Sex differences in dementia risk and risk factors: Individual‐participant data analysis using 21 cohorts across six continents from the COSMIC consortium

Introduction: Sex differences in dementia risk, and risk factor (RF) associations with dementia, remain uncertain across diverse ethno‐regional groups. Methods: A total of 29,850 participants (58% women) from 21 cohorts across six continents were included in an individual participant data meta‐analysis. Sex‐specific hazard ratios (HRs), and women‐to‐men ratio of hazard ratios (RHRs) for associations between RFs and all‐cause dementia were derived from mixed‐effect Cox models. Results: Incident dementia occurred in 2089 (66% women) participants over 4.6 years (median). Women had higher dementia risk (HR, 1.12 [1.02, 1.23]) than men, particularly in low‐ and lower‐middle‐income economies. Associations between longer education and former alcohol use with dementia risk (RHR, 1.01 [1.00, 1.03] per year, and 0.55 [0.38, 0.79], respectively) were stronger for men than women; otherwise, there were no discernible sex differences in other RFs. Discussion: Dementia risk was higher in women than men, with possible variations by country‐level income settings, but most RFs appear to work similarly in women and men

Parity and the risk of incident dementia: a COSMIC study

AIMS: To investigate the association between parity and the risk of incident dementia in women. METHODS: We pooled baseline and follow-up data for community-dwelling women aged 60 or older from six population-based, prospective cohort studies from four European and two Asian countries. We investigated the association between parity and incident dementia using Cox proportional hazards regression models adjusted for age, educational level, hypertension, diabetes mellitus and cohort, with additional analysis by dementia subtype (Alzheimer dementia (AD) and non-Alzheimer dementia (NAD)). RESULTS: Of 9756 women dementia-free at baseline, 7010 completed one or more follow-up assessments. The mean follow-up duration was 5.4 ± 3.1 years and dementia developed in 550 participants. The number of parities was associated with the risk of incident dementia (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.02-1.13). Grand multiparity (five or more parities) increased the risk of dementia by 30% compared to 1-4 parities (HR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.02-1.67). The risk of NAD increased by 12% for every parity (HR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.02-1.23) and by 60% for grand multiparity (HR = 1.60, 95% CI = 1.00-2.55), but the risk of AD was not significantly associated with parity. CONCLUSIONS: Grand multiparity is a significant risk factor for dementia in women. This may have particularly important implications for women in low and middle-income countries where the fertility rate and prevalence of grand multiparity are high

Parity and the risk of incident dementia: a COSMIC study

AIMS: To investigate the association between parity and the risk of incident dementia in women. METHODS: We pooled baseline and follow-up data for community-dwelling women aged 60 or older from six population-based, prospective cohort studies from four European and two Asian countries. We investigated the association between parity and incident dementia using Cox proportional hazards regression models adjusted for age, educational level, hypertension, diabetes mellitus and cohort, with additional analysis by dementia subtype (Alzheimer dementia (AD) and non-Alzheimer dementia (NAD)). RESULTS: Of 9756 women dementia-free at baseline, 7010 completed one or more follow-up assessments. The mean follow-up duration was 5.4 ± 3.1 years and dementia developed in 550 participants. The number of parities was associated with the risk of incident dementia (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.02-1.13). Grand multiparity (five or more parities) increased the risk of dementia by 30% compared to 1-4 parities (HR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.02-1.67). The risk of NAD increased by 12% for every parity (HR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.02-1.23) and by 60% for grand multiparity (HR = 1.60, 95% CI = 1.00-2.55), but the risk of AD was not significantly associated with parity. CONCLUSIONS: Grand multiparity is a significant risk factor for dementia in women. This may have particularly important implications for women in low and middle-income countries where the fertility rate and prevalence of grand multiparity are high

