Skip to main content
Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry logoLink to Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry
. 2006 Aug 22;77(12):1329–1335. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.2006.097543

Effects of apolipoprotein E genotype on outcome after ischaemic stroke, intracerebral haemorrhage and subarachnoid haemorrhage

N A Martínez‐González 1, C L M Sudlow 1
PMCID: PMC2077401  EMSID: UKMS2651  PMID: 16926234

Abstract

Background

Rodent models of acute ischaemic stroke and head injury suggest that apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotype influences neuronal repair, regeneration and survival after brain injury. Possession of an APOE ε4 allele is associated with poor outcome after head injury in clinical studies. APOE might therefore influence outcome after acute stroke in humans.

Objective and methods

To comprehensively search, identify, assess and carry out meta‐analyses of studies reporting on the association between APOE and the combined outcome of death or dependency, or death alone, several months after ischaemic stroke, intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) or subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH).

Results

Main analyses included data from nine studies on 2262 patients (1453 with ischaemic stroke, 199 with ICH and 610 with SAH). Overall, ε4+ genotypes were not significantly associated with risk of death or dependency several months after stroke. However, there was significant heterogeneity between studies, and between the three pathological types of stroke. ε4+ genotypes were associated with increased death or dependency after SAH (relative risk (RR) 1.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.06 to 1.84), with a trend towards a similar association with ICH (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.92), but not with ischaemic stroke (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.12). Results were similar for death alone.

Conclusions

APOE may differentially affect outcome after the three main pathological types of stroke. Further, large studies are needed to confirm or refute these findings, and to assess the possibility of an interaction between the effects of APOE and age.


In contrast with the many studies assessing the role of various candidate genes in the causation of stroke and its subtypes,1,2,3 the role of genetic factors influencing outcome after acute stroke has been relatively little studied in humans.4,5 However, studies on animal models of stroke comparing outcomes among genetically manipulated animals with those among wild‐type animals suggest that this should be a promising subject, which may ultimately improve our understanding of the pathways of neuronal protection and recovery, and even lead to new therapeutic insights.4,6

The apolipoprotein E gene (APOE) is one of the most widely studied genes in vascular and neurodegenerative diseases. Its protein product is a 34‐kDa glycoprotein with three common isoforms, E2, E3 and E4, encoded by the alleles ε2, ε3 and ε4, respectively, giving rise to six genotypes, the ε3/ε3 genotype occurring in about 50–66% of people in most populations.7 APOE has a major role in lipid redistribution, which is important for membrane maintenance and repair in the brain, and in the regulation of synaptic remodelling during or after brain injury.6,8,9,10,11 Rodent models of head injury and ischaemic stroke suggest that APOE influences neuronal repair, regeneration and survival after brain injury.6,11 In clinical studies, possession of an APOE ε4 allele is associated with poor outcome after head injury.5 These observations suggest that APOE might influence outcome after acute stroke in humans, but clinical studies have produced conflicting results.5

Here, we use systematic review and meta‐analysis methods to assess the effect of APOE on outcome after the three main pathological types of acute stroke: ischaemic stroke, intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) and subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH).

Methods

Study identification and selection

We sought all available published studies on the influence of APOE on outcome (death or the combination of death or dependency) after acute stroke in adult humans. We identified studies by searching Medline and Embase from 1966 to May 2005 (search strategy in box 1), the reference lists of relevant papers thus identified and recent textbooks on stroke or stroke genetics. We included only studies that analysed the main pathological stroke types separately. For studies with more than one publication describing results on overlapping groups of patients, we included only the largest of the available published datasets to avoid double counting. We requested summary data from the authors of two studies for which relevant data had been obtained but were not reported in the publications. We independently selected relevant studies, resolving disagreements by discussion.

Data extraction

From each study selected, we extracted information on year of publication; setting and country; subjects' ethnicity; number of subjects; definition of acute stroke; whether or not recruitment was consecutive; subjects' mean age and sex distribution; method, definition and timing of outcome assessment; blinding of genotyping to outcome assessment, and of outcome assessors to genotype; and genotyping samples and methods. We extracted data on the numbers of subjects who had died or were dead or dependent at the end of follow‐up with genotypes containing or not containing the ε4 allele (ε4+ genotypes), and with or without the ε2+ genotype. We independently extracted the information from each study, resolving disagreements by discussion.

