Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the association between cognition and levels of cystatin C in persons with chronic kidney disease (CKD). DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort Cognitive Study. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals with a baseline cognitive assessment completed at the same visit as serum cystatin C measurement (N = 821; mean age 64.9, 50.6% male, 48.6% white). MEASUREMENTS: Levels of serum cystatin C were categorized into tertiles; cognitive function was assessed using six neuropsychological tests. Scores on these tests were compared across tertiles of cystatin C using linear regression and logistic regression to examine the association between cystatin C level and cognitive performance (1 standard deviation difference from the mean). RESULTS: After multivariable adjustment for age, race, education, and medical comorbidities in linear models, higher levels of cystatin C were associated with worse cognition on the modified Mini-Mental State Examination, Buschke Delayed Recall, Trail-Making Test Part (Trails) A and Part B, and Boston Naming (P < .05 for all). This association remained statistically significant for Buschke Delayed Recall (P = .01) and Trails A (P = .03) after additional adjustment for estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). The highest tertile of cystatin C was associated with greater likelihood of poor performance on Trails A (odds ratio (OR) = 2.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.16-4.06), Trails B (OR = 1.89, 95% CI = 1.09-3.27), and Boston Naming (OR = 1.85, 95% CI = 1.07-3.19) than the lowest tertile after multivariate adjustment in logistic models. CONCLUSION: In individuals with CKD, higher serum cystatin C levels were associated with worse cognition and greater likelihood of poor cognitive performance on attention, executive function, and naming. Cystatin C is a marker of cognitive impairment and may be associated with cognition independent of eGFR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yaffe et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: