s10654 024 01135 3

(1)

NEURO-EPIDEMIOLOGY https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-024-01135-3

Introduction

Globally, dementia is the fifth leading cause of death in women [1]. In 2019, dementia was estimated to have caused over one million deaths and 17.7 million disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) among women, which were substan- tially higher than the figures for men (0.6 million deaths and 10.6 million DALYs) [2, 3]. The death rates and DALY of dementia in women aged 50–59 years, 60–69 years, and

≥ 70 years were also higher than those in men, indicating that the female predominance may not be simply due to the longer lifespan [3]. Some risk factors for dementia are well established, such as lower education, smoking, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, depression, and pre-existing stroke, but these factors are insufficient to explain the excess burden of dementia in women [4]. Sex-specific risk factors need to be investigated.

Annette J. Dobson [email protected]

1 School of Public Health, University of Queensland, Public Health Building, 288 Herston Road, Herston, Brisbane, QLD 4006, Australia

2 Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, University Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands

3 Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden

4 International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organization, Lyon, France

Abstract

Emerging evidence has shown the association between female reproductive histories (e.g., menarche age, parity, premature and early menopause) and the risk of dementia. However, little attention has been given to infertility and pregnancy loss.

To examine the associations of infertility, recurrent miscarriages, and stillbirth with the risk of dementia, this study used data from four cohorts in the International Collaboration for a Life Course Approach to Reproductive Health and Chronic Disease Events. Women with data on at least one of the reproductive exposures of interest, dementia, and all covariates were included. Histories of infertility, miscarriage, and stillbirth were self-reported. Dementia (including Alzheimer’s disease) was identified through surveys, aged care, pharmaceutical, hospital, and death registry data. Cause-specific Cox regression models were used to estimate the hazard ratios of dementia, accounting for well-established risk factors of dementia, study variability, and within-study correlation. Overall, 291,055 women were included at a median (interquartile range) age of 55.0 (47.0–62.0) at baseline. During the median (interquartile range) follow-up period of 13.0 (12.0–14.0) years, 3334 (1.2%) women developed dementia. Compared to women without stillbirth, a history of recurrent stillbirths (≥ 2) was associated with 64% higher risk of dementia (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.64, 95% confidence interval: 1.46–1.85).

Compared to women without miscarriage, women with recurrent miscarriages (≥ 3) were at 22% higher risk of dementia (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.22, 95% confidence interval: 1.19–1.25). These findings suggest that recurrent stillbirths is a risk factor for dementia and may need to be considered in risk assessment of dementia in women.

Keywords Infertility · Miscarriage · Stillbirth · Dementia · Cohort study

Received: 23 February 2023 / Accepted: 20 May 2024 / Published online: 18 June 2024

Association of infertility and recurrent pregnancy loss with the risk of dementia

Chen Liang¹ · Annette J. Dobson¹ · Hsin-Fang Chung¹ · Yvonne T. van der Schouw² · Sven Sandin³ · Elisabete Weiderpass⁴ · Gita D. Mishra¹

(2)

A growing number of studies suggest female reproductive histories, such as later age at menarche, nulliparity, premature and early menopause (Supplementary Table 1), as the risk factors of dementia [5–13]. These studies suggest shorter cumulative exposure to oestrogen as a key underlying mechanism. However, little attention has been given to infertility and pregnancy loss (i.e., miscarriage and stillbirth), which are often accompanied by hormonal changes (e.g., low estrogen). Additionally, systematic diseases, such as diabetes and hypertension, have been identified as risk factors for infertility and pregnancy loss, and for the development of dementia [14–16]. Therefore, it is plausible to hypothesize that women with these fertility issues may have a higher risk of dementia. As far as we know, there were three previous studies exploring the association of infertility, miscarriage, or stillbirth with dementia (Supplementary Table 1) [5, 6, 11]. These studies did not reveal an association with miscarriage or infertility, and the results on stillbirth were inconsistent. However, study limitations, such as inappropriate exclusion criteria (e.g., excluding women without children), inadequate follow-up (e.g., up to a median age of 49 years), and insufficient adjustment (e.g., lacking adjustment for chronic conditions during follow-up period), compromised their findings.

Therefore, in this study, individual-level data pooled from four cohorts contributing to the International Collabo- ration for a Life Course Approach to Reproductive Health and Chronic Disease Events (InterLACE) were used [17].

The aim was to assess the association of infertility, miscarriage, and stillbirth with the risk of dementia adjusting for well-established risk factors of dementia.

Methods

Data source and study population

The InterLACE consortium is composed of 27 observational studies, pooling individual-level data of over 850,000 women from 12 countries. The design of the InterLACE has been published previously [18]. Among these observational studies, four cohorts from four countries (Australia, Netherlands, UK, and Sweden) with data on at least one of

the fertility issues (i.e., infertility, miscarriage, or stillbirth) and the outcome (dementia, including Alzheimer’s disease) were included: the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health 1946-51 cohort (ALSWH-mid), the Dutch Prospect-EPIC Utrecht in the European Prospective Investi- gation into Cancer and Nutrition (Prospect-EPIC), UK Bio- bank, and the Swedish Women’s Lifestyle and Health Study (WLH). Study characteristics are presented in Table 1.

Women with data on fertility issues, dementia, and covariates were included (Supplementary Fig. 1).

