Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
Hyperlipidemia has been proposed as a risk factor of dementia and cognitive decline. However, the findings of the relationship between cholesterol level and cognitive/brain function have been inconsistent. Here, using a well-controlled sample from the Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI), we investigated the probable non-linear relationship between plasma total cholesterol (TC) level, gray matter volume (GMv), and cognitive performance in 117 non-demented subjects (mean age, 61.5 ± 8.9 years), including 67 Parkinson's disease (PD) patients and 50 demographically matched controls. A quadratic relationship between semantic fluency (SF) performance and TC levels was identified. Within the subjects with a desirable TC level (TC < 200 mg/dl), low TC (lTC) levels were associated with reduced SF performance, as well as reduced GMv in three medial temporal regions [including bilateral anterior hippocampus (HIP)]. In contrast, no significant relationship between TC and cognition performance/GMv was found in individuals with a high cholesterol level (i.e., TC ≥ 200 mg/dl). Further region of interest (ROI)-based analysis showed that individuals with TC levels ranging from 100 to 160 mg/dl had the lowest GMv in the medial temporal regions. These findings suggest that low-normal TC level may be associated with reduced cognitive function and brain atrophy in regions implicated in neurodegenerative diseases, adding to a growing body of literature supporting a probable non-linear relationship between cholesterol level and brain health. However, this finding needs to be verified with other large public cohort data that do not include PD patients.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.