The main findings of this study can be summarized in the following points:
-
(1)
Three distinct trajectories of aging were identified: “good”, “intermediate”, “severe”. Most of the participants showed the “good” trajectory.
-
(2)
Female gender, obesity and lower education were more represented in the “intermediate” and “severe” trajectories.
-
(3)
ApoE-e4 allele carrier status was not associated with any of the three trajectories.
-
(4)
Dementia was more represented in the “severe” trajectory group.
The present study showed that most of the Italian elders included in the InveCe.Ab cohort aged in a stable way, preserving good cognitive status, good physical performance, and showing no impairment in ADL. This is consistent with the findings of Christensen et al. [21], who reported that people aged 65–85 years in the last 20 years enjoyed a better quality of life compared with a previous cohort of seniors.
The GBTM statistical approach, starting from cognitive, functional and disability trajectories, clearly identified three scenarios of aging: “good”, with substantially no change over time; “intermediate”, characterized by moderate impairment of cognition and disability; and “severe”, in which there was worsening of all three dimensions. Taken singly, each of the considered dimensions is important in the aging process and has been studied in depth in geriatric research. Trajectories of cognition [6], disability [10] and functional decline [22] together determine the quality of the aging process as a whole, and they are crucial targets of preventive and clinical geriatric medicine. Like ours, all the aforementioned studies, which highlight the reciprocal connection between these dimensions and trajectory-based successful aging, used multidimensional indicators [23].
With regard to the profiles deriving from the multi-trajectory model, the “severe” scenario group had the largest proportion of subjects with dementia (37% versus 7% in the “intermediate” and 1% in the “good” scenarios). The analysis of estimated versus observed rates of dementia showed good agreement, confirming the reliability of the trajectories as predictors of dementia onset, and showing the existence of a relationship between these elderly subjects’ trajectories and their likelihood of developing dementia.
Overall, we demonstrated, within our study population, different trajectories of aging, which have different implications. Obesity and education, known to be important risk/protective factors in the general population, showed different distribution patterns in the three trajectory groups, characterized by increasing rates of obesity and of low education from the “good” to the “severe” scenario. This is in agreement with the findings of other studies evaluating the possible connection between obesity and cognitive and physical decline [24,25,26,27]. A higher level of education is a well-known protective factor against cognitive decline [28,29,30], and a contributing factor to successful aging [31] and longevity [32].
To our knowledge, this is the first attempt to identify trajectories of aging using the GBTM statistical method and starting from the trajectories of three different dimensions of health in the elderly. The variables chosen for this analysis, being very simple and usually present in geriatric evaluations, facilitated the building of the trajectories. Furthermore, the GBTM method allowed us to identify the highest risk of dementia in the group showing the worst scenario.
The value of trajectories as opposed to single-point observations was recently demonstrated in a Canadian study conducted in 154 community-dwelling older people followed up for five years [9]. The findings of that study showed that the incidence of dementia could be reliably derived from cognitive and functional trajectory trends observed over time, whereas a “single time-point assessment was not sufficient to detect individuals at high risk of dementia”.
Furthermore, compared with a single time-point data evaluation, which can only detect associations, the GBTM method, being able to trace, over time, shared or different clinical characteristics between patients belonging to different groups, might find useful clinical application. Indeed, the type of longitudinal analysis we carried out may serve to clarify the factors on which to focus to identify, and subsequently promote, the best aging trajectory.
Our study has several limitations, the first being the presence of missing data in the follow-up assessments. To evaluate the possible effect of attrition bias typical of studies involving elders, the study participants were compared with the rest of the InveCe.Ab cohort (not enrolled in the present study), and no difference was found [11]. Information bias was controlled in this study by means of dual diagnostic assessment (i.e., by a psychologist and geriatrician) and, when necessary, by contacting family doctors. Finally, selection bias was avoided using a careful recruitment method involving direct contact with the subjects, which resulted in a high response rate, around 80% [33].
Second, differences emerged in the numbers of subjects displaying the different trajectories, a circumstance that could result in wider confidence intervals and less precision.
Third, the data concern an age-homogeneous population living in a restricted area, which may well reduce the generalisability of the results.
On the other hand, the study has several strengths. First, the evaluation was carried out by specially trained social interviewers, geriatricians and psychologists (the same ones at each of the three assessment times). Second, the baseline recruitment rate was very high—over 80% of the eligible subjects. Third, the data showed good agreement between the different statistical analyses, and the relationship between the trajectory groups and the cumulative incidence of dementia was clearly demonstrated.