血糖和三酸甘油脂指數(TyG)被認為與失智風險密切相關。本篇深入分析 TyG 指數作為胰島素抗性指標在失智症和認知衰退中的應用,並提供如何通過控制血糖和三酸甘油脂來降低失智風險的建議。
隨著全球老齡化的加劇,失智症(dementia)成為全球重要的公共衛生議題之一,對於失智症的風險評估與預防更是刻不容緩。近年來的研究中發現,血糖和三酸甘油酯(TG, triglyceride)指數的組合,即「三酸甘油酯-血糖指數」(TyG 指數),可能與失智症的風險密切相關。本文將深入解釋 TyG 指數的意義、其與失智症風險的潛在關聯性,並探討如何通過血糖與三酸甘油酯的管理來減少失智風險。
TyG 指數是一種通過簡單檢測血糖與三酸甘油酯來推估胰島素抗性(insulin resistance)的指標。胰島素抗性是指身體對胰島素的反應減弱,進而需要更多的胰島素來維持正常的血糖水平,這常見於2型糖尿病患者和肥胖人群。TyG 指數的計算公式如下:
TyG指數=ln(三酸甘油酯mg/dL×空腹血糖mg/dL/2)TyG 指數 = \ln (\text{三酸甘油酯} \text{mg/dL} \times \text{空腹血糖} \text{mg/dL} / 2)TyG指數=ln(三酸甘油酯mg/dL×空腹血糖mg/dL/2)
由於 TyG 指數的計算僅需空腹血糖和三酸甘油酯數值,比起傳統胰島素測試更簡單且經濟,許多研究指出 TyG 指數的準確度足以替代複雜的胰島素抗性測試,例如常用於醫學研究中的「胰島素鉗夾法」(HEGC, hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp)。此外,TyG 指數的靈敏度和特異性在多項與代謝疾病相關的研究中均獲得支持,使其逐漸成為重要的臨床指標之一。
1. 失智症的基本概念
失智症是一種以記憶力下降、認知能力受損為特徵的慢性病症,包括阿茲海默症(Alzheimer's disease)、血管性癡呆(vascular dementia)、路易體失智症(Lewy body dementia)等多種類型。隨著人口老化,失智症患者的人數不斷攀升,根據世界衛生組織的報告,全球受失智症影響的人口已超過 5 千萬,且預計到 2050 年,該數字將突破 1 億。這類疾病不僅對患者的生活品質造成極大影響,也帶來巨大的社會與經濟負擔。
2. 胰島素抗性與腦部健康的關係
胰島素除了在調節血糖方面發揮作用,還在腦部的神經傳導和突觸可塑性中發揮關鍵作用。胰島素抗性會引發腦部胰島素信號傳遞異常,導致能量供應不足、突觸連接減少,並促進腦內炎症,進而損害神經元健康。腦部的胰島素抗性被認為與阿茲海默症等神經退化性疾病有潛在聯繫,故胰島素抗性與失智症風險間的關係逐漸成為研究焦點。
3. TyG 指數與胰島素抗性相關研究
許多研究已將 TyG 指數作為衡量胰島素抗性的簡單指標。據《Brain and Behavior》發表的一項系統性回顧與統合分析(Ghondaghsaz et al., 2024),該研究分析了 17 篇關於 TyG 指數與認知功能的論文,結果顯示 TyG 指數與認知衰退的風險顯著相關。研究發現每增加一單位 TyG 指數,失智風險會上升約 2.86 倍,支持 TyG 指數在預測失智風險上的應用價值。
1. 系統性回顧與統合分析:主要研究結果
在 Ghondaghsaz 等人的研究中,納入了17個相關研究,這些研究涵蓋了來自不同地區的多種樣本人群,包括中國、韓國、美國等。結果顯示,認知衰退群體的 TyG 指數顯著高於正常對照組,這顯示 TyG 指數可能成為預測失智風險的重要指標。
2. 失智風險與 TyG 指數的關聯性
統合分析還顯示,TyG 指數較高的人群中失智風險顯著增加。例如,在調查不同 TyG 指數的對比下,最高的 TyG 指數組別(第四分位數)相較於最低的 TyG 指數組別(第一分位數),其失智風險增加了 1.62 倍(調整後的比值比 aOR 1.62,95% CI 1.11 至 2.38)。這表明 TyG 指數可以作為早期篩查的潛在工具,用於識別有失智高風險的個體。
3. TyG 指數作為診斷工具的效能
這項分析同時顯示 TyG 指數在預測失智風險上的 AUC(受試者操作特徵曲線下面積)達到 0.73,顯示中等至良好的診斷效能。這使得 TyG 指數成為具有潛力的臨床工具,用於失智症高風險群體的早期篩查。
1. 胰島素在大腦中的功能
胰島素不僅在體內的糖代謝中發揮重要作用,還在腦部的多種功能中發揮關鍵角色。胰島素在大腦中參與神經元的增殖、神經傳導、記憶形成等過程,對維持神經元健康至關重要。胰島素抗性會導致腦部胰島素信號異常,進而影響認知功能,特別是記憶和學習能力。
2. 胰島素抗性引發的炎症對腦部的影響
當身體處於胰島素抗性狀態時,會引發全身性炎症反應,這種慢性炎症會破壞血腦屏障的完整性,使得更多的有害物質進入腦部,增加腦內氧化壓力。長期累積的炎症會導致神經元退化,是引發阿茲海默症和其他神經退化性疾病的重要原因之一。
3. 高血糖對大腦的直接影響
高血糖水平會直接損害腦部血管,導致小血管病變,並且進一步影響到大腦的血液供應。這種血管損傷不僅會降低大腦的氧氣和營養供應,也會導致腦部組織的損傷。這種血管損傷與失智症尤其是血管性癡呆的發展息息相關。
1. 改善飲食習慣:低糖飲食
控制血糖是降低失智風險的重要策略之一。低糖飲食可以幫助穩定血糖水平,減少胰島素抗性。研究顯示,地中海飲食和低碳水化合物飲食可以有效降低血糖及三酸甘油酯含量,對於預防失智症有明顯效果。
2. 定期運動
適度運動可以提高胰島素敏感性,降低 TyG 指數。運動不僅有助於減少脂肪堆積,還能促進腦部血液循環,減少失智風險。對於預防認知衰退,建議每週至少進行 150 分鐘的中等強度有氧運動。
3. 體重控制
肥胖是胰島素抗性的危險因子之一。通過體重控制可以減少脂肪堆積,進而降低 TyG 指數。維持健康體重不僅有助於血糖和三酸甘油酯的管理,還可以降低失智風險。
4. 藥物輔助治療
對於胰島素抗性較嚴重的個體,特別是糖尿病患者,使用降血糖藥物(如二甲雙胍)或降低胰島素抗性的藥物(如 SGLT2 抑制劑)可以有效降低 TyG 指數,減少腦部退化的風險。
TyG 指數作為簡便的胰島素抗性指標,目前在預測失智症風險方面已有初步成效,但其在臨床中的廣泛應用仍需要更多實證支持。
1. 建立標準化的評估框架
由於各項研究中的人群特徵不同,未來需要在不同人群中進行更多 TyG 指數與失智風險的對照研究,建立一套標準化的臨床評估框架。
2. 開展更大規模的縱向研究
現有的研究多為橫斷研究,無法完全確定 TyG 指數與失智之間的因果關係。未來可透過長期追蹤不同 TyG 指數人群的失智風險變化,來確立 TyG 指數與失智的關聯性。
3. 探索 TyG 指數與腦部病理改變的直接關係
TyG 指數如何影響腦內胰島素信號、神經元退化及腦血管病變等問題仍未完全明確。結合腦成像技術與病理檢查可以提供更直接的證據。
現有研究表明,TyG 指數與失智症風險有顯著關聯,且隨著 TyG 指數的升高,認知衰退的風險亦顯著增加。透過控制血糖、降低三酸甘油酯以及減少胰島素抗性,可以有效降低失智風險。隨著更多研究證實 TyG 指數在失智風險評估中的應用潛力,其未來可能成為失智症早期篩查的一個簡便且可靠的指標。
Brain Behav. 2024 Oct 31;14(11):e70131. doi: 10.1002/brb3.70131
Exploring the Association Between Cognitive Decline and Triglyceride‐Glucose Index: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
Elina Ghondaghsaz 1, Amirmohammad Khalaji 2,3, Mehrdad Mahalleh 2,4, Mahdi Masrour 2, Parsa Mohammadi 2, Alessandro Cannavo 5, Amir Hossein Behnoush 2,3,✉
