BioSig Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ: BSGM) (“BioSig” or the “Company”), a medical technology company is pleased to announce it has entered into a Letter of Intent (“LOI”) to enter into a proposed merger or other business combination (the “Merger”), with Streamex Exchange Corporation (“Streamex”) in an all-stock transaction, to bring a real-world asset tokenization company public on the Nasdaq.
Wednesday, May 14, 2025
Early Alzheimer's Brain Edema, Bleeding Rates Reported in Lecanemab Real-World Study
Treating early Alzheimer's disease patients with lecanemab (Leqembi) was feasible and most patients tolerated the drug well, a retrospective study at one specialty memory clinic showed.
Infusion-related reactions occurred in 37% of 234 Alzheimer's patients treated with lecanemab and typically were mild, according to Suzanne Schindler, MD, PhD, of Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, and co-authors.
Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA) emerged in 42 of 194 people (22%) who received at least four lecanemab infusions and had at least one MRI, the researchers reported in JAMA Neurology.
Overall, 29 people (15%) had ARIA with brain edema or effusion (ARIA-E) -- with or without ARIA with brain hemorrhage or hemosiderin deposition (ARIA-H), including microhemorrhages and superficial siderosis -- and 13 people had isolated ARIA-H (6.7%).
Most ARIA cases were asymptomatic (74%) and radiographically mild (62%). Eleven patients (5.7%) developed symptomatic ARIA; two (1.0%) were patients with clinically severe ARIA symptoms. No patients developed a macrohemorrhage or died.
Patients with mild dementia at baseline had a 15-fold higher rate of symptomatic ARIA compared with those with mild cognitive impairment or very mild dementia (27% vs 1.8%, P<0.001), Schindler and colleagues noted.
"Most patients on lecanemab tolerate the drug well," Schindler said in a statement. "This report may help patients and providers better understand the risks of treatment, which are lower in patients with very mild symptoms of Alzheimer's."
Lecanemab, approved by the FDA in 2023 to treat early Alzheimer's disease, is a monoclonal antibody that binds with high affinity to amyloid-beta soluble protofibrils. In the phase III CLARITY-AD clinical trial, 12.6% of lecanemab-treated participants had ARIA-E and 17.3% had ARIA-H. Recent data from the open-label extension study updated those figures and reported that three deaths concurrent with ARIA or intracerebral hemorrhage occurred.
Lecanemab and donanemab (Kisunla), another anti-amyloid treatment, won approval based on evidence that they slowed cognitive decline in people with early symptomatic Alzheimer's, defined as mild cognitive impairment, very mild dementia, or mild dementia due to Alzheimer's disease.
Both drugs carry a boxed warning for ARIA, especially for people who are APOE4 homozygotes. A recent analysis suggested lecanemab and donanemab may extend independent living by 10 to 13 months for some Alzheimer's patients.
Schindler and colleagues conducted a retrospective analysis of 234 consecutive patients who started lecanemab treatment between August 2023 and October 2024 at the outpatient specialty memory clinic at Washington University. The 234 patients accounted for 5.9% of 3,938 memory clinic patients seen during that period.
Patients were treated with 10 mg/kg lecanemab intravenously every 2 weeks. Mean baseline age was 74 and 50% of patients were female; nearly all (98%) treated patients were white.
Compared with the CLARITY-AD study, a lower percentage of lecanemab-treated patients in the Washington University study were APOE4 homozygotes (8.5% vs 16%, P=0.004). Nine Washington University patients (3.8%) were receiving anticoagulant medications and 83 patients (35%) were taking antiplatelet agents including aspirin and/or clopidogrel (Plavix) at baseline.
Infusion-related reactions, which were mostly mild or moderate, were more frequent in the Washington University study than in CLARITY-AD (37% vs 26%, P=0.002). In mid-July 2024, the Washington University treatment protocol was changed to include pretreatment with an antihistamine and acetaminophen before initial infusions; the rate of infusion-related reactions dropped to 27% after this change.
No patients with fewer than four infusions developed symptomatic ARIA or had ARIA findings on urgent MRI scans. Patients at risk for ARIA were treated for an average of 6.5 months.
"Of the 194 patients at risk for ARIA during the study period, 44 patients (23%) had at least one microhemorrhage and/or superficial siderosis before lecanemab treatment was initiated," Schindler and co-authors noted.
