Search

Key Points: Question: Is there an association between sedentary behavior and risk of all-cause dementia in older adults? Findings: In this retrospective study of prospectively collected data of 49 841 adults participating in the UK Biobank, more time spent in sedentary behaviors (determined through a machine learning–based analysis of wrist-worn accelerometer data) was significantly associated with higher risk of incident dementia. Meaning: Among older adults, more time spent in sedentary behaviors was associated with higher risk of incident all-cause dementia. Importance: Sedentary behavior is associated with cardiometabolic disease and mortality, but its association with dementia is unclear. Objective: To investigate whether accelerometer-assessed sedentary behavior is associated with incident dementia. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective study of prospectively collected data from the UK Biobank including 49 841 adults aged 60 years or older without a diagnosis of dementia at the time of wearing the wrist accelerometer and living in England, Scotland, or Wales. Follow-up began at the time of wearing the accelerometer (February 2013 to December 2015) and continued until September 2021 in England, July 2021 in Scotland, and February 2018 in Wales. Exposures: Mean daily sedentary behavior time (included in the primary analysis) and mean daily sedentary bout length, maximum daily sedentary bout length, and mean number of daily sedentary bouts (included in the secondary analyses) were derived from a machine learning–based analysis of 1 week of wrist-worn accelerometer data. Main Outcome and Measures: Incident all-cause dementia diagnosis from inpatient hospital records and death registry data. Cox proportional hazard models with linear and cubic spline terms were used to assess associations. Results: A total of 49 841 older adults (mean age, 67.19 [SD, 4.29] years; 54.7% were female) were followed up for a mean of 6.72 years (SD, 0.95 years). During this time, 414 individuals were diagnosed with incident all-cause dementia. In the fully adjusted models, there was a significant nonlinear association between time spent in sedentary behavior and incident dementia. Relative to a median of 9.27 hours/d for sedentary behavior, the hazard ratios (HRs) for dementia were 1.08 (95% CI, 1.04-1.12, P <.001) for 10 hours/d, 1.63 (95% CI, 1.35-1.97, P <.001) for 12 hours/d, and 3.21 (95% CI, 2.05-5.04, P <.001) for 15 hours/d. The adjusted incidence rate of dementia per 1000 person-years was 7.49 (95% CI, 7.48-7.49) for 9.27 hours/d of sedentary behavior, 8.06 (95% CI, 7.76-8.36) for 10 hours/d, 12.00 (95% CI, 10.00-14.36) for 12 hours/d, and 22.74 (95% CI, 14.92-34.11) for 15 hours/d. Mean daily sedentary bout length (HR, 1.53 [95% CI, 1.03-2.27], P =.04 and 0.65 [95% CI, 0.04-1.57] more dementia cases per 1000 person-years for a 1-hour increase from the mean of 0.48 hours) and maximum daily sedentary bout length (HR, 1.15 [95% CI, 1.02-1.31], P =.02 and 0.19 [95% CI, 0.02-0.38] more dementia cases per 1000 person-years for a 1-hour increase from the mean of 1.95 hours) were significantly associated with higher risk of incident dementia. The number of sedentary bouts per day was not associated with higher risk of incident dementia (HR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.99-1.01], P =.89). In the sensitivity analyses, after adjustment for time spent in sedentary behavior, the mean daily sedentary bout length and the maximum daily sedentary bout length were no longer significantly associated with incident dementia. Conclusions and Relevance: Among older adults, more time spent in sedentary behaviors was significantly associated with higher incidence of all-cause dementia. Future research is needed to determine whether the association between sedentary behavior and risk of dementia is causal. This study of prospectively collected data from the UK Biobank investigates whether accelerometer-assessed sedentary behavior is associated with incident dementia in adults aged 60 years or older without a diagnosis of dementia at the time of wearing the wrist accelerometer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article criticizes a recent study on physical activity and dementia, highlighting the authors' failure to fully address ascertainment bias, which could lead to an overestimation of the association between physical activity and dementia due to the reliance on hospitalization or death.

Importance: Increasing evidence shows that physical activity is associated with reduced risk for depression, pointing to a potential modifiable target for prevention. However, the causality and direction of this association are not clear; physical activity may protect against depression, and/or depression may result in decreased physical activity.Objective: To examine bidirectional relationships between physical activity and depression using a genetically informed method for assessing potential causal inference.Design, Setting, and Participants: This 2-sample mendelian randomization (MR) used independent top genetic variants associated with 2 physical activity phenotypes-self-reported (n = 377 234) and objective accelerometer-based (n = 91 084)-and with major depressive disorder (MDD) (n = 143 265) as genetic instruments from the largest available, nonoverlapping genome-wide association studies (GWAS). GWAS were previously conducted in diverse observational cohorts, including the UK Biobank (for physical activity) and participating studies in the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium (for MDD) among adults of European ancestry. Mendelian randomization estimates from each genetic instrument were combined using inverse variance weighted meta-analysis, with alternate methods (eg, weighted median, MR Egger, MR-Pleiotropy Residual Sum and Outlier [PRESSO]) and multiple sensitivity analyses to assess horizontal pleiotropy and remove outliers. Data were analyzed from May 10 through July 31, 2018.Main Outcomes and Measures: MDD and physical activity.Results: GWAS summary data were available for a combined sample size of 611 583 adult participants. Mendelian randomization evidence suggested a protective relationship between accelerometer-based activity and MDD (odds ratio [OR], 0.74 for MDD per 1-SD increase in mean acceleration; 95% CI, 0.59-0.92; P = .006). In contrast, there was no statistically significant relationship between MDD and accelerometer-based activity (β = -0.08 in mean acceleration per MDD vs control status; 95% CI, -0.47 to 0.32; P = .70). Furthermore, there was no significant relationship between self-reported activity and MDD (OR, 1.28 for MDD per 1-SD increase in metabolic-equivalent minutes of reported moderate-to-vigorous activity; 95% CI, 0.57-3.37; P = .48), or between MDD and self-reported activity (β = 0.02 per MDD in standardized metabolic-equivalent minutes of reported moderate-to-vigorous activity per MDD vs control status; 95% CI, -0.008 to 0.05; P = .15).Conclusions and Relevance: Using genetic instruments identified from large-scale GWAS, robust evidence supports a protective relationship between objectively assessed-but not self-reported-physical activity and the risk for MDD. Findings point to the importance of objective measurement of physical activity in epidemiologic studies of mental health and support the hypothesis that enhancing physical activity may be an effective prevention strategy for depression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]