| Literature DB >> 35740885 |
Francesca Giampieri1, Justyna Godos2, Giuseppe Caruso3,4, Marcin Owczarek5, Joanna Jurek6, Sabrina Castellano7, Raffaele Ferri8, Filippo Caraci3,4, Giuseppe Grosso2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Aging society faces significant health challenges, among which cognitive-related disorders are emerging. Diet quality has been recognized among the major contributors to the rising prevalence of cognitive disorders, with increasing evidence of the putative role of plant-based foods and their bioactive components, including polyphenols. Dietary polyphenols, including phytoestrogens, have been hypothesized to exert beneficial effects toward brain health through various molecular mechanisms. However, the evidence on the association between dietary phytoestrogen intake and cognitive function is limited. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between phytoestrogen intake and cognitive status in a cohort of older adults living in Sicily, Southern Italy.Entities:
Keywords: brain; cognition; cognitive status; cohort; daidzein; genistein; isoflavones; lignans; phytoestrogens; population
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35740885 PMCID: PMC9221352 DOI: 10.3390/biom12060760
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomolecules ISSN: 2218-273X
Figure 1Major food sources of phytoestrogens in the study sample (n = 883).
Background characteristics by tertiles of dietary isoflavone and lignan intake in the study sample (n = 883).
| Phytoestrogen Intake | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1, | T2, | T3, | ||
|
| 66.2 (11.1) | 64.9 (9.4) | 63.8 (7.9) | 0.011 |
|
| 0.008 | |||
| Male | 110 (40.7) | 163 (49.8) | 109 (38.1) | |
| Female | 160 (59.3) | 164 (50.2) | 177 (61.9) | |
|
| 0.067 | |||
| Normal | 111 (42.4) | 103 (33.1) | 86 (33.3) | |
| Overweight | 104 (39.7) | 130 (41.8) | 105 (40.7) | |
| Obese | 47 (17.9) | 78 (25.1) | 67 (26.0) | |
|
| 0.132 | |||
| Low | 125 (46.3) | 174 (53.2) | 152 (53.1) | |
| Medium | 104 (38.5) | 95 (29.1) | 86 (30.1) | |
| High | 41 (15.2) | 58 (17.7) | 48 (16.8) | |
|
| 0.042 | |||
| Non-smoker | 156 (57.8) | 175 (53.5) | 166 (58.0) | |
| Ex-smoker | 55 (20.4) | 62 (19.0) | 70 (24.5) | |
| Current smoker | 59 (21.9) | 90 (27.5) | 50 (17.5) | |
|
| 0.198 | |||
| Low | 63 (27.0) | 67 (24.0) | 66 (27.8) | |
| Medium | 120 (51.5) | 130 (46.6) | 120 (50.6) | |
| High | 50 (21.5) | 82 (29.4) | 51 (21.5) | |
|
| <0.001 | |||
| No | 57 (21.1) | 77 (23.5) | 56 (19.6) | |
| Moderate | 162 (60.0) | 207 (63.3) | 146 (51.0) | |
| Regular | 51 (18.9) | 43 (13.1) | 84 (29.4) | |
|
| <0.001 | |||
| Low | 255 (94.4) | 264 (80.7) | 230 (80.4) | |
| High | 15 (5.6) | 63 (19.3) | 56 (19.6) | |
|
| ||||
| Hypertension | 205 (75.9) | 248 (75.8) | 207 (72.4) | 0.533 |
| Cardiovascular disease | 127 (47.0) | 138 (42.4) | 141 (49.3) | 0.195 |
| Cancer | 34 (12.6) | 23 (7.0) | 17 (5.9) | 0.01 |
|
| 1855.1 (543.5) | 2042.9 (558.4) | 2234.8 (780.3) | <0.001 |
Average total phytoestrogen and individual compound intake in the sample, total and by cognitive status.