Exposures

The histories of infertility, miscarriage, and stillbirth were retrospectively collected through questionnaires at baseline or follow-up surveys (Supplementary Table 2). Women were identified as infertile if they reported an experience of not being able to conceive after one year (or longer) of unprotected sex, medical consultation for infertility, or diagnosis or treatment of infertility by a physician. The outcome of each pregnancy (i.e., live birth, miscarriage, or stillbirth), the number of miscarriages, and the number of stillbirths were also collected. The number of miscarriages was grouped into four categories (0, 1, 2, and ≥ 3), and the number of stillbirths was grouped into three categories (0, 1, and

≥ 2) [19, 20]. Recurrent miscarriages was defined as three or more miscarriages, and recurrent stillbirths was defined as two or more stillbirths, which could be interspersed with live births.

Outcome

Information on dementia was obtained through self- reported data or health administrative data, including aged care assessment, pharmaceutical scripts, hospital admis- sions, and death registrations (Supplementary Table 2). All the studies provided hospital admission data, and three of them (ALSWH-mid, Prospect-EPIC, and UK Biobank) also had death registry data. Hospital admission and death registry data were coded using the 9th or 10th versions of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9 and ICD- 10). ICD-9 codes 290.0, 290.1, 290.2, 290.4, 290.8, 290.9, 331.0, 331.1 and ICD-10 codes F00, F01, F03, G30, G31.0

Study Country Number Baseline year Age, median (interquartile range) Baseline Last follow-up ALSWH-mid Australia 11,770 1996 47.6 (46.3, 48.9) 70.0 (69.0, 72.0) Prospect-EPIC Netherlands 15,015 1993–1997 56.2 (51.8, 61.6) 72.7 (68.2, 78.0) UK Biobank UK 221,765 2006–2010 58.0 (51.0, 63.0) 71.0 (63.0, 76.0)

WLH Sweden 42,505 1991–1992 40.0 (35.0, 45.0) 58.0 (53.0, 63.0)

ALSWH-mid: the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health 1946-51 cohort; Prospect-EPIC:

the Utrecht contribution to the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition cohort, the Table 1 Characteristics of the

four studies in the InterLACE consortium

(3)

were used to define dementia, including Alzheimer’s disease [21]. In addition to ICD codes, ALSWH-mid and Pros- pect-EPIC identified dementia cases through questionnaire items on physician-diagnosed dementia and dementia treatment, and UK Biobank identified dementia cases through centre visit assessment. ALSWH-mid also identified the cases from aged care and pharmaceutical data (medication for Alzheimer’s disease).

Covariates

Covariates were collected at cohort entry, except for the incidences of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and stroke (Supplementary Table 2). The incidences of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and stroke were collected until the end of follow-up. For Asian women, body mass index (BMI) was categorized as underweight (< 18.5 kg/m²), normal (18.5–22.9 kg/m²), overweight (23–27.4 kg/m²), and obese (≥ 27.5 kg/m²). For other women, the categories of BMI were defined as underweight (< 18.5 kg/m²), normal (18.5–

24.9 kg/m²), overweight (25.0–29.9 kg/m²) and obese (≥ 30.0 kg/m²). Other covariates were race/ethnicity (Cau- casian, Asian, and other), education level (≤ 10, 11–12, and

> 12 years), age at last birth (≤ 20, 21–25, 26–30, 31–35,

> 35 years old), smoking status (current smoker, and former or non-smoker), alcohol intake (none, monthly, weekly, and daily), depression (yes and no), hypertension (yes and no), diabetes mellitus (yes and no), and stroke (yes and no). For the main analysis, the categories of Asian and other races were combined due to the small number of women.

Statistical analysis

Baseline characteristics were presented as numbers and percentages for categorical variables, and as medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs) for continuous variables. Kaplan Meier plots were created to compare the times to dementia between exposed and unexposed women, and the log-rank test was conducted to assess the difference between these times. Cause-specific Cox regression models were used to examine the association between infertility, miscarriage, stillbirth, and risk of dementia with age as the timescale.

Dementia was the event of interest, and women without dementia were censored at death or the end of follow-up.

Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. Difference between studies was taken into account by including study as a fixed categorical covariate.

Robust variance estimators were used to account for potential within-study correlation. All models were adjusted for fixed covariates (i.e., race/ethnicity, education level, smoking status, and BMI at baseline) and time-dependent covariates (i.e., incidence of hypertension, diabetes, and stroke up

to the end of follow-up) [4, 15, 16, 22, 23]. Analyses for miscarriage and stillbirth were restricted to women who had ever been pregnant.

To examine the robustness of findings, multiple sensitivity analyses were conducted. First, Fine and Gray competing risk models for the sub-distribution hazard of dementia were fitted. Deaths from other causes were taken as competing events. That was because the prevalence of dementia increases sharply with age especially after the age of 70, and participants might die from other causes before the occurrence of dementia, which precluded the occurrence of dementia [1, 24]. Second, analyses were restricted to women who ever had children, to exclude the influence of nulliparity. Third, analyses were restricted to women without a history of gestational diabetes or gestational hypertension, to exclude the influence of these two pregnancy complications.

Fourth, cause-specific models were additionally adjusted for age at last birth, alcohol intake, and depression status, which were not included in the main analysis due to high proportion of missing data. The associations of infertility, miscarriage, and stillbirth with dementia were also examined in each cohort separately. All statistical analyses were performed using SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC). All tests of hypotheses were conducted at the two- sided 5% level of significance. No adjustments were made for multiple testing.