Box 1: Search strategy for Medline

  1. apolipoproteins/ or apolipoproteins e/

  2. ((apolipoprotein$ adj e) or (apoprotein$ adj e) or apo‐e or apo e or apoe).tw.

  3. ((apolipoprotein$ adj e2) or (apoprotein$ adj e2) or apo‐e2 or apo e2 or apoe2).tw.

  4. ((apolipoprotein$ adj e3) or (apoprotein$ adj e3) or apo‐e3 or apo e3 or apoe3).tw.

  5. ((apolipoprotein$ adj e4) or (apoprotein$ adj e4) or apo‐e4 or apo e4 or apoe4).tw.

  6. ((apolipoprotein$ adj e5) or (apoprotein$ adj e5) or apo‐e5 or apo e5 or apoe5).tw.

  7. ((apolipoprotein$ adj e7) or (apoprotein$ adj e7) or apo‐e7 or apo e7 or apoe7).tw.

  8. 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 or 7

  9. exp cerebrovascular disorders/ or exp basal ganglia cerebrovascular disease/ or exp brain ischemia/ or exp carotid artery diseases/ or exp cerebrovascular accident/ or exp hypoxia‐ischemia, brain/ or exp intracranial arterial diseases/ or exp “intracranial embolism and thrombosis”/ or exp intracranial hemorrhages/ or vasospasm, intracranial/

  10. (stroke$ or apoplexy or cerebral vasc$ or cerebrovasc$ or cva$).tw.

  11. 9 or 10

  12. 8 and 11

  13. limit 12 to human

A similar strategy was designed for Embase.

Statistical analyses

We assessed the effects of ε4+ versus ε4− genotypes (primary analysis) and those of ε2+ versus ε2− genotypes (secondary analysis) on death and death or dependency by calculating study‐specific and fixed effects pooled relative risks (RRs) using Cochrane RevMan software (V.4.2; http://www.cc‐ims.net/RevMan). We used the χ2 test to assess heterogeneity between studies and different pathological types of stroke.

As data from two eligible studies were unavailable and so excluded from our main analyses (see below), we carried out sensitivity analyses for the ε4+ versus ε4− comparison to assess what effect a range of plausible results for these studies might have had on our conclusions (additional data are available online at http://www.jnnp.bmjjjournals.com/supplemental).

Results

Characteristics of included studies

The 949 articles identified by our search yielded 18 potentially relevant papers,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29 from which we selected 11 eligible studies on 3120 subjects.12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22 We had to exclude two of these from our main analyses, as outcome data that had been collected were unavailable in the publications, and the authors could not provide us with unpublished summary data.14,16 Thus, we included nine studies on 2262 subjects in our main analyses (fig 1). Table 1 summarises the details.

graphic file with name jn97543.f1.jpg

Figure 1 Selection of studies for inclusion.

Table 1 Characteristics of studies included.

