Cited by 49Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchTrauma and Emergency Care Studies

The Association Between Apolipoprotein E and Functional Outcome After Traumatic Brain Injury: A Meta-Analysis

Open access
Li, Lizhuo, Bao, Yijun, He, Songbai, Wang, Gang, Guan, Yanlei, Ma, Dexuan, Wu, Rile, Wang, Pengfei +5 more·2015·Medicine

Abstract

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading cause of death and disability. Previous studies have investigated the association of apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 with functional outcome after TBI and reported inconsistent results.The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic literature search and conduct meta-analyses to examine whether APOE ε4 is associated with poorer functional outcome in patients with TBI.We performed a systematic literature search in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Google Scholar, and HuGE.The eligibility criteria of this study included the following: Patients had TBI; the studies reported APOE genotype data or provided odds ratios (ORs) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs); the functional outcome was assessed using the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) or the Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended (GOSE); and patients were followed for at least 3 months after TBI.In all meta-analyses, we used random-effects models to calculate the odds ratio as a measure of association. We examined the association of APOE ε4 with functional outcome at different time points after TBI.A total of 12 studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the meta-analyses. We did not find a significant association between APOE ε4 and functional outcome at 6 (P = 0.23), 12 (P = 0.44), and 24 months (P = 0.85) after TBI. However, APOE ε4 was associated with an increased risk of unfavorable long-term (≥6 months) functional outcome after TBI (OR = 1.36, 95% CI: 1.07-1.74, P = 0.01).Limitations of this study include The sample size was limited; the initial severity of TBI varied within and across studies; we could not control for potential confounding factors, such as age at injury and sex; a meta-analysis of the genotype dosage effect was not feasible; and we could not examine the association with specific factors such as neurobehavioral or specific cognitive functions.Our meta-analysis indicates APOE ε4 is associated with the long-term functional outcome of patients with TBI. Future studies that control for confounding factors, with large sample sizes and more homogeneous initial TBI severity levels, are needed to validate the findings from this study.

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 · 10.1097/md.0000000000002028

Cites

43 of 43 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?

  • Individuals with genetic predisposition to developing AD (ApoE4 risk alleles) display altered outcome after TBI, making the distinction between environmental and genetic risk factors for post-injury recovery unclear.

    “Also, several clinical studies report that individuals with genetic predisposition to developing AD (ApoE4 risk alleles) display altered outcome after TBI making the distinction between environmental and genetic risk factors for post-injury recovery unclear (33, 34).”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Li, L., Bao, Y., He, S., Wang, G., Guan, Y., Ma, D., Wu, R., Wang, P., Huang, X., Tao, S., Liu, Q., Wang, Y., & Yang, J.
Affiliations
Shenyang Medical College (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Li, Lizhuo
  • Bao, Yijun
  • He, Songbai
Venue
Medicine
Published
2015-11
Volume
94
Issue
46
Pages
e2028
ISSN
0025-7974 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2318993527
Cited by
49
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 4
FWCI
0.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Illinois Department of Public Health
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute on Aging (R01AG036042, RF1AG036042)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
Keywords
traumatic brain injury, apolipoprotein E, APOE ε4, functional outcome, long-term outcomes, genetic risk factors, Glasgow Outcome Scale, Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended
MeSH terms
Brain Injuries, Humans, Prognosis, Models, Statistical, Biomarkers, Recovery of Function, Glasgow Outcome Scale, 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