logo
What makes 'superager' brains more resistant to aging?

What makes 'superager' brains more resistant to aging?

Research is ongoing about what components contribute to healthier brains as people age. Recent research identified some unique brain features of 'superagers,' people at least 80 years old who perform cognitively similarly to people decades younger. The research also identified that superagers tended to be more sociable than their peers. More research into superagers could lead to interventions that help protect cognition.Some people have better cognitive function than others as they age, and this is an area of scientific study.A study recently published in Alzheimer's & Dementia details the unique features of a group of superagers. These people meet certain word recall cognitive criteria in later life.The research suggests that superagers are very sociable and also identified unique brain characteristics of this group, such as higher levels of von Economo neurons, also known as 'spindle neurons.' These unique brain cells appear to be involved in emotional processing and social cognition.What makes a person a 'superager'?This research looked at 'the first 25 years of the Northwestern University SuperAging Program.' This program seeks to see if it's possible to avoid the decline in brain capacity that comes with age and the possible biological phenotype — or observable traits — related to this avoidance. The paper explains that the term superaging was developed by the Northwestern Alzheimer's Disease Research Center (ADRC).Superagers are people who are 80 years old or older who meet a certain score on a test called the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test. Superagers' scores are similar to those of people between the ages of 56 and 66. Superagers were also at least average for age in other areas of cognitive function. Right now, there are 133 active participants in the Northwestern ADRC Clinical Core. Researchers have conducted 77 autopsies to look at the brain features of deceased participants, based on brain donation. Researchers did not pinpoint a lifestyle linked to superaging. Some participants followed a healthy lifestyle while others followed less healthy patterns.Superagers also appeared to have similar medical problems to their neurotypical peers. However, superagers were noted as being sociable, enjoying extracurricular activities, and endorsing extraversion. They were also more likely to rate their relationships positively than their peers.Using neuroimaging, researchers found that superagers did not display cortical thinning, a thinning in the outer layer of the brain, that nonsuperagers experienced.While there is more research needed to see if superagers start with larger brains, researchers suggest that cortical thinning happens more slowly in superagers.They also identified an area of the brain called the anterior cingulate that had more cortical thickness compared to younger neurotypical participants. This area of the brain is involved in things like emotion and social networking. In the anterior cingulate gyrus, there were also higher levels of nerve cells called von Economo neurons. This was even in comparison to younger individuals. Researchers think that superagers might have this higher nerve density from birth. Researchers also looked for neurofibrillary tangles, a protein buildup in neurons that can be present in Alzheimer's disease as well as in normal aging.Overall, researchers found that superagers had fewer neurofibrillary problems than their peers. For example, in superagers, they observed fewer neurofibrillary tangles in the rhinal cortices, an area of the brain. Superagers' brains may be more resistant to cognitive declineResearchers concluded that 'there are at least two pathways to the maintenance of youthful memory capacity in old brains.' They suggest that this type of brain could resist the start of neurofibrillary pathology and be resilient to the cognitive effects of neurofibrillary pathology.Furthermore, they observed that superagers had another type of neuron that was bigger. This difference may make a specific brain pathway resist changes like neurofibrillary degeneration.Or it could be a reactionary change leading to resilience. When looking at plasma biomarkers, superagers also had lower levels of something called p-tau181, which researchers note was consistent with the lower levels of neurofibrillary degeneration. The findings further support that superagers have enhanced functionality of a component of the brain called the cortical cholinergic system at multiple levels. This system can be affected both in Alzheimer's disease and normal aging. Finally, researchers observed differences in the microglia of superagers. Microglia are cells in the brain that help control the microenvironment of the central nervous system.In superagers, there were fewer activated microglia in the white matter, something that happens in physiological aging. Preliminary findings suggest that microglia in superagers may have distinct features. The authors note the need for more research in this area. In their publication, the authors also included a case study of one superager who was highly independent until she experienced a stroke near the end of her life.When observing her brain, researchers observed certain characteristics. For example, the amygdala and hippocampus areas of the brain were similar to those of a younger person. They also observed features like 'low density of neurofibrillary tangles and pretangles' in the postmortem examination. Kaushik Govindaraju, DO, from Medical Offices of Manhattan and contributor to Labfinder, who was not involved in the study noted the following about the research to Medical News Today: 'We have thought that mental decline with aging is inevitable and even expected/anticipated. We marvel at elderly people who have good memories because for as long as humanity has existed, we have been told and have seen that this is not the biological norm. This research may push back against this in an unprecedented way.'Study limitations and continued researchThis research provides more information on a possible superaging phenotype, but has limitations. For one thing, it examined a fairly small number of participants, and recruitment methods could have impacted the study sample. This particular paper also did not release information on certain components, such as the gender breakdown of the group or ethnicity. This research is ongoing, and this paper noted components of the first 25 years of the research. Some reported data was also based on preliminary findings, like the biomarker data, so more research is needed. Certain eligibility requirements, such as being able to attend in-person visits in Chicago, may also affect the research. Methods of data collection may also be important to note, such as the use of surveys. Researchers also pointed out that current methods for staging of neurofibrillary changes might need to be reevaluated, since it does not reflect the presence of undamaged neurons.They show one superager who had some neurofibrillary degeneration but also a higher level of normal neurons, which might not be present in neurotypical peers who have the same amount of neurofibrillary degeneration. More research is required to see what features are present from birth in superagers, as well as how the results may apply to the general population. More research into the distinct differences in superagers' brains and why they are present may also be helpful.What can we learn from superagers?This research could lead to developing strategies to help 'typical' agers. Alexandra Touroutoglou, MSc, PhD, an assistant professor of neurology at Harvard Medical School, and director of Imaging Operations at Frontotemporal Disorders Unit at Massachusetts General Hospital, who was not involved in the recent research, noted the following general benefits of studying people who age well: 'Superagers are exciting because they show that age-related memory decline is not necessarily inevitable. So much of aging research is focused on looking at pathology and disorder, trying to work backwards to what went wrong. But there are things we can learn from those who age exceptionally well. Studying those people who age best could point the way to new treatments, either in terms of interventions or lifestyle changes, that could prolong cognitive health for all the rest of us who age in more typical ways.'Emily K. Hurst, DO, AOA board-certified in Critical Care Medicine, Internal Medicine, and Hospice and Palliative Care Medicine, likewise not involved in the current study, commented that 'identifying superagers and continuing to study their unique characteristics both biologically and environmentally, can determine how the modifiable changes may be translated to others in their quest to deter cognitive decline.''This will be a game changer in avoiding senescence,' said Hurst. 'I hope this article serves to help our society recognize and elevate the value many of those in our community can contribute in years long past retirement, and help medical professionals see our patients in their ability instead of their numerical age.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Researchers discover the immune system's ‘fountain of youth' - but it has a cost
Researchers discover the immune system's ‘fountain of youth' - but it has a cost