First author, year of publication Setting, country Ethnicity Consecutive recruitment Stroke definition Follow‐up method Number of subjects (number with APOE and outcome data) Men (%) Mean age (years) Time of outcome assessment Outcomes with data available
Studies on ischaemic stroke
McCarron,121998 University Hospital Stroke Unit, Scotland Caucasian Patients unselected Acute IS proved on CT or MR brain scan Scottish death register and database of hospital discharge records 640 (616) 47 71 3 months Poor outcome (dead or living in an institution)
McCarron,13 2000 University Hospital Stroke Unit, Scotland Caucasian Y Acute IS proved on CT or MR brain scan Patients observed prospectively (further details not given) 189 (157) 47 69 3 months Poor outcome (mRS 4–6); death
Catto,14 2000* University Hospital, UK Caucasian Y Acute IS proved on CT brain scan UK national death register 60 (60) 50† 73† Median 2.4 years Death
Broderick,15 2001 Hospitals in the USA participating in trial of ivtPA versus placebo, USA Caucasian N Acute IS proved on CT brain scan Examination 624 (409) 61 67 3 months Unfavourable outcome (mRS 2–6)
MacLeod,16 2001* University Hospital Stroke Unit, UK Caucasian Patients unselected Acute IS proved on CT brain scan Patients observed prospectively (further details not given) 266 (266) 56 65.7 ? Unfavourable outcome (mRS 3–6)
Studies on intracerebral haemorrhage
McCarron,12 1998 University Hospital Stroke Unit, Scotland Caucasian Patients unselected ICH proved on CT or MR brain scan Scottish death register and database of hospital discharge records 74 (67) 45 74 3 months Poor outcome (dead or living in an institution)
McCarron,17 1999 University Hospital, USA Mixed: 73% Caucasian, 27% African American ? CT‐proved diagnosis of ICH considered secondary to hypertension, cerebral amyloid angiopathy or thrombolysis ? 125 (102) 52 64 Hospital discharge Death
Catto,14 2000* University Hospital, UK Caucasian Y ICH proved on CT brain scan UK national death register 532 (532) ? ? Median 2.4 years Death
Studies on subarachnoid haemorrhage
Leung,18 2002 University Hospital, China Chinese Y Spontaneous aneurysmal SAH confirmed by CT or lumbar puncture and CT angiography +/− digital subtraction angiography Face‐to‐face or telephone interviews with patient or carers 72 (72) 35 58 6 months Unfavourable outcome (GOS 1–3)
Niskakangas,19 2001 University Hospital Neurosurgery Department, Finland Caucasian Y Spontaneous aneurysmal SAH confirmed by CT and catheter angiography Examination, telephone interview or postal questionnaire 126 (108) 40 52 6 months Unfavourable outcome (GOS 1–3); death
Dunn,20 2001 University Hospital Neurosurgery Department, Scotland Caucasian Y Spontaneous SAH confirmed by CT scan or lumbar puncture Telephone interview 125 (96) 40 49 6 months Unfavourable outcome (GOS 1–3)
Tang,21 2003 Hospital Neurosurgery Department, China Chinese ? Aneurysmal SAH confirmed by CT brain scan and digital substraction angiography with or without surgery Examination or telephone interview 120 (104) 48 45 3 months Unfavourable outcome (GOS 1–3)
Ruigrok,22 2005 University Hospital, The Netherlands Caucasian Y Aneurysmal SAH confirmed by CT brain scan and CT or conventional angiography ? 167 (167) 48 53 3 months Death or dependency (GOS 1–3)

?, not stated or unclear; APOE, apolipoprotein E gene; CT, computed tomography; GOS, Glasgow Outcome Scale; ICH, intracerebral haemorrhage; IS, ischaemic stroke; ivtPA, intravenous tissue plasminogen activator; MR, magnetic resonance; mRS, modified Rankin Score; N, no; SAH, subarachnoid haemorrhage; Y, yes.

*Not included in the main analyses.

†Of total patients in study (n = 592, including 60 with ICH).

The studies were mainly conducted in European countries on white people, but one in the USA was conducted on Caucasians and African Americans,17 and two were on Chinese patients.18,21 All were hospital based. Six studies recruited consecutively admitted patients,13,14,18,19,20,22 one recruited patients from a randomised trial of thrombolysis for acute ischaemic stroke (ie, highly selected patients),15 two stated that the patients were “unselected”,12,16 and two did not state whether recruitment was consecutive or in some way selective.17,21

Genotype and outcome data were available for 1898 of the 2262 (84%) subjects from the nine studies in our main analyses. All had data on ε4+ genotypes, whereas only five had data on ε2+ genotypes.13,15,17,21,22 One study included both IS and ICH patients.12 Mean age was 69 years in the IS patients, 68 years in the ICH patients, and 51 years in the SAH patients. Around half of the patients were male.

Eight of the nine studies in the main analyses provided data on the combined outcome of death or dependency, defined on the basis of the Glasgow Outcome Scale in the five studies on SAH,18,19,20,21,22 discharge to an institution in one study,12 the modified Rankin Scale and the Barthel index in one study,13 and the modified Rankin Scale, Barthel index, Glasgow Outcome Scale and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale in another.15 We used the modified Rankin Scale data for our analyses for these last two studies. Only four of the nine studies in the main analyses presented data separately on death.13,14,17,19 Outcomes were assessed at 3 months in five studies,12,13,15,21,22 at 6 months in three studies18,19,20 and at hospital discharge in one study.17 Follow‐up was generally by examination or telephone interview. Outcomes were assessed blind to genotype and vice versa in all but one study that did not comment on blinding.17

All studies used blood samples for DNA extraction, and one also used buccal smears.19 Genotype analysis was by restriction enzyme digestion of the polymerase chain reaction product in all but one study, which assessed APOE genotypes indirectly by measuring the apolipoprotein E protein phenotypes.15

