4.6 Article

Physical activity, APOE genotype, and dementia risk: Findings from the Cardiovascular Health Cognition Study

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 161, 期 7, 页码 639-651

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwi092

关键词

aged; Alzheimer disease; dementia; exercise; motor activity; physical fitness; risk factors

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [N01-HC-85083, N01-HC-85082, N01-HC-85081, N01-HC-85080, N01-HC-85079, N01-HC-35129, N01-HC-15103, N01-HC-85084, N01-HC-85086, N01-HC-85085] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIA NIH HHS [AG15928] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Physical activity may help preserve cognitive function and decrease dementia risk, but epidemiologic findings are inconsistent. The authors conducted a prospective study to determine the association between physical activity and risk of dementia, Alzheimer's disease, and vascular dementia. The US study population comprised 3,375 men and women aged 65 years or older, free of dementia at baseline, who participated in the Cardiovascular Health Cognition Study in 1992-2000. Leisure-time energy expenditure and an activity index reflecting number of different physical activities were calculated. Analyses were based on Cox proportional hazards models. There were 480 incident cases of dementia over an average of 5.4 years of follow-up. After multivariate adjustment, participants in the highest quartile of physical energy expenditure had a relative risk of dementia of 0.85 (95% confidence interval: 0.61, 1.19) compared with those in the lowest quartile, and participants engaging in > 4 activities had a relative risk of dementia of 0.51 (95% confidence interval: 0.33, 0.79) compared with those engaging in 0-1 activity. These associations were more marked in apolipoprotein E genotype (APOE) epsilon 4 allele noncarriers but were absent in carriers. A similar pattern was observed for Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia. Mechanisms to explain the observed relations deserve further study.

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