ArticleNeurology2024
Neuropathologic Burden and Dementia in Nonagenarians and Centenarians: Comparison of 2 Community-Based Cohorts
Article in Neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neocortical tau burden determines the degree of cognitive impairment in individuals with Braak stage V neurofibrillary degeneration.Acta neuropathologica · 2026Article
- Primary age-related tauopathy.Acta neuropathologica · 2025Review
- Unraveling the clinical-pathological correlations of subjects with isolated and mixed neurodegenerative processes in the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center dataset.Journal of neuropathology and experimental neurology · 2025Article
- Parvalbumin Interneuron Dysfunction in Neurological Disorders: Focus on Epilepsy and Alzheimer's Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Disentangling and quantifying the relative cognitive impact of concurrent mixed neurodegenerative pathologies.Acta neuropathologica · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThe aim of this study was to compare 2 large clinicopathologic cohorts of participants aged 90+ and to determine whether the association between neuropathologic burden and dementia in these older groups differs substantially from those seen in younger-old adults.
methodsAutopsied participants from The 90+ Study and Adult Changes in Thought (ACT) Study community-based cohort studies were evaluated for dementia-associated neuropathologic changes. Associations between neuropathologic variables and dementia were assessed using logistic or linear regression, and the weighted population attributable fraction (PAF) per type of neuropathologic change was estimated.
resultsThe 90+ Study participants (n = 414) were older (mean age at death = 97.7 years) and had higher amyloid/tau burden than ACT <90 (n = 418) (mean age at death = 83.5 years) and ACT 90+ (n = 401) (mean age at death = 94.2 years) participants. The ACT 90+ cohort had significantly higher rates of limbic-predominant age-related TDP-43 encephalopathy (LATE-NC), microvascular brain injury (μVBI), and total neuropathologic burden. Independent associations between individual neuropathologic lesions and odds of dementia were similar between all 3 groups, with the exception of μVBI, which was associated with increased dementia risk in the ACT <90 group only (odds ratio 1.5, 95% CI 1.2-1.8, DISCUSSION: Our results suggest that specific neuropathologic features may differ in their effect on dementia among nonagenarians and centenarians from cohorts with different selection criteria and study design. Furthermore, microvascular lesions seem to have a more significant effect on dementia in younger compared with older participants. The results from this study demonstrate that different populations may require distinct dementia interventions, underscoring the need for disease-specific biomarkers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.