| Total Population | Cognitively-Healthy | Cognitively- Impaired | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
|
| 5.47 (10.72) | 5.51 (10.63) | 5.05 (11.68) | 0.709 |
|
| 2.61 (10.18) | 2.60 (10.14) | 2.67 (10.63) | 0.953 |
|
| 0.09 (0.22) | 0.09 (0.22) | 0.09 (0.25) | 0.816 |
|
| 0.09 (0.26) | 0.09 (0.26) | 0.09 (0.29) | 0.853 |
|
| 2.86 (2.56) | 2.91 (2.58) | 2.38 (2.28) | 0.071 |
|
| 1.54 (1.55) | 1.57 (1.56) | 1.25 (1.38) | 0.075 |
|
| 0.03 (0.03) | 0.03 (0.03) | 0.03 (0.03) | 0.041 |
|
| 0.99 (0.80) | 1.01 (0.81) | 0.85 (0.72) | 0.099 |
|
| 0.12 (0.09) | 0.12 (0.09) | 0.10 (0.09) | 0.068 |
Association between total and individual isoflavone and lignan intake, and impaired cognitive status.
| Phytoestrogen Intake | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | T2 | T3 | |
|
| 1.00 (0.36) | 2.56 (0.69) | 13.01 (16.42) |
| Model 1, OR (95% CI) a | 1 | 0.42 (0.23–0.75) | 0.70 (0.40–1.22) |
| Model 2, OR (95% CI) b | 1 | 0.44 (0.22–0.86) | 1.16 (0.61–2.19) |
| Model 3, OR (95% CI) c | 1 | 0.48 (0.24–0.94) | 1.25 (0.65–2.41) |
|
| 0.01 (0.01) | 0.05 (0.02) | 9.05 (17.49) |
| Model 1, OR (95% CI) a | 1 | 0.67 (0.39–1.13) | 0.57 (0.30–1.06) |
| Model 2, OR (95% CI) b | 1 | 0.61 (0.34–1.11) | 0.43 (0.20–0.92) |
| Model 3, OR (95% CI) c | 1 | 0.66 (0.36–1.22) | 0.46 (0.21–1.00) |
|
| 0.01 (0.00) | 0.03 (0.01) | 0.22 (0.34) |
| Model 1, OR (95% CI) a | 1 | 0.77 (0.45–1.32) | 0.52 (0.28–0.95) |
| Model 2, OR (95% CI) b | 1 | 0.76 (0.42–1.40) | 0.41 (0.20–0.84) |
| Model 3, OR (95% CI) c | 1 | 0.84 (0.45–1.57) | 0.44 (0.21–0.92) |
|
| 0.00 (0.00) | 0.02 (0.01) | 0.23 (0.41) |
| Model 1, OR (95% CI) a | 1 | 0.60 (0.35–1.03) | 0.49 (0.27–0.88) |
| Model 2, OR (95% CI) b | 1 | 0.50 (0.27–0.94) | 0.36 (0.18–0.73) |
| Model 3, OR (95% CI) c | 1 | 0.53 (0.28–1.01) | 0.38 (0.18–0.78) |
|
| 0.85 (0.34) | 1.92 (0.41) | 5.28 (2.75) |
| Model 1, OR (95% CI) a | 1 | 0.64 (0.37–1.11) | 0.48 (0.26–0.88) |
| Model 2, OR (95% CI) b | 1 | 0.71 (0.38–1.32) | 0.74 (0.37–1.47) |
| Model 3, OR (95% CI) c | 1 | 0.77 (0.40–1.46) | 0.84 (0.41–1.71) |
|
| 0.35 (0.19) | 0.98 (0.23) | 2.99 (1.69) |
| Model 1, OR (95% CI) a | 1 | 0.51 (0.30–0.90) | 0.44 (0.24–0.80) |
| Model 2, OR (95% CI) b | 1 | 0.54 (0.29–1.02) | 0.66 (0.34–1.29) |
| Model 3, OR (95% CI) c | 1 | 0.58 (0.30–1.11) | 0.73 (0.36–1.47) |
|
| 0.01 (0.00) | 0.02 (0.01) | 0.06 (0.04) |
