Agent and method for improving comprehensive memory of healthy person

Abstract

Disclosed is an agent for improving the comprehensive memory of healthy persons, which contains uridylic acid as an active ingredient.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to an agent (preparation) and a method for improving the overall memory of healthy people. Background Art

[0002] Cognitive function refers to general intellectual functions such as understanding, judgment, and logic, and is directly related to the ability of daily life. For example, in the neurocognitive disorders (NCD) classified by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders V (DSM-5) published by the American Psychiatric Association, the impaired cognitive function areas of NCD patients are divided into six areas: "complex attention", "executive function", "learning and memory", "language (speech)", "perception-motor", and "social cognition". Improving cognitive function can be said to be a common desire of men, women, young and old.

[0003] Research related to the improvement of cognitive function can be roughly divided into two directions: one is "maintaining / restoring decreased (declining) cognitive function" and the other is "improving cognitive function in healthy people."

[0004] As for research related to improvement of cognitive function, the mainstream so far has been "maintaining / restoring decreased cognitive function".

[0005] As the main cause of cognitive decline, the most notable disease in recent years is dementia. Dementia is defined as "a disease in which once acquired intellectual functions decline as a whole due to acquired brain dysfunction, and which interferes with social interaction and daily life even without impaired consciousness" (Non-Patent Literature 1).

[0006] As a major cause of cognitive decline alongside dementia, there is "normal age-related cognitive decline (physiological amnesia)". "Normal age-related cognitive decline (physiological amnesia)" is distinguished from dementia by the following characteristics: it is usually a partial forgetfulness of experiences, which does not progress or progresses very slowly; the patient remains aware of the disease; the patient retains an orientation to time and date, and rarely interferes with daily life (Non-Patent Document 2).

[0007] Regarding age-related cognitive decline, it is known that visual-spatial cognition, language function, and verbal memory functions do improve before the age of 50, but in the 60s, mathematical processing, verbal memory, perception speed, visual-spatial cognition, reasoning, and language functions decline rapidly with age (Non-Patent Literature 3).

[0008] To date, a great deal of research has been done on the improvement of cognitive function, but most of it is related to the restoration and / or prevention of cognitive decline. That is, with the extension of lifespan worldwide and the penetration of the concept of healthy lifespan, there has been a growing demand to restore cognitive function that has declined due to the above-mentioned "dementia" and / or "age-related normal cognitive decline (physiological forgetfulness)", and to maintain cognitive function by preventing "dementia" and / or "age-related normal cognitive decline (physiological forgetfulness)", leading to a great deal of research. On the other hand, there has been little research on further enhancing cognitive function from a healthy state.

[0009] However, recently, "the improvement of cognitive function in healthy individuals" has been attracting attention. This is different from the restoration of declined cognitive function and the maintenance of cognitive function studied so far, and is research aimed at further enhancing the cognitive function that healthy individuals themselves possess.

[0010] In order to continuously enjoy the effect of improving cognitive function in healthy individuals, it is necessary to daily ingest (take in) agents / raw materials with such an effect. Therefore, research is actively being conducted on improving cognitive function using food raw materials suitable for daily intake.

[0011] As mentioned above, cognitive function is an intellectual function formed by several regions, but it is extremely difficult to improve all of it with a single agent. Therefore, in recent research on improving cognitive function based on food raw materials, it is expected to clarify the cognitive function regions that can be improved by the food raw materials, and to achieve the desired cognitive function improvement effect by ingesting foods that improve the desired functional regions or by combining multiple food raw materials. As an example of clarifying the cognitive function regions that can be improved by food raw materials, there is Patent Document 1 showing that visual memory can be improved by ingesting Bifidobacterium N61 strain, and Non-Patent Document 4 showing that attention / concentration can be improved by ingesting polyphenols derived from blackcurrant, etc.

[0012] Depending on the different food raw materials, although there are food raw materials that have an improvement effect across multiple cognitive function regions, there are actual situations where they are used for different purposes when the desired improvement effects on cognitive functions are different. For example, as a functional food raw material, L-theanine, in the application for functional labeled foods, the same operator has made applications for the following three improvement effects on cognitive functions: at a daily recommended intake of 50.3 mg (milligrams) or more, "has the function of improving the accuracy of attention (the ability to sustain an action with continuous attention) and judgment (the accuracy and speed of judgment, the ability to appropriately handle according to changing situations)" (Non-Patent Document 5); at a daily recommended intake of 200 mg, "assists the language fluency of those with a relatively low ability to quickly and abundantly recall language information (language fluency) as part of cognitive function" (Non-Patent Document 6); at a daily recommended intake of 100 mg, "temporarily supports working memory in cognitive function (the ability to hold and correctly process multiple pieces of information required to solve problems)" (Non-Patent Document 7).

