4.4 Article

Cortical thickness is associated with different apolipoprotein E genotypes in healthy elderly adults

期刊

NEUROSCIENCE LETTERS
卷 479, 期 3, 页码 332-336

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neulet.2010.05.092

关键词

Cortical thickness; Apolipoprotein E; Alzheimer's disease

资金

  1. National Key Basic Research and Development Program (973) [2007CB512305]
  2. National High Technology Program (863) [2009AA02Z302]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30730035, 60903101]
  4. Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) (National Institutes of Health) [U01 AG024904]
  5. National Institute on Aging
  6. National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
  7. NIH [P30 AG010129, K01 AG030514]
  8. Dana Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Previous studies have consistently suggested that the epsilon 4 allele of apolipoprotein E (APOE) gene is a major risk factor for Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, whether the epsilon 2 allele, a possible protective factor for AD, will express its protective effect in terms of cortical thickness in healthy elderly carriers is unclear. The goal of this study is to clarify the effects of APOE genotypes on cortical thickness in nondemented elderly subjects. We used 164 healthy, cognitively normal, elderly subjects, who were grouped into epsilon 2 carriers, epsilon 3 homozygotes, and epsilon 4 carriers respectively. The APOE epsilon 2 carriers had a significant thicker (corrected p < 0.05)cortical thickness in the superior temporal cortex compared with the epsilon 3 homozygotes. In addition to this area, the APOE epsilon 2 carriers had a significantly thicker region in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (corrected p < 0.05) than did the epsilon 4 carriers. These findings suggest that the different alleles of the APOE gene have distinct neuroanatomic effects in elderly healthy subjects and may play specific roles in the development of AD. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据