Researchers race to detect Alzheimer's sooner using $3.9M grant

Nov 15, 2024

3 min

Chris Martens


Too often, people learn they have Alzheimer’s disease when it’s too late. The changes in the brain that lead to the disease manifesting with symptoms have already been occurring for decades.


Researchers at the University of Delaware will attempt to detect the disease sooner through a new study that examines changes in the arteries and brain tissue in midlife adults in their 50s and 60s. The findings of this work, funded by a nearly $4 million grant from the National Institute on Aging (NIA), could identify the earliest mechanisms linking vascular aging to the loss of brain tissue integrity, leading to new targets for interventions aimed at preventing age-related cognitive impairment.


“People who develop high blood pressure or stiffening of the aorta and carotid arteries in midlife are at a much higher risk for developing cognitive impairment or dementia in late life,” said Christopher Martens, the principal investigator of the study.


Martens, an associate professor of kinesiology and applied physiology in UD's College of Health Sciences and director of the Delaware Center for Cognitive Aging (DECCAR), is working closely with Curtis Johnson, an associate professor of biomedical engineering in the College of Engineering and leader of the neuroimaging biomarker core within DECCAR, on research funded by a nearly $4 million grant from the National Institute on Aging (NIA), a division of the National Institutes of Health (NIH).


“A lot happens as we age, so we’re aiming to pinpoint the timing and exact mechanisms that cause these changes in midlife adults,” Martens said.


This latest grant extends DECCAR’s ongoing Delaware Longitudinal Study for Alzheimer’s Prevention (DeLSAP), which seeks to study how risk and protective factors for dementia are related and change over time. Those eligible for DeLSAP could also meet the criteria for participating in the new study.


In his Neurovascular Aging Laboratory, Martens studies mechanisms leading to the stiffening of arteries, while Johnson is specifically interested in measuring the stiffness of the brain.


“As a person ages, the brain gets softer and breaks down, and we’re looking to see whether changes in arterial stiffness and patterns of blood flow in the brain cause this decline,” Johnson said.


Changes in blood flow to the brain come from controllable factors. Smoking, cardiovascular health, diet and exercise all impact blood flow positively and negatively.


“A lot of aging research is done at the end of life,” Johnson said. “We want to look at midlife and try to predict what happens later in life so we can prevent it.”


While the brain gets softer with age, arteries get stiffer.


“We hypothesize that midlife increases in stiffness in blood vessels cause damaging pulsatile pressure to enter the brain,” Martens said. “We believe this is one of the reasons we start to develop cognitive issues at an older age because the brain is exposed to increased pressure; that pressure is likely inflicting damage on surrounding brain tissue.”


In Johnson’s Mechanical Neuroimaging Lab, researchers will use high-resolution magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) to determine where brain damage occurs and what specific brain structures may be affected.


“From an MRI perspective, most researchers look at AD and other neurodegenerative diseases like multiple sclerosis with an emphasis on detection in a hospital setting,” Johnson said. “Using highly specialized techniques we’ve developed, we focus on the earlier side and how these changes progress into disease from the neuroscience side, emphasizing prevention.”


Together, they’ll seek to learn whether arterial stiffness causes the kind of cognitive impairment seen in AD or whether the decline is associated with a loss in the integrity of brain tissue.


“If we can prove arterial stiffness is playing a causal role in cognitive aging, that would provide further support for focusing on blood vessel health as an intervention for delaying AD or other forms of dementia versus solely focusing on the brain,” Martens said.

Connect with:
Chris Martens

Chris Martens

Associate Professor, Kinesiology & Applied Physiology

Prof. Martens's laboratory is interested in understanding mechanisms by which impaired vascular function contributes to cognitive declines.