| Model 1, OR (95% CI) a | 1 | 0.80 (0.47–1.37) | 0.52 (0.28–0.98) |
| Model 2, OR (95% CI) b | 1 | 0.84 (0.44–1.57) | 0.80 (0.39–1.62) |
| Model 3, OR (95% CI) c | 1 | 0.90 (0.48–1.70) | 0.92 (0.44–1.91) |
|
| 0.34 (0.12) | 0.70 (0.14) | 1.76 (0.84) |
| Model 1, OR (95% CI) a | 1 | 0.66 (0.38–1.14) | 0.48 (0.26–0.89) |
| Model 2, OR (95% CI) b | 1 | 0.73 (0.39–1.36) | 0.75 (0.38–1.47) |
| Model 3, OR (95% CI) c | 1 | 0.80 (0.42–1.51) | 0.85 (0.42–1.71) |
|
| 0.04 (0.02) | 0.09 (0.02) | 0.21 (0.10) |
| Model 1, OR (95% CI) a | 1 | 0.68 (0.39–1.18) | 0.62 (0.34–1.12) |
| Model 2, OR (95% CI) b | 1 | 0.69 (0.36–1.32) | 1.03 (0.52–2.04) |
| Model 3, OR (95% CI) c | 1 | 0.77 (0.40–1.49) | 1.18 (0.58–2.38) |
a Model 1 adjusted for energy intake (kcal/day, continuous); b Model 2 = Model 1 additionally adjusted for age (continuous), sex (categories), BMI (categories), smoking status (smokers, ex-smokers, non-smokers), alcohol consumption (0 g/day, <12 g/day, ≥12 g/day), physical activity level (low, medium, high), educational level (low, medium, high), and health status; c Model 3 = Model 2 + adherence to the Mediterranean diet (categories). OR (odds ratio); CI (confidence interval).
Association between total isoflavone and lignan intake, and impaired cognitive status by age groups.
| Phytoestrogen Intake | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | T2 | T3 | |
|
| 1.03 (0.3) | 2.55 (0.71) | 13.27 (17.04) |
| <70 y, OR (95% CI) a | 1 | 1.01 (0.39–2.61) | 1.99 (0.87–4.53) |
|
| 0.96 (0.37) | 2.59 (0.65) | 12.03 (14.00) |
| ≥70 y, OR (95% CI) a | 1 | 0.41 (0.15–1.11) | 0.42 (0.09–1.89) |
|
| 0.01 (0.01) | 0.05 (0.01) | 7.58 (14.68) |
| <70 y, OR (95% CI) a | 1 | 0.61 (0.26–1.39) | 0.79 (0.35–1.77) |
|
| 0.01 (0.01) | 0.05 (0.02) | 9.54 (18.35) |
| ≥70 y, OR (95% CI) a | 1 | 0.52 (0.19–1.44) | 0.10 (0.01–0.88) |
|
| 0.85 (0.33) | 1.89 (0.41) | 5.59 (3.02) |
| <70 y, OR (95% CI) a | 1 | 1.18 (0.49–2.88) | 1.68 (0.71–4.00) |
|
| 0.85 (0.34) | 1.98 (0.39) | 4.28 (1.06) |
| ≥70 y, OR (95% CI) a | 1 | 0.79 (0.31–2.05) | 0.16 (0.03–0.87) |
a Multivariate model adjusted for energy intake (kcal/day, continuous), sex (categories), smoking status (smokers, ex-smokers, non-smokers), alcohol consumption (0 g/day, <12 g/day, ≥12 g/day), physical activity level (low, medium, high), and adherence to the Mediterranean diet (categories). OR (odds ratio); CI (confidence interval).