4.7 Article

Association between alcohol consumption and Alzheimer's disease: A Mendelian randomization study

期刊

ALZHEIMERS & DEMENTIA
卷 16, 期 2, 页码 345-353

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1016/j.jalz.2019.09.086

关键词

Alcohol consumption; Alcohol dependence; Alzheimer's disease; Mendelian randomization

资金

  1. NHMRC [1002560]
  2. JPB Foundation
  3. National Institute onAlcohol Abuse and Alcoholism [U10AA08401]
  4. Inserm
  5. Medical Research Council [503480]
  6. Alzheimer's Research UK [503176]
  7. Wellcome Trust [082604/2/07/Z]
  8. Federal Ministry of Education and Research
  9. NIH
  10. NIA [R01AG033193, AG081220, U01 AG032984, U24AG021886, U01AG016976]
  11. NHLBI [R01HL105756]
  12. Icelandic Heart Association
  13. Erasmus Medical Center
  14. Erasmus University Rotterdam
  15. Alzheimer's Association [ADGC-10-196728]
  16. InstitutPasteur

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: Observational studies have suggested that light-to-moderate alcohol consumption decreases the risk of Alzheimer's disease, but it is unclear if this association is causal. Methods: Two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis was used to examine whether alcohol consumption, alcohol dependence, or Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT) scores were causally associated with the risk of Late-Onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD) or Alzheimer's disease age of onset survival (AAOS). Additionally, gamma-glutamyltransferase levels were included as a positive control. Results: There was no evidence of a causal association between alcohol consumption, alcohol dependence, or AUDIT, and LOAD. Alcohol consumption was associated with an earlier AAOS and increased gamma-glutamyltransferase blood concentrations. Alcohol dependence was associated with a delayed AAOS. Discussion: MR found robust evidence of a causal association between alcohol consumption and an earlier AAOS, but not alcohol intake and LOAD risk. The protective effect of alcohol dependence is potentially due to survivor bias.

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

4.7
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