The Independent

timean hour ago

  • The Independent

Researchers discover the immune system's ‘fountain of youth' - but it has a cost

Researchers have discovered the 'fountain of youth' for cells - but it comes with a big cost. Some people over 60 years old were found to have immune systems that appear to much younger in wear-and-tear, Mayo Clinic researchers announced Thursday. The immune system is what protects us from getting sick and promotes healing. With age, the immune system's ability to protect the body from infection and disease can wane. Young immune systems are constantly exposed to new bacteria and viruses, and previous research has shown that infant immune systems beat those of adults at fighting off the invaders. Researchers now say some have immune systems that don't match their age. "We observed that these patients have very young immune systems despite being in their 60s and 70s,' Dr. Cornelia Weyand, a Mayo Clinic rheumatologist and clinician-scientist, said in a statement. 'But the price they pay for that is autoimmunity.' Autoimmunity is what happens when the immune system mistakenly attacks healthy tissues and organs. There are more than 100 known autoimmune diseases, according to the Cleveland Clinic, including lupus, multiple sclerosis, psoriasis, celiac disease and Hashimoto's thyroiditis. Women are at a higher risk than men, thanks to genetic and hormonal differences, according to Stanford Medicine. Doctors discovered this anomaly in more than 100 older patients who went to the Minnesota clinic to receive treatment for a rare autoimmune disease known as giant cell arteritis. Giant cell arteritis is an inflammation of the lining of your arteries that can affect the arteries in your head, the clinic explained. Untreated, it can lead to blindness, an aortic aneurysm, and, less commonly, stroke. It frequently causes headaches, jaw pain and vision problems. What causes the disorder remains unknown. Studying the diseased tissue of these patients, the researchers found they had specialized cells in their immune system known as 'stem-like T cells.' The cells behave like young stem cells, which are critical for repairing and maintaining a healthy immune system. But, in this case, they were spreading the autoimmune disease. Going forward, the scientists hope to learn more about this link and what they observed from the patients. "Contrary to what one may think, there are benefits to having an immune system that ages in tandem with the body," Dr. Jörg Goronzy, a Mayo Clinic researcher on aging, said. "We need to consider the price to pay for immune youthfulness. That price can be autoimmune disease."

Stone Age humans were picky about which rocks they used for making tools, study finds
Stone Age humans were picky about which rocks they used for making tools, study finds

The Independent

time2 hours ago

  • The Independent

Stone Age humans were picky about which rocks they used for making tools, study finds