Effects on death or dependency—main analyses

Overall, there was no significant effect of ε4+ versus ε4− genotypes (summary RR 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96 to 1.21; fig 2). However, there was significant heterogeneity between the studies (χ28 = 25.4, p = 0.001), some of which seemed to be accounted for by the pathological type of stroke. We found no significant effect on ischaemic stroke (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.12), but found a trend towards an association with poor outcome after ICH (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.92) and a significant association with poor outcome after SAH (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.84). There was significant heterogeneity between the pooled results for the three pathological types of stroke (χ22 = 10.4, p = 0.005), and residual heterogeneity between the results of the five studies on SAH (fig 2).

graphic file with name jn97543.f2.jpg

Figure 2 Meta‐analysis of effect of apolipoprotein E ε4+ genotypes on death or dependency several months after acute stroke. n, number dead or dependent at time of outcome assessment; N, number with specified genotype. Squares represent point estimates of relative risks, with size proportional to the statistical weight of each study. Horizontal lines correspond to 95% CI. Pooled relative risks are shown as diamonds, whose width is their 95% CI.

There was no significant effect of ε2+ versus ε2− genotypes, either overall or for the pathological types of stroke considered separately. However, the reliability of these analyses is limited, as they were based on less than half of the available data.

Effects on death—main analyses

The pattern of the results for ε4+ versus ε4− genotypes was similar to that for death or dependency, although less than half of the total subjects contributed to these analyses. Overall, there was a just significant increase in the risk of death with an ε4+ genotype (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.67). There was no significant effect for ischaemic stroke (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.55), but ε4+ genotypes conferred a non‐significant trend towards an increased risk of death for patients with ICH (RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.89 to 2.98) and SAH (RR 1.98, 95% CI 0.72 to 5.49). However, as there was no statistically significant heterogeneity between results of the individual studies or the three pathological types of stroke, these subgroup analyses should be interpreted with caution (fig 3).

graphic file with name jn97543.f3.jpg

Figure 3 Meta‐analysis of effect of the apolipoprotein E ε4+ genotypes on death several months after acute stroke. n, number who had died by the time of outcome assessment; N, number with specified genotype. Squares represent point estimates of relative risks, with size proportional to the statistical weight of each study. Horizontal lines correspond to 95% CI. Pooled relative risks are shown as diamonds, whose width is their 95% CI.

Data on the effects of ε2+ versus ε2− genotypes were available for only about one third of the available data, making the reliability of the results limited. There was no significant effect on death overall or for the separate pathological types of stroke.

Most studies provided both unadjusted results and results adjusted for potential confounders of the association between APOE and outcome. Unadjusted and adjusted results were generally very similar, although in two of the studies on SAH, the association of ε4+ genotypes with poor outcome became more extreme after adjustment.18,19

Sensitivity analyses

Tables A and B provided online at http://www.jnnp.bmjjournals.com/supplemental show detailed results. Including plausible values for the eligible studies with unavailable data did not affect the results of our meta‐analyses of the effect of ε4+ genotypes on outcome after ischaemic stroke.14,16 However, including plausible data for ICH from Catto et al14 produced a range of results, which included the possibilities of either no effect or an adverse effect on death after intracerebral haemorrhage.

Discussion

These results suggest that ε4 carriers may be at increased risk of poor outcome (death or dependency, or death alone) several months after ICH or SAH, but not that after ischaemic stroke.

However, it is important to consider whether the apparently deleterious effect of ε4+ genotypes on outcome after ICH or SAH could be a false‐positive finding. Residual confounding seems unlikely to explain our findings, as unadjusted and adjusted results were generally similar. However, various potential sources of bias could lead to false‐positive results. Firstly, publication bias (where the results of small positive studies are more likely to be published than those of small negative studies) could explain why the pooled results of the smaller studies on ICH and SAH (mean number of subjects 116) were positive, whereas those of the larger studies on ischaemic stroke (mean number of subjects 484) were not. Publication bias has often been identified in systematic reviews of observational epidemiological studies,30 including candidate gene studies—for example, our own study on the role of APOE in incidence of different pathological types of stroke.3 Secondly, reporting bias could have affected our findings, as data on both outcomes of interest were not available from all studies. Thirdly, selection and “loss‐to‐follow‐up” biases may have affected our results because, although several studies recruited consecutive patients, patients had to survive long enough to give consent and provide a sample for DNA; the most severely affected patients with stroke who died early were inevitably excluded. In addition, outcome data were not available for all recruited patients, and one study on ICH reported outcome at discharge from hospital, which may have introduced bias if time to discharge varied between APOE genotype groups.17