Author information
Article notes
Copyright and License information
PMCID: PMC11527841 PMID: 39482852
ABSTRACT
Background
Cognitive decline and dementia are debilitating conditions that compromise the quality of life and charge the healthcare system with a substantial socioeconomic burden. In this context, emerging evidence supports an association between the triglyceride‐glucose index (TyG), a surrogate insulin resistance marker, and cognitive decline and dementia. Hence, we systematically reviewed the studies assessing the TyG index in patients with cognitive decline and their controls.
Methods
Online international databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and the Web of Science) were searched comprehensively for studies showing the TyG index in patients with cognitive decline/impairment. Random‐effect meta‐analyses were conducted to calculate the standardized mean difference (SMD), pooled odds ratio (OR), and pooled area under the curve (AUC), in addition to 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the comparisons of groups.
Results
Seventeen studies were included in our analysis. Then, we conducted a meta‐analysis, demonstrating that patients with cognitive decline had significantly higher levels of TyG index than those without (SMD 0.83, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.50, p = 0.015). Moreover, our data showed that a 1‐unit increase in the TyG index was associated with higher odds of cognitive decline (adjusted OR [aOR] 2.86, 95% CI 1.49 to 5.50, p = 0.002). Further, we observed that patients in the fourth TyG quartile with higher values of the TyG index than the first quartile presented with more increased cognitive decline (aOR 1.62, 95%CI 1.11 to 2.38, p = 0.013). Finally, pooled AUC data for the diagnostic performance of the TyG index resulted in an overall AUC value of 0.73 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.79). Sensitivity and specificity were also calculated as 0.695 and 0.687, respectively.
Conclusion
This study supports the clinical utility of the TyG index in patients with cognitive decline and solicits more focused studies to consolidate its usage in clinical settings and real‐world practice.
Keywords: cognitive decline, cognitive impairment, dementia, meta‐analysis, systematic review, triglyceride‐glucose index
The role of insulin resistance and triglyceride‐glucose index (TyG) has been investigated in cognitive decline and dementia. Based on 17 included studies, patients with cognitive decline had significantly higher levels of TyG index compared to controls. TyG, as a surrogate marker of insulin resistance, could be a potentially useful biomarker in dementia and cognitive decline.
1. Introduction
Dementia is an “umbrella” term that generally describes several brain diseases affecting memory, other cognitive abilities, and behavior that significantly decrease individuals’ quality of life, along with their families, with substantial social and economic burdens (WHO 2023). There are four common types of dementia: (1) Alzheimer's disease, accounting for 60%–80% of all cases; (2) vascular dementia, which is the second most prevalent form with 20% of patients affected; (3) Lewy body dementia, with 5%–15% of all dementias, represents the third form of dementia and includes two subtypes of Parkinson's disease and Lewy body dementia; (4) the less common form defined by frontotemporal dementia.
