4.2 Review

Aβ1-40 and Aβ1-42 Plasmatic Levels In Stroke: Influence of Pre-Existing Cognitive Status and Stroke Characteristics

期刊

CURRENT ALZHEIMER RESEARCH
卷 14, 期 6, 页码 686-694

出版社

BENTHAM SCIENCE PUBL LTD
DOI: 10.2174/1567205012666151027141730

关键词

Stroke; cerebral ischemia; cerebral infarction; cerebral hemorrhage; dementia; cognitive decline; plasma amyloid beta peptides; cohort studies

资金

  1. Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique (Biostroke) [DGS 2006/0153]
  2. research group on Alzheimer's disease and vascular disorders from the French ministry of research [EA 1046]
  3. ADRINORD

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Many stroke patients have pre-existing cognitive impairment. Plasma amyloid beta peptides (A beta)-possible biomarkers of Alzheimer's pathology-induce vascular dysfunction. Our objective was to evaluate factors influencing plasma A beta 1-40 and A beta 1-42 peptides in a cohort of stroke patients. In the Biostroke study (ClinicalTrials. gov Identifier: NCT00763217), we collected vascular risk factors, neuro-imaging features and biological tests including A beta 1-40 and A beta 1-42. We used the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) to systematically assess the pre-existing cognitive status. Of 403 patients (371 ischemia), 25 met criteria for pre-existing dementia, 142 for pre-existing cognitive decline-no-dementia, and 236 had no PCoI. A beta 1-42 was independently associated with PCoI (odds ratio 0.973; 95% confidence interval: 0.950-0.996; p=0.024). Factors associated with plasma A beta 140 were age, smoking and diabetes mellitus. After exclusion of hemorrhagic strokes, the results remained unchanged, but blood samples taken less than 12 hours after onset were associated with lower plasma A beta 1-40. Our results support a dissociated response of the 2 plasma A beta peptides in stroke patients, plasma A beta 1-40 being involved in vascular aspects whereas A beta 1-42 might be involved in neurodegenerative processes.

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

4.2
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