Objectives

Poor quality of early life conditions has been associated with poorer late life cognition and increased risk of dementia. Early life physical development can be captured using adult measures of height and head circumference. Availability of resources may be reflected by socioeconomic indicators, such as parental education and family size. We sought to determine the association between early life development and experience and late life semantic memory, episodic memory, and executive functioning abilities, as well as rate of cognitive decline.

Method

This study was conducted using the UC Davis Aging Diversity cohort, an ethnically diverse sample of Caucasian, African American, and Hispanic individuals from northern California. We used latent variable modeling to measure growth and childhood socioeconomic environment (SES) and examine their associations with longitudinal cognitive outcomes using mixed effects modeling.

Results

Growth was positively related to higher childhood SES. Higher childhood SES was associated with better semantic memory. Both low growth and low SES were associated with increased rate of cognitive decline.

Discussion

These findings demonstrate that early life experiences influence the trajectory of cognitive aging. Early life development and experience appears to provide a distal basis upon which additional risk and protective factors interact in the development of dementia.

Objective

We examined the influence of a broad spectrum of life experiences on longitudinal cognitive trajectories in a demographically diverse sample of older adults.

Method

Participants were 333 educationally, ethnically, and cognitively diverse older adults enrolled in a longitudinal aging study. Mixed-effects regression was used to measure baseline status in episodic memory, executive functioning, and semantic memory and change in a global cognition factor defined by change in these 3 domain-specific measures. We examined effects of life experience variables (literacy, childhood socioeconomic status, morphometric measures of physical development, life course physical and recreational activity) on longitudinal cognitive trajectories, covarying for age, apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotype and demographics (education, ethnicity, language).

Results

Non-Latino Whites had higher baseline cognition, but life experience variables attenuated ethnic differences in cognitive scores. Age, literacy, childhood socioeconomic status, and physical activity significantly influenced baseline cognition. Age, APOE ε4, and decline in intellectually and socially stimulating recreational activity from mid to late life were independently associated with increased late life cognitive decline. Higher literacy and late life recreational activity were associated with less decline. Literacy had similar effects for English and Spanish readers/speakers. Bilingual English and Spanish speakers did not differ from English Speakers in cognitive performance.

Conclusions

Life experience variables, especially literacy level, were strongly related to baseline cognition and substantially attenuated effects of race/ethnicity and education. Cognitive change was best explained by age, APOE ε4, literacy, and current recreational activities. Literacy had robust associations with baseline cognition and cognitive change in both English and Spanish speakers.

In 2016, the UC Davis Latino Aging Research Resource Center and UC Davis Alzheimer's Disease Center brought together experts from across the country to consolidate current knowledge and identify future directions in aging and diversity research. This report disseminates the research priorities that emerged from this conference, building on an earlier Gerontological Society of America preconference. We review key racial/ethnic differences in cognitive aging and dementia and identify current knowledge gaps in the field. We advocate for a systems-level framework for future research whereby environmental, sociocultural, behavioral, neuropathological, genetic, and psychometric levels of analysis are examined together to identify pathways and mechanisms that influence disparities. We then discuss steps to increase the recruitment and retention of racial/ethnic minorities in aging studies, as none of the recommendations will be possible without strong collaboration between racial/ethnic minority communities and researchers. This approach is consistent with the National Institute on Aging Health Disparities Research Framework.

In 2016, the UC Davis Latino Aging Research Resource Center and UC Davis Alzheimer's Disease Center brought together experts from across the country to consolidate current knowledge and identify future directions in aging and diversity research. This report disseminates the research priorities that emerged from this conference, building on an earlier Gerontological Society of America preconference. We review key racial/ethnic differences in cognitive aging and dementia and identify current knowledge gaps in the field. We advocate for a systems-level framework for future research whereby environmental, sociocultural, behavioral, neuropathological, genetic, and psychometric levels of analysis are examined together to identify pathways and mechanisms that influence disparities. We then discuss steps to increase the recruitment and retention of racial/ethnic minorities in aging studies, as none of the recommendations will be possible without strong collaboration between racial/ethnic minority communities and researchers. This approach is consistent with the National Institute on Aging Health Disparities Research Framework.

Introduction

We hypothesized that, like apolipoprotein E (APOE), other late-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD) genetic susceptibility loci predict mortality.

Methods

We used a weighted genetic risk score (GRS) from 21 non-APOE LOAD risk variants to predict survival in the Adult Changes in Thought and the Health and Retirement Studies. We meta-analyzed hazard ratios and examined models adjusted for cognitive performance or limited to participants with dementia. For replication, we assessed the GRS-longevity association in the Cohorts for Heart and Aging Research in Genomic Epidemiology, comparing cases surviving to age ≥90 years with controls who died between ages 55 and 80 years.

Results

Higher GRS predicted mortality (hazard ratio = 1.05; 95% confidence interval: 1.00-1.10, P = .04). After adjusting for cognitive performance or restricting to participants with dementia, the relationship was attenuated and no longer significant. In case-control analysis, the GRS was associated with reduced longevity (odds ratio = 0.64; 95% confidence interval: 0.41-1.00, P = .05).

