Evidence Hub

Biological and Neuroimaging Markers as Predictors of 5-Year Incident Frailty in Older Adults: A Secondary Analysis of the MAPT Study

Lu WH, de Souto Barreto P, Rolland Y, Bouyahia A, Fischer C, Mangin JF, Giudici KV, Vellas B et al.

The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences, 2021

1,394 participants · 13 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study aims to investigate the predictive value of biological and neuroimaging markers to determine incident frailty among older people for a period of 5 years.

METHODS: We included 1394 adults aged 70 years and older from the Multidomain Alzheimer Preventive Trial, who were not frail at baseline (according to Fried's criteria) and who had at least 1 post-baseline measurement of frailty. Participants who progressed to frailty during the 5-year follow-up were categorized as "incident frailty" and those who remained non-frail were categorized as "without frailty." The differences of baseline biochemical factors (25-hydroxyvitamin D, homocysteine, omega-3 index, C-reactive protein), other biological markers (Apolipoprotein E genotypes, amyloid-β deposits), and neuroimaging data (gray matter volume, hippocampal volume, white matter hyperintensities) were compared between groups. Cox proportional hazard model was used to evaluate the associations between biomarkers and incident frailty.

RESULTS: A total of 195 participants (14.0%) became frail over 5 years. Although 25-hydroxyvitamin D deficiency, homocysteine levels, low-grade inflammation (persistently increased C-reactive protein 3-10 mg/L), gray matter, and hippocampal volume were significantly associated with incident frailty in unadjusted models, these associations disappeared after adjustment for age, sex, and other confounders. Omega-3 index was the sole marker that presented a trend of association with…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 1,394 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free