Sex- and age-specific associations between cardiometabolic risk and white matter brain age in the UK Biobank cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cardiometabolic risk factors (CMRs) are associated with accelerated brain aging and increased risk for sex-dimorphic illnesses such as Alzheimer’s Disease (AD). Yet, it is unknown how CMRs interact with sex and apolipoprotein E-ε4 (APOE4), a known genetic risk factor for AD, to influence brain age across different life stages. Using age prediction based on multi-shell diffusion-weighted imaging data in 21,308 UK Biobank participants, we investigated whether associations between white matter Brain Age Gap (BAG) and body mass index (BMI), waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), body fat percentage (BF%), and APOE4 status varied i) between males and females, ii) according to age at menopause in females, and iii) across different age groups in males and females. We report sex differences in associations between BAG and all three CMRs, with stronger positive associations among males com- pared to females. Higher BAG (older brain age relative to chronological age) was associated with greater BMI, WHR, and BF% in males, whereas in females, higher BAG was associated with greater WHR, but not BMI and BF%. These divergent associations were most prominent within the oldest group of females (66-81yrs), where higher BF% was linked to lower BAG (younger brain age relative to chronological age). Earlier menopause transition was associated with higher BAG, but no interactions were found with CMRs. APOE4 status was not significantly associated with BAG, and no significant interactions with CMRs were found. In conclusion, the findings point to sex- and age-specific associations between body fat composition and brain age. Incorporating sex as a factor of interest in studies addressing cardiometabolic risk may promote sex-specific precision medicine, consequently improving health care for both males and females.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".