Parity and the risk of incident dementia: a COSMIC study

AIMS: To investigate the association between parity and the risk of incident dementia in women. METHODS: We pooled baseline and follow-up data for community-dwelling women aged 60 or older from six population-based, prospective cohort studies from four European and two Asian countries. We investigated the association between parity and incident dementia using Cox proportional hazards regression models adjusted for age, educational level, hypertension, diabetes mellitus and cohort, with additional analysis by dementia subtype (Alzheimer dementia (AD) and non-Alzheimer dementia (NAD)). RESULTS: Of 9756 women dementia-free at baseline, 7010 completed one or more follow-up assessments. The mean follow-up duration was 5.4 ± 3.1 years and dementia developed in 550 participants. The number of parities was associated with the risk of incident dementia (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.02-1.13). Grand multiparity (five or more parities) increased the risk of dementia by 30% compared to 1-4 parities (HR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.02-1.67). The risk of NAD increased by 12% for every parity (HR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.02-1.23) and by 60% for grand multiparity (HR = 1.60, 95% CI = 1.00-2.55), but the risk of AD was not significantly associated with parity. CONCLUSIONS: Grand multiparity is a significant risk factor for dementia in women. This may have particularly important implications for women in low and middle-income countries where the fertility rate and prevalence of grand multiparity are high

Does parity matter in women’s risk of dementia? A COSMIC collaboration cohort study

BACKGROUND: Dementia shows sex difference in its epidemiology. Childbirth, a distinctive experience of women, is associated with the risk for various diseases. However, its association with the risk of dementia in women has rarely been studied. METHODS: We harmonized and pooled baseline data from 11 population-based cohorts from 11 countries over 3 continents, including 14, 792 women aged 60¿years or older. We investigated the association between parity and the risk of dementia using logistic regression models that adjusted for age, educational level, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and cohort, with additional analyses by region and dementia subtype. RESULTS: Across all cohorts, grand multiparous (5 or more childbirths) women had a 47% greater risk of dementia than primiparous (1 childbirth) women (odds ratio [OR]¿=¿1.47, 95% confidence interval [CI]¿=¿1.10-1.94), while nulliparous (no childbirth) women and women with 2 to 4 childbirths showed a comparable dementia risk to primiparous women. However, there were differences associated with region and dementia subtype. Compared to women with 1 to 4 childbirths, grand multiparous women showed a higher risk of dementia in Europe (OR¿=¿2.99, 95% CI¿=¿1.38-6.47) and Latin America (OR¿=¿1.49, 95% CI¿=¿1.04-2.12), while nulliparous women showed a higher dementia risk in Asia (OR¿=¿2.15, 95% CI¿=¿1.33-3.47). Grand multiparity was associated with 6.9-fold higher risk of vascular dementia in Europe (OR¿=¿6.86, 95% CI¿=¿1.81-26.08), whereas nulliparity was associated with a higher risk of Alzheimer disease (OR¿=¿1.91, 95% CI 1.07-3.39) and non-Alzheimer non-vascular dementia (OR¿=¿3.47, 95% CI¿=¿1.44-8.35) in Asia. CONCLUSION: Parity is associated with women''s risk of dementia, though this is not uniform across regions and dementia subtypes

Does parity matter in women's risk of dementia? A COSMIC collaboration cohort study.

BackgroundDementia shows sex difference in its epidemiology. Childbirth, a distinctive experience of women, is associated with the risk for various diseases. However, its association with the risk of dementia in women has rarely been studied.MethodsWe harmonized and pooled baseline data from 11 population-based cohorts from 11 countries over 3 continents, including 14,792 women aged 60 years or older. We investigated the association between parity and the risk of dementia using logistic regression models that adjusted for age, educational level, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and cohort, with additional analyses by region and dementia subtype.ResultsAcross all cohorts, grand multiparous (5 or more childbirths) women had a 47% greater risk of dementia than primiparous (1 childbirth) women (odds ratio [OR] = 1.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.10-1.94), while nulliparous (no childbirth) women and women with 2 to 4 childbirths showed a comparable dementia risk to primiparous women. However, there were differences associated with region and dementia subtype. Compared to women with 1 to 4 childbirths, grand multiparous women showed a higher risk of dementia in Europe (OR = 2.99, 95% CI = 1.38-6.47) and Latin America (OR = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.04-2.12), while nulliparous women showed a higher dementia risk in Asia (OR = 2.15, 95% CI = 1.33-3.47). Grand multiparity was associated with 6.9-fold higher risk of vascular dementia in Europe (OR = 6.86, 95% CI = 1.81-26.08), whereas nulliparity was associated with a higher risk of Alzheimer disease (OR = 1.91, 95% CI 1.07-3.39) and non-Alzheimer non-vascular dementia (OR = 3.47, 95% CI = 1.44-8.35) in Asia.ConclusionParity is associated with women's risk of dementia, though this is not uniform across regions and dementia subtypes

