Home › Research › Biomarkers
Sex differences in risk factors that predict progression from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer's dementia
Berezuk C, Khan M, Callahan BL, Ramirez J, Black SE, Zakzanis KK, Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative.. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society : JINS, 2022-08-15
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Objectives To evaluate whether cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers, apolipoprotein e4, neuroimaging abnormalities, and neuropsychological data differentially predict progression from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to dementia for men and women. Methods Participants who were diagnosed with MCI at baseline ( n = 449) were classified as either progressing to Alzheimer's dementia at follow-up or as not progressing. Men and women were first compared using bivariate analyses. Sex-stratified Cox proportional hazard regressions were performed examining the relationship between baseline data and the likelihood of progressing to dementia. Sex interactions were subsequently examined. Results Cox proportional hazard regression controlling for age and education indicated that all variables significantly predicted subsequent progression to dementia for men and women. Sex interactions indicated that only Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) delayed recall and Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ) were significantly stronger risk factors for women. When all variables were entered into a fully adjusted model, significant risk factors for women were Aβ42, hippocampal volume, RAVLT delayed recall, Boston Naming Test, and FAQ. In contrast, for men, Aβ42, p-tau181, p-tau181/Aβ42, hippocampal volume, category fluency and FAQ were significant risk factors. Interactions with sex were only significant for p-tau181/Aβ42 and RAVLT delayed recall for the fully adjusted model. Conclusions Men and women with MCI may to differ for which factors predict subsequent dementia although future analyses with greater power are needed to evaluate sex differences. We hypothesize that brain and cognitive reserve theories may partially explain these findings.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Berezuk, C., Khan, M., Callahan, B. L., Ramirez, J., Black, S. E., Zakzanis, K. K., et al. (2023). Sex differences in risk factors that predict progression from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer's dementia. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society : JINS. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1355617722000297
Vancouver
Berezuk C, Khan M, Callahan BL, Ramirez J, Black SE, Zakzanis KK, et al. Sex differences in risk factors that predict progression from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer's dementia. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society : JINS. 2023. doi:10.1017/s1355617722000297. PMID: 35968841.
BibTeX
@article{berezuk2023-35968841,
author = {Berezuk, C. and Khan, M. and Callahan, B. L. and Ramirez, J. and Black, S. E. and Zakzanis, K. K. and {Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative}},
title = {{Sex differences in risk factors that predict progression from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer's dementia}},
journal = {Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society : JINS},
year = {2023},
doi = {10.1017/s1355617722000297},
pmid = {35968841},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1017/s1355617722000297}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Results Cox proportional hazard regression controlling for age and education indicated that all variables significantly predicted subsequent progression to dementia for men and women.
- Sex interactions indicated that only Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) delayed recall and Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ) were significantly stronger risk factors for women.
- When all variables were entered into a fully adjusted model, significant risk factors for women were Aβ42, hippocampal volume, RAVLT delayed recall, Boston Naming Test, and FAQ.
- In contrast, for men, Aβ42, p-tau181, p-tau181/Aβ42, hippocampal volume, category fluency and FAQ were significant risk factors.
- Interactions with sex were only significant for p-tau181/Aβ42 and RAVLT delayed recall for the fully adjusted model.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Participants449
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 48/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 48 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society : JINS) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 3 / 5 | 2023 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 449 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| 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 | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 35968841) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 28 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 48 out of 100. |
| Total | 48 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related studies in Biomarkers
Also tagged “sex-differences”
3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “sex-differences”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.