Search

Background: Ethnic differences in cognitive decline have been reported. Whether they can be explained by differences in systolic blood pressure (SBP) is uncertain. Objective: Determine whether cumulative mean SBP levels explain differences in cognitive decline between Hispanic and White individuals. Methods: Pooled cohort study of individual participant data from six cohorts (1971–2017). The present study reports results on SBP and cognition among Hispanic and White individuals. Outcomes were changes in global cognition (GC) (primary), executive function (EF) (secondary), and memory standardized as t-scores (mean [SD], 50 [10]); a 1-point difference represents a 0.1 SD difference in cognition. Median follow-up was 7.7 (Q1–Q3, 5.2–20.1) years. Results: We included 24,570 participants free of stroke and dementia: 2,475 Hispanic individuals (median age, cumulative mean SBP at first cognitive assessment, 67 years, 132.5 mmHg; 40.8% men) and 22,095 White individuals (60 years,134 mmHg; 47.3% men). Hispanic individuals had slower declines in GC, EF, and memory than White individuals when all six cohorts were examined. Two cohorts recruited Hispanic individuals by design. In a sensitivity analysis, Hispanic individuals in these cohorts had faster decline in GC, similar decline in EF, and slower decline in memory than White individuals. Higher time-varying cumulative mean SBP was associated with faster declines in GC, EF, and memory in all analyses. After adjusting for time-varying cumulative mean SBP, differences in cognitive slopes between Hispanic and White individuals did not change. Conclusion: We found no evidence that cumulative mean SBP differences explained differences in cognitive decline between Hispanic and White individuals.

Background and ObjectivesThere are disparities in the prevalence of obesity by race, and the relationship between obesity and cognitive decline is unclear. The objective of this study was to determine whether obesity is independently associated with cognitive decline and whether the association between obesity and cognitive decline differs in Black and White adults. We hypothesized that obesity is associated with greater cognitive decline compared with normal weight and that the effect of obesity on cognitive decline is more pronounced in Black adults compared with their White counterparts.MethodsWe pooled data from 28,867 participants free of stroke and dementia (mean, SD: age 61 [10.7] years at the first cognitive assessment, 55% female, 24% Black, and 29% obese) from 6 cohorts. The primary outcome was the annual change in global cognition. We performed linear mixed-effects models with and without time-varying cumulative mean systolic blood pressure (SBP) and fasting plasma glucose (FPG). Global cognition was set to a t-score metric (mean 50, SD 10) at a participant's first cognitive assessment; a 1-point difference represents a 0.1 SD difference in global cognition across the 6 cohorts. The median follow-up was 6.5 years (25th percentile, 75th percentile: 5.03, 20.15).ResultsObese participants had lower baseline global cognition than normal-weight participants (difference in intercepts, −0.36 [95% CI, −0.46 to −0.17];p< 0.001). This difference in baseline global cognition was attenuated but was borderline significant after accounting for SBP and FPG (adjusted differences in intercepts, −0.19 [95% CI, −0.39 to 0.002];p= 0.05). There was no difference in the rate of decline in global cognition between obese and normal-weight participants (difference in slope, 0.009 points/year [95% CI, −0.009 to 0.03];p= 0.32). After accounting for SBP and FPG, obese participants had a slower decline in global cognition (adjusted difference in slope, 0.03 points/year slower [95% CI, 0.01 to 0.05];p< 0.001). There was no evidence that race modified the association between body mass index and global cognitive decline (p= 0.34).DiscussionThese results suggest that obesity is associated with lower initial cognitive scores and may potentially attenuate declines in cognition after accounting for BP and FPG.

ImportanceIncident stroke is associated with accelerated cognitive decline. Whether poststroke vascular risk factor levels are associated with faster cognitive decline is uncertain.ObjectiveTo evaluate associations of poststroke systolic blood pressure (SBP), glucose, and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels with cognitive decline.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsIndividual participant data meta-analysis of 4 US cohort studies (conducted 1971-2019). Linear mixed-effects models estimated changes in cognition after incident stroke. Median (IQR) follow-up was 4.7 (2.6-7.9) years. Analysis began August 2021 and was completed March 2023.ExposuresTime-dependent cumulative mean poststroke SBP, glucose, and LDL cholesterol levels.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was change in global cognition. Secondary outcomes were change in executive function and memory. Outcomes were standardized as t scores (mean [SD], 50 [10]); a 1-point difference represents a 0.1-SD difference in cognition.ResultsA total of 1120 eligible dementia-free individuals with incident stroke were identified; 982 (87.7%) had available covariate data and 138 (12.3%) were excluded for missing covariate data. Of the 982, 480 (48.9%) were female individuals, and 289 (29.4%) were Black individuals. The median age at incident stroke was 74.6 (IQR, 69.1-79.8; range, 44.1-96.4) years. Cumulative mean poststroke SBP and LDL cholesterol levels were not associated with any cognitive outcome. However, after accounting for cumulative mean poststroke SBP and LDL cholesterol levels, higher cumulative mean poststroke glucose level was associated with faster decline in global cognition (−0.04 points/y faster per each 10–mg/dL increase [95% CI, −0.08 to −0.001 points/y]; P = .046) but not executive function or memory. After restricting to 798 participants with apolipoprotein E4 (APOE4) data and controlling for APOE4 and APOE4 × time, higher cumulative mean poststroke glucose level was associated with a faster decline in global cognition in models without and with adjustment for cumulative mean poststroke SBP and LDL cholesterol levels (−0.05 points/y faster per 10–mg/dL increase [95% CI, −0.09 to −0.01 points/y]; P = .01; −0.07 points/y faster per 10–mg/dL increase [95% CI, −0.11 to −0.03 points/y]; P = .002) but not executive function or memory declines.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study, higher poststroke glucose levels were associated with faster global cognitive decline. We found no evidence that poststroke LDL cholesterol and SBP levels were associated with cognitive decline.