Alzheimer's DiseaseAgingClinical TrialsCerebral Blood FlowVascular Aging

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from University of Delaware

6 min

A look at raw milk's health risks and potential benefits as Trump administration hints at law changes

More than half of U.S. states allow the sale of raw milk directly from farms to consumers, a number that would likely increase if Robert F. Kennedy Jr. – a raw milk advocate – is confirmed to lead the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). Kali Kniel, a professor of microbial food safety at the University of Delaware, can discuss the dangers and potential benefits of drinking raw milk. Some have celebrated the legalization of raw milk around the country, claiming it tastes better and has some nutritional benefits. Meanwhile, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, one of the DHHS agencies Kennedy would lead, cautions against drinking raw milk, which comes directly from cows, sheep or goats and has been banned from being sold across state lines since the 1980s. Concerns regarding raw milk have been elevated as a deadly strain of bird flu is infecting dairy farms around the country. In the following Q&A, Kniel talks about the pathogens that may be present in raw milk, ways to communicate food safety to the public and other topics. Milk and other dairy products that sit on shelves at the grocery store are pasteurized. What does this process involve and why is it important for dairy products? Pasteurization of milk is a process of heating milk and passing it between heated stainless steel plates until it reaches 161 degrees Fahrenheit. It is held at that temperature for around 15 seconds before it is quickly cooled to 39 degrees Fahrenheit. This process is intended to kill the pathogenic bacteria that could make a person sick. How does this process affect milk’s quality and nutritional value? Scientific studies have shown that pasteurization does not significantly change the nutritional value of milk. Unpasteurized milk may have more vitamin C, which does not survive the pasteurization process, but milk is not considered a good source of vitamin C, as it contains less than 10% of the Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA), the average amount of nutrients it takes to meet a healthy person’s needs. There are no beneficial bacteria in raw milk. Milk (pasteurized or raw) is not a good source of probiotic or potentially beneficial bacteria, so for that consumers should choose yogurt and other fermented dairy products as well as other fermented products. Scientific studies using animal models have shown no difference in how calcium in raw milk and pasteurized milk is absorbed by the human body. Popularity in drinking raw milk is increasing, despite the U.S. Food and Drug Administration advising that it’s not safe to drink. What are the health risks that come with drinking raw milk? Raw milk may contain pathogenic bacteria, including Campylobacter, Salmonella, pathogenic types of E. coli, Listeria and Brucella, as well as the protozoan parasite Cryptosporidium. These are all zoonotic microbes, which means they can be transmitted from animals to humans. Often the animal does not appear ill, so it is not possible to determine if an ill animal is shedding these pathogens in its feces that can contaminate milk. Microbial testing of the finished product and environmental monitoring programs may be helpful, but do not guarantee that the raw milk is absent of these pathogens. Milk can be contaminated with these pathogens from direct contamination with feces or from environmental conditions. Cross-contamination from dairy workers can also happen, even when people are trying their best to reduce the risk of cross-contamination. The likelihood of a disease outbreak occurring associated with a person consuming raw milk is relatively high given that others may also be exposed. Unpasteurized milk will have a relatively short shelf life and may not be available for testing. Following good hygiene practices on the farm and during milking such as biosecurity around the farm, appropriately sanitizing equipment and monitoring the health of animals can reduce the chance of milk contamination, but not eliminate it. There have been numerous outbreaks of illness associated with raw milk as well as cheese made from raw milk. Persons most at risk of illness associated with drinking raw milk include children, in particular 5 years of age and under, individuals aged 65 and over, pregnant women and immunocompromised individuals. It should be noted that all outbreaks of illness associated with raw milk have included individuals under 19 years of age. Children may be most vulnerable, as they cannot voice an opinion on consumption and risk of raw milk if it is in their household. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) collects data on foodborne disease outbreaks voluntarily reported by state, local or territorial health departments. According to the CDC from 2013 to 2018 there were 75 outbreaks of illness linked to raw milk consumption. These outbreaks include 675 illnesses and 98 hospitalizations. Most of these illnesses were caused by Campylobacter, shiga-toxigenic E. coli, or Salmonella. An increase in outbreaks has been correlated with changes in the availability of raw milk. For example, between 2009 and 2023, there were 25 documented outbreaks in the state of Utah, which has 16 raw milk retailers licensed by the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food. In all of these outbreaks, the raw milk was contaminated with the bacteria Campylobacter, which typically causes gastroenteritis symptoms like diarrhea and nausea, but may also cause chronic illness, including Guillain-Barré syndrome which can cause paralysis. How likely are these illnesses to happen from drinking raw milk? It is difficult to say. Foodborne illness is often underreported, depending on how severe people’s symptoms are. According to one study, only about 3.2% of the U.S. population drinks raw milk, while about 1.6% eats cheese made from raw milk. But compared with consumers of pasteurized dairy products, they are 840 times more likely to experience an illness and 45 times more likely to be hospitalized. The authors of this work used the CDC’s national reporting system to analyze data from 2009 to 2014. Despite health risks, why do some people still drink raw milk? Some people feel a nostalgic connection to raw milk, and others may feel that foods that are not treated with heat retain certain nutrients and enzymatic activity. I am not aware of any peer-reviewed rigorous scientific studies that indicate the nutritional benefits of consuming raw milk over time, given the risks of potential for illness, combined with a well balanced diet full of healthful food choices. It remains that raw milk is particularly risky for children to consume, as children can get sick from consuming fewer bacterial cells compared to adults. More than 900 cases of highly pathogenic avian influenza — the disease commonly known as bird flu — have been detected in dairy cattle across 16 states, and at least 40 people have been infected with the disease from close contact with dairy cows. Raw milk is being tested for the virus. With raw milk gaining interest among consumers, what are the possible consequences? Does it elevate the risk of bird flu spreading further to people? There remain clear risks of transmission of pathogenic bacteria through consumption of raw milk, and now with the potential for contamination of raw milk with avian influenza, it is even more important that consumers protect themselves by drinking pasteurized milk. The people most at risk right now are those involved with the milking process and in the handling of dairy cattle. So it is important that those individuals be aware of the risks and take appropriate precautions, including hand washing and wearing appropriate personal protective equipment like protective clothing, gloves, face shields and eye protection. As of December, the U.S. Department of Agriculture is requiring 13 states to share raw milk samples so the agency can test for bird flu viruses. How could this testing better help us understand the virus? I think it is very smart that USDA is leading the National Milk Testing Strategy, which will help us understand the extent of infected herds. Surveillance of microorganisms is an important way to assess risk so we can develop appropriate strategies to reduce and control these risks.