[0013] In the above example, depending on the desired cognitive function, the effects are different. The content of L-theanine as the active ingredient is adjusted according to the cognitive function region, and the appeal points, consumers, and sales locations of food and beverages containing this food raw material are also different. Therefore, although they all have the common point of improving cognitive function, their uses are completely different.

[0014] Uridine monophosphate is a type of nucleotide, a substance widely contained or added in organisms and foods, and is a raw material with extremely high safety and most suitable for adding to foods.

[0015] In Patent Document 2, a composition containing i) uridine and the like and ii) docosahexaenoic acid and the like that increases the composite score of the neuropsychological test battery [NTB] is described. However, in Patent Document 2, there is no description at all about whether uridine and the like exert effects alone. In addition, the invention described in Patent Document 2 is targeted at patients with Alzheimer's disease or dementia, not at healthy individuals.

[0016] In Patent Document 3, a composition containing i) uridine and the like and ii) docosahexaenoic acid and the like that improves executive function is described. However, in Patent Document 3, there is no description at all about whether uridine and the like exert effects alone. In addition, the invention described in Patent Document 3 is targeted at patients with Alzheimer's disease or dementia, not at healthy individuals.

[0017] In Patent Document 4, a learning / memory ability-improving agent containing uridylic acid and the like is described. However, the invention described in Patent Document 4 is directed to individuals (persons) whose learning / memory ability has sharply declined due to aging such as senile dementia and / or diseases.

[0018] Therefore, there is no sufficient opinion on whether uridylic acid alone has an effect of improving comprehensive memory in healthy individuals.

[0019] Prior Art Documents

[0020] Patent Documents

[0021] Patent Document 1: Japanese Unexamined Patent Application Publication No. 2020-188755

[0022] Patent Document 2: Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 2014-532696

[0023] Patent Document 3: Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 2014-534226

[0024] Patent Document 4: Japanese Unexamined Patent Application Publication No. 2001-233776

[0025] Non-Patent Documents

[0026] Non-Patent Document 1: Haruo Hanyu et al., "Q&A on Forgetfulness Diagnosis in the Clinic (1 page)", Chugai Medical Publishing Co., Ltd., published in July 2020

[0027] Non-Patent Document 2: Dementia Diagnosis and Treatment Guidelines 2017 (8 pages), Medical Science Press Co., Ltd., published on August 1, 2017

[0028] Non-Patent Document 3: Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn. 2004 June; 11(2-3): 304-324.

[0029] Non-Patent Document 4: Japanese Journal of Health Development, Vol. 42, pp. 37-48, 2021

[0030] Non-Patent Document 5: Format I: Basic Information on Scientific Basis, etc. of Declared Foods (for General Consumers), Application No. F568

[0031] Non-Patent Document 6: Format I: Basic Information on Scientific Basis, etc. of Declared Foods (for General Consumers), Application No. G600

[0032] Non-Patent Document 7: Format I: Basic Information on Scientific Basis, etc. of Declared Foods (for General Consumers), Application No. G1323 Summary of the Invention

[0033] Problems to be Solved by the Invention

[0034] An object of the present invention is to provide a novel and highly safe agent (comprehensive memory improving agent) that exhibits an effect of improving the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals when used as a food, pharmaceutical, quasi-drug, etc., and a method for improving the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals using the agent.

[0035] Technical Solutions for Solving the Problems

[0036] The inventors of the present application conducted in-depth research to achieve the above object, and as a result, for the first time, it was found that uridylic acid not only has an effect of improving the comprehensive memory of those with a sharp decline in learning / memory ability caused by aging and / or diseases such as Alzheimer's disease known in the past, but also has an effect of improving the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals, thus completing the present invention.

[0037] That is, the present invention is an agent (comprehensive memory improving agent) for improving the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals, containing uridylic acid as an active ingredient.

[0038] In addition, the present invention is a method for improving the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals using the above agent.

