Cited by 143Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms

Gender Differences in Alzheimer Disease: Brain Atrophy, Histopathology Burden, and Cognition

Open access
Filon, Jessica R., Intorcia, Anthony J., Sue, Lucia I., Vazquez Arreola, Elsa, Wilson, Jeffrey, Davis, Kathryn J., Sabbagh, Marwan N., Belden, Christine M. +13 more·2016·Journal of Neuropathology & Experimental Neurology

Abstract

Multiple studies suggest that females are affected by Alzheimer disease (AD) more severely and more frequently than males. Other studies have failed to confirm this and the issue remains controversial. Difficulties include differences in study methods and male versus female life expectancy. Another element of uncertainty is that the majority of studies have lacked neuropathological confirmation of the AD diagnosis. We compared clinical and pathological AD severity in 1028 deceased subjects with full neuropathological examinations. The age of dementia onset did not differ by gender but females were more likely to proceed to very severe clinical and pathological disease, with significantly higher proportions having a Mini-Mental State Examination score of 5 or less and Braak stage VI neurofibrillary degeneration. Median neuritic plaque densities were similar in females and males with AD but females had significantly greater tangle density scores. In addition, we found that AD-control brain weight differences were significantly greater for females, even after adjustment for age, disease duration, and comorbid conditions. These findings suggest that when they are affected by AD, females progress more often to severe cognitive dysfunction, due to more severe neurofibrillary degeneration, and greater loss of brain parenchyma.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/jnen/nlw047

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Women develop greater neurofibrillary degeneration, brain parenchymal loss, and cognitive decline.

    “Recent studies suggest that women develop greater neurofibrillary degeneration, brain parenchymal loss, and cognitive decline.52,53,54”

    From Sex differences in cognitive decline among US adults (2021) · cites this paper as [53]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 58 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [15]Beach TG Adler CH Sue LI,. Arizona Study of Aging and Neurodegenerative Disorders and Brain and Body Donation Program. Neuropathology 2015; 35: 354 – 89 25619230 PMC4593391
  2. [17]Gallyas F. An argyrophil III method for the demonstration of fibrous neuroglia. Acta Morphol Acad Sci Hung 1981; 29: 185 – 93 6172011
  3. [28]Hyman BT Trojanowski JQ. Consensus recommendations for the postmortem diagnosis of Alzheimer disease from the National Institute on Aging and the Reagan Institute Working Group on diagnostic criteria for the neuropathological assessment of Alzheimer disease. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 1997; 56: 1095 – 7 9329452

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Filon, J. R., Intorcia, A. J., Sue, L. I., Vazquez Arreola, E., Wilson, J., Davis, K. J., Sabbagh, M. N., Belden, C. M., Caselli, R. J., Adler, C. H., Woodruff, B. K., Rapscak, S. Z., Ahern, G. L., Burke, A. D., Jacobson, S., Shill, H. A., Driver-Dunckley, E., Chen, K., Reiman, E. M., Beach, T. G., & Serrano, G. E.
Affiliations
University of Arizona (US)
Corresponding author
Serrano, Geidy E.
Venue
Journal of Neuropathology & Experimental Neurology
Published
2016-06-11
Volume
75
Issue
8
Pages
748-754
ISSN
  • 0022-3069 (ISSN-L)
  • 1554-6578
OpenAlex
W2418237732
Cited by
143
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1
FWCI
5.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuropathology & Experimental Neurology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • NIH
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (U24 NS072026)
  • National Institute on Aging (P30 AG19610)
  • Arizona Department of Health Services (211002)
  • Arizona Biomedical Research Commission (4001, 0011, 05-901, 1001)
  • Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Neuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, sex differences, brain atrophy, neurofibrillary tangles, Braak stages, neuritic plaques, cognitive impairment, dementia severity, neuropathology, brain weight, Mini-Mental State Examination

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