Could the result of no apparent effect on outcome after ischaemic stroke be a false‐negative finding? This seems less likely, particularly as two additional eligible studies for which we were unable to obtain data found no association between APOE and outcome after ischaemic stroke, and including plausible values for these in sensitivity analyses did not alter our findings.14,16 Our meta‐analysis of effects on death or dependency after ischaemic stroke included studies with varying outcome definitions, but this seems unlikely to have affected the overall results, as the RRs for the different studies were similar. Another possibility is that we may have missed an effect on outcome after ischaemic stroke because of an interaction with age. The patients in the studies on ischaemic stroke were slightly older than those with haemorrhagic stroke, particularly SAH. A recent study found that the effect of ε4+ genotypes on death or severe disability 6 months after acute head injury was age dependent. The association was most pronounced in participants aged <15 years and diminished with increasing age.31 This raises the possibility that an association between the APOE genotype and outcome after ischaemic stroke might be detectable only in patients with a mean age at least several years below that of the ischaemic stroke patients in the studies in our review, and that the association between APOE genotype and outcome after ICH or SAH may be stronger with decreasing age. However, given the small difference in mean age between the patients with ischaemic stroke, ICH and SAH, this seems unlikely to be the only reason for the difference in results between haemorrhagic and ischaemic types of stroke.

The explanation for the apparent differences between the effects on different pathological types of stroke, if real, is uncertain. Some studies have suggested that the effects on SAH might be due to an association of ε4+ genotypes with delayed ischaemic neurological deficit.20,32 A study exploring the reasons for the association between ε4+ genotypes and poor outcome after ICH found no detectable effect of APOE on haematoma or oedema volumes.17 Another study that examined whether the effects of APOE on coagulation profiles might explain the different effects on outcome after ischaemic stroke and ICH found inconclusive results.25

In summary, our results suggest that APOE may affect outcome after ICH and SAH, but not after ischaemic stroke. Larger studies are needed to confirm or refute these findings, and to assess the possibility of an interaction between the effects of the APOE genotype and age. If the apparent differences between the pathological types of stroke are confirmed, research into the reasons for this should improve our understanding of the role of apolipoprotein E in recovery after stroke, and may ultimately lead to new therapeutic insights.

Supplementary Material

[web only tables]

Acknowledgements

We thank Brenda Thomas for her help with designing the electronic search strategy, and Peter Sandercock, Charles Warlow and Caroline Jackson for their helpful comments on an earlier draft.

Abbreviations

APOE - apolipoprotein E gene

ICH - intracerebral haemorrhage

SAH - subarachnoid haemorrhage

Footnotes

Funding: NAM‐G is supported by CONACyT‐SEP México. CLMS is supported by a Wellcome Trust Clinician Scientist award.

Competing interests: None.

Neither funding source had any role in the design, analysis or interpretation of the results of this study, or in the writing of the paper or the decision to submit it for publication.

