BACKGROUND: Although the concept of healthy ageing has stimulated considerable interest, no generally accepted definition has been developed nor has its biological basis been determined. OBJECTIVE: To develop a definition of healthy ageing and investigate its association with longevity and neuropathology. METHODS: Analyses were based on cognitive, physical, and post-mortem assessments from 1991 to 1998 in the Nun Study, a longitudinal study of ageing in participants 75+ years at baseline. We defined three mutually exclusive levels of healthy ageing (excellent, very good, and good) based on measures of global cognitive function, short-term memory, basic and instrumental activities of daily living, and self-rated function. Mortality analyses were based on 636 participants; neuropathologic analyses were restricted to 221 who had died and were autopsied. RESULTS: Only 11% of those meeting criteria for the excellent level of healthy ageing at baseline subsequently died, compared with 24% for the very good, 39% for the good, and 60% for the remaining participants. Survival curves showed significantly greater longevity with higher levels of healthy ageing. The risk of not attaining healthy ageing, adjusted for age, increased two-fold in participants with brain infarcts alone, six-fold in those with Alzheimer neuropathology alone, and more than thirteen-fold in those with both brain infarcts and Alzheimer neuropathology. CONCLUSIONS: The biological validity of our definition of healthy ageing is supported by its strong association with mortality and longevity. Avoiding Alzheimer and stroke neuropathology is critical to the maintenance of healthy ageing, and the presence of both pathologies dramatically decreases the likelihood of healthy ageing.
BACKGROUND: Although the concept of healthy ageing has stimulated considerable interest, no generally accepted definition has been developed nor has its biological basis been determined. OBJECTIVE: To develop a definition of healthy ageing and investigate its association with longevity and neuropathology. METHODS: Analyses were based on cognitive, physical, and post-mortem assessments from 1991 to 1998 in the Nun Study, a longitudinal study of ageing in participants 75+ years at baseline. We defined three mutually exclusive levels of healthy ageing (excellent, very good, and good) based on measures of global cognitive function, short-term memory, basic and instrumental activities of daily living, and self-rated function. Mortality analyses were based on 636 participants; neuropathologic analyses were restricted to 221 who had died and were autopsied. RESULTS: Only 11% of those meeting criteria for the excellent level of healthy ageing at baseline subsequently died, compared with 24% for the very good, 39% for the good, and 60% for the remaining participants. Survival curves showed significantly greater longevity with higher levels of healthy ageing. The risk of not attaining healthy ageing, adjusted for age, increased two-fold in participants with brain infarcts alone, six-fold in those with Alzheimer neuropathology alone, and more than thirteen-fold in those with both brain infarcts and Alzheimer neuropathology. CONCLUSIONS: The biological validity of our definition of healthy ageing is supported by its strong association with mortality and longevity. Avoiding Alzheimer and stroke neuropathology is critical to the maintenance of healthy ageing, and the presence of both pathologies dramatically decreases the likelihood of healthy ageing.
Authors: A R Potvin; W W Tourtellotte; J S Dailey; J W Alberts; J E Walker; R W Pew; W G Henderson; D N Snyder Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 1972-10 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: C Dufouil; D Clayton; C Brayne; L Y Chi; T R Dening; E S Paykel; D W O'Connor; A Ahmed; M A McGee; F A Huppert Journal: Neurology Date: 2000-12-12 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Karen S SantaCruz; Joshua A Sonnen; Maryam Kherad Pezhouh; Mark F Desrosiers; Peter T Nelson; Suzanne L Tyas Journal: J Neuropathol Exp Neurol Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 3.685
Authors: Joshua A Sonnen; Karen Santa Cruz; Laura S Hemmy; Randall Woltjer; James B Leverenz; Kathleen S Montine; Clifford R Jack; Jeffrey Kaye; Kelvin Lim; Eric B Larson; Lon White; Thomas J Montine Journal: Arch Neurol Date: 2011-08
Authors: Jirayu Tanprasertsuk; Elizabeth J Johnson; Mary Ann Johnson; Leonard W Poon; Peter T Nelson; Adam Davey; Peter Martin; Aron K Barbey; Kathryn Barger; Xiang-Dong Wang; Tammy M Scott Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2019 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Jun Hua; SeungWook Lee; Nicholas I S Blair; Michael Wyss; Jiri M G van Bergen; Simon J Schreiner; Sonja M Kagerer; Sandra E Leh; Anton F Gietl; Valerie Treyer; Alfred Buck; Roger M Nitsch; Klaas P Pruessmann; Hanzhang Lu; Peter C M Van Zijl; Marilyn Albert; Christoph Hock; Paul G Unschuld Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2019-01-10 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Hugo Botha; William G Mantyh; Melissa E Murray; David S Knopman; Scott A Przybelski; Heather J Wiste; Jonathan Graff-Radford; Keith A Josephs; Christopher G Schwarz; Walter K Kremers; Bradley F Boeve; Ronald C Petersen; Mary M Machulda; Joseph E Parisi; Dennis W Dickson; Val Lowe; Clifford R Jack; David T Jones Journal: Brain Date: 2018-04-01 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Janna H Neltner; Erin L Abner; Gregory A Jicha; Frederick A Schmitt; Ela Patel; Leonard W Poon; Gearing Marla; Robert C Green; Adam Davey; Mary Ann Johnson; S Michal Jazwinski; Sangkyu Kim; Daron Davis; John L Woodard; Richard J Kryscio; Linda J Van Eldik; Peter T Nelson Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2015-10-19 Impact factor: 4.673