Results

Overall, 291,055 women at a median (IQR) age of 55.0 (47.0, 62.0) years from four cohorts were included and were followed up for a median (IQR) of 13.0 (12.0–14.0) years.

The percentages of women who experienced infertility, miscarriage, and stillbirth were 17.9%, 25.4%, and 3.2%, respectively. The baseline characteristics of women with and without these reproductive issues were compared in Table 2.

By the end of follow-up, 3334 (1.2%) women had developed dementia at a median (IQR) age of 75.0 (71.0–78.0). Among these women with dementia, 2511 were identified through a single data source (2019 from hospital admission data, 299 from death registry data, 82 from pharmaceutical data and 111 from other data sources), while 758 and 65 cases were identified through two and three or more data sources, respectively. The characteristics of women with and without dementia were provided in supplementary Table 3. Due to missing data, 16.6%, 4.9%, and 4.0% women were excluded in analyses of infertility, miscarriage, and stillbirth, respectively (Supplementary Fig. 1). Excluded women were more likely to be less-educated, current smokers, and have diabetes or stroke (Supplementary Table 4).

(4)

revealed a stronger association for recurrent stillbirths (≥ 2) (adjusted HR = 1.64, 95%CI 1.46–1.85; Table 3, Supple- mentary Fig. 6).

Sensitivity analysis

First, Fine and Gray competing risk models were fitted, and the results were similar to the main analysis (Supplemen- tary Table 5). Second, analysis restricted to women who had children did not alter the results (Supplementary Table 6). Third, analysis restricted to women without gestational hypertension or gestational diabetes revealed similar results to the main analysis (Supplementary Table 7). Fourth, when models with additional adjustment of age at last birth, alcohol intake, and depression status were fitted, the estimated HRs of infertility, miscarriage, and stillbirth decreased slightly, and the 95% CIs became wider due to smaller sample size (Supplementary Table 8). The associations of In the analysis of infertility, 67,010 women were

included, and 501 developed dementia. There was insufficient evidence to establish an association between infertility and dementia (adjusted HR = 1.09, 95%CI: 0.81–1.46, Table 3, Supplementary Fig. 2).

Among women who had ever been pregnant, 244,608 were included in the analysis of miscarriage, and 3187 developed dementia. Compared to women without miscarriage, women with recurrent miscarriages (≥ 3) had a mod- estly higher risk of dementia (adjusted HR = 1.22, 95%CI:

1.19–1.25; Table 3, Supplementary Figs. 3–4).

A total of 234,947 women who had ever been pregnant were included in the analysis of stillbirth, and 2996 developed dementia. Compared to women without stillbirth, women who experienced a stillbirth were at higher risk of dementia in the crude model (HR = 1.21, 95% CI:

1.12–1.31), which was attenuated in the adjusted model (HR = 1.09, 95%CI: 1.03–1.15, Table 3, Supplementary Fig. 5). However, analysis of the number of stillbirths

Table 2 Characteristics of study participants

Characteristics Infertility (N = 67,010) Miscarriage (N = 244,608) Stillbirth (N = 234,947)

Never Ever Never Ever Never Ever

Exposure, No. (%)

55,028 (82.1%) 11,982 (17.9%) 182,434 (74.6%) 62,174 (25.4%) 227,359 (96.8%) 7,588 (3.2%) Race/ethnicity, No. (%)

Caucasian 54,729 (99.5%) 11,936 (99.6%) 174,024 (95.4%) 58,972 (94.9%) 216,967 (95.4%) 6,787 (89.4%)

Others 299 (0.5%) 46 (0.4%) 8,410 (4.6%) 3,202 (5.2%) 10,392 (4.6%) 801 (10.6%)

Education level, No. (%)

≤ 10 20,025 (36.4%) 3,826 (31.9%) 97,045 (53.2%) 30,088 (48.4%) 117,728 (51.8%) 4,519 (59.6%) 11–12 15,812 (28.7%) 3,499 (29.2%) 25,034 (13.7%) 8,978 (14.4%) 31,500 (13.9%) 903 (11.9%)

> 12 19,191 (34.9%) 4,657 (38.9%) 60,355 (33.1%) 23,108 (37.2%) 78,131 (34.4%) 2,166 (28.6%) Smoking status, No. (%)

Never or past smoker 43,901 (79.8%) 9,145 (76.3%) 164,606 (90.2%) 55,350 (89.0%) 205,403 (90.3%) 6,656 (87.7%) Current smoker 11,127 (20.2%) 2,837 (23.7%) 17,828 (9.8%) 6,824 (11.0%) 21,956 (9.7%) 932 (12.3%) Body-mass index, No. (%)

Underweight 788 (1.4%) 202 (1.7%) 1,262 (0.7%) 463 (0.7%) 1,504 (0.7%) 47 (0.6%)

Normal 33,646 (61.1%) 7,733 (64.5%) 69,842 (38.3%) 23,743 (38.2%) 86,479 (38.0%) 2,338 (30.8%) Overweight 15,111 (27.5%) 2,982 (24.9%) 68,541 (37.6%) 22,834 (36.7%) 85,572 (37.6%) 2,951 (38.9%)

Obese 5,483 (10.0%) 1,065 (8.9%) 42,789 (23.5%) 15,134 (24.3%) 53,804 (23.7%) 2,252 (29.7%)