"Of note, patients with a greater burden of microhemorrhages and/or superficial siderosis were excluded from treatment and, therefore, 23% is an underestimate of the prevalence of these findings in patients with early symptomatic Alzheimer's disease," the researchers pointed out. "This suggests that a proportion of ARIA-H that develops during the course of treatment is unrelated to anti-amyloid antibody treatment."
Overall, 23 of 234 (9.8%) patients in the study withdrew from lecanemab treatment for various reasons, including 10 (4.3%) people who withdrew due to ARIA.
A study limitation and important concern was the very low diversity of patients being treated with lecanemab, Schindler and colleagues said. While this study showed how anti-amyloid antibodies can be provided in a specialty memory clinic with rich resources, these treatments could be used in other clinics using a variety of strategies, they added.
Disclosures
Funding for this study included support from the Barbara Morriss trust.
Schindler reported personal fees from Eisai, Eli Lilly, and Novo Nordisk outside the submitted work. Her employer, Washington University, has a stake in C2N Diagnostics. Co-authors reported multiple relationships with industry and other agencies.
Primary Source
JAMA Neurology
Source Reference: Paczynski M, et al "Lecanemab treatment in a specialty memory clinic" JAMA Neurol 2025; DOI: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2025.1232.
https://www.medpagetoday.com/neurology/alzheimersdisease/115551
Pfizer Confirms: Leading JAK Inhibitor Often Comes With Weight Gain
Inflammation and autoimmune patients taking tofacitinib (Xeljanz) in the drug's late-stage and post-marketing studies were more likely than those on placebo to gain weight and body mass index (BMI) points, pooled data from more than 5,000 rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients showed.
After 6 months, placebo was associated with a mean weight gain of 0.4 kg (o.88 lb), compared with 1.2-1.9 kg (2.6-4.2 lb) with tofacitinib (all P<0.01), depending on the dose, according to Jose L. Rivas, MD, of Pfizer's facility in Madrid, Spain, and colleagues.
Some 55% of placebo group members gained weight to some degree, while this occurred in 65%-70% of those on tofacitinib after 6 months, the researchers reported in ACR Open Rheumatologyopens in a new tab or window. Weight gain ≥5% was even more lopsided: this was seen in 11% of the placebo patients, versus 16%-28% of patients on tofacitinib.
And, both the mean absolute weight gains and the proportions with gains ≥5% were greater still in patients who took tofacitinib for 12 months: 2.0-2.6 kg (4.5-5.6 lb) and 33%-37%. (No 12-month data were given for those on placebo.)
BMI changes in 6 months were consistently less than 1 point with the Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor, irrespective of dose, although still greater than with placebo. Average increases at 6 months were 0.4-0.7 points with the different drug doses, versus 0.1 points with placebo.
Rivas and colleagues drew on data from eight phase III/IV studies of tofacitinib, the pioneering JAK inhibitor for RA, with a total of 5,335 patients. Three dosing regimens were tested in these trials: 5 mg twice daily (n=2,349), 10 mg twice daily (n=1,611), 11 mg once daily (n=694), and placebo (n=681). The first two tofacitinib doses were administered for up to 12 months, while placebo and the 11-mg dose through 6 months.
Some 77%-84% of patients were women with mean ages of 52-57, depending on the dosing group. Approximately two-thirds were white. Weight at baseline averaged around 72 kg (158 lb), and mean BMI was about 27.
Change in weight was positively, if weakly, correlated with the 28-joint Disease Activity Score as modified by erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR), a key measure of RA symptom severity. Correlation coefficients at 6 months ranged from 0.04 to 0.142, none of which indicated a strong relationship; moreover, the highest value was seen in the placebo group.
Results were similar when Rivas's group examined change in BMI against DAS28-ESR. In both cases, because obesity is associated with systemic inflammation, which is in turn an exacerbating factor in RA, these findings weren't surprising.
Still, patients with significant weight gain did show substantial increases in total cholesterol levels, by roughly 30-40 mg/dL at 6 months.
"Weight and BMI continued to increase through 12 months of observation in the studies, so a new equilibrium had not yet been reached," the researchers wrote. "Longer term observations are warranted to establish whether there is sustained weight gain, if this varies by tofacitinib dose, and if there are any health implications of continued weight gain."