[0039] Advantages of the Invention

[0040] The agent of the present invention containing uridylic acid as an active ingredient exhibits an effect of improving the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals when used as a food, pharmaceutical, quasi-drug, etc., and is novel and highly safe. In particular, by using this agent, a new means will be provided, that is, by improving the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals, it contributes to the improvement of QOL (quality of life) and the increase in the productivity of intellectual activities. Description of the Drawings

[0041] Figure 1 Shows the change amount of the standardized comprehensive memory score of all subjects before and after the test described in Example 2-1. The vertical axis represents the change amount of the standardized comprehensive memory score of each test group before and after the test. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The "**" symbol in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.05, indicating a significant difference from the placebo group (the difference is statistically significant).

[0042] Figure 2 Shows the change amount of the standardized executive function score of all subjects before and after the test described in Example 2-2. The vertical axis represents the change amount of the standardized executive function score of each test group before and after the test. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups described in Example 1.

[0043] Figure 3 Indicates the change in the standardized score of cognitive flexibility of all subjects before and after the test as described in Example 2-3. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of cognitive flexibility of each test group before and after the test. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups described in Example 1.

[0044] Figure 4 Indicates the change in the standardized score of working memory of all subjects before and after the test as described in Example 2-4. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of working memory of each test group before and after the test. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The "*" symbol in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.10, indicating a significant trend compared with the placebo group.

[0045] Figure 5 Indicates the change in the standardized score of processing speed of all subjects before and after the test as described in Example 2-5. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of processing speed of each test group before and after the test. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups described in Example 1.

[0046] Figure 6 Indicates the change in the standardized score of NCI of all subjects before and after the test as described in Example 2-6. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of NCI of each test group before and after the test. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups described in Example 1.

[0047] Figure 7 Indicates the change in the standardized score of comprehensive memory of subjects under 60 years old before and after the test as described in Example 3-1. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of comprehensive memory of each test group before and after the test. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The "*" symbol in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.10, indicating a significant trend compared with the placebo group.

[0048] Figure 8 Indicates the change in the standardized score of executive function of subjects under 60 years old before and after the test as described in Example 3-2. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of executive function of each test group before and after the test. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups described in Example 1.

[0049] Figure 9Indicates the change in the standardized score of cognitive flexibility of subjects under 60 years old recorded in Example 3-3 before and after the test. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of cognitive flexibility of each test group before and after the test. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1. The "*" symbol in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.10, showing a significant trend compared with the placebo group.

[0050] Figure 10 Indicates the change in the standardized score of comprehensive attention of subjects under 60 years old recorded in Example 3-4 before and after the test. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of comprehensive attention of each test group before and after the test. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1.

[0051] Figure 11 Indicates the change in the standardized score of working memory of subjects under 60 years old recorded in Example 3-5 before and after the test. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of working memory of each test group before and after the test. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1.

[0052] Figure 12 Indicates the change in the standardized score of processing speed of subjects under 60 years old recorded in Example 3-6 before and after the test. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of processing speed of each test group before and after the test. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1.

[0053] Figure 13 Indicates the change in the standardized score of NCI of subjects under 60 years old recorded in Example 3-7 before and after the test. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of NCI of each test group before and after the test. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1. The "**" symbol in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.05, showing a significant difference compared with the placebo group.

[0054] Figure 14 Indicates the change in the standardized score of comprehensive memory of subjects with a comprehensive memory standardized score below 90 points recorded in Example 4-1 before and after the test. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of comprehensive memory of each test group before and after the test. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1. The "*" symbol in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.10, showing a significant trend compared with the placebo group.

[0055] Figure 15Indicates the change in the standardized score of executive function before and after the test for subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points as described in Example 4-2. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of executive function before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups as described in Example 1. The "*" symbol in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.10, showing a significant trend compared with the placebo group.

[0056] Figure 16 Indicates the change in the standardized score of cognitive flexibility before and after the test for subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points as described in Example 4-3. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of cognitive flexibility before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups as described in Example 1. The "**" symbol in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.05, showing a significant difference compared with the placebo group.

[0057] Figure 17 Indicates the change in the standardized score of comprehensive attention before and after the test for subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points as described in Example 4-4. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of comprehensive attention before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups as described in Example 1.

