美国和英国老年痴呆症前的虚弱轨迹

IF 20.4 1区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
David D. Ward, Jonny P. Flint, Thomas J. Littlejohns, Isabelle F. Foote, Marco Canevelli, Lindsay M. K. Wallace, Emily H. Gordon, David J. Llewellyn, Janice M. Ranson, Ruth E. Hubbard, Kenneth Rockwood, Erwin Stolz
{"title":"美国和英国老年痴呆症前的虚弱轨迹","authors":"David D. Ward, Jonny P. Flint, Thomas J. Littlejohns, Isabelle F. Foote, Marco Canevelli, Lindsay M. K. Wallace, Emily H. Gordon, David J. Llewellyn, Janice M. Ranson, Ruth E. Hubbard, Kenneth Rockwood, Erwin Stolz","doi":"10.1001/jamaneurol.2024.3774","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ImportanceAn accessible marker of both biological age and dementia risk is crucial to advancing dementia prevention and treatment strategies. Although frailty is a candidate for that role, the nature of the relationship between frailty and dementia is not well understood.ObjectiveTo clarify the temporal relationship between frailty and incident dementia by investigating frailty trajectories in the years preceding dementia onset.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsParticipant data came from 4 prospective cohort studies: the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, the Health and Retirement Study, the Rush Memory and Aging Project, and the National Alzheimer Coordinating Center. Data were collected between 1997 and 2024 and were analyzed from July 2023 to August 2024. The settings were retirement communities, national-level surveys, and a multiclinic-based cohort. Included individuals were 60 years or older and without cognitive impairment at baseline. Included individuals also had data on age, sex, education level, and ethnicity and a frailty index score calculated at baseline.ExposureFrailty was the main exposure, with participants’ degrees of frailty quantified using retrospectively calculated frailty index scores.Main Outcomes and MeasuresIncident all-cause dementia ascertained through physician-derived diagnoses, self- and informant-report, and estimated classifications based on combinations of cognitive tests.ResultsThe participant number before exclusions was 87 737. After exclusions, data from 29 849 participants (mean [SD] age, 71.6 [7.7] years; 18 369 female [62%]; 257 963 person-years of follow-up; 3154 cases of incident dementia) were analyzed. Bayesian generalized linear mixed regression models revealed accelerations in frailty trajectories 4 to 9 years before incident dementia. Overall, frailty was positively associated with dementia risk (adjusted hazard ratios [aHRs] ranged from 1.18; 95% CI, 1.13-1.24 to 1.73; 95% CI, 1.57-1.92). This association held among participants whose time between frailty measurement and incident dementia exceeded the identified acceleration period (aHRs ranged from 1.18; 95% CI, 1.12-1.23 to 1.43; 95% CI, 1.14-1.80).Conclusions and RelevanceThese findings suggest that frailty measurements may be used to identify high-risk population groups for preferential enrolment into clinical trials for dementia prevention and treatment. Frailty itself may represent a useful upstream target for behavioral and societal approaches to dementia prevention.","PeriodicalId":14677,"journal":{"name":"JAMA neurology","volume":"154 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":20.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Frailty Trajectories Preceding Dementia in the US and UK\",\"authors\":\"David D. Ward, Jonny P. Flint, Thomas J. Littlejohns, Isabelle F. Foote, Marco Canevelli, Lindsay M. K. Wallace, Emily H. Gordon, David J. Llewellyn, Janice M. Ranson, Ruth E. Hubbard, Kenneth Rockwood, Erwin Stolz\",\"doi\":\"10.1001/jamaneurol.2024.3774\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ImportanceAn accessible marker of both biological age and dementia risk is crucial to advancing dementia prevention and treatment strategies. Although frailty is a candidate for that role, the nature of the relationship between frailty and dementia is not well understood.ObjectiveTo clarify the temporal relationship between frailty and incident dementia by investigating frailty trajectories in the years preceding dementia onset.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsParticipant data came from 4 prospective cohort studies: the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, the Health and Retirement Study, the Rush Memory and Aging Project, and the National Alzheimer Coordinating Center. Data were collected between 1997 and 2024 and were analyzed from July 2023 to August 2024. The settings were retirement communities, national-level surveys, and a multiclinic-based cohort. Included individuals were 60 years or older and without cognitive impairment at baseline. Included individuals also had data on age, sex, education level, and ethnicity and a frailty index score calculated at baseline.ExposureFrailty was the main exposure, with participants’ degrees of frailty quantified using retrospectively calculated frailty index scores.Main Outcomes and MeasuresIncident all-cause dementia ascertained through physician-derived diagnoses, self- and informant-report, and estimated classifications based on combinations of cognitive tests.ResultsThe participant number before exclusions was 87 737. After exclusions, data from 29 849 participants (mean [SD] age, 71.6 [7.7] years; 18 369 female [62%]; 257 963 person-years of follow-up; 3154 