4.5 Article

Interactive effects of KIBRA and CLSTN2 polymorphisms on episodic memory in old-age unipolar depression

期刊

NEUROPSYCHOLOGIA
卷 62, 期 -, 页码 137-142

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.07.020

关键词

KIBRA; CLSTN2; Depression; Episodic memory; Old age

资金

  1. Ministry of Health and Social Affairs, Sweden
  2. Swedish Research Council
  3. Karolinska Institutet
  4. Gamla Tjanarinnor foundation
  5. Osterman's foundation
  6. Swedish Alzheimer Foundation
  7. King Gustaf V and Queen Victoria's Free Mason Foundation
  8. Swedish Council for Working Life and Social Research
  9. Swedish Brain Power
  10. Alexander von Humboldt Research Award
  11. af Jochnick Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The KIBRA (rs17070145) C-allele and the CLSTN2 (rs6439886) T-allele have both been associated with poorer episodic memory performance. Given that episodic memory is affected in depression, we hypothesized that the combination of these risk alleles would be particularly detrimental to episodic memory performance in depressed persons. In the population-based SNAC-K study, 2170 participants (>= 60 years) without dementia (DSM-IV criteria) and antidepressant pharmacotherapy were clinically examined and diagnosed following ICD-10 criteria for unipolar depression, and genotyped for KIBRA and CLSTN2. Participants were categorized according to unipolar depression status (yes, no) and genotype combinations (KIBRA: CC, any T; CLSTN2: TT, any C). Critically, a three-way interaction effect showed that the CC/TT genotype combination was associated with poorer episodic recall and recognition performance only in depressed elderly persons, with depressed CC/TT carriers consistently performing at the lowest level. This finding supports the view that effects of genetic polymorphisms on cognitive functioning may be most easily disclosed at suboptimal levels of cognitive ability, such as in old-age depression. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据