Indeed, it's not clear what those might be. Although weight gain is generally considered unhealthy, Rivas and colleagues pointed out that, among RA patients, previous research had suggested that high BMI is protective against cardiovascular and overall mortality, while being underweight was detrimental.
"Further research is warranted on the relationship between disease activity and changes in weight and BMI with tofacitinib in RA, and whether these changes are associated with increased risk of other comorbidities with known associations with weight," the researchers concluded.
Limitations included that an examination of tofacitinib's effects on body weight had not been part of the trials' original protocols. Rivas and colleagues noted, too, that eligibility criteria varied among the eight trials; some patients were on tofacitinib monotherapy while others were taking corticosteroids and/or other medications for RA.
Disclosures
The study was funded by Pfizer, maker of tofacitinib. Several authors were Pfizer employees, including Rivas. Several c0-authors reported relationships with Pfizer and/or other commercial entities.
Primary Source
ACR Open Rheumatology
Source Reference: Wollenhaupt J, et al "Analysis of the impact of tofacitinib treatment on weight and body mass index in patients with rheumatoid arthritis" ACR Open Rheumatol 2025; DOI: 10.1002/acr2.70040.
https://www.medpagetoday.com/rheumatology/generalrheumatology/115558
DOJ to Stay Enforcement of Mental Health Parity Act
In response to a lawsuit brought in January by the ERISA Industry Committee, the U.S. Department of Justice announced Friday that President Donald Trump’s administration will stay enforcement of aspects of the Mental Health Parity Act and Equity Addiction Act final rule that took effect during the administration of former President Joe Biden.
The Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services and the Treasury now intend to reconsider the rule, including whether to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking, to rescind or to modify the regulation.
The Employee Benefits Security Administration finalized the rule in September 2024 with the goal of expanding access and lowering costs for mental health and substance abuse disorder care.
A summary of the final rule states, “these final rules amend the existing [nonquantitative treatment limitation] standard to prohibit group health plans and health insurance issuers offering group or individual health insurance coverage from using NQTLs that place greater restrictions on access to mental health and substance use disorder benefits as compared to medical/surgical benefits.”
In ERIC’s complaint, filed in January in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the industry group that represents large U.S. employers argued that the rule does not require health plans to provide any particular mental health or substance abuse disorder coverage or even to provide these benefits at all. ERIC further argued that much of the parity rule “upends the regulatory and compliance framework that has evolved over decades pursuant to the limits established by Congress.”
“The Parity Rule also imposes entirely new, ambiguous requirements that are so burdensome and unworkable that they will discourage employers from offering MH/SUD benefits at all,” ERIC stated in its complaint.
For instance, the group argued that the rule’s new “meaningful benefits” requirement is an example of the departments’ regulatory overreach. Under the rule, plans that cover a mental health or substance abuse disorder condition in a benefit classification (inpatient, outpatient or pharmacy) must provide “meaningful benefits” for that condition in all classifications in which medical and surgical benefits are provided.
“If a plan offers inpatient [medical and surgical] benefits—as nearly every health plan does—and also offers inpatient MH/SUD benefits, the Departments have now arrogated to themselves authority to determine the adequacy of those inpatient MH/SUD benefits,” ERIC stated in the complaint.
The industry group released a statement on Monday praising the Trump administration’s response to the lawsuit and its decision not to penalize employers under the rule while the case is pending and is reconsidering the rule.
“Today’s action by the Trump Administration recognizes the need for greater examination to ensure employers have the clarity and flexibility they need to offer robust behavioral health benefits for a healthy, productive workforce,” the ERIC release stated. “This critical first step paves the way for the administration to restore a sensible approach to parity rules for mental health and substance use disorder care.”
The 2024 rule has two applicability dates: plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2025, and plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2026.
The federal departments intend to issue a non-enforcement policy in the “near future” covering the portions of the rule that are applicable for plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2025, and January 1, 2026, and also intend to “reexamine the Departments’ current MHPAEA enforcement program more broadly.”
Because the departments do not intend to enforce parts of the rule and are reconsidering the regulation challenged in the litigation, the federal departments have agreed it is appropriate to place the case in abeyance, pending the completion of the reconsideration process.