Early human ancestors during the Old Stone Age were more picky about the rocks they used for making tools than previously known, according to research published Friday. Not only did these early people make tools, they had a mental picture of where suitable raw materials were located and planned ahead to use them, traveling long distances. By around 2.6 million years ago, early humans had developed a method of pounding rocks together to chip off sharp flakes that could be used as blades for butchering meat. This allowed them to feast on large animals like hippos that gathered near a freshwater spring at the Nyayanga archaeological site in Kenya. 'But hippo skin is really tough" — and not all rocks were suitable for creating blades sharp enough to pierce hippo skin, said co-author Thomas Plummer, a paleoanthropologist at Queens College of the City University of New York. Co-author Emma Finestone of the Cleveland Museum of Natural History added: 'When we think about stone tools, not every rock is equal in terms of the quality of tools.' At the Nyayanga site, researchers found durable blades made of quartzite, a rock material that they traced to streambeds and other locations around 8 miles (13 kilometers) away. The new research appears in the journal Science Advances. 'This suggests they've got a mental map of where different resources are distributed across the landscape,' said co-author Rick Potts of the Smithsonian 's Human Origins Program. Previously, researchers had assumed the stones may have been found within just a mile or so of the freshwater spring site. The new study shows that 'these early humans were thinking ahead. This is probably the earliest time we have in the archaeological record an indication of that behavior,' said Eric Delson, a paleoanthropologist at the American Museum of Natural History, who was not involved in the research. The oldest previously known example of early human ancestors transporting raw materials for tool-making was about 600,000 years later than the Nyayanga site. Researchers said it's unclear who these early toolmakers were — whether members of the Homo genus or a related but extinct branch of the family tree, such as Paranthropus. Homo sapiens did not arise until much later, around 300,000 years ago. But the knack for seeking out the best raw materials to make simple technology dates back nearly 3 million years. 'We today are a species that's still technology-dependent — using tools to spread around the world and adapt to different environments,' said Finestone. ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

The shocking side effect of ADHD drugs that could impact 22million Americans
The shocking side effect of ADHD drugs that could impact 22million Americans

Daily Mail​

time3 hours ago

  • Daily Mail​

The shocking side effect of ADHD drugs that could impact 22million Americans

People with ADHD who take medication may have a lower risk of dangerous behaviors, such as criminality, addiction and suicidal ideations, according to a new study. ADHD affects around five percent of children and 2.5 percent of adults globally, roughly 200 million people. It is linked to increased risks of suicidal behaviors, substance abuse, accidental injuries, transport accidents and criminality if people do not seek treatment. An international team of researchers wanted to establish if medication reduces these risks. Researchers from the University of Southampton and the Karolinska Institute in Sweden found that for two years of treatment with ADHD medication, people who took the drugs were less likely to experience these harmful incidents than those who didn't take medication. Around 22 million Americans are estimated to have ADHD and just over half of these are prescribed medication to manage their symptoms, which can include impulsiveness, disorganization and difficulty focusing. Medications are broadly classified into two main categories: stimulants and non-stimulants. Stimulants, the most common type, include methylphenidate and amphetamine-based medications that improve the transmission of the brain chemical dopamine which affects mood, motivation and movement. Non-stimulant options like atomoxetine, clonidine, and guanfacine can also be used, if stimulants are not effective or well tolerated. These help improve the transmission of norepinephrine, a hormone that helps with alertness and focus. Some of the best known brand names for ADHD medications include Adderall, Ritalin, Vyvanse, Focalin, Concerta, and Daytrana. Exactly why the condition occurs is not completely understood, but ADHD tends to run in families, suggesting genes may play a part. It is surprisingly common and as diagnosis has risen, so too have prescriptions for ADHD medication. From 2012 to 2022, the number of annual stimulant prescriptions increased by 57.9 percent, reaching 79.6 million, according to the DEA. In the new study, researchers examined multiple population and health records in Sweden linked by unique personal identification numbers assigned to every resident in the country. The team used a novel study design called a 'trial emulation' to simulate a trial using existing real-world data from 148,581 people with ADHD. Comparing those who had started any type of ADHD medication within three months of diagnosis with those who hadn't, they examined the records over the following two years. They found any form of medication reduced the first occurrence of four of the five incidents (with accidental injury being the exception) and all five outcomes when considering recurring incidents. Those taking stimulant medication were associated with the lowest incident rates, compared to non-stimulant medications. Methylphenidate was the most commonly prescribed drug, the researchers found. The likelihood was most reduced amongst people exhibiting a recurring pattern of behavior, such as multiple suicide attempts, numerous drug relapses or repeat offending. Medication didn't reduce the risk of a first-time accidental injury, but did reduce the risk of recurring ones. The study is the first of its kind to show the beneficial effect of ADHD medication on these broader clinical outcomes using a novel statistical method and data representative of all patients in routine clinical care from a whole country. 'This finding is consistent with most guidelines that generally recommend stimulants as the first-line treatment, followed by non-stimulants,' explains Dr Zheng Chang, senior author of the study from the Karolinska Institute. 'There is an ongoing discussion regarding whether methylphenidate [a stimulant medication for ADHD] should be included in the World Health Organization model list of essential medications, and we hope this research will help to inform this debate.' Co-senior author on the paper Samuele Cortese, a National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Research Professor at the University of Southampton added: 'The failure form clinical services to provide timely treatments that reduce these important outcomes represents a major ethical issue that needs to be addressed with urgency, with the crucial input of people with lived experience.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store