Discussion

Non-APOE LOAD susceptibility loci confer risk for mortality, likely through effects on dementia incidence.

Objective

Numerous studies show that depressive symptoms measured at a single assessment predict greater future stroke risk. Longer-term symptom patterns, such as variability across repeated measures or worst symptom level, might better reflect adverse aspects of depression than a single measurement. This prospective study compared five approaches to operationalizing depressive symptoms at annual assessments as predictors of stroke incidence.

Design

Cohort followed for incident stroke over an average of 6.4 years.

Setting

The Adult Changes in Thought cohort follows initially cognitively intact, community- dwelling older adults from a population base defined by membership in Group Health, a Seattle-based nonprofit healthcare organization.

Participants

3,524 individuals aged 65 years and older.

Measurements

We identified 665 incident strokes using ICD codes. We considered both baseline Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression scale (CES-D) score and, using a moving window of three most recent annual CES-D measurements, we compared most recent, maximum, average, and intra-individual variability of CES-D scores as predictors of subsequent stroke using Cox proportional hazards models.

Results

Greater maximum (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.18; 95% CI: 1.07-1.30), average (HR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.05-1.36) and intra-individual variability (HR: 1.15; 95% CI: 1.06-1.24) in CES-D were each associated with elevated stroke risk, independent of sociodemographics, cardiovascular risks, cognition, and daily functioning. Neither baseline nor most recent CES-D was associated with stroke. In a combined model, intra-individual variability in CES-D predicted stroke, but average CES-D did not.

Conclusions

Capturing the dynamic nature of depression is relevant in assessing stroke risk. Fluctuating depressive symptoms may reflect a prodrome of reduced cerebrovascular integrity.

Purpose

Depression strongly predicts stroke incidence, suggesting that treating depression may reduce stroke risk. Antidepressant medications, however, may increase stroke risk via direct pathways. Previous evidence on antidepressant medication and stroke incidence is mixed. We evaluated associations between antidepressant use and incident stroke.

Methods

For 2302 Adult Changes in Thought cohort participants with no stroke at study entry, we characterized antidepressant use from pharmacy records, biennial depressive symptoms with a 10-item Centers for Epidemiologic Study-Depression scale, and incident strokes from ICD codes. We used discrete-time survival models with inverse probability weighting to compare stroke risk associated with filling antidepressant prescriptions and by medication category: tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or other.

Results

Over an average 8.4-year follow-up, 441 incident strokes occurred. Filling antidepressant medications 3+ times versus 0-2 times predicted 35% increased odds of stroke (OR = 1.35; 95% CI: 0.98, 1.66). Use of TCAs was associated with stroke onset (OR per 10 fills = 1.28; CI: 1.04, 1.57), but use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (OR = 0.98; CI: 0.80, 1.20) or other antidepressants (OR = 0.99; CI: 0.67, 1.45) was not.

Conclusions

Although patients who received antidepressant medication were at higher risk of stroke, this association appeared specific to TCA prescriptions.

Introduction

Physical exercise and cognitive training have the potential to enhance cognitive function and mobility in older adults at risk of Alzheimer's disease and related dementia (ADRD), but little is known about the feasibility of delivering multidomain interventions in home settings of older adults at risk of ADRD. This study aims to assess the feasibility of home-based delivery of exercise and cognitive interventions, and to evaluate the relationship between participants' intervention preferences and their subsequent adherence. Secondary objectives include the effect of the interventions on ADRD risk factors, including frailty, mobility, sleep, diet and psychological health.

Methods and analysis

The SYNchronising Exercises, Remedies in GaIt and Cognition at Home (SYNERGIC@Home) feasibility trial is a randomised control trial that follows a 2×2 factorial design, with a 16-week home-based intervention programme (3 sessions per week) of physical exercises and cognitive training. Participants will be randomised in blocks of four to one of the following four arms: (1) combined exercise (aerobic and resistance)+cognitive training (NEUROPEAK); (2) combined exercise+control cognitive training (web searching); (3) control exercise (balance and toning)+cognitive training; and (4) control exercise+control cognitive training. SYNERGIC@Home will be implemented through video conferencing. Baseline and post-intervention assessments at 4-month and 10-month follow-up will include measures of cognition, frailty, mobility, sleep, diet and psychological health. Primary feasibility outcome is adherence to the interventions. Primary analytic outcome is the relationship between pre-allocation preference for a given intervention and subsequent adherence to the allocated intervention. A series of secondary analytic outcomes examining the potential effect of the individual and combined interventions on cognitive, mobility and general well-being will be measured at baseline and follow-up.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethics approval was granted by the relevant research ethics boards. Findings of the study will be presented to stakeholders and published in peer-reviewed journals and at provincial, national and international conferences.

Trial registration number

NCT04997681, Pre-results.