Hypertension, No. (%)

No 36,555 (66.4%) 8,550 (71.4%) 114,913 (63.0%) 38,969 (62.7%) 144,879 (63.7%) 4,073 (53.7%) Yes 18,473 (33.6%) 3,432 (28.6%) 67,521 (37.0%) 23,205 (37.3%) 82,480 (36.3%) 3,515 (46.3%) Diabetes mellitus, No. (%)

No 49,719 (90.4%) 10,795 (90.1%) 168,540 (92.4%) 56,638 (91.1%) 210,819 (92.7%) 6,659 (87.8%)

Yes 5,309 (9.7%) 1,187 (9.9%) 13,894 (7.6%) 5,536 (8.9%) 16,540 (7.3%) 929 (12.2%)

Stroke, No. (%)

No 52,971 (96.3%) 11,557 (96.5%) 176,453 (96.7%) 59,895 (96.3%) 220,059 (96.8%) 7,178 (94.6%)

Yes 2,057 (3.7%) 425 (3.6%) 5,981 (3.3%) 2,279 (3.7%) 7,300 (3.2%) 410 (5.4%)

Women from three studies (i.e., ALSWH-mid, WLH, and Prospect-EPIC), three studies (i.e., ALSWH-mid, UK Biobank, and Prospect-EPIC), and two studies (i.e., UK Biobank and Prospect-EPIC) were included in the analysis for infertility, miscarriage, and stillbirth, respectively.

Body-mass index (kg/m²): For Asian, the classifications of body mass index are < 18.5 (underweight), 18.5–22.9 (normal), 23-27.4 (overweight), and ≥ 27.5 (obese). For others, the classifications of body mass index are < 18.5 (underweight), 18.5–24.9 (normal), 25-29.9 (overweight), and

≥ 30 (obese). Information on exposure, race/ethnicity, education level, smoking status, and body-mass index was collected at baseline, when information on hypertension, diabetes, and stroke was updated to the end of follow-up

(5)

number of women included was insufficient to provide evidence that all-cause infertility was associated with dementia.

This study suggested a modest association between recurrent miscarriages (≥ 3) and dementia. Three previous studies examined the association between miscarriage and dementia. Andolf et al., Basit et al., and Gong et al. recruited 1,128,709, 1,243,957, and 273,240 women from Sweden, Denmark, and the UK, respectively, and found no evidence on the association between miscarriage (single or recurrent) and dementia [5, 6, 11]. In the study by Andolf et al., ICD- 10 codes of O262 (pregnancy care for patient with recurrent pregnancy loss) and N96 (recurrent pregnancy loss) were used to identify recurrent miscarriages although these codes taken together were not specific for recurrent miscarriages [5]. In the studies by Basit et al. and Gong et al., the number of miscarriages was classified as 0, 1, and ≥ 2, while in the present study the number of miscarriages was classified as 0, 1, 2, and ≥ 3 [6, 11]. There is no consensus on the definition of recurrent miscarriages (≥ 2 or ≥ 3) [22]. The present study showed that ≥ 3 miscarriages were associated with dementia risk, as had also been observed in previous studies on stroke and premature all-cause death [25, 26].

The present study also revealed an elevated risk of dementia among women with recurrent stillbirths. Only two previous studies have investigated the association between stillbirth and dementia, and their findings were inconsistent.

Basit et al. showed women with a history of stillbirth were at higher risk of dementia (HR = 1.86, 95%CI: 1.28–2.71), but Gong et al. reported no association with single or recurrent infertility, miscarriage, and stillbirth with dementia in each

cohort were provided separately (supplementary Figs. 7–9).

Discussion

This pooled analysis of 291,055 women from four prospective cohorts showed a 1.64-fold increased risk of dementia among women with a history of recurrent stillbirths (≥ 2).

The association for recurrent miscarriages (≥ 3) was weaker, with around 22% increased risk. However, there was insufficient evidence to support an association between infertility and dementia risk.

To our knowledge, there has been only one previous cohort study reporting an association between infertility and dementia. In the study by Andolf et al., 1,128,709 Swed- ish women with at least one live birth were enrolled, and a lower risk of dementia was observed among women with secondary infertility [5]. Women with infertility were identified through ICD codes (N970, N978, N979) only, which failed to include women who experienced infertility but did not seek medical help. In the present study, women without children were included, and a history of infertility was defined through infertility diagnosis, fertility treatment, or failing to conceive after one year (or longer) of unprotected sex, which could have included primary infertility and infertility due to male factors. Compared to Andolf et al.’s study, a much higher proportion of women were considered infertile in the present study (17.9% vs. 2.4%). Nevertheless, the

Table 3 Association between Infertility, miscarriage, stillbirth, and dementia

Exposure Person-year Sample size Event IR Crude model

HR (95%CI) Adjusted model HR (95%CI)

History of infertility Never 3,504,824 55,028 431 1.23 Ref. Ref.

Ever 737,923 11,982 70 0.95 1.08 (0.79,1.49) 1.09 (0.81,1.46)

History of miscarriage Never 12,738,716 182,434 2,423 1.90 Ref. Ref.

Ever 4,291,693 62,174 764 1.78 0.98 (0.95,1.02) 0.97 (0.95,1.00)

Number of miscarriages 0 12,738,716 182,434 2,423 1.90 Ref. Ref.