Several mental health and substance use disorder advocacy organizations—the Legal Action Center, the American Psychological Association, Inseparable, Mental Health America, National Alliance on Mental Illness and National Health Law Program—expressed disappointment in the Trump administration’s response to the ERIC complaint.
According to the organizations, working people and their families, who are paying for health insurance coverage, will face steeper challenges to access mental health and substance use disorder care “to which they are legally entitled” if the parity rule is not enforced.
“The 2024 regulations are necessary for implementing the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021, signed by President Trump, and closing loopholes in the enforcement of parity,” the organizations wrote in a statement. “The Trump Administration has renewed the opioid public health emergency and declared May 2025 as National Mental Health Awareness Month. These words must be backed by actions that meaningfully protect access to treatment, not just the interests of insurance companies.”
A recent survey conducted by Prudential Group Insurance found that 48% of employees believe their employer should help them address mental health challenges.
In addition, 69% of employers ranked mental health as an area in which they intend to support their employees. Generation Z and Millennial employees surveyed were more likely than older generations to rank mental health as a top priority.
https://www.plansponsor.com/doj-to-stay-enforcement-of-mental-health-parity-act/
Study highlights the growing toll of parental substance use on American children
A large percentage of American children are growing up in households with at least one parent who uses alcohol or other drugs in problematic ways-raising the risk that those children will go on to do the same, a new study suggests.
Using data from 2023 to give as current a view as possible, the researchers estimate that 19 million children-1 in 4 of Americans under age 18-live with a parent or other adult who meets the definition for a substance use disorder.
Of them, an estimated 6 million children live with an adult who has a mental illness in addition to their substance use disorder.
The most common substance that parents showed disordered use of was alcohol, with survey data leading to estimates that 12 million parents meet criteria for some level of alcohol use disorder. Just over 6 million parents may meet criteria for cannabis use disorder. About 3.4 million meet criteria for disordered use of multiple substances.
The number living with a parent who had any substance use disorder in 2023 is higher than the 17 million estimated in a paper published just months ago that used data from 2020.
The new findings are published in the journal JAMA Pediatrics by a team from the University of Michigan Center for the Study of Drugs, Alcohol, Smoking, and Health, which McCabe directs. He is a professor in the U-M School of Nursing and Institute for Social Research, and a member of the U-M Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation.
Both studies used data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, a federal program that has tracked U.S. drug and alcohol use since the 1970s, yielding data that researchers and policymakers have used.
That survey faces an uncertain future due to staff and budget cuts at the federal agency where it's based, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration or SAMHSA. The survey's entire staff received layoff notices in April.
In addition to alcohol and cannabis, McCabe and his colleagues estimate that just over 2 million children live with a parent who has a substance use disorder related to prescription drugs, and just over half a million live with a parent whose use of illicit drugs such as cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine meets criteria for a substance use disorder.
The researchers include Vita McCabe, the director of University of Michigan Addiction Treatment Services in the Department of Psychiatry at Michigan Medicine, U-M's academic medical center.
"We know that children raised in homes where adults have substance use issues are more likely to have adverse childhood experiences, to use alcohol and drugs earlier and more frequently, and to be diagnosed with mental health conditions of their own," said Vita McCabe, a board-certified in addiction medicine and psychiatry. "That's why it's so important for parents to know that there is effective treatment available, including the medications naltrexone and/or acamprosate for alcohol use disorder, cognitive behavioral therapy for cannabis use disorder, and buprenorphine or methadone for opioid use disorder including both prescription and non-prescription opioids."
Both the new paper and the one published in March in the Journal of Addiction Medicine based diagnoses of substance use disorders and major mental health conditions on the criteria contained in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5, or DSM-5.
In the March study, the authors showed that the change in how substance use disorder was defined in DSM-5 compared with its previous version led to a major increase in the number of children estimated to be living with a parent with a substance use issue.
Ty Schepis, an addiction psychologist at Texas State University, was the lead author of the earlier paper and is senior author of the new paper.
"Our new findings add to the understanding of how many children are living with a parent who has a severe and comorbid substance use disorder and other mental illness such as major depression," he said. "This is important to note because of the additional risk that this creates for children as they grow into adults."