[0058] Figure 18 Indicates the change in the standardized score of working memory before and after the test for subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points as described in Example 4-5. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of working memory before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups as described in Example 1.

[0059] Figure 19 Indicates the change in the standardized score of NCI before and after the test for subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points as described in Example 4-6. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of NCI before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups as described in Example 1.

[0060] Figure 20Indicates the change in the standardized score of comprehensive memory before and after the test for those with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 83.5 points as recorded in Example 5-1. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of comprehensive memory before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups as recorded in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.05, showing a significant difference from the placebo group.

[0061] Figure 21 Indicates the change in the standardized score of executive function before and after the test for those with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 83.5 points as recorded in Example 5-2. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of executive function before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups as recorded in Example 1. The symbol "*" in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.10, showing a significant trend compared with the placebo group.

[0062] Figure 22 Indicates the change in the standardized score of cognitive flexibility before and after the test for those with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 83.5 points as recorded in Example 5-3. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of cognitive flexibility before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups as recorded in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.05, showing a significant difference from the placebo group.

[0063] Figure 23 Indicates the change in the standardized score of comprehensive attention before and after the test for those with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 83.5 points as recorded in Example 5-4. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of comprehensive attention before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups as recorded in Example 1. The symbol "*" in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.10, showing a significant trend compared with the placebo group.

[0064] Figure 24 Indicates the change in the standardized score of NCI before and after the test for those with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 83.5 points as recorded in Example 5-5. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of NCI before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups as recorded in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.05, showing a significant difference from the placebo group.

[0065] Figure 25Indicates the change in the standardized score of comprehensive memory of the subjects recorded in Example 6-1 who are less than 60 years old and have a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 90 points before and after the test. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of comprehensive memory of each test group before and after the test. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1.

[0066] Figure 26 Indicates the change in the standardized score of executive function of the subjects recorded in Example 6-2 who are less than 60 years old and have a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 90 points before and after the test. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of executive function of each test group before and after the test. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1. The "**" symbol in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.05, showing a significant difference from the placebo group.

[0067] Figure 27 Indicates the change in the standardized score of cognitive flexibility of the subjects recorded in Example 6-3 who are less than 60 years old and have a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 90 points before and after the test. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of cognitive flexibility of each test group before and after the test. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1. The "**" symbol in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.05, showing a significant difference from the placebo group.

[0068] Figure 28 Indicates the change in the standardized score of comprehensive attention of the subjects recorded in Example 6-4 who are less than 60 years old and have a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 90 points before and after the test. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of comprehensive attention of each test group before and after the test. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1.

[0069] Figure 29 Indicates the change in the standardized score of processing speed of the subjects recorded in Example 6-5 who are less than 60 years old and have a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 90 points before and after the test. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of processing speed of each test group before and after the test. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1.

[0070] Figure 30Indicates the change in the NCI standardized score of the subjects recorded in Example 6-6, who are less than 60 years old and have a comprehensive memory standardized score lower than 90 points, before and after the trial. The vertical axis represents the change in the NCI standardized score of each test group before and after the trial. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.05, showing a significant difference from the placebo group.

[0071] Figure 31 Indicates the change in the comprehensive memory standardized score of the subjects recorded in Example 7-1, who are less than 60 years old and have a comprehensive memory standardized score lower than 83.5 points, before and after the trial. The vertical axis represents the change in the comprehensive memory standardized score of each test group before and after the trial. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1.

[0072] Figure 32 Indicates the change in the executive function standardized score of the subjects recorded in Example 7-2, who are less than 60 years old and have a comprehensive memory standardized score lower than 83.5 points, before and after the trial. The vertical axis represents the change in the executive function standardized score of each test group before and after the trial. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1. The symbol "*" in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.10, showing a significant trend compared with the placebo group.

[0073] Figure 33 Indicates the change in the cognitive flexibility standardized score of the subjects recorded in Example 7-3, who are less than 60 years old and have a comprehensive memory standardized score lower than 83.5 points, before and after the trial. The vertical axis represents the change in the cognitive flexibility standardized score of each test group before and after the trial. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.05, showing a significant difference from the placebo group.

[0074] Figure 34 Indicates the change in the comprehensive attention standardized score of the subjects recorded in Example 7-4, who are less than 60 years old and have a comprehensive memory standardized score lower than 83.5 points, before and after the trial. The vertical axis represents the change in the comprehensive attention standardized score of each test group before and after the trial. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.05, showing a significant difference from the placebo group.

