OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the influences of a family history of Alzheimer dementia (FHxAD) and the apolipoprotein E epsilon4 genotype (APOE epsilon4) on cognitive decline. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Residents of Cache County, Utah, aged 65 years or older, were invited to participate. At baseline, 2957 participants provided DNA for genotyping of APOE and a detailed FHxAD. They also completed the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination. Cognitive status was reexamined after 3 and 7 years. We used mixed-effects models to examine the association among FHxAD, APOE epsilon4, and cognitive trajectories. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Modified Mini-Mental State Examination score trajectories over time. RESULTS: Compared with participants who did not have APOE epsilon4 or an FHxAD, those with APOE epsilon4 scored lower on the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination at baseline (-0.70 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.15 to -0.24). Participants with an FHxAD and APOE epsilon4 differed less, if at all, in baseline score (-0.46 points; 95% CI, -1.09 to 0.16) but declined faster during the 7-year study (-9.75 points [95% CI, -10.82 to -8.67] vs -2.91 points [95% CI, -3.37 to -2.44]). After exclusion of participants who developed prodromal AD or incident dementia, the group with an FHxAD and APOE epsilon4 declined much less during the 7-year study (-1.54; 95% CI, -2.59 to -0.50). CONCLUSIONS: Much of the association among FHxAD, APOE epsilon4, and cognitive decline may be attributed to undetected incipient (latent) disease. In the absence of latent disease, the 2 factors do not appear individually to be associated with cognitive decline, although they may be additive.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the influences of a family history of Alzheimer dementia (FHxAD) and the apolipoprotein E epsilon4 genotype (APOE epsilon4) on cognitive decline. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Residents of Cache County, Utah, aged 65 years or older, were invited to participate. At baseline, 2957 participants provided DNA for genotyping of APOE and a detailed FHxAD. They also completed the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination. Cognitive status was reexamined after 3 and 7 years. We used mixed-effects models to examine the association among FHxAD, APOE epsilon4, and cognitive trajectories. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Modified Mini-Mental State Examination score trajectories over time. RESULTS: Compared with participants who did not have APOE epsilon4 or an FHxAD, those with APOE epsilon4 scored lower on the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination at baseline (-0.70 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.15 to -0.24). Participants with an FHxAD and APOE epsilon4 differed less, if at all, in baseline score (-0.46 points; 95% CI, -1.09 to 0.16) but declined faster during the 7-year study (-9.75 points [95% CI, -10.82 to -8.67] vs -2.91 points [95% CI, -3.37 to -2.44]). After exclusion of participants who developed prodromal AD or incident dementia, the group with an FHxAD and APOE epsilon4 declined much less during the 7-year study (-1.54; 95% CI, -2.59 to -0.50). CONCLUSIONS: Much of the association among FHxAD, APOE epsilon4, and cognitive decline may be attributed to undetected incipient (latent) disease. In the absence of latent disease, the 2 factors do not appear individually to be associated with cognitive decline, although they may be additive.
Authors: M Winnock; L Letenneur; H Jacqmin-Gadda; J Dallongeville; P Amouyel; J F Dartigues Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: JoAnn T Tschanz; Kathleen A Welsh-Bohmer; Brenda L Plassman; Maria C Norton; Bonita W Wyse; John C S Breitner Journal: Neuropsychiatry Neuropsychol Behav Neurol Date: 2002-03
Authors: Katheen A Welsh-Bohmer; Truls Ostbye; Linda Sanders; Carl F Pieper; Kathleen M Hayden; JoAnn T Tschanz; Maria C Norton Journal: Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2008-06-10 Impact factor: 3.535
Authors: Scott M Hofer; Helen Christensen; Andrew J Mackinnon; Ailsa E Korten; Anthony F Jorm; Alexander S Henderson; Simon Easteal Journal: Psychol Aging Date: 2002-06
Authors: David J Moore; Miguel Arce; Suzanne Moseley; J Allen McCutchan; Jennifer Marquie-Beck; Donald R Franklin; Florin Vaida; Cristian L Achim; Justin McArthur; Susan Morgello; David M Simpson; Benjamin B Gelman; Ann C Collier; Christina M Marra; David B Clifford; Robert K Heaton; Igor Grant Journal: J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci Date: 2011 Impact factor: 2.198
Authors: Chengjie Xiong; Catherine M Roe; Virginia Buckles; Anne Fagan; David Holtzman; David Balota; Janet Duchek; Martha Storandt; Mark Mintun; Elizabeth Grant; Abraham Z Snyder; Denise Head; Tammie L S Benzinger; Joseph Mettenburg; John Csernansky; John C Morris Journal: Arch Neurol Date: 2011-10
Authors: Jennifer L Etnier; William B Karper; Jeffrey D Labban; Aaron T Piepmeier; Chia-Hao Shih; William N Dudley; Vincent C Henrich; Laurie Wideman Journal: Ann Behav Med Date: 2018-02-05
Authors: Markus Donix; Linda M Ercoli; Prabha Siddarth; Jesse A Brown; Laurel Martin-Harris; Alison C Burggren; Karen J Miller; Gary W Small; Susan Y Bookheimer Journal: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 4.105
Authors: Christine Fennema-Notestine; Matthew S Panizzon; Wesley R Thompson; Chi-Hua Chen; Lisa T Eyler; Bruce Fischl; Carol E Franz; Michael D Grant; Amy J Jak; Terry L Jernigan; Michael J Lyons; Michael C Neale; Larry J Seidman; Ming T Tsuang; Hong Xian; Anders M Dale; William S Kremen Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2011 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: C J Brainerd; V F Reyna; R C Petersen; G E Smith; A E Kenney; C J Gross; E S Taub; B L Plassman; G G Fisher Journal: Neuropsychology Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Chelsea C Hays; Zvinka Z Zlatar; M J Meloy; Mark W Bondi; Paul E Gilbert; Thomas T Liu; Jonathan L Helm; Christina E Wierenga Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2019-09-04 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Chelsea C Hays; Zvinka Z Zlatar; M J Meloy; Mark W Bondi; Paul E Gilbert; Thomas Liu; Jonathan L Helm; Christina E Wierenga Journal: Brain Imaging Behav Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 3.978