4.6 Article

Body mass index and two-year change of in vivo Alzheimer's disease pathologies in cognitively normal older adults

期刊

ALZHEIMERS RESEARCH & THERAPY
卷 15, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s13195-023-01259-w

关键词

Body mass index; Alzheimer disease; Beta-amyloid; Tau; Longitudinal changes

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Low BMI in late-life may predict or contribute to the progression of tau pathology over the subsequent years in cognitively unimpaired older adults.
BackgroundLow body mass index (BMI) or underweight status in late life is associated with an increased risk of dementia or Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, the relationship between late-life BMI and prospective longitudinal changes of in-vivo AD pathology has not been investigated.MethodsThis prospective longitudinal study was conducted as part of the Korean Brain Aging Study for Early Diagnosis and Prediction of Alzheimer's Disease (KBASE). A total of 194 cognitive normal older adults were included in the analysis. BMI at baseline was measured, and two-year changes in brain A beta and tau deposition on PET imaging were used as the main outcomes. Linear mixed-effects (LME) models were used to examine the relationships between late-life BMI and longitudinal change in AD neuropathological biomarkers.ResultsA lower BMI at baseline was significantly associated with a greater increase in tau deposition in AD-signature region over 2 years (beta, -0.018; 95% CI, -0.028 to -0.004; p = .008), In contrast, BMI was not related to two-year changes in global A beta deposition (beta, 0.0002; 95% CI, -0.003 to 0.002, p = .671). An additional exploratory analysis for each sex showed lower baseline BMI was associated with greater increases in tau deposition in males (beta, -0.027; 95% CI, -0.046 to -0.009; p = 0.007), but not in females.DiscussionThe findings suggest that lower BMI in late-life may predict or contribute to the progression of tau pathology over the subsequent years in cognitively unimpaired older adults.

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

4.6
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