1 3,065,128 44,317 524 1.71 0.94 (0.91,0.97) 0.94 (0.91,0.96)

2 786,986 11,434 139 1.77 0.97 (0.85,1.12) 0.96 (0.83,1.11)

≥ 3 435,644 6,369 97 2.23 1.30 (1.23,1.37) 1.22 (1.19,1.25)

History of stillbirth Never 15,815,662 227,359 2,851 1.80 Ref. Ref.

Ever 537,885 7,588 145 2.70 1.21 (1.12,1.31) 1.09 (1.03,1.15)

Number of stillbirths 0 15,815,662 227,359 2,851 1.80 Ref. Ref.

1 467,222 6,580 117 2.50 1.12 (1.05,1.20) 1.01 (0.97,1.05)

≥ 2 69,911 998 28 4.01 1.91 (1.79,2.03) 1.64 (1.46,1.85)

IR: incidence rate (per 10 000 person-years). HR: hazard ratio. CI: confidence interval. Women (N = 67,010) from ALSWH-mid, WLH, and Prospect-EPIC were included in the analysis for infertility, and women with and without infertility developed dementia at a median (IQR) age of 66.0 (59.0, 74.0) and 72.0 (67.0, 78.0), respectively. Women (N = 244,608) from ALSWH-mid, UK Biobank, and Prospect-EPIC were included in the analysis for miscarriage, and women with 0, 1, 2, and ≥ 3 miscarriages had dementia at a median (IQR) age of 75.0 (72.0, 78.0), 75.0 (71.0, 78.0), 75.0 (70.0, 78.0), and 75.0 (69.0, 78.0), respectively. Women (N = 234,947) from UK Biobank and Prospect-EPIC were included in the analysis for stillbirth, and women with 0, 1 and ≥ 2 stillbirths developed dementia at a median (IQR) age of 76.0 (72.0, 79.0), 76.0 (73.0, 78.0), and 75.5 (70.5, 78.0), respectively. Models were adjusted for race, education level, smoking status, body-mass index, hypertension, diabetes, and stroke, when hypertension, diabetes, and stroke were included as time-varying covariates. Study variability and within-study correlation were taken into account by including study as a covariate and using robust variance estimators in all models

(6)

changes, increased glucocorticoid steroid levels, inflammatory changes (e.g., increases in IL-6 and TNF), toxic effects of hyperglycaemia (e.g., oxidative stress imbalance) and hyperinsulinemia (e.g., interfering with Aβ metabolism) [31, 36–39]. Other factors, such as homocysteine levels and abnormal maternal immune responses, may be involved as well [40–44]. Miscarriages or stillbirths due to these factors are likely to recur if these factors persist during the reproductive stage. However, miscarriages or stillbirths caused by chromosomal abnormalities or infections are not necessarily recurring and are unlikely to be linked to the development of dementia. This may partly explain the null associations of single miscarriage and single stillbirth with dementia. These hypotheses are mainly from observational studies, and molecular studies are needed in the future to confirm the underlying mechanisms linking pregnancy loss and dementia.

Limitations

This study had several limitations. First, information about the histories of infertility, miscarriage, and stillbirth was collected through questionnaires, which might introduce recall bias. Previous studies have shown that self-reported infertility and pregnancy loss had sensitivities of 73.5% and 72.0%, respectively [45, 46]. Therefore, recall bias might have limited influence on the results. Second, the present study could not separate female and male infertility. It has been reported that 20–30% of infertility cases are due to male factors only, and the rest are due to female factors only or both male and female factors, indicating the majority due to female factors [15]. Third, there might be unidenti- fied dementia cases or delayed detection of dementia cases.

Diagnosis of dementia is often long and difficult, and outpa- tient data which might have identified the condition earlier was not included in the present study. It is possible that some dementia cases were not detected or detected long after the dementia onset. Fourth, the associations for dementia subtypes (i.e., Alzheimer’s dementia and other dementia) were not explored due to data limitations. The distribution of dementia subtypes (Alzheimer’s dementia, other dementia, or mixed types) differed considerably between studies, pos- sibly due to the inconsistent use of criteria or age differences of the women. Furthermore, dementia subtype may become more complex with increasing age; for example, of the 3334 dementia cases, 2801 were identified through hospital admission data, and the admission diagnoses of dementia subtypes changed among 549 women during the follow-up period. Fifth, the covariates were all collected at midlife. We were unable to adjust for important reproductive age risk factors for infertility and pregnancy loss, including smoking, alcohol intake, and BMI. Uncontrolled stillbirths [6, 11]. Both studies had limitations. Women were

followed up to a median age of 49 in Basit et al.’s study [6], which is insufficient for the occurrence of dementia [1]. Besides, control for confounding may have been inadequate. Basit et al. did not control for smoking, Gong et al.

failed to adjust for education level, and neither of them took into account the incidence of chronic conditions (i.e., hypertension, diabetes, and stroke) during the follow-up period [6, 11]. In the present study, women were followed up to a median (IQR) age of 69.0 (62.0–75.0) years, and models were adjusted for more potential confounders, which provided a more precise estimate for the association between recurrent stillbirths and dementia.