Overall, dementia represents a significant and growing global health challenge, with almost 50 million people currently affected, according to the World Health Organization (WHO 2023; Wu et al. 2017; GBD 2016 Dementia Collaborators 2019). Although it is not a normal stage of the aging process, age is considered the most potent known risk factor for dementia. Therefore, it has been estimated that due to the increasing geriatric population, the global total of people with dementia will double in 2030 and triplicate in 2050 (WHO 2023; Kong et al. 2018). Based on this premise, accurate diagnosis and the identification of modifiable risk factors are two prerequisites for delivering optimal therapies specific to diverse dementia subtypes that can help to reduce its global burden. In this context, understanding cognitive decline is one of the most critical issues (Jongsiriyanyong and Limpawattana 2018). The spectrum of cognitive decline ranges from an average cognitive decline observed with aging to mild cognitive impairment (MCI), an intermediate state, to dementia (Jongsiriyanyong and Limpawattana 2018). The term MCI is used when the decline in cognition is higher than expected for one's age and education level without fulfilling the dementia criteria (Petersen et al. 2018). The likelihood of progression from MCI to any of the types of dementia has been estimated to range from 5% to 17% per year, and the risk factors include age, MCI subtype, brain imaging characteristics like reduced volume or increased white matter intensities (WMI), cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers, and lack of social engagement (Petersen et al. 2018). In addition, the presence of concurrent conditions such as heart failure and depression in which insulin resistance (IR) plays a role might have associations with cognitive decline (Tudoran et al. 2020). Therefore, much focus has been on identifying modifiable and nonmodifiable risk factors to prevent the transition from MCI to dementia (Jongsiriyanyong and Limpawattana 2018).
The Lancet Commission on Dementia Prevention, Intervention, and Care has reported diabetes among a list of independent risk factors for dementia (Livingston et al. 2020). Despite this, how diabetes, cognitive decline, and dementia are entangled and whether these disorders share a common pathogenic mechanism remain two big unresolved questions. Importantly, several pieces of evidence have identified IR as a probable mechanistic link factor in this association. In addition, IR acts as a metabolic substrate of several other independent risk factors of dementia (Livingston et al. 2020), supporting the idea that this condition plays a direct pivotal role in cognitive decline and dementia. This idea has been corroborated also by observation of a relationship between IR and cognitive impairment in both diabetic and nondiabetic populations (Benedict et al. 2012; Backeström et al. 2015; Lutski et al. 2017; Wei et al. 2023; Kim and Arvanitakis 2023). Despite this evidence, several gaps remain. Therefore, by our previous report and in line with others, we focused on the studies assessing the triglyceride‐glucose (TyG) index, a surrogate marker of IR. The TyG index is easily calculated using fasting triglycerides and fasting plasma glucose values and compared with other tools to assess IR (Sánchez‐Íñigo et al. 2016; Khalaji et al. 2023; Okamura et al. 2020; Hong, Han, and Park 2021). This index presents high sensitivity and specificity and can be used as a helpful index of diabetes and several other IR‐related disorders, including dementia and depression (Sánchez‐Íñigo et al. 2016; Khalaji et al. 2023; Okamura et al. 2020; Hong, Han, and Park 2021; Behnoush et al. 2024). Based on this premise, we conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis to establish if the TyG index is an accessible predictor of cognitive decline and dementia.
2. Methods
The systematic review and meta‐analysis were conducted in adherence to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (Page et al. 2021). The protocol of this study was officially documented in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) with the registration number CRD42023475580 on November 8, 2023.
2.1. Literature Search
A systematic search was carried out on four online databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase, on October 25, 2023, to identify the most relevant publications. No limitations were placed on the year of publication or any other filters. A combination of Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms and free‐text keywords related to “TyG” and “cognitive impairment,” along with their corresponding expansions, were utilized to query the databases. The search query is provided in Table S1.
2.2. Selection Criteria
Our study incorporated original research that fulfilled one of the following criteria: (1) it presented data on the TyG index in individuals with cognitive decline and in controls; (2) it assessed the diagnostic precision of the TyG index in distinguishing between individuals with cognitive decline and controls, using measures such as sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC); (3) it reported the correlation between the TyG Index levels and the prevalence of cognitive decline, either in the form of odds ratios (ORs) or hazard ratios (HRs); (4) it examined the predictive capability of categorized TyG index values in identifying concurrent cognitive decline; and (5) population‐based studies on healthy subjects that assessed the effect of TyG on the risk of cognitive decline or dementia development. Exclusion criteria encompassed review articles, case reports, and non‐English publications lacking English abstracts. There was no restriction on date of publication among studies, and all studies from inception to search date were included.
2.3. Data Extraction
The information from the included studies was collected independently by two investigators, AK and EG, using an electronic spreadsheet. The relevant information extracted from each study, when available, contained the authors' names, year of publication, country of origin, study design, sample size, control population, mean age, male percentage, TyG levels in different groups, diagnostic performance measures such as sensitivity, specificity, and AUC, as well as the correlation of TyG levels with concomitant cognitive decline, presented as ORs and HRs. In addition to these findings, the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) or standard deviations (SDs) and p‐values were also obtained. Disagreements were effectively resolved through the process of engaging in productive discussion and reaching a consensus.
2.4. Quality Assessment
The quality assessment of cohort and case‐control studies included in the analysis was conducted using the Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale (NOS) (Wells et al. 2000). The quality of each study was assessed independently by two investigators, AK and EG, using predetermined criteria. Discrepancies pertaining to the evaluation of quality were resolved by means of communication or consultation with an additional reviewer. The NOS comprises three primary types of bias, namely selection bias, comparability bias, and outcome bias. Ratings of “good,” “fair,” and “poor” were assigned to the categories of seven and above, two to six, and one and below, respectively.
