Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. Long-term cohort studies

Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models

Shorter LTL was associated with an increased risk of NDDs, including Alzheimer's disease (HR: 0.52, 95% CI 0.40-0.67, P < 0.001), dementia in AD (HR: 0.53, 95% CI 0.39-0.73, P < 0.001), unspecified dementia (HR: 0.74, 95% CI 0.58-0.95, P < 0.05), degenerative diseases of the nervous system (including other specified degenerative diseases such as circumscribed brain atrophy and senile degeneration of the brain) (HR: 0.62, 95% CI 0.45-0.84, P < 0.01), extrapyramidal and movement disorders (including other specified extrapyramidal and movement disorders such as a range of tremors, chorea, tics, and other abnormal involuntary movements) (HR: 0.63, 95% CI 0.48-0.82, P < 0.01), and mental and behavioral disorders due to use of alcohol (HR: 0.46, 95% CI 0.38-0.55, P < 0.001). Conversely, longer LTL was associated with a 3.71-fold increased risk of multiple sclerosis (MS) (HR: 3.71, 95% CI 1.91-7.18, P < 0.001). ML models confirmed the predictive value of LTL for NDDs. Shorter LTL increased the risk of several NDDs, while longer LTL paradoxically predisposed individuals to MS, especially in younger populations. ML models demonstrated strong potential for predicting NDD risks, enhancing our understanding of the role of telomeres in neurodegeneration.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Chen, X., Huang, Y., Zhao, C., & Huang, M. (2026). Association between leukocyte telomere length and neurodegenerative diseases: a prospective cohort in the UK Biobank. Journal of Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-025-13479-1

Vancouver

Chen X, Huang Y, Zhao C, Huang M. Association between leukocyte telomere length and neurodegenerative diseases: a prospective cohort in the UK Biobank. Journal of Neurology. 2026. doi:10.1007/s00415-025-13479-1. PMID: 41670794.

BibTeX

@article{chen2026-41670794,
  author  = {Chen, Xiangting and Huang, Yueqing and Zhao, Chunhua and Huang, Min},
  title   = {{Association between leukocyte telomere length and neurodegenerative diseases: a prospective cohort in the UK Biobank}},
  journal = {Journal of Neurology},
  year    = {2026},
  doi     = {10.1007/s00415-025-13479-1},
  pmid    = {41670794},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-025-13479-1}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Why it matters

In this UK Biobank cohort, shorter leukocyte telomere length was associated with higher risk of Alzheimer's disease and several other neurodegenerative conditions, while longer telomere length was linked to higher risk of multiple sclerosis. These are associations from a prospective cohort and do not establish that changing telomere length would treat or prevent dementia.

Study details

How this study scored 51/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record 2 of 4; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 5 of 5; Sample size 4 of 4; Effect reported 3 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 1 of 7; Citations per year 1 of 5; Impact for its field and year 4 of 6; Cited by studies here 0 of 6; Still being cited 1 of 4; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record 0 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 1 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. 49 of the 96 points it could be judged on, which is 51 of 100. Total 51 of 100.49 of the 96 points we could judge = 51 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on senior author's track record, so that was left out: it earned 49 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 51 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of Neurology)
Journal's citation record 2 / 4 Journal of Neurology: journal h-index 208 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence 3 / 5 Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 5 / 5 2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 4 / 4 459,902 participants
Effect reported 3 / 3 Effect reported with a statistic (interval, p-value, ratio or similar)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited 1 / 7 Cited 4 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 1 / 5 2.0 citations a year over 2 year(s) since 2026
Impact for its field and year 4 / 6 Cited 16.6× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 0 / 6 No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited 1 / 4 Cited 4 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record — / 4 OpenAlex's profile for last-listed author Min Huang holds only 2 work(s), too few to judge a track record — left out of this score
Institution's track record 0 / 3 Nanjing Medical University: institution h-index 508 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 1 / 3 OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 41670794)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 49 / 96 Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 49 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 51 out of 100.
Total 51 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

Related studies in Long-term cohort studies

Also tagged “tdp-43”

1,150 studies in the library carry the topic tag “tdp-43”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,150 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Long-term cohort studies

See all studies in Long-term cohort studies →