The effect size for recurrent stillbirths on the risk of dementia [1.64 (1.46, 1.85)] was comparable to the effect sizes of obesity, hypertension, and diabetes [1.6 (1.3, 1.9), 1.6 (1.2, 2.2) and 1.5 (1.3, 1.8)] in the 2020 Lancet report [4]. The magnitude of the effect size supports the consider- ation of recurrent stillbirths as a risk factor for dementia in women. Health professionals should be aware of the poten- tially increased risk of dementia among women with a history of recurrent stillbirths, and tailor preventive measures accordingly.

The observed associations of recurrent miscarriages and recurrent stillbirths with dementia may be explained by endothelial dysfunction. Previous studies on the elevated risk of cardiovascular disease and stroke among women with recurrent pregnancy loss supported this hypothesis:

endothelial dysfunction could not only cause placentation- related defects, leading to pregnancy loss, but also persist after a complicated pregnancy, which may result in adverse health conditions for the development of dementia in later life [27–31]. Cerebrovascular endothelial cell dysfunction can activate glia and the inflammatory environment in the brain, resulting in cerebral blood flow dysregulation and blood-brain barrier damage [27]. In this process, synapses, neuronal axons, and white matter are compromised, leading to cognitive impairment [27]. Meanwhile, oestrogen and progesterone are fundamental regulators of mitochondrial function and neuroplasticity in the female central nervous system [32, 33]. Women with pregnancy loss may have inadequate level of oestrogen or progesterone. Mitochon- drial dysfunction and declining neuroplasticity, owing to oestrogen and progesterone deficiency, may provide a link between pregnancy loss and dementia. Loss of the neuroprotective effects of female sex hormones (e.g., protecting the blood-brain barrier, down-regulating inflammatory cascade, and limiting cellular necrosis and apoptosis) would also elevate the risk of dementia [34, 35]. Additionally, stroke, diabetes, and depression, which are more prevalent among women with pregnancy loss, may promote the development of dementia through cerebrovascular lesions or structural

(7)

from the Swedish Research Council (Grant number 521-2011-2955).

This research has been conducted using the UK Biobank resource under Application 26629.

Prospect-EPIC Utrecht was funded by the European Commission – Europe Against Cancer: WHO AEP/90/05; The Dutch Ministry of Health, The Dutch Prevention Funds; the LK Research Funds, and the WCRF funds (WCRF 98A04 and WCRF 2000/30).

All study teams would like to thank the participants for volunteer- ing their time to be involved in the respective studies. The findings and views in this paper are not those from the original studies or their respective funding agencies.

Author contributions Manuscript concept, study design, and statistical methods: Chen Liang, Hsin-Fang Chung, Annette J. Dobson, and Gita D. Mishra. Contributing data: Annette J. Dobson, Yvonne T. van der Schouw, Sven Sandin, Elisabete Weiderpass, and Gita D. Mishra.

Analysis, interpretation of data, and drafting of the manuscript: Chen Liang. Critical revision of manuscript for important intellectual con- tent: all authors. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding InterLACE project is funded by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council Centres of Research Excellence (APP1153420). Professor Gita Mishra is supported by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council Investigator Grant (APP2009577).

Open Access funding enabled and organized by CAUL and its Mem- ber Institutions

Data availability The InterLACE data are not freely available. The anonymised dataset is governed by a Collaborative Research Agree- ment among several institutions. Those interested in collaborating on the project can contact the scientific committee at [email protected].

au.

Declarations

Ethics approval The Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health 1946-51 cohort (ALSWH-mid), the Dutch Prospect-EPIC Utrecht in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (Prospect-EPIC), UK Biobank, and the Swedish Women’s Lifestyle and Health Study (WLH) received ethics approval from the human research ethics committee or the institutional review board at each study institution.

Consent to participate Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Competing interests The authors have no relevant financial or non- financial interests to disclose.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.

org/licenses/by/4.0/.

confounders might mask the association for dementia. Sixth, some women were excluded due to missing data, which could lead to sample bias. Besides, women in the present study were mainly Caucasian, which limited the general- isability of current findings to other populations. Seventh, the present study did not collect data on hormonal or blood biomarkers, and future studies with such data might shed more light on the underlying mechanisms. Finally, the study involved many statistical tests, and we did not adjust for the multiplicity. Still, our main hypothesis involved five inde- pendent tests. Using a Bonferroni approach, p-values for miscarriage and stillbirth (as ordinal categorical variables) were less than 0.05/5.

Conclusions

In summary, this study indicated that the risk of dementia was increased among women with a history of recurrent stillbirths. The association with recurrent miscarriages was weaker, and there was insufficient power to assess any association with all-cause infertility. This finding suggests that recurrent stillbirths should be considered an early marker for later risk of dementia. More cohort studies in other populations are needed to confirm this finding, and molecular studies are required to reveal the exact biological mechanisms.

Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654- 024-01135-3.

Acknowledgements The data on which this research is based were drawn from four observational studies. The research included data from the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health (ALSWH), the University of Newcastle, Australia, and The University of Queensland, Australia. We are grateful to the Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care for funding and to the women who provided the survey data. The authors acknowledge the Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care for providing aged care data, and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) as the integrating authority. The authors acknowledge the assistance of the Data Linkage Unit at the AIHW for undertaking the data linkage to the National Death Index (NDI). The authors acknowledge the following:

• The Centre for Health Record Linkage (CHeReL), NSW Ministry of Health and ACT Health, for the NSW Admitted Patients; and the ACT Admitted Patient Care Data Collections.

• The Department of Health Western Australia, including the Data Linkage Branch, and the WA Hospital Morbidity Data Collection.

