K Deckers1, M P J Van Boxtel, F R J Verhey, S Köhler. 1. Kay Deckers, MSc, Maastricht University, School for Mental Health and Neuroscience, Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, the Netherlands, T: +31-43-3884098, F: +31-43-3884092, E: kay.deckers@maastrichtuniversity.nl.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Obesity has been associated with increased risk of cognitive impairment or dementia, but recent findings are contradictory, possibly due to methodological differences. The present study tries to clarify these inconsistencies by following the cognitive trajectories of individuals with obesity over 12 years and studying the effect of obesity status (obesity at baseline versus incident obesity at follow-up), chronicity, definition, potential confounding (e.g. age, cardiovascular factors), and non-linear associations. DESIGN: Longitudinal study with 12 years follow-up. SETTING: Community based. PARTICIPANTS: 1,807 cognitively healthy individuals (aged 24-83) from the Maastricht Aging Study (1992-2004). MEASUREMENTS: Memory, executive function and processing speed were assessed at baseline and at 6- and 12-year follow-up. Obesity was defined as having a body mass index (BMI) of ≥ 30.0 kg/m2 or waist circumference (WC) of > 102 cm for men and > 88 cm for women. RESULTS: At baseline, 545 persons were obese (BMI: 329 (18%); WC: 494 (27%); both: 278 (15%). They showed faster decline in memory, executive function, and processing speed. Chronic obese showed less widespread impairment than those who regained normal weight. Associations across cognitive domains were weaker for obesity defined by BMI than for WC. At follow-up, 190 developed obesity, and they performed worse on executive function at baseline, but showed less decline compared with participants with normal weight. Yet, age-stratification and post-hoc analyses showed that most of these associations were confounded by age. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that the association between obesity and cognitive decline was confounded by the effect of age on rate of decline. Future studies should take this into account.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Obesity has been associated with increased risk of cognitive impairment or dementia, but recent findings are contradictory, possibly due to methodological differences. The present study tries to clarify these inconsistencies by following the cognitive trajectories of individuals with obesity over 12 years and studying the effect of obesity status (obesity at baseline versus incident obesity at follow-up), chronicity, definition, potential confounding (e.g. age, cardiovascular factors), and non-linear associations. DESIGN: Longitudinal study with 12 years follow-up. SETTING: Community based. PARTICIPANTS: 1,807 cognitively healthy individuals (aged 24-83) from the Maastricht Aging Study (1992-2004). MEASUREMENTS: Memory, executive function and processing speed were assessed at baseline and at 6- and 12-year follow-up. Obesity was defined as having a body mass index (BMI) of ≥ 30.0 kg/m2 or waist circumference (WC) of > 102 cm for men and > 88 cm for women. RESULTS: At baseline, 545 persons were obese (BMI: 329 (18%); WC: 494 (27%); both: 278 (15%). They showed faster decline in memory, executive function, and processing speed. Chronic obese showed less widespread impairment than those who regained normal weight. Associations across cognitive domains were weaker for obesity defined by BMI than for WC. At follow-up, 190 developed obesity, and they performed worse on executive function at baseline, but showed less decline compared with participants with normal weight. Yet, age-stratification and post-hoc analyses showed that most of these associations were confounded by age. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that the association between obesity and cognitive decline was confounded by the effect of age on rate of decline. Future studies should take this into account.
Authors: Brenda L Plassman; John W Williams; James R Burke; Tracey Holsinger; Sophiya Benjamin Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2010-06-14 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Cleusa P Ferri; Martin Prince; Carol Brayne; Henry Brodaty; Laura Fratiglioni; Mary Ganguli; Kathleen Hall; Kazuo Hasegawa; Hugh Hendrie; Yueqin Huang; Anthony Jorm; Colin Mathers; Paulo R Menezes; Elizabeth Rimmer; Marcia Scazufca Journal: Lancet Date: 2005-12-17 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Anna Dahl; Linda B Hassing; Eleonor Fransson; Stig Berg; Margaret Gatz; Chandra A Reynolds; Nancy L Pedersen Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2009-04-06 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Renée F A G de Bruijn; Michiel J Bos; Marileen L P Portegies; Albert Hofman; Oscar H Franco; Peter J Koudstaal; M Arfan Ikram Journal: BMC Med Date: 2015-07-21 Impact factor: 8.775
Authors: Angeles Vinuesa; Carlos Pomilio; Amal Gregosa; Melisa Bentivegna; Jessica Presa; Melina Bellotto; Flavia Saravia; Juan Beauquis Journal: Front Neurosci Date: 2021-04-23 Impact factor: 4.677
Authors: Leah H Rubin; Deborah Gustafson; Kellie L Hawkins; Long Zhang; Lisa P Jacobson; James T Becker; Cynthia A Munro; Jordan E Lake; Eileen Martin; Andrew Levine; Todd T Brown; Ned Sacktor; Kristine M Erlandson Journal: Neurology Date: 2019-06-14 Impact factor: 11.800
Authors: John A Batsis; Christian Haudenschild; Robert M Roth; Tyler L Gooding; Meredith N Roderka; Travis Masterson; John Brand; Matthew C Lohman; Todd A Mackenzie Journal: J Am Med Dir Assoc Date: 2020-10-21 Impact factor: 4.669