cases of incident dementia) were analyzed. Bayesian generalized linear mixed regression models revealed accelerations in frailty trajectories 4 to 9 years before incident dementia. Overall, frailty was positively associated with dementia risk (adjusted hazard ratios [aHRs] ranged from 1.18; 95% CI, 1.13-1.24 to 1.73; 95% CI, 1.57-1.92). This association held among participants whose time between frailty measurement and incident dementia exceeded the identified acceleration period (aHRs ranged from 1.18; 95% CI, 1.12-1.23 to 1.43; 95% CI, 1.14-1.80).Conclusions and RelevanceThese findings suggest that frailty measurements may be used to identify high-risk population groups for preferential enrolment into clinical trials for dementia prevention and treatment. Frailty itself may represent a useful upstream target for behavioral and societal approaches to dementia prevention.\",\"PeriodicalId\":14677,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JAMA neurology\",\"volume\":\"154 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":20.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JAMA neurology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2024.3774\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA neurology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2024.3774","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

重要性一个可用于衡量生物年龄和痴呆症风险的指标对于推进痴呆症预防和治疗策略至关重要。设计、环境和参与者参与者的数据来自 4 项前瞻性队列研究:英国老龄化纵向研究、健康与退休研究、拉什记忆与老龄化项目和国家阿尔茨海默氏症协调中心。数据收集时间为 1997 年至 2024 年,分析时间为 2023 年 7 月至 2024 年 8 月。数据收集的环境包括退休社区、国家级调查和多临床队列。研究对象年龄在 60 岁或以上,基线时无认知障碍。主要结果和测量通过医生诊断、自我报告和信息报告以及基于认知测试组合的估计分类来确定所有原因的痴呆事件。结果排除前的参与者人数为 87 737 人。排除后,分析了 29 849 名参与者的数据(平均 [SD] 年龄 71.6 [7.7] 岁;18 369 名女性 [62%];随访 257 963 人年;3154 例痴呆症患者)。贝叶斯广义线性混合回归模型显示,在痴呆症发病前 4 到 9 年,虚弱轨迹会加速发展。总体而言,虚弱与痴呆症风险呈正相关(调整后危险比 [aHRs] 从 1.18; 95% CI, 1.13-1.24 到 1.73; 95% CI, 1.57-1.92)。这些研究结果表明,虚弱程度测量可用于识别高风险人群,使其优先加入痴呆症预防和治疗的临床试验。虚弱本身就可能是预防痴呆症的行为和社会方法的一个有用的上游目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Frailty Trajectories Preceding Dementia in the US and UK
ImportanceAn accessible marker of both biological age and dementia risk is crucial to advancing dementia prevention and treatment strategies. Although frailty is a candidate for that role, the nature of the relationship between frailty and dementia is not well understood.ObjectiveTo clarify the temporal relationship between frailty and incident dementia by investigating frailty trajectories in the years preceding dementia onset.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsParticipant data came from 4 prospective cohort studies: the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, the Health and Retirement Study, the Rush Memory and Aging Project, and the National Alzheimer Coordinating Center. Data were collected between 1997 and 2024 and were analyzed from July 2023 to August 2024. The settings were retirement communities, national-level surveys, and a multiclinic-based cohort. Included individuals were 60 years or older and without cognitive impairment at baseline. Included individuals also had data on age, sex, education level, and ethnicity and a frailty index score calculated at baseline.ExposureFrailty was the main exposure, with participants’ degrees of frailty quantified using retrospectively calculated frailty index scores.Main Outcomes and MeasuresIncident all-cause dementia ascertained through physician-derived diagnoses, self- and informant-report, and estimated classifications based on combinations of cognitive tests.ResultsThe participant number before exclusions was 87 737. After exclusions, data from 29 849 participants (mean [SD] age, 71.6 [7.7] years; 18 369 female [62%]; 257 963 person-years of follow-up; 3154 cases of incident dementia) were analyzed. Bayesian generalized linear mixed regression models revealed accelerations in frailty trajectories 4 to 9 years before incident dementia. Overall, frailty was positively associated with dementia risk (adjusted hazard ratios [aHRs] ranged from 1.18; 95% CI, 1.13-1.24 to 1.73; 95% CI, 1.57-1.92). This association held among participants whose time between frailty measurement and incident dementia exceeded the identified acceleration period (aHRs ranged from 1.18; 95% CI, 1.12-1.23 to 1.43; 95% CI, 1.14-1.80).Conclusions and RelevanceThese findings suggest that frailty measurements may be used to identify high-risk population groups for preferential enrolment into clinical trials for dementia prevention and treatment. Frailty itself may represent a useful upstream target for behavioral and societal approaches to dementia prevention.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
JAMA neurology
JAMA neurology CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
41.90
自引率
1.70%
发文量
250
期刊介绍: JAMA Neurology is an international peer-reviewed journal for physicians caring for people with neurologic disorders and those interested in the structure and function of the normal and diseased nervous system. The Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry began publication in 1919 and, in 1959, became 2 separate journals: Archives of Neurology and Archives of General Psychiatry. In 2013, their names changed to JAMA Neurology and JAMA Psychiatry, respectively. JAMA Neurology is a member of the JAMA Network, a consortium of peer-reviewed, general medical and specialty publications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信