1 min

Los Angeles wildfires: Experts address health concerns and evacuation strategies

Major wildfires are once again raging in California, this time in Los Angeles County. According to news reports, they have so far been responsible for two deaths, 1,000 damaged structures and the evacuation of more than 30,000 residents. Experts from the University of Delaware's Disaster Research Center can comment on health impacts, evacuation strategies and how to manage pets and animals during disasters. Below are three of the Disaster Research Center core faculty and the topics they can discuss related to the current wildfires: Jennifer Horney, founding director of UD’s epidemiology program: Health impacts of disasters (mental and physical) as well as evacuation. Additionally, exposure to wildfire smoke which increases risk of respiratory infections; the scale of these fires during a very high period for these infectious diseases (flu, RSV, COVID) may also put pressure on public health and health care systems. Tricia Wachtendorf, co-director of the Disaster Research Center and professor of sociology and criminal justice: Disaster donations, social vulnerability and evacuation. Sarah DeYoung, associate professor of sociology and criminal justice: Pets and animals during evacuations.

1 min

Expert: Meta ditches fact checking, a major loss for the American people

Meta moving away from fact-checking towards a "community notes" model is the equivalent of crowd-sourcing truth, says the University of Delaware's Dannagal Young. This shift in policy is a victory for intuition, common sense and lived experience over data, expertise and evidence. It also stands as another example of media institutions acting preemptively to avoid political and economic fallout under the incoming administration. Young, director of UD's Center for Political Communication and professor of communication, can talk about epistemology (how people understand the world) and how it relates to populism and populist leaders like incoming President Donald Trump. Young can also discuss the following: • The contents of Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg's announcement video, in which he explains that recent elections mark a "cultural tipping point" in the direction of "free speech." "He's acknowledging that this policy change isn't a principled stance Meta is now taking, as much as a response to what he thinks the public is calling for (a dubious conclusion to draw from a narrow electoral victory)," Young said. • Zuckerberg's new stance, and how it will allow him to curry favor with the incoming administration because it allows Meta to avoid having to moderate Trump-friendly content. • Why content moderation and fact checking are expensive, and how moving away from that model is a "WIN-WIN-WIN for Meta: politically, culturally, and economically. And a LOSE LOSE LOSE for the American people: socially, culturally, and democratically," Young said.

View all posts