| Literature DB >> 26333696 |
Jie Li1, Lixin Na1, Hao Ma1, Zhe Zhang1, Tianjiao Li1, Liqun Lin1, Qiang Li2, Changhao Sun1, Ying Li1.
Abstract
The effects of prenatal nutrition on adult cognitive function have been reported for one generation. However, human evidence for multigenerational effects is lacking. We examined whether prenatal exposure to the Chinese famine of 1959-61 affects adult cognitive function in two consecutive generations. In this retrospective family cohort study, we investigated 1062 families consisting of 2124 parents and 1215 offspring. We assessed parental and offspring cognitive performance by means of a comprehensive test battery. Generalized linear regression model analysis in the parental generation showed that prenatal exposure to famine was associated with a 8.1 (95% CI 5.8 to 10.4) second increase in trail making test part A, a 7.0 (1.5 to 12.5) second increase in trail making test part B, and a 5.5 (-7.3 to -3.7) score decrease in the Stroop color-word test in adulthood, after adjustment for potential confounders. In the offspring generation, linear mixed model analysis found no significant association between parental prenatal exposure to famine and offspring cognitive function in adulthood after adjustment for potential confounders. In conclusion, prenatal exposure to severe malnutrition is negatively associated with visual- motor skill, mental flexibility, and selective attention in adulthood. However, these associations are limited to only one generation.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26333696 PMCID: PMC4558714 DOI: 10.1038/srep13792
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Parental and offspring characteristics by famine exposure status.
| Parents | Offspring | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Exposure | Neither | Maternal | Paternal | Bilineal | |
| 1111 | 1013 | 341 | 273 | 258 | 343 | |
| Men | 539 (48.5) | 523 (51.6) | 203 (59.4) | 162 (59.3) | 160 (62.0) | 223 (65.1) |
| Offspring characteristics at birth | ||||||
| Birth weight (kg) | — | — | 3.2 (0.6) | 3.2 (0.6) | 3.2 (0.6) | 3.1 (0.6) |
| Preterm | — | — | 26 (7.5) | 20 (7.5) | 19 (7.4) | 26 (7.5) |
| Smoking mothers | — | — | 30 (8.9) | 22 (8.2) | 22 (8.4) | 29 (8.5) |
| Maternal educational level | ||||||
| < High school | — | — | 196 (57.6) | 156 (57.0) | 150 (58.3) | 199 (58.0) |
| High school | — | — | 141 (41.3) | 113 (41.5) | 103 (40.1) | 142 (41.5) |
| > High school | — | — | 4 (1.1) | 4 (1.5) | 5 (1.6) | 2 (0.5) |
| Parental economic status | ||||||
| Low economic status | — | — | 215 (63.1) | 172 (62.9) | 161 (62.5) | 223 (65.1) |
| High economic status | — | — | 126 (36.9) | 101 (37.1) | 97 (37.5) | 120 (34.9) |
| Characteristics obtained at 2012 | ||||||
| Age in 2012 (range, year) | 49.3 (48–50) | 52.4 (51–53) | 26.6 (12–32) | 27.2 (14–35) | 26.7 (12–32) | 26.8 (14–35) |
| Smoker | 527 (47.4) | 431 (42.5) | 111 (32.5) | 99 (36.2) | 84 (32.6) | 131 (38.1) |
| Drinker | 371 (33.4) | 361 (35.6) | 121 (35.6) | 84 (30.9) | 95 (37.0) | 145 (42.3) |
| Educational level | ||||||
| < High school | 568 (51.1) | 520 (51.3) | 59 (17.3) | 56 (20.5) | 44 (17.0) | 58 (16.9) |
| High school | 528 (47.5) | 476 (47.0) | 241 (70.8) | 194 (70.9) | 192 (74.3) | 257 (75.0) |
| > High school | 15 (1.4) | 17 (1.7) | 41 (11.9) | 23 (8.6) | 22 (8.7) | 28 (8.1) |
| Economic status | ||||||
| Low economic status | 240 (21.6) | 233 (23.0) | 142 (41.5) | 136 (49.8) | 110 (42.5) | 170 (49.6) |
| High economic status | 871 (78.4) | 780 (77.0) | 199 (58.5) | 137 (50.2) | 148 (57.5) | 173 (50.4) |
| Anthropometric measures | ||||||
| Body weight (kg) | 64.3 (10.6) | 64.7 (10.2) | 64.8 (13.5) | 64.1 (12.2) | 64.8 (13.1) | 64.9 (13.1) |
| Height (cm) | 163.0 (8.0) | 161.9 (7.6) | 166.8 (8.6) | 165.7 (8.1) | 166.1 (8.6) | 166.2 (8.2) |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 24.0 (3.5) | 24.6 (3.2) | 23.2 (3.9) | 23.4 (4.0) | 23.3 (3.7) | 23.4 (3.8) |
Data are given as means (SD) for measurement variables and n (%) for enumeration variables.