References

  • 1.Hassan A, Markus H S. Genetics and ischaemic stroke. Brain 20001231784–1812. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Casas J P, Hingorani A D, Bautista L E.et al Meta‐analysis of genetic studies in ischaemic stroke: thirty‐two genes involving approximately 18,000 cases and 58,000 controls. Arch Neurol 2004611652–1661. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Sudlow C, Martínez González N A, Kim J.et al Does apolipoprotein E genotype influence the risk of ischemic stroke, intracerebral hemorrhage, or subarachnoid hemorrhage? Systematic review and meta‐analyses of 31 studies among 5961 cases and 17 965 controls. Stroke 200637364–370. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Meschia J F, Meschia J F. Not so accidental outcomes following cerebrovascular accidents. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 20044341–342. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Waters R J, Nicoll J A. Genetic influences on outcome following acute neurological insults. Curr Opin Crit Care 200511105–110. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Horsburgh K, McCarron M O, White F.et al The role of apolipoprotein E in Alzheimer's disease, acute brain injury and cerebrovascular disease: evidence of common mechanisms and utility of animal models. Neurobiol Aging 200021245–255. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Eichner J E, Dunn S T, Perveen G.et al Apolipoprotein E polymorphism and cardiovascular disease: a HuGE review. Am J Epidemiol 2002155487–495. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Mahley R W. Apolipoprotein E: cholesterol transport protein with expanding role in cell biology. Science 1988240622–630. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Poirier J, Baccichet A, Dea D.et al Cholesterol synthesis and lipoprotein reuptake during synaptic remodelling in hippocampus in adult rats. Neuroscience 19935581–90. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Poirier J. Apolipoprotein E in animal models of CNS injury and in Alzheimer's disease. Trends Neurosci 199417525–530. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Graham D I, Horsburgh K, Nicoll J A.et al Apolipoprotein E and the response of the brain to injury. Acta Neurochir Suppl 19997389–92. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.McCarron M O, Muir K W, Weir C J.et al The apolipoprotein E epsilon4 allele and outcome in cerebrovascular disease. Stroke 1998291882–1887. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.McCarron M O, Muir K W, Nicoll J A.et al Prospective study of apolipoprotein E genotype and functional outcome following ischaemic stroke. Arch Neurol 2000571480–1484. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Catto A J, McCormack L J, Mansfield M W.et al Apolipoprotein E polymorphism in cerebrovascular disease. Acta Neurol Scand 2000101399–404. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Broderick J, Lu M, Jackson C.et al Apolipoprotein E phenotype and the efficacy of intravenous tissue plasminogen activator in acute ischaemic stroke. Ann Neurol 200149736–744. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.MacLeod M J, De Lange R P, Breen G.et al Lack of association between apolipoprotein E genotype and ischaemic stroke in a Scottish population. Eur J Clin Invest 200131570–573. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.McCarron M O, Hoffmann K L, DeLong D M.et al Intracerebral haemorrhage outcome: apolipoprotein E genotype, haematoma, and edema volumes. Neurology 1999532176–2179. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Leung C H, Poon W S, Yu L M.et al Apolipoprotein E genotype and outcome in aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage. Stroke 200233548–552. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Niskakangas T, Ohman J, Niemela M.et al Association of apolipoprotein E polymorphism with outcome after aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage: a preliminary study. Stroke 2001321181–1184. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Dunn L T, Stewart E, Murray G D.et al The influence of apolipoprotein E genotype on outcome after spontaneous subarachnoid haemorrhage: a preliminary study. Neurosurgery 2001481006–1010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Tang J, Zhao J, Zhao Y.et al Apolipoprotein E epsilon4 and the risk of unfavorable outcome after aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage. Surg Neurol 200360391–396. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Ruigrok Y M, Slooter A J, Bardoel A.et al Genes and outcome after aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage. J Neurol 2005252417–422. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.McCarron M O, Weir C J, Muir K W.et al Effect of apolipoprotein E genotype on in‐hospital mortality following intracerebral haemorrhage. Acta Neurol Scand 2003107106–109. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Alberts M J, Graffagnino C, McClenny C.et al ApoE genotype and survival from intracerebral haemorrhage. Lancet 1995346575. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Weir C J, McCarron M O, Muir K W.et al Apolipoprotein E genotype, coagulation, and survival following acute stroke. Neurology 2001571097–1100. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Morris P G, Wilson J T L, Dunn L T.et al Apolipoprotein E polymorphism and neuropsychological outcome following subarachnoid haemorrhage. Acta Neurol Scand 2004109205–209. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Liu Y, Laakso M P, Karonen J O.et al Apolipoprotein E polymorphism and acute ischaemic stroke: a diffusion‐ and perfusion‐weighted magnetic resonance imaging study. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 2002221336–1342. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Treger I, Froom P, Ring H.et al Association between apolipoprotein E4 and rehabilitation outcome in hospitalized ischaemic stroke patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 200384973–976. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.McCarron M O, Nicoll J A, Love S.et al Surgical intervention, biopsy and APOE genotype in cerebral amyloid angiopathy‐related haemorrhage. Br J Neurosurg 199913462–467. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Egger M, Davey Smith G. Meta‐analysis. Bias in location and selection of studies. BMJ 199831661–66. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Teasdale G M, Murray G D, Nicoll J A. The association between APOE epsilon4, age and outcome after head injury: a prospective cohort study. Brain 20051282556–2561. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Lanterna L A, Rigoldi M, Tredici G.et al APOE influences vasospasm and cognition of noncomatose patients with subarachnoid haemorrhage. Neurology 2005641238–1244. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

[web only tables]

Articles from Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES