- Browse by Author
Browsing by Author "Matthews, Fiona E."
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item The changing prevalence and incidence of dementia over time — current evidence(Nature, 2017) Wu, Yu-Tzu; Beiser, Alexa S.; Breteler, Monique M. B.; Fratiglioni, Laura; Helmer, Catherine; Hendrie, Hugh C.; Honda, Hiroyuki; Ikram, M. Arfan; Langa, Kenneth M.; Lobo, Antonio; Matthews, Fiona E.; Ohara, Tomoyuki; Pérès, Karine; Qiu, Chengxuan; Seshadri, Sudha; Sjölund, Britt-Marie; Skoog, Ingmar; Brayne, Carol; Psychiatry, School of MedicineDementia is an increasing focus for policymakers, civil organizations and multidisciplinary researchers. The most recent descriptive epidemiological research into dementia is enabling investigation into how the prevalence and incidence are changing over time. To establish clear trends, such comparisons need to be founded on population-based studies that use similar diagnostic and research methods consistently over time. This narrative Review synthesizes the findings from 14 studies that investigated trends in dementia prevalence (nine studies) and incidence (five studies) from Sweden, Spain, the UK, the Netherlands, France, the USA, Japan and Nigeria. Besides the Japanese study, these studies indicate stable or declining prevalence and incidence of dementia, and some provide evidence of sex-specific changes. No single risk or protective factor has been identified that fully explains the observed trends, but major societal changes and improvements in living conditions, education and healthcare might have favourably influenced physical, mental and cognitive health throughout an individual's life course, and could be responsible for a reduced risk of dementia in later life. Analytical epidemiological approaches combined with translational neuroscientific research could provide a unique opportunity to explore the neuropathology that underlies changing occurrence of dementia in the general population.Item Neuropathological Correlates of Cumulative Benzodiazepine and Anticholinergic Drug Use(IOS Press, 2020-04) Richardson, Kathryn; Wharton, Stephen B.; Grossi, Carlota M.; Matthews, Fiona E.; Fox, Chris; Maidment, Ian; Loke, Yoon K.; Steel, Nicholas; Arthur, Antony; Myint, Phyo Kyaw; Boustani, Malaz; Campbell, Noll; Robinson, Louise; Brayne, Carol; Savva, George M.; Medicine, School of MedicineBackground:Benzodiazepines and anticholinergic drugs have been implicated in causing cognitive decline and potentially increasing dementia risk. However, evidence for an association with neuropathology is limited. Objective:To estimate the correlation between neuropathology at death and prior use of benzodiazepines and anticholinergic drugs. Methods:We categorized 298 brain donors from the population-based Medical Research Council Cognitive Function and Ageing Study, according to their history of benzodiazepine (including Z-drugs) or anticholinergic medication (drugs scoring 3 on the Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden scale) use. We used logistic regression to compare dichotomized neuropathological features for those with and without history of benzodiazepine and anticholinergic drug use before dementia, adjusted for confounders. Results:Forty-nine (16%) and 51 (17%) participants reported benzodiazepine and anticholinergic drug use. Alzheimer’s disease neuropathologic change was similar whether or not exposed to either drug, for example 46% and 57% had intermediate/high levels among those with and without anticholinergic drug use. Although not significant after multiple testing adjustments, we estimated an odds ratio (OR) of 0.40 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.18–0.87) for anticholinergic use and cortical atrophy. For benzodiazepine use, we estimated ORs of 4.63 (1.11–19.24) and 3.30 (1.02–10.68) for neuronal loss in the nucleus basalis and substantial nigra. There was evidence of neuronal loss in the nucleus basalis with anticholinergic drug use, but the association reduced when adjusted for confounders. Conclusions:We found no evidence that benzodiazepine or anticholinergic drug use is associated with typical pathological features of Alzheimer’s disease; however, we cannot rule out effects owing to small numbers.