[0075] Figure 35Indicates the change in the NCI standardized score before and after the test for the subjects recorded in Example 7-5 who are less than 60 years old and have a comprehensive memory standardized score lower than 83.5 points. The vertical axis represents the change in the NCI standardized score before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1. The "**" symbol in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.05, indicating a significant difference from the placebo group.

[0076] Figure 36 Indicates the change in the comprehensive memory standardized score before and after the test for those with a comprehensive memory standardized score of 90 or more and less than 100 points recorded in Example 8-1. The vertical axis represents the change in the comprehensive memory standardized score before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1.

[0077] Figure 37 Indicates the change in the processing speed standardized score before and after the test for those with a comprehensive memory standardized score of 90 or more and less than 100 points recorded in Example 8-2. The vertical axis represents the change in the processing speed standardized score before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1.

[0078] Figure 38 Indicates the change in the cognitive function speed standardized score before and after the test for those with a comprehensive memory standardized score of 90 or more and less than 100 points recorded in Example 8-3. The vertical axis represents the change in the cognitive function speed standardized score before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1.

[0079] Figure 39 Indicates the change in the NCI standardized score before and after the test for those with a comprehensive memory standardized score of 90 or more and less than 100 points recorded in Example 8-4. The vertical axis represents the change in the NCI standardized score before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1.

[0080] Figure 40 Indicates the change in the comprehensive memory standardized score before and after the test for those who are less than 60 years old and have a comprehensive memory standardized score of 90 or more and less than 100 points recorded in Example 9-1. The vertical axis represents the change in the comprehensive memory standardized score before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1.

[0081] Figure 41 It represents the change in the standardized score of executive function before and after the test for those who are less than 60 years old and have a standardized comprehensive memory score of 90 or more and less than 100 as recorded in Example 9-2. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of executive function before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1.

[0082] Figure 42 It represents the change in the standardized score of comprehensive attention before and after the test for those who are less than 60 years old and have a standardized comprehensive memory score of 90 or more and less than 100 as recorded in Example 9-3. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of comprehensive attention before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1.

[0083] Figure 43 It represents the change in the standardized score of working memory before and after the test for those who are less than 60 years old and have a standardized comprehensive memory score of 90 or more and less than 100 as recorded in Example 9-4. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of working memory before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1.

[0084] Figure 44 It represents the change in the standardized score of processing speed before and after the test for those who are less than 60 years old and have a standardized comprehensive memory score of 90 or more and less than 100 as recorded in Example 9-5. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of processing speed before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1.

[0085] Figure 45 It represents the change in the standardized score of cognitive function speed before and after the test for those who are less than 60 years old and have a standardized comprehensive memory score of 90 or more and less than 100 as recorded in Example 9-6. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of cognitive function speed before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1. The "*" symbol in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.10, showing a significant trend compared with the placebo group.

[0086] Figure 46Indicates the change in the NCI standardized score before and after the test for those aged less than 60 years old with a comprehensive memory standardized score of 90 or more and less than 100 as described in Example 9-7. The vertical axis represents the change in the NCI standardized score before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups described in Example 1.

[0087] Figure 47 Indicates the change in the working memory standardized score before and after the test for the subjects with a comprehensive memory standardized score of 83.5 or more and less than 100 as described in Reference Example 1. The vertical axis represents the change in the working memory standardized score before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The "**" symbol in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.05, showing a significant difference from the placebo group.

[0088] Figure 48 Indicates the change in the processing speed standardized score before and after the test for the subjects with a comprehensive memory standardized score of 83.5 or more and less than 100 as described in Reference Example 2. The vertical axis represents the change in the processing speed standardized score before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups described in Example 1.

[0089] Figure 49 Indicates the change in the cognitive function speed standardized score before and after the test for the subjects with a comprehensive memory standardized score of 83.5 or more and less than 100 as described in Reference Example 3. The vertical axis represents the change in the cognitive function speed standardized score before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups described in Example 1.

[0090] Figure 50 Indicates the change in the comprehensive memory standardized score before and after the test for those aged less than 60 years old with a comprehensive memory standardized score of 83.5 or more and less than 100 as described in Reference Example 4. The vertical axis represents the change in the comprehensive memory standardized score before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups described in Example 1.

