| Literature DB >> 26298692 |
Simon R Cox1, Sarah E MacPherson2, Karen J Ferguson3, Natalie A Royle4, Susana Muñoz Maniega4, Maria Del C Valdés Hernández4, Mark E Bastin4, Alasdair M J MacLullich3, Joanna M Wardlaw4, Ian J Deary2.
Abstract
Elevated glucocorticoid (GC) levels putatively damage specific brain regions, which in turn may accelerate cognitive ageing. However, many studies are cross-sectional or have relatively short follow-up periods, making it difficult to relate GCs directly to changes in cognitive ability with increasing age. Moreover, studies combining endocrine, MRI and cognitive variables are scarce, measurement methods vary considerably, and formal tests of the underlying causal hypothesis (cortisol→brain→cognition) are absent. In this study, 90 men, aged 73 years, provided measures of fluid intelligence, processing speed and memory, diurnal and reactive salivary cortisol and two measures of white matter (WM) structure (WM hyperintensity volume from structural MRI and mean diffusivity averaged across 12 major tracts from diffusion tensor MRI), hippocampal volume, and also cognitive ability at age 11. We tested whether negative relationships between cognitive ageing differences (over more than 60 years) and salivary cortisol were significantly mediated by WM and hippocampal volume. Significant associations between reactive cortisol at 73 and cognitive ageing differences between 11 and 73 (r=-.28 to -.36, p<.05) were partially mediated by both WM structural measures, but not hippocampal volume. Cortisol-WM relationships were modest, as was the degree to which WM structure attenuated cortisol-cognition associations (<15%). These data support the hypothesis that GCs contribute to cognitive ageing differences from childhood to the early 70s, partly via brain WM structure.Entities:
Keywords: Ageing; Cognitive change; Cortisol; Hippocampus; White matter
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26298692 PMCID: PMC4642652 DOI: 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2015.08.005
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Psychoneuroendocrinology ISSN: 0306-4530 Impact factor: 4.905
Fig. 1A schematic relationship in which an observed relationship between independent (X) and outcome (Y) variables is hypothesised to be explained by a mediator variable M. The direct effect of X on M is a, the effect of M on Y is b, and c’ denotes the X → Y path coefficient after controlling for M. Therefore the indirect effect of X on Y is the product of the X → M, and M → Y paths, or ab. For the purposes of this study, X = cortisol, M = brain structure, Y = cognition.
Descriptive statistics of study variables.
| Variable | units | Mean | SD | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WAKING | nmol/l | 89 | 24 | 10.59 |
| EVENING | nmol/l | 84 | 3.47 | 2.75 |
| DIURNAL | nmol/l | 84 | −20.77 | 9.72 |
| START | nmol/l | 86 | 16.39 | 7.77 |
| END | nmol/l | 89 | 12.67 | 6.07 |
| REACTIVE | nmol/l | 86 | −3.87 | 7.19 |
| MMSE | /30 | 90 | 28.54 | 1.52 |
| WMH | mm3 | 89 | 12672.63 | 11037.29 |
| HC | mm3 | 89 | 3228.05 | 369.24 |
WAKING: salivary cortisol levels taken at home on waking, EVENING: salivary cortisol levels taken at home at around 10 pm, DIURNAL: the slope (b–a) between WAKING and EVENING, START: salivary cortisol levels taken at the start of a cognitive testing appointment, END: salivary cortisol levels taken at the end of a cognitive testing appointment, REACTIVE: the slope (b–a) between START and END, MMSE: Mini Mental State Examination scores, WMH: white matter hyperintensity volume, HC: hippocampal volume.
