Search

Both telomere length and frailty were observed to be associated with aging. Whether and to what extent telomere length is related to frailty is essentially unknown. In this cross-sectional analysis of baseline data of 3537 community-dwelling adults aged 50 to 75 years of a large German cohort study, we assessed the hypothesis that shorter telomere length might be a biological marker for frailty. Using whole blood DNA we examined mean telomere repeat copy to single gene copy number (T/S ratio) using quantitative PCR. Construction of a frailty index (FI) was based on a deficit accumulation approach, which quantifies frailty as ratio of the deficits present divided by the total number of deficits considered. Mean FI was determined according to age by tertiles of T/S ratio. Furthermore, we used correlation analyses stratified for gender and age groups to examine the association of the T/S ratio with frailty. Mean FI value was similar across tertiles of the T/S ratio (0.24 ± 0.14, 0.24 ± 0.14 and 0.23 ± 0.14, respectively (p = 0.09)), and FI and the T/S ratio were uncorrelated in gender- and age-specific analyses. In conclusion, T/S ratio and frailty were unrelated in this large sample of older adults. T/S ratio may therefore not be a meaningful biological marker for frailty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Objective: To provide a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective, population-based cohort studies on the association of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) and all-cause mortality. Methods: Relevant studies were identified by systematically searching Medline, EMBASE and ISI Web of Knowledge. Reported hazard ratios (HRs) for 25(OH)D categories were recalculated employing comprehensive trend estimation from summarized dose-response data and pooled in a random effects model meta-analysis. Results: Overall, 12 original studies were included in the review and meta-analysis comprising 32,142 mainly elderly study participants with measured 25(OH)D of whom 6921 died during follow-up. An inverse association between 25(OH)D levels and all-cause mortality was found in all but two studies that was statistically significant in several of the individual studies. In meta-analysis, 25(OH)D levels were significantly inversely associated with all-cause mortality with a pooled HR of 0.92 (95% confidence interval: 0.89–0.95) for a 20nmol/l increase in 25(OH)D levels. Conclusion: In this meta-analysis of prospective, population-based cohort studies, a 20nmol/l increase in 25(OH)D levels was associated with an 8% lower mortality in the general elderly population. This agrees with results from meta-analyses on randomized controlled trials that found a decrease in mortality with vitamin D3 supplementation of a comparable magnitude. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The present study is aimed to compare survival and prognostic changes over time between elderly (70–84 years) and middle-aged cancer patients (55–69 years). We considered seven cancer sites (stomach, colon, breast, cervix and corpus uteri, ovary and prostate) and all cancers combined (but excluding prostate and non-melanoma skin cancers). Five-year relative survival was estimated for cohorts of patients diagnosed in 1988–1999 in a pool of 51 European populations covered by cancer registries. Furthermore, we applied the period-analysis method to more recent incidence data from 32 cancer registries to provide 1- and 5-year relative survival estimates for the period of follow-up 2000–2002. A significant survival improvement was observed from 1988 to 1999 for all cancers combined and for every cancer site, except cervical cancer. However, survival increased at a slower rate in the elderly, so that the gap between younger and older patients widened, particularly for prostate cancer in men and for all considered cancers except cervical cancer in women. For breast and prostate cancers, the increasing gap was likely attributable to a larger use of, respectively, mammographic screening and PSA test in middle-aged with respect to the elderly. In the period analysis of the most recent data, relative survival was much higher in middle-aged patients than in the elderly. The differences were higher for breast and gynaecological cancers, and for prostate cancer. Most of this age gap was due to a very large difference in survival after the 1st year following the diagnosis. Differences were much smaller for conditional 5-year relative survival among patients who had already survived the first year. The increase of survival in elderly men is encouraging but the lesser improvement in women and, in particular, the widening gap for breast cancer suggest that many barriers still delay access to care and that enhanced prevention and clinical management remain major issues. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]