Suppr超能文献

主观认知下降与多基因风险评分在预测全因痴呆、阿尔茨海默病和血管性痴呆中的比较。

Comparison of subjective cognitive decline and polygenic risk score in the prediction of all-cause dementia, Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia.

机构信息

Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center, Im Neuenheimer Feld 581, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.

Department Genes and Environment, Max Planck Institute of Psychiatry, Kraepelinstraße 2-10, 80804, Munich, Germany.

出版信息

Alzheimers Res Ther. 2024 Aug 19;16(1):188. doi: 10.1186/s13195-024-01559-9.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Polygenic risk scores (PRS) and subjective cognitive decline (SCD) are associated with the risk of developing dementia. It remains to examine whether they can improve the established cardiovascular risk factors aging and dementia (CAIDE) model and how their predictive abilities compare.

METHODS

The CAIDE model was applied to a sub-sample of a large, population-based cohort study (n = 5,360; aged 50-75) and evaluated for the outcomes of all-cause dementia, Alzheimer's disease (AD) and vascular dementia (VD) by calculating Akaike's information criterion (AIC) and the area under the curve (AUC). The improvement of the CAIDE model by PRS and SCD was further examined using the net reclassification improvement (NRI) method and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI).

RESULTS

During 17 years of follow-up, 410 participants were diagnosed with dementia, including 139 AD and 152 VD diagnoses. Overall, the CAIDE model showed high discriminative ability for all outcomes, reaching AUCs of 0.785, 0.793, and 0.789 for all-cause dementia, AD, and VD, respectively. Adding information on SCD significantly increased NRI for all-cause dementia (4.4%, p = 0.04) and VD (7.7%, p = 0.01). In contrast, prediction models for AD further improved when PRS was added to the model (NRI, 8.4%, p = 0.03). When APOE ε4 carrier status was included (CAIDE Model 2), AUCs increased, but PRS and SCD did not further improve the prediction.

CONCLUSIONS

Unlike PRS, information on SCD can be assessed more efficiently, and thus, the model including SCD can be more easily transferred to the clinical setting. Nevertheless, the two variables seem negligible if APOE ε4 carrier status is available.

摘要

背景

多基因风险评分(PRS)和主观认知下降(SCD)与痴呆风险相关。目前仍需研究它们是否可以改善已建立的心血管风险因素衰老和痴呆(CAIDE)模型,以及它们的预测能力如何比较。

方法

将 CAIDE 模型应用于一项大型人群队列研究的子样本(n=5360;年龄 50-75 岁),通过计算赤池信息量准则(AIC)和曲线下面积(AUC)来评估所有原因痴呆、阿尔茨海默病(AD)和血管性痴呆(VD)的结局。使用净重新分类改善(NRI)和综合判别改善(IDI)方法进一步研究 PRS 和 SCD 对 CAIDE 模型的改善。

结果

在 17 年的随访期间,410 名参与者被诊断为痴呆症,包括 139 例 AD 和 152 例 VD 诊断。总体而言,CAIDE 模型对所有结局均具有较高的区分能力,AUC 分别为 0.785、0.793 和 0.789,用于所有原因痴呆症、AD 和 VD。添加 SCD 信息可显著提高所有原因痴呆症(4.4%,p=0.04)和 VD(7.7%,p=0.01)的 NRI。相比之下,当将 PRS 添加到模型中时,AD 的预测模型进一步改善(NRI,8.4%,p=0.03)。当包括 APOE ε4 载脂蛋白状态(CAIDE 模型 2)时,AUC 增加,但 PRS 和 SCD 并未进一步改善预测。

结论

与 PRS 不同,SCD 信息可以更有效地评估,因此,包括 SCD 的模型可以更容易地转移到临床环境中。然而,如果存在 APOE ε4 载脂蛋白状态,则这两个变量似乎可以忽略不计。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4144/11331600/12956b4933c9/13195_2024_1559_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验