2.5. Statistical Analysis
All statistical analyses and visualizations were conducted using R version 4.2.2 (R Core Team [2021], Vienna, Austria) with the assistance of the “meta” and “mada” packages (Balduzzi, Rücker, and Schwarzer 2019; Doebler and Holling 2017). The bivariate random effect model proposed by Reitsma et al. (2005) was utilized to aggregate findings from studies addressing diagnostic specificity and sensitivity. The model also computes the summary receiver operating characteristic (sROC) curve and the corresponding AUC (Reitsma et al. 2005). For the AUC values provided by the studies themselves, a meta‐analysis was conducted using the random effects model with the inverse variance method to compute a pooled AUC (Higgins, Thompson, and Spiegelhalter 2009). In order to compare the mean TyG index levels in the control groups and the groups experiencing cognitive decline, we employed the bias‐corrected Hedges' g standardized mean difference (SMD) in meta‐analysis. Hedges' g was chosen as it accounts for both test and control sample sizes when determining the effect size (Hedges 1981). A meta‐analysis using the random effects model with the inverse variance method was also performed on ORs gathered from studies that examined the TyG index as a continuous variable. The ORs in these studies reflect the risk per one‐unit increment of the TyG index. Furthermore, if the TyG index was treated as a categorical variable with four quartiles of TyG levels, the ORs for comparing the group with the highest TyG index (fourth quartile) to the group with the lowest TyG index (first quartile) were used in the meta‐analysis. Each quartile is defined according to the TyG levels in each population. The first quartile (Q1) is the first 25% of data, and the fourth quartile (Q4) is the last 25%. Unadjusted and most adjusted OR values were analyzed and reported separately for the two mentioned meta‐analyses.
The random effects model was employed in all analyses due to the prediction of high heterogeneity between the analyzed studies and the marginally different measurement techniques they used. I2 and tau2 statistics were employed for the assessment of heterogeneity in all meta‐analyses. Multivariant meta‐regression was also used to investigate the sources of heterogeneity among the studies.
When the median and interquartile range were reported, the mean and standard deviation were calculated using methods suggested by Luo and Wan (Wan et al. 2014; Luo et al. 2018). The standard error of the AUCs for use in meta‐analysis was calculated using the 95% CI. In case no CI was provided, the method developed by Hanley and McNeil was implemented for the calculation of the standard error from the sample size and the AUC (Hanley and McNeil 1982; Obuchowski, Lieber, and Wians 2004). Furthermore, a statistically significant result was considered as having a p‐value less than 0.05 and an I2 value greater than 50%.
3. Results
3.1. Search and Baseline Characteristics of Included Studies
The screening of databases led to the identification of 166 studies, with most studies from Scopus (n = 65), followed by Embase (n = 38), the Web of Science (n = 32), and PubMed (n = 31). Subsequently, 66 studies were removed because of duplicates, whereas 83 were excluded after title/abstract and full‐text screening. As shown in Figure 1, in the PRISMA flowchart, we finally included 17 studies for the analysis (Hong, Han, and Park 2021; Faqih et al. 2021; Gentreau et al. 2022; Guo et al. 2021; Huang et al. 2022; Jiang et al. 2021; S. Li, Deng, and Zhang 2022; Liu et al. 2023; Ma et al. 2023; Seo et al. 2023; Sun et al. 2023; Teng et al. 2022; Tian, Fa et al. 2023; Tian, Song et al. 2023; Tong et al. 2022; Wang et al. 2022; Weyman‐Vela et al. 2022).
FIGURE 1.
PRISMA flowchart for search, screening, and reasons for exclusion.
Table 1 illustrates the characteristics of the included studies on 5,636,864 participants. All the studies were published between the years 2021 and 2023 and were mainly conducted in China (Guo et al. 2021; Jiang et al. 2021; S. Li, Deng, and Zhang 2022; Liu et al. 2023; Ma et al. 2023; Sun et al. 2023; Teng et al. 2022; Tian, Fa et al. 2023; Tian, Song et al. 2023; Tong et al. 2022; Wang et al. 2022). The most extensive study was conducted in South Korea on a population of 5,568,048 individuals (Hong, Han, and Park 2021). The result of the quality assessment for studies is shown in Table S2. Based on the NOS system, all studies had high qualities.
TABLE 1.
Baseline characteristics of the studies evaluating the TyG index in cognitive impairment.
Study
Year
Location
Population
Outcome
Sample size
Mean age (years)
Male (%)
TyG index
Main findings
Faqih et al. (2021)
2021
Saudi Arabia
Patients with AD or memory loss
AD
354
80.5 ± 10.2
46.3
NR
Higher odds of AD were reported in patients with IR compared to the non‐IR group in the age‐adjusted model (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.33, p < 0.05).
Gentreau et al. (2022)
2022
France
Patients who developed MCI or dementia in 7‐year follow‐up and CN controls
Prodromal dementia
497
71.0 ± 3.9
48.7
8.42 ± 0.48
Comparable levels of the TyG index were found between CN individuals and the MCI/dementia group (CN: 8.41 ± 0.47, dementia/MCI: 8.45 ± 0.50, p = 0.706).
Guo et al. (2021)
2021
China
Elderly patients with CSVD with or without VCI
VCI
275
NR
NR
8.95 ± 0.54
The TyG index was significantly higher in the VCI group compared to the non‐VCI group (9.07 ± 0.54 vs. 8.70 ± 0.55, p < 0.01).
Hong, Han, and Park (2021)
2021
Republic of Korea
Population‐based study
Dementia, AD, and VD
5,586,048
44.9 ± 13.2
50.7
NR
Individuals in Q2, Q3, and Q4 of the TyG index had higher HR for dementia, AD, and VD, compared to Q1 (p < 0.05).