The research was funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, part of the National Institutes of Health (R01DA031160, R01DA043691).
Source:
Journal reference:
McCabe, S. E., et al. (2025). US Children Living With a Parent With Substance Use Disorder. JAMA Pediatrics. doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2025.0828.
Biden aides discussed wheelchair use if he were re-elected, new book says
This story is adapted from the forthcoming book "Original Sin: President Biden's Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again," by CNN's Jake Tapper and Axios' Alex Thompson.
Joe Biden's physical deterioration was so severe in 2023 and 2024 that advisers privately discussed the possibility he'd need to use a wheelchair if he won re-election, CNN's Jake Tapper and Axios' Alex Thompson write in their new book, "Original Sin," out May 20.
Why it matters: The discussions reflected the extent of the president's declining health — particularly the significant degeneration of his spine — and his aides' alarm over it as Biden sought a second term at age 81.
The conversations also reveal the White House's determination to conceal the reality of Biden's condition, at the risk of his own health, while he faced a tough re-election bid against Donald Trump.
- The book is based on interviews with more than 200 people, mostly Democratic insiders, with knowledge of the events that unfolded during the final two years of Biden's presidency. Almost all of the interviews took place after the 2024 election.
Driving the news: "Biden's physical deterioration — most apparent in his halting walk — had become so severe that there were internal discussions about putting the president in a wheelchair, but they couldn't do so until after the election," the authors write.
- Biden aides believed it was politically untenable to have Biden use a wheelchair during his re-election campaign.
- "Given Biden's age, [his physician Kevin O'Connor] also privately said that if he had another bad fall, a wheelchair might be necessary for what could be a difficult recovery," the authors report.
Biden's team had increasing fears of a fall after he tripped over a sandbag at the Air Force Academy in June 2023. Aides then began taking many more precautions to avoid a repeat before the November 2024 election.
- They tried to figure out shorter walking paths, began insisting on handrails for steps up to the stage at his appearances, had him wear sneakers more often, changed his visual briefings before events to ensure he knew every step he was expected to take, and guided him more carefully through the movements.
The intrigue: O'Connor had long privately expressed concern about the toll the presidency was taking on Biden's health.
- The doctor often argued with Biden's political officials to get more rest time into the president's schedule.
- O'Connor sometimes quipped that Biden's staff members were trying to kill him, while he was trying to keep him alive.
Zoom in: Throughout 2024, Biden aides told reporters that the president's halting walk was partly the result of him fracturing his foot in November 2020, and then refusing to consistently wear his walking boot. In short, they said, Biden was being undone by his own vigor.
- But that contradicted what O'Connor had publicly reported at the time.
- After Biden wore a walking boot for 10 weeks in late 2020 and early 2021, O'Connor noted that "both small fractures of his foot are completely healed" and that "this injury has healed as expected."
- O'Connor repeated in his public health summaries that Biden had "mild post-fracture foot arthritis," but focused largely on "significant spinal arthritis" to explain the changes in the president's gait.
Zoom out: Biden, his family, and senior White House officials pushed forward with the president's re-election campaign despite seeing signs of physical and mental decline over the course of his administration, the authors write.
- But Biden's disastrous debate performance against Trump last June stunned Democratic leaders, who began pushing for the president to drop his re-election bid.
- He did so three weeks later and quickly endorsed Vice President Harris, paving the way for her to be the party's new nominee for president.
What they're saying: Asked about the book's reporting, a Biden spokesperson who declined to be identified said in a statement to Axios that Biden's "medical exam made clear that he had a stiffened gait caused, in part, by wear and tear to his spine — but that no special treatment was necessary and that it had not worsened."
- "He was transparent about this, and it was far from 'severe,'" the statement added. "Yes, there were physical changes as he got older, but evidence of aging is not evidence of mental incapacity."
- "And so far," the statement continued, "we are still waiting for someone, anyone, to point out where Joe Biden had to make a presidential decision or make a presidential address where he was unable to do his job because of mental decline. In fact, the evidence points to the opposite — he was a very effective president."
'Sedentary Time Tied to Brain Volume, Worse Cognition in Older Adults'
More time spent sitting or lying down was linked with neurodegeneration and worse cognitive scores in older adults, even among people who were physically active, a 7-year study showed.
