↓ Skip to main content

Apolipoprotein E Genotype and Sex Risk Factors for Alzheimer Disease: A Meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA Neurology, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
19 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
39 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
Title
Apolipoprotein E Genotype and Sex Risk Factors for Alzheimer Disease: A Meta-analysis
Published in
JAMA Neurology, August 2017
DOI 10.1001/jamaneurol.2017.2188
Pubmed ID
Authors

Scott C. Neu, Judy Pa, Walter Kukull, Duane Beekly, Amanda Kuzma, Prabhakaran Gangadharan, Li-San Wang, Klaus Romero, Stephen P. Arneric, Alberto Redolfi, Daniele Orlandi, Giovanni B. Frisoni, Rhoda Au, Sherral Devine, Sanford Auerbach, Ana Espinosa, Mercè Boada, Agustín Ruiz, Sterling C. Johnson, Rebecca Koscik, Jiun-Jie Wang, Wen-Chuin Hsu, Yao-Liang Chen, Arthur W. Toga

Abstract

It is unclear whether female carriers of the apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 allele are at greater risk of developing Alzheimer disease (AD) than men, and the sex-dependent association of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and APOE has not been established. To determine how sex and APOE genotype affect the risks for developing MCI and AD. Twenty-seven independent research studies in the Global Alzheimer's Association Interactive Network with data on nearly 58 000 participants. Non-Hispanic white individuals with clinical diagnostic and APOE genotype data. Homogeneous data sets were pooled in case-control analyses, and logistic regression models were used to compute risks. Age-adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals for developing MCI and AD were calculated for men and women across APOE genotypes. Participants were men and women between ages 55 and 85 years. Across data sets most participants were white, and for many participants, racial/ethnic information was either not collected or not known. Men (OR, 3.09; 95% CI, 2.79-3.42) and women (OR, 3.31; CI, 3.03-3.61) with the APOE ε3/ε4 genotype from ages 55 to 85 years did not show a difference in AD risk; however, women had an increased risk compared with men between the ages of 65 and 75 years (women, OR, 4.37; 95% CI, 3.82-5.00; men, OR, 3.14; 95% CI, 2.68-3.67; P = .002). Men with APOE ε3/ε4 had an increased risk of AD compared with men with APOE ε3/ε3. The APOE ε2/ε3 genotype conferred a protective effect on women (OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.43-0.61) decreasing their risk of AD more (P value = .01) than men (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.60-0.85). There was no difference between men with APOE ε3/ε4 (OR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.36-1.76) and women (OR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.43-1.81) in their risk of developing MCI between the ages of 55 and 85 years, but women had an increased risk between 55 and 70 years (women, OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.19-1.73; men, OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.87-1.30; P = .05). There were no significant differences between men and women in their risks for converting from MCI to AD between the ages of 55 and 85 years. Individuals with APOE ε4/ε4 showed increased risks vs individuals with ε3/ε4, but no significant differences between men and women with ε4/ε4 were seen. Contrary to long-standing views, men and women with the APOE ε3/ε4 genotype have nearly the same odds of developing AD from age 55 to 85 years, but women have an increased risk at younger ages.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 39 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 21%
Researcher 3 21%
Professor 2 14%
Student > Postgraduate 2 14%
Student > Master 1 7%
Other 3 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 43%
Unspecified 3 21%
Psychology 2 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Other 1 7%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 174. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 September 2017.
All research outputs
#43,034
of 8,422,968 outputs
Outputs from JAMA Neurology
#76
of 1,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,104
of 161,089 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA Neurology
#7
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,422,968 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,416 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 161,089 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.