Huang et al. (2022)
2022
Taiwan
Population‐based study
MMSE ≥ 24
28,486
63.9 ± 2.9
39.2
8.5 ± 0.6
The TyG index was significantly higher in individuals with MMSE < 24 compared to those with MMSE ≥ 24 (8.6 ± 0.6 vs. 8.5 ± 0.6, p < 0.001).
Jiang et al. (2021)
2021
China
CSVD patients with or without VCI
VCI
280
67.6 ± 11.8
57.8
9.16 ± 0.71
The TyG index was significantly higher in the VCI group compared to the non‐VCI group (p < 0.001).
Li, Deng, and Zhang (2022)
2022
China
Population‐based study
Cognitive decline (MMSE)
1774
53.5 ± 8.5
48.0
8.31 ± 0.62
A higher incidence of cognitive decline was found in higher quartiles of the TyG index (p = 0.017).
Liu et al. (2023)
2023
China
Elderly patients with MoCA ≥ 18
MCI (MoCA)
262
53.0 ± 7.5
NR
NR
A negative correlation between the TyG index and MoCA score was found (r = −0.75, 95% CI −1.29 to 0.20, p < 0.05).
Ma et al. (2023)
2023
China
Population‐based study
Cognitive impairment (MMSE)
1484
58.1 ±
9.2
40.0
8.69 ± 0.57
Cognitively impaired individuals had significantly higher TyG index compared to CN ones (8.89 ± 0.58 vs. 8.68 ± 0.56, p = 0.001).
Seo et al. (2023)
2023
United States
Male firefighters aged 20–60 years
PVT and DMS
114
39.4 ± 2.6
100
8.7 ± 0.1
Significant positive correlations between DMS total time with the TyG index (p < 0.01) and DMS reaction time with the TyG index were found (p < 0.01).
Sun et al. (2023)
2023
China
Population‐based study
AD
2170
63.0 ± 8.2
46.7
8.7 ± 0.6
Baseline TyG index was associated with significantly higher risk of AD (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.60, p = 0.027).
Teng et al. (2022)
2022
China
Elderly patients with T2DM
Cognitive impairment (MMSE)
308
70.6 ± 6.1
48.7
8.99 ± 0.68
T2DM patients with cognitive impairment had significantly higher TyG index compared to T2DM patients with no cognitive impairment (9.20 ± 0.72 vs. 8.79 ± 0.57, p < 0.001).
Tian, Fa et al. (2023)
2023
China
Population‐based study
Dementia, AD, and VD
5199
71.8 ± 5.5
42.9
8.62 ± 0.53
Patients with dementia had significantly higher levels of TyG index compared to those without dementia (8.73 ± 0.57 vs. 8.61 ± 0.53, p = 0.001)
Tian, Song et al. (2023)
2023
China
Population‐based study
Cognitive function (z‐score)
4541
71.0 ± 4.7
43.6
8.61 ± 0.53
A significant J‐shaped inverted association between the TyG index and z‐scores of verbal fluency, global cognition, and executive function were found (p < 0.05).
Tong et al. (2022)
2022
China
T2DM patients with or without MCI
MCI
517
58.0 ± 8.9
54.4
9.37 ± 0.70
Patients with MCI had significantly higher TyG levels compared to CN ones (9.69 [IQR 9.35–10.10] vs. 9.05 [95% CI 8.62–9.39], p < 0.01). Moreover, mean TyG‐BMI index was also higher in this group, compared to CN patients (246 [IQR 222–270] vs. 228 [IQR 204–249], p < 0.01).
Wang et al. (2022)
2022
China
Population‐based study
WRT and MST
4420
58.9 ± 8.7
46.6
8.63 ± 0.61
In males, the higher odds of cognitive decline (global cognition) were found in Q4 of TyG index compared to Q1 (reference) (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.71, p = 0.031).
Weyman‐Vala et al. (2022)
2022
Mexico
Participants with or without MCI aged 60–90 years
MCI (MMSE)
135
72.8 ± 6.2
18.5
4.53 ± 0.25
The higher TyG index was in patients with MCI compared to CN individuals (5.0 ± 0.3 vs. 4.1 ± 0.2, p < 0.001).
Abbreviations: AD: Alzheimer's disease, BMI: body mass index, CI: confidence interval, CN: cognitively normal, CSVD: cerebral small vessel disease, DMS: delayed‐match‐to‐sample task, HR: hazard ratio, IQR: interquartile range, IR: insulin resistance, MCI: mild cognitive impairment, MMSE: Mini‐Mental State Examination, MoCA: Montreal Cognitive Function Scale, MST: mental status, NR: not reported, OR: odds ratio, PVT: psychomotor vigilance task, T2DM: type 2 diabetes mellitus, TyG: triglyceride‐glucose index, VCI: vascular cognitive impairment, WRT: word recall test.
3.2. Meta‐Analysis of the TyG Index in Patients with Cognitive Decline vs. Controls
Nine studies investigated the TyG index in patients with cognitive decline and compared them with controls (Gentreau et al. 2022; Guo et al. 2021; Huang et al. 2022; Jiang et al. 2021; Ma et al. 2023; Teng et al. 2022; Tian, Fa et al. 2023; Tong et al. 2022; Weyman‐Vela et al. 2022). Random‐effect meta‐analysis was performed to pool these comparisons, and as shown in the forest plot in Figure 2, patients with cognitive decline had significantly higher levels of the TyG index (SMD 0.83, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.50, p = 0.015). This analysis was associated with high heterogeneity (I 2 97%, 95% CI 96% to 98%).
FIGURE 2.
Forest plot for meta‐analysis of TyG levels in patients with cognitive decline versus controls.
