Epigenetic scores of blood-based proteins as biomarkers of general cognitive function and brain health.

BACKGROUND: Epigenetic Scores (EpiScores) for blood protein levels have been associated with disease outcomes and measures of brain health, highlighting their potential usefulness as clinical biomarkers. They are typically derived via penalised regression, whereby a linear weighted sum of DNA methylation (DNAm) levels at CpG sites are predictive of protein levels. Here, we examine 84 previously published protein EpiScores as possible biomarkers of cross-sectional and longitudinal measures of general cognitive function and brain health, and incident dementia across three independent cohorts. RESULTS: Using 84 protein EpiScores as candidate biomarkers, associations with general cognitive function (both cross-sectionally and longitudinally) were tested in three independent cohorts: Generation Scotland (GS), and the Lothian Birth Cohorts of 1921 and 1936 (LBC1921 and LBC1936, respectively). A meta-analysis of general cognitive functioning results in all three cohorts identified 18 EpiScore associations (absolute meta-analytic standardised estimates ranged from 0.03 to 0.14, median of 0.04, PFDR < 0.05). Several associations were also observed between EpiScores and global brain volumetric measures in the LBC1936. An EpiScore for the S100A9 protein (a known Alzheimer disease biomarker) was associated with general cognitive functioning (meta-analytic standardised beta: - 0.06, P = 1.3 × 10-9), and with time-to-dementia in GS (Hazard ratio 1.24, 95% confidence interval 1.08-1.44, P = 0.003), but not in LBC1936 (Hazard ratio 1.11, P = 0.32). CONCLUSIONS: EpiScores might make a contribution to the risk profile of poor general cognitive function and global brain health, and risk of dementia, however these scores require replication in further studies.

Identifying dementia using medical data linkage in a longitudinal cohort study: Lothian Birth Cohort 1936.

BACKGROUND: The Lothian Birth Cohort 1936 (LBC1936) is a longitudinal study of ageing with well-characterised assessments, but until now, it has relied on self-report or proxies for dementia such as cognitive tests. Our aims were twofold: a) to describe a framework for identifying dementia in a cohort study. b) to report the age-specific incidence and prevalence of all-cause dementia and dementia subtypes in 865 individuals in the LBC1936. METHODS: Electronic Health Records (EHR) of all participants were reviewed, and relevant information was extracted to form case vignettes for everyone with any record of cognitive dysfunction. The EHR data sources include hospital and clinic letters, general practitioner and hospital referrals, prescribed medications, imaging and laboratory results. Death certificate data were obtained separately. Clinician assessments were performed when there was concern about a participant's cognition. A diagnosis of probable dementia, possible dementia, or no dementia was agreed upon by a consensus diagnostic review board, comprised of a multidisciplinary team of clinical dementia experts who reviewed case vignettes and clinician assessment letters. For those with probable dementia, a subtype was also determined, where possible. We compared the agreement between our newly ascertained dementia diagnoses with the existing self-reported dementia diagnoses. RESULTS: Self-reported dementia diagnoses were positive in only 17.8% of ascertained dementia diagnoses. The EHR review identified 163/865 (18.8%) individuals as having cognitive dysfunction. At the consensus diagnostic review board, 118/163 were diagnosed with probable all-cause dementia, a prevalence of 13.6%. Age-specific dementia prevalence increased with age from 0.8% (65-74.9 years) to 9.93% (85-89.9 years). Prevalence rates for women were higher in nearly all age groups. The most common subtype was dementia due to Alzheimer disease (49.2%), followed by mixed Alzheimer and cerebrovascular disease (17.0%), dementia of unknown or unspecified cause (16.1%), and dementia due to vascular disease (8.5%). CONCLUSIONS: We present a robust systematic framework and guide for other cohort teams wanting to ascertain dementia diagnoses. The newly ascertained dementia diagnosis provides vital data for further analyses of LBC1936 to allow exploration of lifecourse predictors of dementia.

Cognitive Change Before Old Age (11 to 70) Predicts Cognitive Change During Old Age (70 to 82).

Identifying predictors of cognitive decline in old age helps us understand its mechanisms and identify those at greater risk. Here, we examined how cognitive change from ages 11 to 70 is associated with cognitive change at older ages (70 to 82 years) in the Lothian Birth Cohort 1936 longitudinal study (N = 1,091 at recruitment). Using latent-growth-curve models, we estimated rates of change from ages 70 to 82 in general cognitive ability (g) and in three cognitive domains: visuospatial, memory, and processing speed. We found that g accounted for 71.3% of interindividual change variance. Greater cognitive gain from ages 11 to 70 predicted slower decline in g over 12 subsequent years (ß = 0.163, p = .001), independently of cognitive level in childhood and at age 70, and domain-specific change beyond g. These results contribute to the goal of identifying people at higher risk of age-related cognitive decline.