In cross-sectional models, greater sedentary time was tied to a smaller Alzheimer's disease-imaging MRI signature (β = -0.0001, P=0.01) and worse episodic memory scores (β = -0.001, P=0.003), reported Angela Jefferson, PhD, of Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, and colleagues. Cross-sectional outcomes varied by APOE4 status.
In longitudinal analyses, more sedentary time was associated with faster hippocampal volume shrinkage (β = -0.1, P=0.008), and declines in naming scores (β = -0.001, P=0.03) and processing speed scores (β = -0.003, P=0.02; β = 0.01, P=0.01), Jefferson and colleagues said in Alzheimer's & Dementia.
Longitudinal relationships between sedentary time and hippocampal volume remained significant when adjusting for moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (P=0.008), the researchers observed. Longitudinal associations between sedentary time and cognitive scores also remained significant when adjusting for moderate-to-vigorous activity (P<0.03).
"Greater sedentary behavior was associated with smaller hippocampal volume and worse cognitive performance over a 7-year period despite taking into account the level of daily moderate-to-vigorous physical activity each person engaged in," noted co-author Marissa Gogniat, PhD, of the University of Pittsburgh.
"These findings suggest that above and beyond physical activity level, more sedentary behavior is still worse for brain health and cognition over time," Gogniat told MedPage Today.
Many associations linking greater sedentary time with brain health and cognitive outcomes were present in APOE4 carriers but not in non-carriers, suggesting increased sedentary time may be especially harmful for people at increased genetic risk for Alzheimer's disease, she added.
Earlier research from the U.K. Biobank showed that a high level of sedentary behavior among people ages 60 and older was associated with a higher risk of dementia
. Currently, the U.S. POINTER trial is looking at whether simultaneously targeting multiple lifestyle factors in sedentary older adults can reduce cognitive impairment.
Jefferson and colleagues studied 404 participants from the legacy and expansion cohorts of the Vanderbilt Memory and Aging Project, a longitudinal study of older adults without dementia at study entry. Mean baseline age was 71 years; 54% were men and 85% were white. One-third of participants carried at least one APOE4 allele.
The study incorporated actigraphy, neuroimaging, and neuropsychological data collected from participants at multiple intervals. Participants were asked to wear a triaxial accelerometer on their non-dominant wrist 24 hours a day for 10 consecutive days. The researchers calculated average minutes per day spent in sedentary behavior, light physical activity, and moderate-to-vigorous activity for each participant. Sleep time was excluded.
Participants had brain MRI at each timepoint. An Alzheimer's signature was calculated at baseline and at each follow-up, based on measurements from regions of interest previously identified as susceptible to Alzheimer's neurodegeneration.
At each timepoint, participants also completed a comprehensive neuropsychological protocol that included information processing speed, language, executive function, visuospatial ability, and episodic memory tests.
The average follow-up time was 4.7 years. Over the course of the study, 27 participants with data for at least two timepoints converted to dementia.
The average amount of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity time in the cohort was 61 minutes/day. Most participants met the CDC guidelines of at least 150 minutes/week of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. Moderate-to-vigorous activity was strongly and inversely tied to sedentary behavior (r = -0.65, P<0.0001), and average sedentary time was 807 minutes/day (13.45 hours).
The cohort lacked racial and ethnic diversity and was well educated, Jefferson and co-authors acknowledged.
"In addition, our sample was quite active while wearing the actigraphy devices with 87% of participants meeting the CDC recommendation of at least 150 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity per week," they noted.
"While such an active sample may limit generalizability, it provides strong evidence that even among a physically active cohort, such increased activity is not protective from the impact of greater sedentary behavior and brain health, especially among APOE4 carriers."
Disclosures
This research was supported by the Alzheimer's Association and the NIH.
Jefferson and Gogniat had no disclosures. One co-author reported a relationship with Vivid Genomics and serving as an editor for Alzheimer's & Dementia.
Primary Source
Alzheimer's & Dementia
Source Reference: Gogniat MA, et al "Increased sedentary behavior is associated with neurodegeneration and worse cognition in older adults over a 7-year period despite high levels of physical activity " Alzheimers Dement 2025; DOI: 10.1002/alz.70157.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)