4.7 Article

Sugary beverage intake and preclinical Alzheimer's disease in the community

期刊

ALZHEIMERS & DEMENTIA
卷 13, 期 9, 页码 955-964

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1016/j.jalz.2017.01.024

关键词

Sugar; Diet; Dementia; Alzheimer's disease; Framingham Heart Study

资金

  1. Australian National Health and Medical Research Council Early Career Fellowship [APP1089698]
  2. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [N01-HC-25195, HHSN268201500001I]
  3. National Institute on Aging [R01 AG054076, R01 AG049607, R01 AG033193, U01 AG049505, U01 AG052409, T32-AG036697]
  4. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke [NS017950, UH2 NS100605]
  5. USDA Agricultural Research Service Agreement [58-1950-4-003]
  6. American Heart Association [15GPSPG23770000]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: Excess sugar consumption has been linked with Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology in animal models. Methods: We examined the cross-sectional association of sugary beverage consumption with neuropsychological (N = 4276) and magnetic resonance imaging (N = 3846) markers of preclinical Alzheimer's disease and vascular brain injury (VBI) in the community-based Framingham Heart Study. Intake of sugary beverages was estimated using a food frequency questionnaire. Results: Relative to consuming less than one sugary beverage per day, higher intake of sugary beverages was associated with lower total brain volume (1-2/day, beta +/- standard error [SE] = -0.55 +/- 0.14 mean percent difference, P = .0002; >2/day, beta +/- SE = -0.68 +/- 0.18, P<. 0001), and poorer performance on tests of episodic memory (all P<. 01). Daily fruit juice intake was associated with lower total brain volume, hippocampal volume, and poorer episodic memory (all P<. 05). Sugary beverage intake was not associated with VBI in a consistent manner across outcomes. Discussion: Higher intake of sugary beverages was associated cross-sectionally with markers of preclinical AD. (C) 2017 the Alzheimer's Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. 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

4.7
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