Sensitivity analysis by the leave‐one‐out method was performed for this meta‐analysis, and no significant change was observed by the removal of any of the studies (Figure S1). Next, we assessed publication bias using the trim‐and‐fill method and observed an asymmetry for the analysis (Figure S2). However, adding three additional studies to gain symmetry led to an insignificant difference between the cognitive decline group and controls (SMD 0.23, 95% CI −0.55 to 1.01, p = 0.58). Similarly, Begg's and Egger's statistical tests showed a significant publication bias (p = 0.022 and 0.020, respectively). Finally, multivariate meta‐regression showed that publication year, sample size, and male ratio were significantly associated with the observed pooled estimate (all p < 0.05). The combination of these variables and the mean age accounted for 69.48% of the heterogeneity (R 2: 69.48%, Table 2).
TABLE 2.
Meta‐regression for meta‐analysis of TyG index in patients with cognitive decline vs. controls.
Multivariant meta‐regression
Moderator
No. of studies
Meta‐regression slope
95% CI
p‐value
Publication year
8
−0.9871
−1.7847 to −0.1896
0.0153
Sample size
8
−0.0001
−0.0001 to −0.0000
0.0234
Mean age
8
−0.0424
−0.1268 to 0.0421
0.3255
Male ratio
8
−9.3006
−13.9735 to −4.6276
< 0.0001
3.3. Meta‐Analysis of Cognitive Decline Risk and the TyG Index
The TyG index was assessed as a continuous variable in increasing the risk of cognitive decline in five studies (Guo et al. 2021; Ma et al. 2023; Sun et al. 2023; Teng et al. 2022; Tong et al. 2022). Among these, only the study by Sun et al. reported HRs for incident AD and, therefore, was not included in the meta‐analysis. Importantly, this study failed to find an association between the TyG index and the risk of AD (aHR 1.32, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.77). Next, we pooled the remaining four studies and included them in the meta‐analysis as they reported adjusted ORs for a 1‐unit increase in the TyG index (Guo et al. 2021; Ma et al. 2023; Teng et al. 2022; Tong et al. 2022). The adjustments for each of the studies are shown in Table S3. As shown in the forest plot in Figure 3, we observed that an increase in the TyG index resulted in significantly higher odds of cognitive decline (aOR 2.86, 95% CI 1.49 to 5.50, p‐value = 0.002) with high heterogeneity (I 2 88%, 95% CI 70% to 95%). Random‐effect meta‐analysis (Figure S3) of unadjusted ORs showed significantly higher odds of cognitive decline with one unit increase in the TyG index (unadjusted OR 3.16, 95% CI 1.58 to 6.31, p = 0.001, I 2: 91%). In Table 3, we summarized ORs and HRs of cognitive decline per 1‐unit increase in the TyG index.
FIGURE 3.
Forest plot for meta‐analysis of adjusted odds ratio for the relationship between TyG index (1‐unit increase) and cognitive decline.
TABLE 3.
Outcomes in different groups/levels of the TyG index.
Study
Population
Outcome
Group 1
Group 2
Group 3
Group 4
Continuous
Faqih et al. (2021)
Patients with AD or memory loss
AD
Low‐TyG (no IR)
Ref
—
High‐TyG (IR)
aOR 1.2
[95% CI 1.0 to 3.1]*
−
—
—
Guo et al. (2021)
Elderly patients with CSVD with or without VCI
VCI
Low‐TyG (< 8.78)
Ref
—
High‐TyG (≥ 8.78)
aOR 4.09
[95% CI 2.18 to 7.68]*
—
—
aOR 2.42
[95% CI 1.37 to 4.29]*
Hong, Han, and Park (2021)
Population‐based study
All‐cause dementia
Q1
Ref
—
Q2
aHR 1.04
[95% CI 1.02 to 1.05]*
Q3
aHR1.07
[95% CI 1.05 to 1.09]*
Q4
aHR 1.14
[95% CI 1.12 to 1.16]*
—
Jiang et al. (2021)
CSVD patients with or without VCI
VCI
Q1 (≤ 3.77)
Ref
—
Q2 (3.77–4.00)
aOR 2.69
[95% CI 1.17 to 6.16]*
Q3 (4.00–4.18)
aOR 2.54
[95% CI 1.12 to 5.75]*
Q4 (≥ 4.18)
aOR 4.67
[95% CI 1.79 to 12.16]*
—
Li, Deng, and Zhang (2022)
Population‐based study
Cognitive decline
Q1 (< 7.87)
Ref
—
Q2 (7.87–8.25)
aOR 1.17
[95% CI 0.85 to 1.62]
Q3 (8.25–8.68)
aOR 1.31
[95% CI 0.93 to 1.83]
Q4 (≥ 8.68)
aOR 1.51
[95% CI 1.06 to 2.14]*
—
Ma et al. (2023)
Population‐based study
Cognitive impairment
Q1 (< 8.30)
Ref
—
Q2 (8.30–8.64)
aOR 2.02
[95% CI 0.94 to 4.34]
Q3 (8.65–9.05)
aOR 2.26
[95% CI 1.06 to 4.84]*
Q4 (> 9.05)
aOR 2.64
[95% CI 1.19 to 5.85]*
aOR 1.64
[95% CI 1.02 to 2.63]*
Sun et al. (2023)
Population‐based study
AD
Q1 (< 8.29)
Ref
—
Q2 (8.29−8.67)
aHR 1.59
[95% CI 0.97 to 2.62]
Q3 (8.68−9.09)
aHR 1.69
[95% CI 1.02 to 2.81]*
Q4 (> 9.09)
aHR 1.39
[95% CI 0.80 to 2.41]
aHR 1.32
[95% CI 0.98 to 1.77]
Teng et al. (2022)
Elderly patients with T2DM
Cognitive impairment
T1 (≤ 8.71)
Ref
—
T2 (8.72‐9.21)
aOR 1.75
[95% CI 0.93 to 3.30]
T3 (≥ 9.22)
aOR 3.30
