MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Blood-Brain Barrier Crossing Renin-Angiotensin Drugs and Cognition in the Elderly: A Meta-Analysis

2021· review· en· W3173296566 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jean K. Ho, Frank Moriarty, Jennifer J. Manly, Eric B. Larson, Denis A. Evans, Kumar B. Rajan, Elizabeth M. Hudak, Lamiaa Hassan, Enwu Liu, Nobuyuki Sato, Naoyuki Hasebe, Danielle Laurin, Pierre‐Hugues Carmichael, Daniel A. Nation

Bibliographic record

VenueHypertension · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de Québec
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsRenin–angiotensin systemBlood–brain barrierMedicineCognitionAngiotensin IINeuroscienceInternal medicineBlood pressurePsychologyCentral nervous systemPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hypertension is an established risk factor for cognitive decline and dementia in older adults, highlighting the potential importance of antihypertensive treatments in prevention efforts. Work surrounding antihypertensive treatments has suggested possible salutary effects on cognition and neuropathology. Several studies have specifically highlighted renin-angiotensin system drugs, including AT1-receptor blockers and angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors, as potentially benefiting cognition in later life. A small number of studies have further suggested renin-angiotensin system drugs that cross the blood-brain barrier may be linked to lower dementia risk compared to their nonpenetrant counterparts. The present meta-analysis sought to evaluate the potential cognitive benefits of blood-brain barrier crossing renin-angiotensin system drugs relative to their nonpenetrant counterparts. We harmonized longitudinal participant data from 14 cohorts from 6 countries (Australia, Canada, Germany, Ireland, Japan, United States), for a total of 12 849 individuals at baseline, and assessed for blood-brain barrier crossing potential within antihypertensive medications used by cognitively normal participants. We analyzed 7 cognitive domains (attention, executive function, language, verbal memory learning, recall, mental status, and processing speed) using ANCOVA (adjusted for age, sex, and education) and meta-analyses. Older adults taking blood-brain barrier-crossing renin-angiotensin drugs exhibited better memory recall over up to 3 years of follow-up, relative to those taking nonpenetrant medications, despite their relatively higher vascular risk burden. Conversely, those taking nonblood-brain barrier-penetrant medications showed better attention over the same follow-up period, although their lower vascular risk burden may partially explain this result. Findings suggest links between blood-brain barrier crossing renin-angiotensin drugs and less memory decline.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.049
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.151
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.199 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations88
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHypertensionSame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207