OBJECTIVE: The APOE4 allele is the strongest genetic risk factor for sporadic Alzheimer disease (AD). Case-control studies suggest the APOE4 link to AD is stronger in women. We examined the APOE4-by-sex interaction in conversion risk (from healthy aging to mild cognitive impairment (MCI)/AD or from MCI to AD) and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarker levels. METHODS: Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to compute hazard ratios (HRs) for an APOE-by-sex interaction on conversion in controls (n = 5,496) and MCI patients (n = 2,588). The interaction was also tested in CSF biomarker levels of 980 subjects from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. RESULTS: Among controls, male and female carriers were more likely to convert to MCI/AD, but the effect was stronger in women (HR = 1.81 for women; HR = 1.27 for men; interaction: p = 0.011). The interaction remained significant in a predefined subanalysis restricted to APOE3/3 and APOE3/4 genotypes. Among MCI patients, both male and female APOE4 carriers were more likely to convert to AD (HR = 2.16 for women; HR = 1.64 for men); the interaction was not significant (p = 0.14). In the subanalysis restricted to APOE3/3 and APOE3/4 genotypes, the interaction was significant (p = 0.02; HR = 2.17 for women; HR = 1.51 for men). The APOE4-by-sex interaction on biomarker levels was significant for MCI patients for total tau and the tau-to-Aβ ratio (p = 0.009 and p = 0.02, respectively; more AD-like in women). INTERPRETATION: APOE4 confers greater AD risk in women. Biomarker results suggest that increased APOE-related risk in women may be associated with tau pathology. These findings have important clinical implications and suggest novel research approaches into AD pathogenesis.
OBJECTIVE: The APOE4 allele is the strongest genetic risk factor for sporadic Alzheimer disease (AD). Case-control studies suggest the APOE4 link to AD is stronger in women. We examined the APOE4-by-sex interaction in conversion risk (from healthy aging to mild cognitive impairment (MCI)/AD or from MCI to AD) and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarker levels. METHODS:Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to compute hazard ratios (HRs) for an APOE-by-sex interaction on conversion in controls (n = 5,496) and MCI patients (n = 2,588). The interaction was also tested in CSF biomarker levels of 980 subjects from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. RESULTS: Among controls, male and female carriers were more likely to convert to MCI/AD, but the effect was stronger in women (HR = 1.81 for women; HR = 1.27 for men; interaction: p = 0.011). The interaction remained significant in a predefined subanalysis restricted to APOE3/3 and APOE3/4 genotypes. Among MCI patients, both male and female APOE4 carriers were more likely to convert to AD (HR = 2.16 for women; HR = 1.64 for men); the interaction was not significant (p = 0.14). In the subanalysis restricted to APOE3/3 and APOE3/4 genotypes, the interaction was significant (p = 0.02; HR = 2.17 for women; HR = 1.51 for men). The APOE4-by-sex interaction on biomarker levels was significant for MCI patients for total tau and the tau-to-Aβ ratio (p = 0.009 and p = 0.02, respectively; more AD-like in women). INTERPRETATION:APOE4 confers greater AD risk in women. Biomarker results suggest that increased APOE-related risk in women may be associated with tau pathology. These findings have important clinical implications and suggest novel research approaches into AD pathogenesis.
Authors: May A Beydoun; Adel Boueiz; Marwan S Abougergi; Melissa H Kitner-Triolo; Hind A Beydoun; Susan M Resnick; Richard O'Brien; Alan B Zonderman Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2010-07-08 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Scott Marquis; M Milar Moore; Diane B Howieson; Gary Sexton; Haydeh Payami; Jeffrey A Kaye; Richard Camicioli Journal: Arch Neurol Date: 2002-04
Authors: Alex Ward; Sheila Crean; Catherine J Mercaldi; Jenna M Collins; Dylan Boyd; Michael N Cook; H Michael Arrighi Journal: Neuroepidemiology Date: 2011-12-17 Impact factor: 3.282
Authors: Leslie M Shaw; Hugo Vanderstichele; Malgorzata Knapik-Czajka; Christopher M Clark; Paul S Aisen; Ronald C Petersen; Kaj Blennow; Holly Soares; Adam Simon; Piotr Lewczuk; Robert Dean; Eric Siemers; William Potter; Virginia M-Y Lee; John Q Trojanowski Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Elizabeth H Corder; Estifanos Ghebremedhin; Miles G Taylor; Dietmar R Thal; Thomas G Ohm; Heiko Braak Journal: Ann N Y Acad Sci Date: 2004-06 Impact factor: 5.691
Authors: Yonas E Geda; David S Knopman; David A Mrazek; Gregory A Jicha; Glenn E Smith; Selamawit Negash; Bradley F Boeve; Robert J Ivnik; Ronald C Petersen; V Shane Pankratz; Walter A Rocca Journal: Arch Neurol Date: 2006-03
Authors: Sandra Weintraub; David Salmon; Nathaniel Mercaldo; Steven Ferris; Neill R Graff-Radford; Helena Chui; Jeffrey Cummings; Charles DeCarli; Norman L Foster; Douglas Galasko; Elaine Peskind; Woodrow Dietrich; Duane L Beekly; Walter A Kukull; John C Morris Journal: Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord Date: 2009 Apr-Jun Impact factor: 2.703
Authors: Robert S Wilson; Julie A Schneider; Lisa L Barnes; Laurel A Beckett; Neelum T Aggarwal; Elizabeth J Cochran; Elizabeth Berry-Kravis; Julie Bach; Jacob H Fox; Denis A Evans; David A Bennett Journal: Arch Neurol Date: 2002-07
Authors: L A Farrer; L A Cupples; J L Haines; B Hyman; W A Kukull; R Mayeux; R H Myers; M A Pericak-Vance; N Risch; C M van Duijn Journal: JAMA Date: 1997 Oct 22-29 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Richard J Caselli; Amylou C Dueck; Dona E C Locke; Leslie C Baxter; Bryan K Woodruff; Yonas E Geda Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2015-02-09 Impact factor: 2.892
Authors: Aaron J Carman; Rennie Ferguson; Robert Cantu; R Dawn Comstock; Penny A Dacks; Steven T DeKosky; Sam Gandy; James Gilbert; Chad Gilliland; Gerard Gioia; Christopher Giza; Michael Greicius; Brian Hainline; Ronald L Hayes; James Hendrix; Barry Jordan; James Kovach; Rachel F Lane; Rebekah Mannix; Thomas Murray; Tad Seifert; Diana W Shineman; Eric Warren; Elisabeth Wilde; Huntington Willard; Howard M Fillit Journal: Nat Rev Neurol Date: 2015-03-17 Impact factor: 42.937
Authors: Neha Sinha; Chelsie N Berg; Nicholas J Tustison; Ashlee Shaw; Diane Hill; Michael A Yassa; Mark A Gluck Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2018-05-26 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Rebecca A Nebel; Neelum T Aggarwal; Lisa L Barnes; Aimee Gallagher; Jill M Goldstein; Kejal Kantarci; Monica P Mallampalli; Elizabeth C Mormino; Laura Scott; Wai Haung Yu; Pauline M Maki; Michelle M Mielke Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2018-06-12 Impact factor: 21.566