Impact of COVID-19 lockdown on psychosocial factors, health, and lifestyle in Scottish octogenarians: The Lothian Birth Cohort 1936 study.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about effects of COVID-19 lockdown on psychosocial factors, health and lifestyle in older adults, particularly those aged over 80 years, despite the risks posed by COVID-19 to this age group. METHODS: Lothian Birth Cohort 1936 members, residing mostly in Edinburgh and the surrounding Lothians regions in Scotland, mean age 84 years (SD = 0.3), responded to an online questionnaire in May 2020 (n = 190). We examined responses (experience and knowledge of COVID-19; adherence to guidance; impact on day-to-day living; social contact; self-reported physical and mental health; loneliness; and lifestyle) and relationships between previously-measured characteristics and questionnaire outcomes. RESULTS: Four respondents experienced COVID-19; most had good COVID-19 knowledge (94.7%) and found guidance easy to understand (86.3%). There were modest declines in self-reported physical and mental health, and 48.2% did less physical activity. In multivariable regression models, adherence to guidance by leaving the house less often associated with less professional occupational class (OR = 0.71, 95%CI 0.51-0.98) and poorer self-rated general health (OR = 0.62, 95%CI 0.42-0.92). Increased internet use associated with female sex (OR = 2.32, 95%CI 1.12-4.86) and higher general cognitive ability (OR = 1.53, 95%CI 1.03-2.33). Loneliness associated with living alone (OR = 0.15, 95%CI 0.07-0.31) and greater anxiety symptoms (OR = 1.76, 95%CI 0.45-1.24). COVID-19 related stress associated with lower emotional stability scores (OR = 0.40, 95%CI 0.24-0.62). Decreased physical activity associated with less professional occupational class (OR = 1.43, 95%CI 1.04-1.96), and lower general cognitive ability (OR = 0.679, 95%CI 0.491-0.931). CONCLUSIONS: Characteristics including cognitive function, occupational class, self-rated health, anxiety, and emotional stability, may be related to risk of poorer lockdown-related psychosocial and physical outcomes.

Home garden use during COVID-19: Associations with physical and mental wellbeing in older adults.

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected many aspects of people's lives. Lockdown measures to reduce the spread of COVID-19 have been more stringent for those aged over 70, at highest risk for the disease. Here, we examine whether home garden usage is associated with self-reported mental and physical wellbeing in older adults, during COVID-19 lockdown in Scotland. This study analysed data from 171 individuals (mean age 84 ± 0.5 years) from the Lothian Birth Cohort 1936 study who completed an online survey approximately two months after lockdown commenced (May/June, 2020), and reported having access to a home garden. The survey also included items on garden activities (gardening, relaxing), frequency of garden usage during lockdown, and measures of self-rated physical health, emotional and mental health, anxiety about COVID-19, and sleep quality. Ordinal regression models were adjusted for sex, living alone, education, occupational social class, anxiety and depressive symptoms, body mass index, and history of diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Neither gardening nor relaxing in the garden were associated with health outcomes. However, higher frequency of garden usage during lockdown was associated with better self-rated physical health (P = 0.005), emotional and mental health (P = 0.04), sleep quality (P = 0.03), and a composite health score (P = 0.001), after adjusting for covariates. None of the garden measures were associated with perceived change in physical health, mental and emotional health, or sleep quality, from pre-lockdown levels. The results of the current study provide support for positive health benefits of spending time in a garden-though associations may be bidirectional-and suggest that domestic gardens could be a potential health resource during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Change in Physical Activity, Sleep Quality, and Psychosocial Variables during COVID-19 Lockdown: Evidence from the Lothian Birth Cohort 1936.

(1) Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected the lives of older people. In this study, we examine changes in physical activity, sleep quality, and psychosocial variables among older people during COVID-19 lockdown. We build on cross-sectional studies on this topic by assessing change longitudinally. We also examined whether participant characteristics including demographic, cognitive, personality, and health variables were related to more positive or negative changes during lockdown. (2) Methods: 137 older participants (mean age 84 years) from the Lothian Birth Cohort 1936 study were included in the analysis. They completed the same questionnaires assessing physical activity, sleep quality, mental wellbeing, social support, loneliness, neighbourhood cohesion, and memory problems before (mostly 2 years earlier) and again during national lockdown. (3) Results: On average, levels of physical activity were reduced (those doing minimal physical activity increased from 10% to 19%) and perceived social support increased during lockdown (effect size drm = 0.178). More positive change in the psychosocial and behavioural outcome variables during lockdown was associated with personality traits (greater intellect, emotional stability, and extraversion) and having a higher general cognitive ability. Participants with a history of cardiovascular disease, more symptoms of anxiety, or who lived alone were more likely to experience negative changes in the outcome variables during lockdown. (4) Discussion: These results provide further insight into the experiences of older people during the COVID-19 pandemic and could help to identify those at greatest risk of negative psychosocial or behavioural changes during this time.