4.5 Article

25-Hydroxyvitamin D, APOE ε4 genotype and cognitive function: findings from the 1958 British birth cohort

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NUTRITION
卷 69, 期 4, 页码 505-508

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/ejcn.2014.201

关键词

-

资金

  1. UCL Impact studentship
  2. Medical Research Council [G0000934]
  3. BUPA Foundation
  4. Jeans for Genes
  5. UK Medical Research Council [G0601653]
  6. Academy of Finland
  7. NHS Executive
  8. Medical Research Council [G0601653, G0000934, G1001799] Funding Source: researchfish
  9. MRC [G1001799, G0601653, G0000934] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Both high and low vitamin D statuses have been associated with lower memory function. Apolipoprotein E (APOE) epsilon 4 alleles have been associated with reduced memory function, and separately with higher vitamin D concentrations. This report aims to examine if the presence of APOE epsilon 4 alleles contributes to the relationship between vitamin D and memory function. A total of 4848 (46% female) participants from the 1958 British birth cohort had information on APOE genotypes and completed memory tests at 50 years, where 4644 also had 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH) D) concentrations measured at 45 years. Both low and high 25(OH) D concentrations were associated with lower memory function after adjustment for number of APOE epsilon 4 alleles (P-curvature = 0.02). There was evidence of interaction between APOE epsilon 4 and 25(OH) D, suggesting the association between 25(OH) D concentrations and memory function is different for those with two APOE epsilon 4 alleles compared with those with zero or one APOE epsilon 4 alleles (recessive model P-interaction = 0.01). Among participants with two APOE epsilon 4 alleles, higher 25(OH) D concentrations were associated with higher memory function, whereas in others, memory scores were slightly lower for individuals with higher versus lower concentrations. Further studies are required to replicate these findings.

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