Article

Apolipoprotein E4 allele presence and functional outcome after severe traumatic brain injury.

University of Pittsburgh School of Nursing, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Journal of Neurotrauma (Impact Factor: 3.97). 06/2007; 24(5):790-7. DOI: 10.1089/neu.2006.0133
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Presence of the apolipoprotein E (APOE) 4 allele has been associated with increased incidence and faster progression of neurodegenerative diseases, poorer recovery from neurologic insult, and decreased cognitive function in the well-elderly. The specific association between APOE genotype and recovery from severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) is conflicting with many groups finding the APOE 4 allele to be associated with poorer outcome while others have found no association. The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between APOE 4 allele presence and recovery during the two years after injury from severe TBI in light of other potential covariates, such as age, race, gender, hypotension or hypoxia before hospital admission and severity of injury. APOE genotype was determined for 123 subjects with severe TBI. Glasgow outcome score (GOS) and mortality were collected at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after injury. Results showed individuals improved over the two year period following injury and those with the 4 allele had a slower recovery rate than those without the APOE 4 allele over the two year period. We did not however find significant differences in GOS at individual time points when controlling for other covariates. Our findings suggest that APOE 4 allele presence influences recovery rate from severe TBI independent of other covariates. The findings of this study are unique in that they address not only the relationship between APOE 4 allele presence and outcome from severe TBI, but also describe differences in trajectory of recovery by APOE 4 allele presence.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
82 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States, and the incidence has been increasing within the geriatric age group as the population ages. There are many factors that are unique to this subgroup, including normal aging processes, differences in pathophysiology, and inherent medical comorbidities that affect their outcomes, treatment, and therefore, the allocation of medical and social services. The geriatric population has age-appropriate strength, coordination and balance deficits that make them predisposed to falls and subsequent TBI. The aging brain often has premorbid atrophy and increased susceptibility to the inflammatory, excitatory, and vascular processes that facilitate neurologic damage during the acute phases after injury. The aged also can have premorbid neurodegenerative and medical comorbidities that also affect their rehabilitation course, recovery, and outcomes once a TBI has occurred. Pharmacological strategies to maximize rehabilitation and recovery require specific considerations of the potential for adverse effects and contraindications specific to common comorbidities in the aged population. The management of geriatric TBI requires a coordinated effort between physicians and other healthcare providers with focus on risk factor modification, medical optimization, and successful return to the community by setting goals that emphasize level of function and quality of life.
    Current Translational Geriatrics and Gerontology Reports. 09/2012; 1(3).
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There is mixed evidence linking adverse outcomes after traumatic brain injury to the presence of the ε4 allele of the apolipoprotein gene (APOE). Further, there has been limited investigation of the role of APOE in populations who have sustained severe brain injuries. In this study, 100 individuals aged 16 to 65 years with a severe to extremely severe traumatic brain injury were recruited prospectively from an inpatient rehabilitation unit. APOE genotypes were determined, and demographic and clinical data were collected by blind assessors at 6 months postinjury. Sixty-nine participants who were divided into an acute (less than 12 months postinjury) and chronic (greater than 12 months) groups also completed neuropsychological assessments testing various domains of memory, attention and problem-solving at follow-up. No significant differences in injury severity, cognitive or functional outcome were found between individuals with the ε4 allele and those without at either time postinjury. This finding is consistent with other recent data that has questioned the role of APOE status as a factor in recovery from TBI.
    Brain Impairment - BRAIN IMPAIR. 09/2009; 10(2):162-168.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Human genetic association studies in individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI) have increased rapidly over the past few years. Recently, several review articles evaluated the association of genetics with outcomes after TBI. However, almost all of the articles discussed in these reviews focused on adult TBI. The primary objective of this review is to gain a better understanding of which genes and/or genetic polymorphisms have been evaluated in pediatric TBI. Our initial search identified 113 articles. After review of these articles only 5 genetic association studies specific to pediatric TBI were identified. All five of these studies evaluated the apolipoprotein (APOE) gene. The study design and methods of these identified papers will be discussed. An additional search was then performed to evaluate genes beyond APOE that have been evaluated in adult TBI; findings from these studies are highlighted. Larger genetic studies will need to be performed in the future to better elucidate the association of APOE and other genes with outcomes after TBI in children. There is great potential to utilized genetic information to inform prognosis and management after TBI in children; however, we have much work ahead of us to reach the goal of individualized management.
    Journal of pediatric rehabilitation medicine 01/2012; 5(3):217-31.