathogenesis, wrote Dr. Deming and colleagues.
One of the study’s limitations is that the investigators included only common variants and thus could not determine the effect of genes that only harbor low-frequency or rare functional variants. Another limitation is that the data cannot support conclusions about whether other genes in the MS4A locus also modulate sTREM2, wrote Dr. Deming and colleagues.
Grants from the National Institutes of Health supported this study. The investigators disclosed consulting and other relationships with various pharmaceutical companies.
SOURCE: Deming Y et al. Sci Transl Med. 2019 Aug 14. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aau2291.
according to research published online August 14 in Science Translational Medicine. The variants affect cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) concentrations of a soluble form of the TREM2 protein (sTREM2), which may be involved in Alzheimer’s disease pathology. “Increasing TREM2 or activating the TREM2 signaling pathway could offer a new therapeutic approach for treating Alzheimer’s disease,” wrote the researchers.
Yuetiva Deming, PhD, of the University of Wisconsin–Madison and colleagues conducted a genome-wide association study to identify genetic modifiers of CSF sTREM2. They analyzed CSF sTREM2 levels in 813 participants in the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). Of this population, 172 participants had Alzheimer’s disease, 169 were cognitively normal, 183 had early mild cognitive impairment (MCI), 221 had late MCI, and 68 had significant memory concerns.
The rs1582763 single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) on chromosome 11 within the MS4A gene region was significantly associated with increased CSF levels of sTREM2. Conditional analyses of the MS4A locus indicated that rs6591561, a missense variant within MS4A4A, was associated with reduced CSF sTREM2. Analyzing 580 additional CSF sTREM2 samples, along with associated genetic data, from six other studies replicated these findings in an independent dataset.
Furthermore, Dr. Deming and colleagues found that rs1582763 was associated with reduced risk for Alzheimer’s disease and older age at Alzheimer’s disease onset. In addition, rs6591561 was associated with increased risk of Alzheimer’s disease and earlier onset of Alzheimer’s disease.
Subsequent analyses showed that rs1582763 modified the expression of the MS4A4A and MS4A6A genes in various tissues. This finding suggests that one or both of these genes are important for influencing the production of sTREM2, wrote Dr. Deming and colleagues. Using human macrophages as a proxy for microglia, the investigators observed that the MS4A4A and TREM2 proteins colocalized on lipid rafts at the plasma membrane. In addition, sTREM2 concentrations increased with MS4A4A overexpression, and silencing of MS4A4A reduced sTREM2 production.
These findings “provide a putative biological connection between the MS4A family, TREM2, and Alzheimer’s disease risk,” wrote the researchers. The data also suggest that MS4A4A is a potential therapeutic target in Alzheimer’s disease. Understanding the role of sTREM2 in Alzheimer’s disease will require additional research, but it may be involved in pathogenesis, wrote Dr. Deming and colleagues.
One of the study’s limitations is that the investigators included only common variants and thus could not determine the effect of genes that only harbor low-frequency or rare functional variants. Another limitation is that the data cannot support conclusions about whether other genes in the MS4A locus also modulate sTREM2, wrote Dr. Deming and colleagues.
Grants from the National Institutes of Health supported this study. The investigators disclosed consulting and other relationships with various pharmaceutical companies.
SOURCE: Deming Y et al. Sci Transl Med. 2019 Aug 14. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aau2291.
FROM SCIENCE TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE
Key clinical point: Two variants of MS4A are associated with the risk of Alzheimer’s disease.
Major finding: The rs1582763 SNP is associated with reduced risk for Alzheimer’s disease, and rs6591561 is associated with increased risk of Alzheimer’s disease.
Study details: A genome-wide association study of 813 participants in the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative.
Disclosures: Grants from the National Institutes of Health supported this study. The investigators disclosed consulting and other relationships with various pharmaceutical companies.
Source: Deming Y et al. Sci Transl Med. 2019 Aug 14. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aau2291.