OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the modifying influence of a delta-aminolevulinic acid dehydratase (ALAD) polymorphism on the relation between lead burden and cognition among older men. METHODS: Information on ALAD genotype, lead measurements, potential confounders, and cognitive testing was collected from 982 participants. For each cognitive test and lead biomarker, we fit separate multiple linear regression models, which included an interaction term for ALAD genotype and the lead biomarker and adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS: With higher levels of tibia lead, ALAD 1-2/2-2 carriers exhibited worse performance on a spatial copying test in comparison with ALAD 1-1 carriers (P interaction = 0.03). However, there was no consistent pattern of an ALAD genotype-lead interaction for the other tests. CONCLUSIONS: The results provide some evidence that ALAD genotype may modify the relation between lead and cognition among older men with low lead burden. However, future work in this area is needed to confirm these suggestive findings.
OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the modifying influence of a delta-aminolevulinic acid dehydratase (ALAD) polymorphism on the relation between lead burden and cognition among older men. METHODS: Information on ALAD genotype, lead measurements, potential confounders, and cognitive testing was collected from 982 participants. For each cognitive test and lead biomarker, we fit separate multiple linear regression models, which included an interaction term for ALAD genotype and the lead biomarker and adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS: With higher levels of tibia lead, ALAD 1-2/2-2 carriers exhibited worse performance on a spatial copying test in comparison with ALAD 1-1 carriers (P interaction = 0.03). However, there was no consistent pattern of an ALAD genotype-lead interaction for the other tests. CONCLUSIONS: The results provide some evidence that ALAD genotype may modify the relation between lead and cognition among older men with low lead burden. However, future work in this area is needed to confirm these suggestive findings.
Authors: Alfred Barth; Andreas W Schaffer; Wolf Osterode; Robert Winker; Christophoros Konnaris; Eva Valic; Christian Wolf; Hugo W Rüdiger Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2002-04-25 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: H Hänninen; A Aitio; T Kovala; R Luukkonen; E Matikainen; T Mannelin; J Erkkilä; V Riihimäki Journal: Occup Environ Med Date: 1998-03 Impact factor: 4.402
Authors: E K Jaffe; M Volin; C R Bronson-Mullins; R L Dunbrack; J Kervinen; J Martins; J F Quinlan; M H Sazinsky; E M Steinhouse; A T Yeung Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2000-01-28 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: J C Morris; A Heyman; R C Mohs; J P Hughes; G van Belle; G Fillenbaum; E D Mellits; C Clark Journal: Neurology Date: 1989-09 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Ming-Tsang Wu; Karl Kelsey; Joel Schwartz; David Sparrow; Scott Weiss; Howard Hu Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Ki-Do Eum; Florence T Wang; Joel Schwartz; Craig P Hersh; Karl Kelsey; Robert O Wright; Avron Spiro; David Sparrow; Howard Hu; Marc G Weisskopf Journal: Neurotoxicology Date: 2013-08-16 Impact factor: 4.294
Authors: John S Ji; Melinda C Power; David Sparrow; Avron Spiro; Howard Hu; Elan D Louis; Marc G Weisskopf Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2015-01-23 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Marília Baierle; Mariele F Charão; Gabriela Göethel; Anelise Barth; Rafael Fracasso; Guilherme Bubols; Elisa Sauer; Sarah C Campanharo; Rafael C C Rocha; Tatiana D Saint'Pierre; Suelen Bordignon; Murilo Zibetti; Clarissa M Trentini; Daiana S Avila; Adriana Gioda; Solange C Garcia Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2014-10-17 Impact factor: 3.390