Estimating prevalence of subjective cognitive decline in and across international cohort studies of aging: a COSMIC study.

BACKGROUND: Subjective cognitive decline (SCD) is recognized as a risk stage for Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other dementias, but its prevalence is not well known. We aimed to use uniform criteria to better estimate SCD prevalence across international cohorts. METHODS: We combined individual participant data for 16 cohorts from 15 countries (members of the COSMIC consortium) and used qualitative and quantitative (Item Response Theory/IRT) harmonization techniques to estimate SCD prevalence. RESULTS: The sample comprised 39,387 cognitively unimpaired individuals above age 60. The prevalence of SCD across studies was around one quarter with both qualitative harmonization/QH (23.8%, 95%CI = 23.3-24.4%) and IRT (25.6%, 95%CI = 25.1-26.1%); however, prevalence estimates varied largely between studies (QH 6.1%, 95%CI = 5.1-7.0%, to 52.7%, 95%CI = 47.4-58.0%; IRT: 7.8%, 95%CI = 6.8-8.9%, to 52.7%, 95%CI = 47.4-58.0%). Across studies, SCD prevalence was higher in men than women, in lower levels of education, in Asian and Black African people compared to White people, in lower- and middle-income countries compared to high-income countries, and in studies conducted in later decades. CONCLUSIONS: SCD is frequent in old age. Having a quarter of older individuals with SCD warrants further investigation of its significance, as a risk stage for AD and other dementias, and of ways to help individuals with SCD who seek medical advice. Moreover, a standardized instrument to measure SCD is needed to overcome the measurement variability currently dominant in the field.Susanne Röhr was supported by the LIFE—Leipzig Research Center for Civilization Diseases, University of Leipzig, funded by the European Social Fund and the Free State of Saxony (grant number LIFE-103 P1). This work was further supported by a grant from the Hans and Ilse Breuer Foundation. Funding for COSMIC comes from a National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia Program Grant (ID 1093083) (PSS, HB), the National Institute On Aging of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number RF1AG057531 (PSS, MG, RBL, KR, KWK, HB), and philanthropic contributions to The Dementia Momentum Fund (UNSW Project ID PS38235). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health or other funders. Funding for each of the contributing studies is as follows: ActiveAging: no funding; CFAS: major awards from the Medical Research Council and the Department of Health, UK; EAS: Supported in part by National Institutes of Health grants NIA 2 P01 AG03949, the Leonard and Sylvia Marx Foundation, and the Czap Foundation; EPIDEMCA: French National Research Agency (ANR-09-MNPS-009-01); ESPRIT: Novartis; Invece.Ab: Financed with own funds and supported in part by "Federazione Alzheimer Italia", Milan, Italy (AG); KLOSCAD: the Korean Health Technology R&D Project, Ministry of Health and Welfare, Republic of Korea [Grant No. HI09C1379 (A092077)]; LEILA75+: the Interdisciplinary Centre for Clinical Research at the University of Leipzig (Interdisziplinäres Zentrum für Klinische Forschung/IZKF; grant 01KS9504); LRGS-TUA: Ministry of Education Longterm Research Grant Scheme (LRGS/BU/2012/UKM–UKM/K/01); MAAS: The Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NOW). Grant Number: 002.005.019; MoVIES: Grant # R01AG07562 from the National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, United States Department of Health and Human Services; PATH: National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia grants 973302, 179805, 157125 and 1002160; SGS: JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP17K09146; SLASII: The SLAS2 study was supported by research grants from the Agency for Science Technology and Research (A*STAR) Biomedical Research Council (BMRC) https://www.a-star.edu.sg/ [Grants 03/1/21/17/214 and 08/1/21/19/567] and the National Medical Research Council http://www.nmrc.gov.sg/ [Grant: NMRC/1108/2007]; ZARADEMP: Supported by grants from the Fondo de Investigación Sanitaria, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, Madrid, Spain (grants 94/1562, 97/1321E, 98/0103, 01/0255, 03/0815, 06/0617, G03/128), and the Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER) of the European Union and Gobierno de Aragón, Group #19

