
94% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.
Find out more
ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Aging Neurosci.
Sec. Neurocognitive Aging and Behavior
Volume 17 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2025.1524474
This article is part of the Research Topic Estrogens and Neurodegeneration: a Link Between Menopause and Alzheimer’s Diseases in Women View all articles
The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Introduction: Disruptions in estrogen exposure (i.e., surgically induced menopause) have been linked to poorer cognitive aging and dementia risk. Hormone therapy use (e.g., birth control, menopausal hormone therapy) has shown mixed associations with cognitive performance, possibly due to limited cognitive test batteries. To address previous inconsistencies, we investigated baseline data from Investigating Gains in Neurocognition in an Intervention Trial of Exercise (IGNITE). We hypothesized that 1) oophorectomy prior to natural menopause would be associated with poorer cognitive performance, 2) timing and duration of birth control and menopausal hormone therapy would influence associations with cognitive performance, and 3) APOE4 carrier status would interact with oophorectomy and hormone therapy to influence cognitive performance. Methods: In 461 postmenopausal females (M age = 69.6) we assessed oophorectomy and hormone therapy use to examine associations with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and factor-analytically derived composite scores for episodic memory, processing speed, working memory, executive function/attentional control, and visuospatial processing. Results: Hypothesis 1) We did not observe associations between oophorectomy prior to natural menopause and poorer cognitive performance. However, hormone therapy use, started on average within two years of oophorectomy, was associated with better episodic memory (β = 0.106, p = 0.02), working memory (β = 0.120, p = 0.005), and visuospatial processing (β = 0.095, p = 0.03). Hypothesis 2) Birth control use was associated with better performance on the MoCA (β = 0.093, p = 0.04), working memory (β = 0.102, p = 0.02), and executive function/attentional control (β = 0.103, p = 0.02). However, duration and timing of birth control and menopausal hormone therapy were not associated with cognitive performance. Hypothesis 3) We did not observe significant interactions between APOE4 status and oophorectomy or hormone therapy in their associations with cognitive performance. Discussion: Our results suggest exposure to estrogen during adulthood, specifically birth control and hormone therapy among women undergoing pre-menopausal oophorectomy, benefits cognitive function in older adulthood. Our comprehensive cognitive battery allowed us to examine cognitive function with a high degree of granularity. Future work should evaluate causal mechanisms of associations between lifetime estrogen exposure and later life cognitive function.
Keywords: Cognition, Aging, Women, estrogen, Oophorectomy, Menopause
Received: 07 Nov 2024; Accepted: 06 Mar 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Watts, Donofry, Ripperger, Eklund, Wan, Kang, Grove, Oberlin, Gujral, Vidoni, Burns, McAuley, Hillman, Kramer, Kamboh and Erickson. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence:
Amber Watts, University of Kansas, Lawrence, United States
Kirk I. Erickson, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, 15260, Pennsylvania, United States
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Research integrity at Frontiers
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.