| Literature DB >> 26343713 |
Guoping Zhou1, Xiaopeng Ji2, Naixue Cui3, Siyuan Cao4, Chang Liu5, Jianghong Liu6.
Abstract
Trace elements such as copper are essential micronutrients. Traditionally, copper has been studied in the context of micronutrient deficiencies. Recent studies in both animals and humans, however, have revealed that elevated blood copper can also have adverse effects on cognitive function since free copper can cross the blood-brain barrier and subsequently impose oxidative stress to neuronal cells. However, most of these human studies were conducted in adult populations with and without cognitive decline, and there are few studies on the effect of excess copper on cognitive function in children. This project seeks to look at the effects of elevated copper levels on cognitive development in a population of school age children (ages 10-14 years with mean age of 12.03 years and standard deviation (SD) of 0.44) from Jintan, China. Briefly, serum copper levels and working memory test scores were collected from a sample of 826 children with a mean serum copper level of 98.10 (SD 0.75). Copper level was considered as a categorical variable (taking the first group as those with as ≤84.3 μg/dL, the second group as >84.3 and ≤110.4 μg/dL, and the third group as >110.4 μg/dL with the cut-off values defined by the first and third quartiles of the sample). Results showed a significant association between high copper levels (>110.4 μg/dL) and poorer working memory in boys but this association was not seen in lower copper levels in either sex. These results suggests that in school age children, like in adults, elevated copper levels have the potential to adversely affect cognition.Entities:
Keywords: cognition; micronutrient; serum copper; working memory
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26343713 PMCID: PMC4586526 DOI: 10.3390/nu7095331
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Sociodemographic characteristics and descriptive statistics of single working memory test score.
| Sex | |
| Girls | 387 (46.8) |
| Boys | 439 (53.2) |
| Age | |
| 10–11 years | 437 (52.9) |
| 12–14 years | 389 (47.1) |
| Mother’s education # | |
| 1 Middle school or less | 345 (42.2) |
| 2 High school | 190 (23.2) |
| 3 College or higher | 283 (34.6) |
| Father’s education # | |
| 1 Middle school or less | 247 (3.2) |
| 2 High school | 238 (29.1) |
| 3 College or higher | 334 (40.8) |
| Categorical serum copper | |
| 1 Q1: ≤84.3 μg/dL | 208 (25.6) |
| 2 Q1–Q3: >84.3, ≤110.4 μg/dL | 413 (5.8) |
| 3 Q3: >110.4 μg/dL | 191 (23.5) |
| Serum Iron | 116.90 ± 50.04 |
| Serum Zinc | 88.87 ± 16.01 |
| Working memory test score | |
| Dot trajectory | 8.29 ± 2.12 |
| Digit span | 6.25 ± 1.5 |
| Dot memory | 5.93 ± 1.90 |
| Box transform memory | 4.77 ± 1.18 |
# variables have system missing data.
Figure 1The confirmatory factor analysis of working memory using structural equation modeling. Numbers on each path from latent variable (Working Memory) to the observed variables represent standardized factor loading (standard error). Numbers on the arrows from the error terms (e) to the observed variables represent covariance of error terms. Numbers on the bottom represent the correlation between the two error terms. *** p < 0.001.
The relationship between sociodemographic characteristics and latent working memory.
| Latent Working Memory | t/F | Kendall’s Correlation | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | 0.2751 | ||
| Girls | 0.01 ± 0.67 | ||
| Boys | 0.001 ± 0.69 | ||
| Age | 0.84 | ||
| 10–11 years | −0.01 ± 0.69 | ||
| 12–14 years | 0.03 ± 0.67 | ||
| Mother’s education # | 2.64 *** (Post hoc Sheffe test: 3 > 1 ***, 3 > 2 **) | ||
| 1 Middle school or less | −0.13 ± 0.63 | ||
| 2 High school | −0.03 ± 0.59 | ||
| 3 College or higher | 0.21 ± 0.75 | ||
| Father’s education # | 1.64 *** (Post hoc Sheffe test 3 > 1 ***, 3 > 2 *) | ||
| 1 Middle school or less | −0.11 ± 0.61 | ||
| 2 High school | −0.03 ± 0.63 | ||
| 3 College or higher | 0.13 ± 0.75 | ||
| Categorical serum copper | 1.74 | ||
| 1 Q1: ≤84.3 μg/dL | 0.01 ± 0.69 | ||
| 2 Q1–Q3: 84.3, 110.4 μg/dL | 0.05 ± 0.71 | ||
| 3 Q3: >110.4 μg/dL | −0.06 ± 0.62 | ||
| Serum Iron | 0.011 | ||
| Serum Zinc | −0.003 |
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. # variables have system missing data.
The regression models of association of working memory with copper.
| Latent Working Memory | 95% CI | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Categorical serum copper | |||
| Q1: ≤84.3 μg/dL | 0.097 (0.053) | 0.067 | (−0.007, 0.201) |
| Q1–Q3: >84.3, ≤110.4 μg/dL | 0.099 (0.009) | <0.001 | (0.082, 0.117) |
| Q3: >110.4 μg/dL | Ref. | ||
| Sex | |||
| Girls | 0.013 (0.019) | 0.490 | (−0.024, 0.049) |
| Boys | Ref. | ||
| Age | |||
| 10–11 years | −0.073 (0.032) | 0.023 | (−0.137, −0.010) |
| 12–14 years | Ref. | ||
| Mother’s education | |||
| Middle school or less | −0.307 (0.057) | <0.001 | (−0.551, −0.062) |
| High school | −0.208 (0.051) | <0.001 | (−0.429, 0.013) |
| College or higher | Ref. | ||
| Father’s education | |||
| Middle school or less | −0.087 (0.046) | 0.056 | (−0.285, 0.111) |
| High school | −0.070 (0.046) | 0.120 | (−0.268, 0.126) |
| College or higher | Ref. | ||
| Serum Iron | 0.00003 (0.00004) | 0.451 | (−0.00005, 0.0001) |
| Serum Zinc | 0.00008 (0.0002) | 0.603 | (−0.0002, 0.0004) |
b: unstandardized regression coefficient; s.e.: standard error; CI: confidence interval; Ref.: Reference level.
Figure 2The mean and confidence interval of dot memory score by sex and serum copper level (Q1: ≤84.3 μg/dL, Q1–Q3: >84.3 μg/dL, ≤110.4 μg/dL, and Q3: >110.4μg/dL). * Significant difference between Q1–Q3: >84.3, ≤110.4 μg/dL and Q3: >110.4 μg/dL.