• SA NT Datalink, SA Health, and Northern Territory Department of Health, for the SA Public Hospital Separations and NT Public Hospital Inpatient ActivityData Collections.

• The Department of Health Tasmania, and the Tasmanian Data Link- age Unit, for the Public Hospital Admitted Patient Episodes Data Col- lection.

• The Department of Health Victoria and Centre for Victorian Data Linkage, for the Victorian Admitted Episodes Dataset.

Women’s Lifestyle and Health Study (WLHS) was funded by a grant

(8)

19. Toth B, Würfel W, Bohlmann M, Zschocke J, Rudnik-Schöneborn S, Nawroth F, et al. Recurrent miscarriage: diagnostic and thera- peutic procedures. Guideline of the DGGG, OEGGG and SGGG (S2k-Level, AWMF registry number 015/050). Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2018;78:364–81.

20. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. The investigation and treatment of couples with recurrent miscarriage (Green-top Guideline No. 17). https://www.rcog.org.uk/guidance/

browse-all-guidance/green-top-guidelines/the-investigation- and-treatment-of-couples-with-recurrent-miscarriage-green-top- guideline-no-17/. Accessed 08 Jan 2024.

21. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. General Record of Incidence of Mortality (GRIM) books. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/life- expectancy-deaths/grim-books/contents/grim-excel-workbooks.

Accessed 08 Jan 2024.

22. Quenby S, Gallos ID, Dhillon-Smith RK, Podesek M, Stephen- son MD, Fisher J, et al. Miscarriage matters: the epidemiological, physical, psychological, and economic costs of early pregnancy loss. Lancet Elsevier Ltd. 2021;397:1658–67.

23. Hachinski V, Einhäupl K, Ganten D, Alladi S, Brayne C, Stephan BCM, et al. Preventing dementia by preventing stroke: the Berlin manifesto. Alzheimer’s Dement. 2019;15:961–84.

24. Waller M, Mishra GD, Dobson AJ. A comparison of cause-specific and competing risk models to assess risk factors for dementia. Epidemiol Method. 2020;9.

25. Liang C, Chung HF, Dobson AJ, Mishra GD. Infertility, miscarriage, stillbirth, and the risk of stroke among women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Stroke. 2022;53:328–37.

26. Wang YX, Mínguez-Alarcón L, Gaskins AJ, Missmer SA, Rich- Edwards JW, Manson JE, et al. Association of spontaneous abortion with all cause and cause specific premature mortality:

prospective cohort study. BMJ. 2021;372:n530.

27. Wang F, Cao Y, Ma L, Pei H, Rausch WD, Li H. Dysfunction of cerebrovascular endothelial cells: prelude to vascular dementia.

Front Aging Neurosci. 2018;10.

28. Germain AM, Romanik MC, Guerra I, Solari S, Reyes MS, John- son RJ, et al. Endothelial dysfunction: a link among preeclamp- sia, recurrent pregnancy loss, and future cardiovascular events?

Hypertension. 2007;49:90–5.

29. Parikh NI, Gonzalez JM, Anderson CAM, Judd SE, Rexrode KM, Hlatky MA et al. Adverse pregnancy outcomes and cardiovascular disease risk: unique opportunities for cardiovascular disease prevention in women: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2021;143.

30. Wang Y-X, Mínguez-Alarcón L, Gaskins AJ, Wang L, Ding M, Missmer SA, et al. Pregnancy loss and risk of cardiovascular disease: the nurses’ health study II. Eur Heart J. 2022;43:190–9.

31. Liang C, Chung H-F, Dobson AJ, Hayashi K, van der Schouw YT, Kuh D et al. Infertility, recurrent pregnancy loss, and risk of stroke: pooled analysis of individual patient data of 618 851 women. BMJ. 2022;e070603.

32. Rettberg JR, Yao J, Brinton RD. Estrogen: a master regulator of bioenergetic systems in the brain and body. Front Neuroendocri- nol. 2014;35:8–30.

33. Lee BH, Puri TA, Galea LAM. Sex and sex hormone differences in hippocampal neurogenesis and their relevance to Alzheimer’s disease. Sex Gend Differ Alzheimer’s Dis. Elsevier; 2021. pp.

23–77.

34. Stein DG, Wright DW, Kellermann AL. Does progesterone have neuroprotective properties? Ann Emerg Med. 2008;51:164–72.

35. Piette P. The history of natural progesterone, the never-ending story. Climacteric. 2018;21:308–14.

36. Kolte AM, Olsen LR, Mikkelsen EM, Christiansen OB, Nielsen HS. Depression and emotional stress is highly prevalent

References

1. Nichols E, Szoeke CEI, Vollset SE, Abbasi N, Abd-Allah F, Abdela J, et al. Global, regional, and national burden of Alzheim- er’s disease and other dementias, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2016. Lancet Neurol.

2019;18:88–106.

2. World Health Organization. Global health estimates: leading cause of death, cause specific mortality, 2000–2019. https://www.

who.int/data/gho/data/themes/mortality-and-global-health-estimates/ghe-leading-causes-of-death. Accessed 08 Jan 2024.

3. World Health Organization. Global health estimates: leading causes of DALYs disease burden, 2000–2019. https://www.who.

int/data/gho/data/themes/mortality-and-global-health-estimates/

global-health-estimates-leading-causes-of-dalys. Accessed 08 Jan 2024.

