Cited by 163Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health

Apolipoprotein E ε4 Allele and the Lifetime Risk of Alzheimer's Disease: What Physicians Know, and What They Should Know

Seshadri, Sudha·1995·Archives of Neurology

Abstract

Background Published studies now show a clear association between Alzheimer's disease (AD) and the apolipoprotein E epsilon 4 allele (APOE* epsilon 4). The clinical value of this information to estimate a healthy individual's lifetime risk of AD has not been well delineated. Physicians dealing with AD may not know either the lifetime risk of developing AD or the effect of the APOE genotype on this risk. Because the lifetime risk of AD depends in part on life expectancy, and available figures on APOE are not population based, a computation is necessary to derive risk estimates useful to physicians. Objectives To estimate the lifetime risk of AD and the effect of APOE genotype information on that risk and to assess the knowledge of these risks among physicians who manage patients with dementia. Design Estimation of risk of AD and survey of physician awareness. The lifetime risk of developing AD without APOE genotype information was first computed for 65-year-olds from existing epidemiologic studies of age-related AD incidence and an actuarial life-table analysis. Using this computed a priori risk of AD and published studies of APOE genotypes in individuals with and without AD, we used a Bayesian analysis to determine the risk of developing AD, with and without an APOE* epsilon 4 allele, for unaffected 65-year-olds. To assess physician knowledge of the lifetime risk of AD and the effect of APOE genotyping on the risk, 50 neurologists, internists, geriatricians, geriatric psychia…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archneur.1995.00540350068018

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Seshadri, S.
Affiliations
University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School (US)
Corresponding author
Seshadri, Sudha
Venue
Archives of Neurology
Published
1995-11-01
Volume
52
Issue
11
Pages
1074
ISSN
0003-9942 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1996807233
Cited by
163
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 7
FWCI
9.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Archives of Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Network (American Medical Association) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Public Health Service (2-P50A605134-11)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS017950)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, APOE ε4, lifetime risk, genetic risk prediction, physician knowledge, dementia management, genetic testing, risk communication, age-related incidence, family history of Alzheimer's disease, neurologists, geriatricians, general practitioners, internists, life expectancy
MeSH terms
Actuarial Analysis, Adult, Aged, Alleles, Alzheimer Disease, Apolipoproteins E, Bayes Theorem, Humans, Risk Factors, Apolipoprotein E4

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review