[95% CI 1.68 to 6.45]*
—
aOR 2.24
[95% CI 1.44 to 3.49]*
Tian, Fa et al. (2023)
Population‐based study
All‐cause dementia
< 75th percentile TyG
Ref
—
≥ 75th percentile TyG
aOR 1.66
[95% CI 1.24 to 2.20]*
Tong et al. (2022)
T2DM patients with or without MCI
MCI
—
—
—
—
aOR 7.37
[95% CI 4.72 to 11.50]*
Wang et al. (2022)
Population‐based study (Female)
Cognitive decline
Q1
Ref
—
Q2
aOR 1.13
[95% CI 0.88 to 1.45]
Q3
aOR 1.01
[95% CI 0.79 to 1.29]
Q4
aOR 1.11
[95% CI 0.87 to 1.42]
—
Wang et al. (2022)
Population‐based study (Male)
Cognitive decline
Q1
Ref
—
Q2
aOR 1.09
[95% CI 0.85 to 1.40]
Q3
aOR 1.09
[95% CI 0.85 to 1.41]
Q4
aOR 1.32
[95% CI 1.03 to 1.71]*
—
Abbreviations: AD: Alzheimer's disease, aHR: adjusted hazard ratio, aOR: adjusted odds ratio, CI: confidence interval, CSVD: cerebral small vessel disease, IR: insulin resistance, MCI: mild cognitive impairment, Q: quartile, T: tertile, T2DM: type 2 diabetes mellitus, VCI: vascular cognitive impairment.
*p < 0.05.
We next examined six studies comparing the quartiles (Q) of the TyG index (Hong, Han, and Park 2021; Jiang et al. 2021; S. Li, Deng, and Zhang 2022; Ma et al. 2023; Sun et al. 2023; Wang et al. 2022). Of these, the study from Hong et al. (Hong, Han, and Park 2021) and Sun et al. (Sun et al. 2023) reported HRs for comparing Q4 with Q1 and were not added to the meta‐analysis of ORs. In their population‐based study, Hong and colleagues (Hong, Han, and Park 2021) found a higher incidence of all‐cause dementia in Q2, Q3, and Q4 of the TyG index compared to Q1 (Q2: aHR 1.04 [95% CI 1.02 to 1.05], Q3: aHR1.07 [95% CI 1.05 to 1.09], Q4: aHR 1.14 [95% CI 1.12 to 1.16]). For their part, Sun and colleagues evaluated AD incidence in a population‐based study (Sun et al. 2023). Interestingly, these authors observed that only patients in the Q3 of the TyG index had a significantly higher incidence of AD than those in the Q1 (aHR 1.69, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.81). Next, we compared Q of the TyG index in fully adjusted models described in four of the six studies reporting ORs (Jiang et al. 2021; S.Li, Deng, and Zhang 2022; Ma et al. 2023; Wang et al. 2022). As shown in the forest plot in Figure 4, our analysis revealed that the fourth and first quartiles of the TyG index showed significant odds of cognitive decline (aOR 1.62, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.38, p = 0.013, I2: 67%). On the other hand, a similar significant OR was obtained by pooling unadjusted ORs (OR 3.63, 95% CI 1.12 to 11.74, p = 0.032, I 2: 92%), as illustrated in Figure S4. Finally, the adjusted OR/HR for comparison of cognitive decline between groups of TyG index is available in Table 3.
FIGURE 4.
Forest plot for meta‐analysis of adjusted odds ratio for the relationship between TyG index (Quartile 4 vs. Quartile 1) and cognitive decline.
3.4. Diagnostic Ability of TyG for Cognitive Decline
The diagnostic ability of the TyG index for cognitive decline was assessed in four studies (Guo et al. 2021; Jiang et al. 2021; Teng et al. 2022; Tong et al. 2022). Pooled AUC by random effect meta‐analysis is shown as a forest plot in Figure 5 (AUC 0.73, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.79, p < 0.001). The heterogeneity was high in this analysis (I 2: 79%). Obtaining AUC by pooling sensitivities and specificities observed in each study resulted in an overall AUC of 0.74. Also, a sensitivity of 0.695 (95% CI 0.629 to 0.753) and a specificity of 0.687 (95% CI 0.587 to 0.772) were observed, as shown in Figure 6 and Figure S5.
FIGURE 5.
Forest plot for pooled AUC for diagnosis of cognitive decline.
FIGURE 6.
Summary receiver operative curve for measurement of TyG for assessment of cognitive decline.
4. Discussion
In this study, we performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis to establish a correlation between cognitive decline and the TyG index. We examined 17 studies identified after literature screening and included them because they respected our inclusion criteria described in Section 2. The main results obtained following our analysis are that (1) individuals experiencing cognitive decline exhibited more elevated levels of the TyG index than those with normal cognitive function, (2) an escalation in the TyG index corresponds to a substantially heightened risk of cognitive decline, and (3) higher TyG indexes are associated with cognitive decline and dementia, even in nondiabetic patients, supporting the central independent pathogenic role of IR.