4. Livingston G, Huntley J, Sommerlad A, Ames D, Ballard C, Banerjee S, et al. Dementia prevention, intervention, and care:

2020 report of the Lancet commission. Lancet. 2020;396:413–46.

5. Andolf E, Bladh M, Möller L, Sydsjö G. Prior placental bed dis- orders and later dementia: a retrospective Swedish register-based cohort study. BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2020;127:1090–9.

6. Basit S, Wohlfahrt J, Boyd HA. Pregnancy loss and risk of later dementia: a nationwide cohort study, Denmark, 1977–2017.

Alzheimer’s Dement Transl Res Clin Interv. 2019;5:146–53.

7. Yoo JE, Shin DW, Han K, Kim D, Won H-S, Lee J, et al. Female reproductive factors and the risk of dementia: a nationwide cohort study. Eur J Neurol. 2020;27:1448–58.

8. Gilsanz P, Lee C, Corrada MM, Kawas CH, Quesenberry CP, Whitmer RA. Reproductive period and risk of dementia in a diverse cohort of health care members. Neurology. 2019;92.

9. Hao W, Fu C, Dong C, Zhou C, Sun H, Xie Z, et al. Age at menopause and all-cause and cause-specific dementia: a prospective analysis of the UK Biobank cohort. Hum Reprod.

2023;38:1746–54.

10. Fu C, Hao W, Ma Y, Shrestha N, Virani SS, Mishra SR, et al.

Number of live births, age at the time of having a child, span of births and risk of dementia: a population-based cohort study of 253,611 U.K. women. J Women’s Heal. 2023;32:680–92.

11. Gong J, Harris K, Peters SAE, Woodward M. Reproductive factors and the risk of incident dementia: a cohort study of UK Biobank participants. Brayne C, editor. PLOS Med. 2022;19:e1003955.

12. Pike CJ, Carroll JC, Rosario ER, Barron AM. Protective actions of sex steroid hormones in Alzheimer’s disease. Front Neuroen- docrinol. 2009;30:239–58.

13. Azcoitia I, Arevalo M-A, De Nicola AF, Garcia-Segura LM.

Neuroprotective actions of estradiol revisited. Trends Endocrinol Metab. 2011;22:467–73.

14. Regan L, Rai R. Epidemiology and the medical causes of miscarriage. Bailliere’s Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol.

2000;14:839–54.

15. Vander Borght M, Wyns C. Fertility and infertility: definition and epidemiology. Clin Biochem. 2018;62:2–10.

16. Lawn JE, Blencowe H, Waiswa P, Amouzou A, Mathers C, Hogan D, et al. Stillbirths: rates, risk factors, and acceleration towards 2030. Lancet. 2016;387:587–603.

17. Mishra GD, Anderson D, Schoenaker DAJM, Adami H-O, Avis NE, Brown D, et al. InterLACE: a new international collaboration for a life course approach to women’s reproductive health and chronic disease events. Maturitas. 2013;74:235–40.

18. Mishra GD, Chung HF, Pandeya N, Dobson AJ, Jones L, Avis NE, et al. The InterLACE study: design, data harmonization and characteristics across 20 studies on women’s health. Maturitas.

2016;92:176–85.

(9)

43. Wallenius M, Salvesen KÅ, Daltveit AK, Skomsvoll JF. Miscar- riage and stillbirth in women with rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheu- matol. 2015;42:1570–2.

44. Gayed M, Gordon C. Pregnancy and rheumatic diseases. Rheu- matology. 2007;46:1634–40.

45. Kristensen P, Irgens LM. Maternal reproductive history: a registry based comparison of previous pregnancy data derived from maternal recall and data obtained during the actual pregnancy.

Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2000;79:471–7.

46. Jung AM, Missmer SA, Cramer DW, Ginsburg ES, Terry KL, Vitonis AF, et al. Self-reported infertility diagnoses and treatment history approximately 20 years after fertility treatment initiation.

Fertil Res Pract. 2021;7:7.

Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to juris- dictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

among women with recurrent pregnancy loss. Hum Reprod.

2015;30:777–82.

37. Kharazmi E, Lukanova A, Teucher B, Groß M-L, Kaaks R. Does pregnancy or pregnancy loss increase later maternal risk of diabetes? Eur J Epidemiol. 2012;27:357–66.

38. Byers AL, Yaffe K. Depression and risk of developing dementia.

Nat Rev Neurol. 2011;7:323–31.

39. Biessels GJ, Staekenborg S, Brunner E, Brayne C, Scheltens P.

Risk of dementia in diabetes mellitus: a systematic review. Lancet Neurol. 2006;5:64–74.

40. Smith AD, Refsum H, Bottiglieri T, Fenech M, Hooshmand B, McCaddon A, et al. Homocysteine and dementia: an international consensus statement. J Alzheimer’s Dis. 2018;62:561–70.

41. Vollset SE, Refsum H, Irgens LM, Emblem BM, Tverdal A, Gjessing HK, et al. Plasma total homocysteine, pregnancy complications, and adverse pregnancy outcomes: the Hordaland homocysteine study. Am J Clin Nutr. 2000;71:962–8.

42. Atzeni F, Pipitone N, Iaccarino L, Masala IF, Weiss R, Alciati A, et al. Rheumatic diseases and autoimmune vascular dementia.

Autoimmun Rev. 2017;16:1265–9.