gov number, NCT00395304.)
Engl J Med 2010;362:975-85.”
“Objective. To determine whether Experience Corps (EC), a social service program, would improve age-vulnerable executive functions and increase activity in brain regions in a high-risk group through increased cognitive and physical activity.
Methods. Eight community-dwelling, older female volunteers and nine matched wait-list controls were recruited to serve in the ongoing EC: Baltimore program in three elementary schools. We employed functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) preintervention and postintervention Selleckchem Acalabrutinib to examine whether EC volunteers improved executive function and showed increased activity in the prefrontal cortex relative to controls. fMRI volunteers were trained and placed with other volunteers 15 h/wk for 6 months during the academic year to assist teachers in kindergarten through third grade to promote children’s literacy and academic achievement.
Results. Participants were African American and had low education, low income, Estrogen/progestogen Receptor modulator and low Mini-Mental State Examination scores (M = 24), indicative of elevated risk for cognitive impairment. Volunteers exhibited intervention-specific increases in brain activity in the left prefrontal cortex and anterior cingulate cortex over the 6-month interval relative to matched controls. Neural gains were matched by behavioral improvements in executive inhibitory ability.
Conclusions. Using fMRI, we demonstrated intervention-specific
short-term gains in executive function and in PF-6463922 concentration the activity of prefrontal cortical regions in older adults at elevated risk for cognitive impairment. These pilot results
provide proof of concept for use-dependent brain plasticity in later life, and, that interventions designed to promote health and function through everyday activity may enhance plasticity in key regions that support executive function.”
“Background: Genomewide association studies have identified multiple genetic variants associated with breast cancer. The extent to which these variants add to existing risk-assessment models is unknown.
Methods: We used information on traditional risk factors and 10 common genetic variants associated with breast cancer in 5590 case subjects and 5998 control subjects, 50 to 79 years of age, from four U.S. cohort studies and one case-control study from Poland to fit models of the absolute risk of breast cancer. With the use of receiver-operating-characteristic curve analysis, we calculated the area under the curve (AUC) as a measure of discrimination. By definition, random classification of case and control subjects provides an AUC of 50%; perfect classification provides an AUC of 100%. We calculated the fraction of case subjects in quintiles of estimated absolute risk after the addition of genetic variants to the traditional risk model.
Results: The AUC for a risk model with age, study and entry year, and four traditional risk factors was 58.0%; with the addition of 10 genetic variants, the AUC was 61.