IR and impaired insulin secretion are often present in patients with type 2 diabetes and those with poor glucose tolerance (Zhao et al. 2023). However, aside from diabetes, IR spawns, or coexists with, other conditions like cardiovascular disease, cancer, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), and other metabolic diseases (Zhao et al. 2023). In addition to these, IR appears to be directly associated with the risk of cognitive decline and dementia (Kim and Arvanitakis 2023). Therefore, understanding IR clearly and exploring innovative therapeutic and diagnostic approaches to reduce the risk of IR‐related disease burden is utterly needed. In this regard, the reduction of glycemic and lipid profiles of patients at cognitive risk using novel anti‐diabetic agents such as sodium‐glucose cotransporter inhibitors (SGLT2i), which could lead to a decrease in TyG index as a marker of IR, leads to better management of dementia (Lardaro et al. 2024; Mui et al. 2021).
IR can be measured using its gold standard, namely the hyperinsulinemic‐positive glucose clamp test (HEGC). However, its clinical application remains poor due to its limitations and complexity. Hence, other less invasive tools have been implemented, such as the homeostatic model assessment (HOMA‐IR) and the TyG index (X. Li et al. 2023). Compared to the HOMA‐IR, the TyG index has gained popularity as it is a more cost‐effective alternative and easy‐to‐measure surrogate marker of the IR (Kang et al. 2017; Minh et al. 2021; Wallace, Levy, and Matthews 2004). Moreover, the clinical usage of the TyG index has been supported by several studies (including meta‐analysis) showing the potential diagnostic and prognostic role of this marker in various IR‐related diseases (Sánchez‐Íñigo et al. 2016; Khalaji et al. 2023; Okamura et al. 2020; Hong, Han, and Park 2021; Behnoush et al. 2024; Azarboo et al. 2024). Clinicians could benefit from measuring this easily calculated index in order to assess the risk of cognitive decline in high‐risk populations. Also, due to the ease of TyG index measurement, assessing TyG level could be useful for screening the general population for not only preventing metabolic conditions but also other nonmetabolic diseases such as cognitive decline.
Importantly, as discussed by the 2020 Lancet Commission on dementia prevention, intervention, and care, there are at least 12 modifiable risk factors that might prevent or delay up to 40% of cases of dementia, and for most of these, like hypertension, depression, smoking, diabetes, sleep, diet, obesity, and alcohol, an association has been described with IR or the TyG index (Hong, Han, and Park 2021; Gao et al. 2023; Korkmaz et al. 2023; Pei et al. 2023; Kim et al. 2023; Chen, Gu, and Huang 2023; Baek et al. 2021). Since the TyG index is a novel index and there are still a limited number of studies on the association of TyG and cognitive decline, as shown in our findings, there is a need for future studies on this to better elucidate this connection.
Our findings support the notion that higher TyG index levels are associated with a risk of decline, aligning with most previous studies. Nonetheless, some studies have not found a connection between insulin resistance and cognitive function. For instance, one study utilizing HOMA2 IR to calculate the insulin resistance index found no association between HOMA2 IR and cognitive function in individuals with type 2 diabetes (Xia et al. 2020; Geijselaers et al. 2017). Since HOMA2‐IR is primarily intended to assess the effects of peripheral insulin resistance on organs such as the liver and skeletal muscle, some researchers argue that it may not accurately indicate brain insulin resistance (Banks, Owen, and Erickson 2012). Thus, more research is necessary to determine whether the TyG index and brain insulin resistance are related.
Of note, our study aligns with most previous studies and confirms that higher TyG index levels are associated with a risk of cognitive decline. Importantly, such an association appears to be independent of the presence of diabetes. Indeed, of the seventeen studies examined, just two (Teng et al. 2022; Tong et al. 2022) exclusively analyzed cognitive decline and TyG index in type 2 diabetic patients, with the remaining studies assessing this association in the general population or patients with dementia/cognitive impairment or cerebral small vessel disease (Table S3). In line with our analysis, the study by Hong et al. (Hong, Han, and Park 2021) in a large population of over 5 million participants enrolled during a median follow‐up of 7.21 years demonstrated that the TyG index was associated with an increased risk of dementia that was independent of traditional risk factors.
Despite this, the correlation between dementia and IR was not demonstrated in all studies, especially in those evaluating IR with the HOMA‐IR tool. Importantly, heterogeneities in populations, study designs, and variability in methods of cognitive assessment and IR may explain these inconsistencies. However, additional research is imperative, especially in subgroups, to better understand the relationship between IR and cognitive decline and then validate and refine the TyG index's diagnostic ability.
5. Conclusion
Our study supports a significant association between cognitive decline and high TyG index values. We revealed the heightened risk of cognitive decline with an increased TyG index and underscored the potential diagnostic capability of this surrogate marker of IR. The assessment of the TyG index's predictive capacity for cognitive decline yielded promising outcomes and highlighted its diagnostic potential with an impressive overall AUC of 0.74, a sensitivity of 0.695, and a specificity of 0.68. Moreover, our multivariate meta‐regression analysis revealed a significant association between the observed pooled estimate and the publication year, sample size, and male ratio. Of note, several questions remain open. Among these, one big question is how IR is mechanistically related to cognitive decline. Therefore, more research in the field, especially preclinical studies, may be helpful in better understanding how IR is associated with cognitive decline and dementia. These studies will help clinicians tailor specific interventions and diagnostic approaches to reduce the burden of dementia.
Author Contributions
Elina Ghondaghsaz: conceptualization, formal analysis, writing–original draft, visualization. Amirmohammad Khalaji: conceptualization, writing–original draft, visualization, formal analysis. Mehrdad Mahalleh: writing–original draft, writing–review and editing. Mahdi Masrour: writing–original draft, writing–review and editing. Parsa Mohammadi: writing–original draft, writing–review and editing. Alessandro Cannavo: writing–original draft, data curation. Amir Hossein Behnoush: writing–original draft, writing–review and editing, supervision.
Ethics Statement
The authors have nothing to report.
Consent
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Peer Review
The peer review history for this article is available at https://publons.com/publon/10.1002/brb3.70131.
Supporting information