Education and the moderating roles of age, sex, ethnicity and apolipoprotein epsilon 4 on the risk of cognitive impairment

Background: We examined how the relationship between education and latelife cognitive impairment (defined as a Mini Mental State Examination score below 24) is influenced by age, sex, ethnicity, and Apolipoprotein E epsilon 4 (APOE*4). Methods: Participants were 30,785 dementia-free individuals aged 55–103 years, from 18 longitudinal cohort studies, with an average follow-up ranging between 2 and 10 years. Pooled hazard ratios were obtained from multilevel parametric survival analyses predicting cognitive impairment (CI) from education and its interactions with baseline age, sex, APOE*4 and ethnicity. In separate models, education was treated as continuous (years) and categorical, with participants assigned to one of four education completion levels: Incomplete Elementary; Elementary; Middle; and High School. Results: Compared to Elementary, Middle (HR = 0.645, P = 0.004) and High School (HR = 0.472, P < 0.001) education were related to reduced CI risk. The decreased risk of CI associated with Middle education weakened with older baseline age (HR = 1.029, P = 0.056) and was stronger in women than men (HR = 1.309, P = 0.001). The association between High School and lowered CI risk, however, was not moderated by sex or baseline age, but was stronger in Asians than Whites (HR = 1.047, P = 0.044), and significant among Asian (HR = 0.34, P < 0.001) and Black (HR = 0.382, P = 0.016), but not White, APOE*4 carriers. Conclusion: High School completion may reduce risk of CI associated with advancing age and APOE*4. The observed ethnoregional differences in this effect are potentially due to variations in social, economic, and political outcomes associated with educational attainment, in combination with neurobiological and genetic differences, and warrant further study

Education and the moderating roles of age, sex, ethnicity and apolipoprotein epsilon 4 on the risk of cognitive impairment

Background: We examined how the relationship between education and latelife cognitive impairment (defined as a Mini Mental State Examination score below 24) is influenced by age, sex, ethnicity, and Apolipoprotein E epsilon 4 (APOE*4). Methods: Participants were 30,785 dementia-free individuals aged 55–103 years, from 18 longitudinal cohort studies, with an average follow-up ranging between 2 and 10 years. Pooled hazard ratios were obtained from multilevel parametric survival analyses predicting cognitive impairment (CI) from education and its interactions with baseline age, sex, APOE*4 and ethnicity. In separate models, education was treated as continuous (years) and categorical, with participants assigned to one of four education completion levels: Incomplete Elementary; Elementary; Middle; and High School. Results: Compared to Elementary, Middle (HR = 0.645, P = 0.004) and High School (HR = 0.472, P &lt; 0.001) education were related to reduced CI risk. The decreased risk of CI associated with Middle education weakened with older baseline age (HR = 1.029, P = 0.056) and was stronger in women than men (HR = 1.309, P = 0.001). The association between High School and lowered CI risk, however, was not moderated by sex or baseline age, but was stronger in Asians than Whites (HR = 1.047, P = 0.044), and significant among Asian (HR = 0.34, P &lt; 0.001) and Black (HR = 0.382, P = 0.016), but not White, APOE*4 carriers. Conclusion: High School completion may reduce risk of CI associated with advancing age and APOE*4. The observed ethnoregional differences in this effect are potentially due to variations in social, economic, and political outcomes associated with educational attainment, in combination with neurobiological and genetic differences, and warrant further study. © 2020 Elsevier B.V

Sex differences in dementia risk and risk factors: Individual‐participant data analysis using 21 cohorts across six continents from the COSMIC consortium

International audienc