Correlations among cortisol, cognitive ageing differences and brain MRI variables.
| Salivary cortisol | Cognition | Brain MRI | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Waking | Evening | Diurnal | Start | End | Reactive | SpeedR | MemoryR | Age 11 IQ | WMH | ||||
| 1 | WAKING | ||||||||||||
| 2 | EVENING | .21 | |||||||||||
| 3 | DIURNAL | −.96 | .04 | ||||||||||
| 4 | START | −.04 | .11 | .05 | |||||||||
| 5 | END | −.01 | −.04 | .09 | .45 | ||||||||
| 6 | REACTIVE | .09 | −.18 | −.00 | −.67 | .30 | |||||||
| 7 | −.04 | .05 | −.02 | -.28 | −.36 | .02 | |||||||
| 8 | SpeedR | −.06 | .06 | .02 | −.36 | −.35 | .08 | .72 | |||||
| 9 | MemoryR | −.00 | −.07 | −.07 | −.35 | −.36 | .09 | .68 | .53 | ||||
| 10 | Age 11 IQ | .22 | −.07 | −.22 | .03 | .08 | −.06 | .00 | .00 | .00 | |||
| 11 | .07 | .23 | −.06 | .25 | −.11 | −.39 | −.25 | −.34 | −.28 | .07 | |||
| 12 | WMH | .04 | .04 | .01 | .24 | .21 | −.11 | −.10 | −.28 | −.25 | .14 | .27 | |
| 13 | HC | .10 | .20 | −.08 | −.10 | .05 | .13 | .35 | .24 | .23 | .19 | .03 | .12 |
Shaded cells illustrate correlations within measurement-type, i.e. cortisol, cognition, and brain imaging; clear cells denote tests driven by experimental hypotheses. WAKING: salivary cortisol levels taken at home on waking, EVENING: salivary cortisol levels taken at home at around 10 pm, DIURNAL: the slope (b–a) between WAKING and EVENING, START: salivary cortisol levels taken at the start of a cognitive testing appointment, END: salivary cortisol levels taken at the end of a cognitive testing appointment, gf: general cognitive ability, Speed: processing speed, Memory: memory ability, R: denotes that the variable was corrected for age 11 cognitive ability, gMD: general factor of tract mean diffusivity, WMH: white matter hyperintensity volume, HC: hippocampal volume. Tract–specific relationships with cortisol are reported in Cox et al., 2015.
Log transformed.
Square root transformed.
Trend (p < .08).
p < .05.
p < .01.
p < .001.
Hierarchical linear regression between cognitive change and reactive cortisol measures.
| df | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| +START | −.28 | 6.47 | 1, 76 | .08 | .013 | |
| +START + END | −.17 | −.26 | 6.37 | 2, 75 | .13 | .005 |
| Speed | ||||||
| +START | −.36 | 11.18 | 1, 76 | .13 | <.001 | |
| +START + END | −.27 | −.21 | 7.42 | 2, 75 | .17 | <.001 |
| Memory | ||||||
| +START | −.35 | 10.48 | 1, 76 | .12 | .002 | |
| +START + END | −.24 | −.26 | 8.03 | 2, 75 | .18 | <.001 |
All predictors were significant (p < .05) apart from.
p = .158.
p = .073.
Mediation Analysis.
| % | Mediation model | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attenuation | Lower CI | Upper CI | ||||||
| START | gMD | −.34 | −.29 | |||||
| START | WMH | −.28 | −.28 | 0.00 | 3.20 (2,74) | −.0748 | .1030 | |
| START | SpeedR | gMD | −.42 | −.36 | ||||
| START | SpeedR | WMH | −.35 | −.32 | ||||
| START | MemoryR | gMD | −.42 | −.36 | ||||
| START | MemoryR | WMH | −.35 | −.31 | ||||
| END | WMH | −.36 | −.35 | 2.78 | 5.60 (2,77) | −.0890 | .0562 | |
| END | Speed | WMH | −.35 | −.31 | ||||
| END | Memory | WMH | −.36 | −.33 | ||||
X: independent variable, Y: outcome variable, M: mediator, c: path from X to Y (listwise, may differ slightly from pairwise associations reported in Table 2), c’: path from X to Y accounting for M. Bold type face indicates significant mediation effect (confidence intervals do not include 0; Preacher and Hayes, 2008). START: cortisol levels at the start of cognitive testing, END: cortisol levels at the end of cognitive testing, gf: general cognitive ability, speed: speed of processing, memory: memory ability, R: variable is a residual, corrected for age 11 cognitive ability. All tests of mediation are one-tailed and bias-corrected.
Log transformed.
Square root transformed.
p < .05.
p < .01.
p < .001.