4.1 Article

Longitudinal change in working memory as a function of APOE genotype in midlife and old age

Journal

SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY
Volume 55, Issue 3, Pages 268-277

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/sjop.12123

Keywords

APOE; longitudinal; cross-sectional; working memory; middle-age; old-age; cognitive phenotype

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Previous investigations into whether the APOE-epsilon 4 allele exerts cognitive effects at midlife have been inconclusive. We have advanced a cognitive phenotype hypothesis arguing that the epsilon 4 allele of the apolipoprotein E gene (APOE) is associated with lower efficiency of neuronal plasticity thereby resulting in poorer cognitive performance independently of the pathology of Alzheimer's disease (Greenwood etal., ). This hypothesis is best tested at midlife, prior to the neuron loss associated with AD diagnosis. This hypothesis predicts that the epsilon 4 allele would alter cognition regardless of age through plasticity mechanisms, but would not induce longitudinal decline in midlife. The alternative prodrome hypothesis predicts that the APOE-epsilon 4 allele would be associated with longitudinal cognitive decline as early as midlife due to prodromal effects of AD. We tested these hypotheses with a working memory task in a large cross-sectional sample of cognitively screened APOE-epsilon 4 carriers and non-carriers and also in a small longitudinal sample over 3years. The sample was divided into middle-aged (mean age 50, range 40-59) and older (mean age 69, range 60-84) individuals. Cross-sectionally, we observed that older, but not middle-aged, APOE-epsilon 4 carriers had lower accuracy than epsilon 4 non-carriers, mainly under the hardest discrimination condition. Longitudinally, we observed increases in accuracy in middle-aged APOE-epsilon 4 carriers, suggesting a cognitive phenotype that includes ability to benefit from experience. We observed a longitudinal decrease in older APOE-epsilon 4 carriers, suggesting an AD prodrome.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available