Strategies to prevent or delay Alzheimer’s disease and Alzheimer’s disease-related dementias (AD/ADRD) are urgently needed. Blood pressure (BP) management is a promising strategy for AD/ADRD prevention and the key element in the primary and secondary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), yet the effects of different population level BP control strategies across the life course on AD/ADRD are not known.Large-scale randomized controlled trials are the least biased approach to identifying the effect of BP control on AD/ADRD, yet trials may be infeasible due to the need for prolonged follow-up and very large sample sizes. Thus, simulation analyses leveraging the best available observational data may be the best and most practical approach to answering these questions.In this manuscript, we describe the design principles, implementation details, and population-level validation of a novel population health microsimulation framework, the MIchigan ChROnic Disease SIMulation (MICROSIM), for The Effect of Lower Blood Pressure over the Life Course on Late-life Cognition in Blacks, Hispanics, and Whites (BP COG) study of the effect of BP levels over the life course on cognitive decline and dementia.MICROSIM was designed by applying computer programming best practices to create a novel simulation model. The initial purpose of this extensible, open-source framework is to explore a series of questions related to the impact of different blood pressure management strategies on late-life cognition and all-cause dementia, as well as the effects on race differences in all-cause dementia incidence. Ultimately, though, the framework is designed to be extensible such that a variety of different clinical conditions could be added to the framework.

Pain, fatigue, and depression frequently co-occur as a symptom cluster. While commonly occurring in those with cancer and autoimmune disease, the cluster is also found in the absence of systemic illness or inflammation. Loneliness is a common psychosocial stressor associated with the cluster cross-sectionally. We investigated whether loneliness predicted the development of pain, fatigue, depression, and the symptom cluster over time.Data from the Health and Retirement Study were used. We included self-respondents ≥50 year-old who had at least two measurements of loneliness and the symptom cluster from 2006-2016 (n = 5974). Time-varying loneliness was used to predict pain, fatigue, depression, and the symptom cluster in the subsequent wave(s) using generalized estimating equations (GEE) and adjusting for sociodemographic covariates, living arrangement, and the presence of the symptom(s) at baseline.Loneliness increased the odds of subsequently reporting pain (aOR 1.22, 95% CI 1.08, 1.37), fatigue (aOR 1.47, 95% CI 1.32, 1.65), depression (aOR 2.33, 95% CI 2.02, 2.68), as well as the symptom cluster (aOR 2.15, 95% CI 1.74, 2.67). The median time between the baseline and final follow-up measurement was 7.6 years (IQR 4.1, 8.2).Loneliness strongly predicts the development of pain, fatigue, and depression as well as the cluster of all three symptoms several years later in a large, nonclinical sample of older American adults. Future studies should examine the multiple pathways through which loneliness may produce this cluster, as well as examine whether other psychosocial stressors also increase risk. It is possible that interventions which address loneliness in older adults may prevent or mitigate the cluster of pain, fatigue, and depression.

BACKGROUND: Ethnic differences in cognitive decline have been reported. Whether they can be explained by differences in systolic blood pressure (SBP) is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: Determine whether cumulative mean SBP levels explain differences in cognitive decline between Hispanic and White individuals. METHODS: Pooled cohort study of individual participant data from six cohorts (1971–2017). The present study reports results on SBP and cognition among Hispanic and White individuals. Outcomes were changes in global cognition (GC) (primary), executive function (EF) (secondary), and memory standardized as t-scores (mean [SD], 50 [10]); a 1-point difference represents a 0.1 SD difference in cognition. Median follow-up was 7.7 (Q1–Q3, 5.2–20.1) years. RESULTS: We included 24,570 participants free of stroke and dementia: 2,475 Hispanic individuals (median age, cumulative mean SBP at first cognitive assessment, 67 years, 132.5 mmHg; 40.8% men) and 22,095 White individuals (60 years,134 mmHg; 47.3% men). Hispanic individuals had slower declines in GC, EF, and memory than White individuals when all six cohorts were examined. Two cohorts recruited Hispanic individuals by design. In a sensitivity analysis, Hispanic individuals in these cohorts had faster decline in GC, similar decline in EF, and slower decline in memory than White individuals. Higher time-varying cumulative mean SBP was associated with faster declines in GC, EF, and memory in all analyses. After adjusting for time-varying cumulative mean SBP, differences in cognitive slopes between Hispanic and White individuals did not change. CONCLUSION: We found no evidence that cumulative mean SBP differences explained differences in cognitive decline between Hispanic and White individuals.

Background: Older patients (≥65 years) with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are undertreated for cardiovascular disease (CVD). One reason for this disparity could be that patients with MCI might underestimate the chances of CVD and overestimate dementia. Objective: To compare conceptions of health risk between older patients with MCI and normal cognition (NC) and their care partners. Methods: We conducted a multi-center mixed-methods study of patient-care partner dyads completing written quantitative surveys (73% response rate; 127 dyads: 66 MCI and 61 NC) or semi-structured interviews (20 dyads: 11 MCI, and 9 NC). Surveys assessed two-year patient risks of dementia, heart attack, stroke, and fall. Interviews assessed similar health risks and reasons for risk perceptions. Results: On surveys, a similarly low proportion of MCI and NC patients felt they were at risk of stroke (5% versus 2%; p = 0.62) and heart attack (2% versus 0%; p = 0.99). More MCI than NC patients perceived dementia risk (26% versus 2%; p