ArticleBrain, behavior, & immunity - health2024
Systemic inflammation in relation to exceptional memory in the Long Life Family Study (LLFS).
Article in Brain, behavior, & immunity - health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Background and objectives: We previously found a substantial familial aggregation of healthy aging phenotypes, including exceptional memory (EM) in long-lived persons. In the current study, we aim to assess whether long-lived families with EM and without EM (non-EM) differ in systemic inflammation status and trajectory. Methods: The current study included 4333 participants of the multi-center Long Life Family Study (LLFS). LLFS families were classified as EM (556 individuals from 28 families) or non-EM (3777 individuals from 416 families), with 2 or more offspring exhibiting exceptional memory performance (i.e. having baseline composite z-score representing immediate and delayed story memory being 1.5 SD above the mean in the nondemented offspring sample) considered as EM. Blood samples from baseline were used to measure inflammatory biomarkers including total white blood cell (WBC) and its subtypes (neutrophils, lymphocytes, monocytes) count, platelet count, high sensitivity C-reactive protein, and interleukin-6. Generalized linear models were used to examine cross-sectional differences in inflammatory biomarkers at baseline. In a sub-sample of 2227 participants (338 subjects from 24 EM families and 1889 from 328 non-EM families) with repeated measures of immune cell counts, we examined whether the rate of biomarker change differed between EM and non-EM families. All models were adjusted for family size, relatedness, age, sex, education, field center, APOE genotype, and body mass index. Results: LLFS participants from EM families had a marginally higher monocyte count at baseline (b = 0.028, SE = 0.0110, p = 0.010) after adjusting for age, sex, education, and field site, particularly in men (p < 0.0001) but not in women (p = 0.493) (p-interaction = 0.003). Over time, monocyte counts increased (p < 0.0001) in both EM and non-EM families, while lymphocytes and platelet counts decreased over time in the non-EM families (p < 0.0001) but not in the EM families. After adjusting for multiple variables, there was no significant difference in biomarker change over time between the EM and non-EM families. Discussion: Compared with non-EM families, EM families had significantly higher monocyte count at baseline but had similar change over time. Our study suggests that differences in monocyte counts may be a pathway through which EM emerges in some long-lived families, especially among men.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.