aStatistically significant different from parents control, P < 0.001.
Parental and offspring cognitive functions in adulthood by famine exposure status.
| Parents | Offspring | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Exposure | Neither | Maternal | Paternal | Bilineal | |
| AH4 Score | 28.3 (9.5) | 27.9 (9.1) | 40.1 (10.8) | 39.8 (10.5) | 40.3 (10.5) | 40.0 (10.5) |
| Auditory verbal learning test | ||||||
| AVLT-I | 25.7 (3.8) | 25.1 (3.7) | 29.7 (3.3) | 29.6 (3.6) | 29.6 (3.7) | 29.6 (3.4) |
| AVLT-II | 6.3 (0.7) | 6.2 (0.8) | 8.2 (0.9) | 8.2 (1.0) | 8.2 (1.0) | 8.2 (0.9) |
| Verbal fluency test | 18.1 (3.9) | 18.0 (4.2) | 20.2 (3.7) | 20.2 (3.4) | 20.1 (3.7) | 20.2 (3.6) |
| Complex figure test | ||||||
| CFT-I | 35.0 (11.5) | 34.9 (11.3) | 32.6 (2.0) | 32.5 (2.4) | 32.7 (2.9) | 32.5 (2.9) |
| CFT-II | 32.9 (10.8) | 32.9 (10.7) | 31.1 (1.9) | 31.1 (2.3) | 31.2 (2.8) | 31.0 (2.7) |
| Trail making test | ||||||
| TMT-A (s) | 47.2 (20.6) | 55.9 (20.1) | 44.6 (12.4) | 43.4 (14.1) | 42.9 (14.9) | 44.4 (12.6) |
| TMT-B (s) | 126.0 (55.5) | 133.7 (54.2) | 88.3 (25.9) | 90.5 (29.4) | 89.3 (31.0) | 92.6 (26.3) |
| Stroop color-word test | ||||||
| Response time (s) | 3.5 (1.1) | 3.5 (1.0) | 3.0 (0.8) | 3.1 (0.8) | 3.0 (0.7) | 3.1 (0.8) |
| Score (%) | 40.2 (17.9) | 34.1 (12.6) | 53.9 (4.0) | 51.5 (4.7) | 50.9 (6.8) | 51.2 (5.8) |
Data are given as means (SD).
aStatistically significantly different from parents control based on generalized linear regression models adjusting for parental potential confounders (sex, age, smoking, drinking, education, and economic status), FDR corrected-P values were 9.8 × 10−11 for TMT-A, 0.023 for TMT-B, and 7.4 × 10−10 for SCWT score.
bThe mixed linear model to assess the associations between parental prenatal exposure to famine and cognitive functioning in adult offspring, with the family number as a random effect and parental famine exposure (neither = 0, maternal = 1, paternal = 2, and bilineal = 3) as the fixed effect. Offspring characteristics in adulthood (sex, age, smoking, drinking, education, and economic status) and at birth (birthweight, preterm, and maternal smoking, drinking, education, and economic status during gestation) were adjusted in the model. The P value of the fixed factor was corrected by FDR. No significant association was found.