[0091] Figure 51Indicates the change in the standardized working memory score before and after the test for subjects recorded in Reference Example 5 who are less than 60 years old and have a standardized comprehensive memory score of 83.5 or above and below 100 points. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized working memory score before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.05, showing a significant difference from the placebo group.

[0092] Figure 52 Indicates the change in the standardized processing speed score before and after the test for subjects recorded in Reference Example 6 who are less than 60 years old and have a standardized comprehensive memory score of 83.5 or above and below 100 points. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized processing speed score before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1. The symbol "*" in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.10, showing a significant trend compared with the placebo group.

[0093] Figure 53 Indicates the change in the standardized cognitive function speed score before and after the test for subjects recorded in Reference Example 7 who are less than 60 years old and have a standardized comprehensive memory score of 83.5 or above and below 100 points. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized cognitive function speed score before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1.

[0094] Figure 54 Indicates the change in the standardized comprehensive memory score before and after the test for those with a standardized verbal memory score below 90 points recorded in Example 10-1. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized comprehensive memory score before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.05, showing a significant difference from the placebo group.

[0095] Figure 55 Indicates the change in the standardized executive function score before and after the test for those with a standardized verbal memory score below 90 points recorded in Example 10-2. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized executive function score before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups recorded in Example 1. The symbol "*" in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.10, showing a significant trend compared with the placebo group.

[0096] Figure 56Indicates the change in the standardized score of cognitive flexibility before and after the test for those with a standardized score of verbal memory lower than 90 points as described in Example 10-3. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of cognitive flexibility before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.05, showing a significant difference from the placebo group.

[0097] Figure 57 Indicates the change in the standardized score of comprehensive attention before and after the test for those with a standardized score of verbal memory lower than 90 points as described in Example 10-4. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of comprehensive attention before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.05, showing a significant difference from the placebo group.

[0098] Figure 58 Indicates the change in the standardized score of working memory before and after the test for those with a standardized score of verbal memory lower than 90 points as described in Example 10-5. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of working memory before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups described in Example 1.

[0099] Figure 59 Indicates the change in the standardized score of processing speed before and after the test for those with a standardized score of verbal memory lower than 90 points as described in Example 10-6. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of processing speed before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups described in Example 1.

[0100] Figure 60 Indicates the change in the standardized score of NCI before and after the test for those with a standardized score of verbal memory lower than 90 points as described in Example 10-7. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized score of NCI before and after the test for each test group. The test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group marked in the figure represent the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates that the p-value < 0.05, showing a significant difference from the placebo group. Detailed implementation mode

[0101] The present invention relates to an agent (comprehensive memory improvement agent) containing uridylic acid as an active ingredient for improving the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals.

[0102] The comprehensive memory in the present invention refers to the total memory that combines memory related to language and visual memory related to graphics, etc.

[0103] In addition, the comprehensive memory in the invention of this application means the cognitive function area measured by two indicators composed of the Verbal Memory (VBM) for measuring verbal memory, etc. and the Visual Memory (VIM) for measuring visual memory, etc. in the Cognitrax examination. Specifically, the comprehensive memory score is defined as the score measured by the following calculation formula in the Cognitrax examination.

[0104] Comprehensive memory score = Number of correct hits (immediate) of VBM + Number of correct passes (immediate) of VBM + Number of correct hits (delayed) of VBM + Number of correct passes (delayed) of VBM + Number of correct hits (immediate) of VIM + Number of correct passes (immediate) of VIM + Number of correct hits (delayed) of VIM + Number of correct passes (delayed) of VIM

[0105] Cognitrax in the invention of this application refers to a cognitive function examination service designed for Japan based on the cognitive function examination technology developed by CNS Vital Signs, Inc. Regarding the content of Cognitrax, reference is also made to the content described in the following documents.

[0106] CNS Vital Signs LLC. CNS Vital Signs Interpretation Guide. 2019. (https: / / www.cnsvs.com / WhitePapers / CNSVS-BriefInterpretationGuide.pdf)

[0107] In the specification of this application, the case described as the Cognitrax examination also has the same meaning as Cognitrax.

[0108] The Verbal Memory (VBM) in the invention of this application refers to a test implemented by the following method. First, 15 words are displayed and remembered, and then the remembered words are found from 30 words including new words.

[0109] The Visual Memory (VIM) in the invention of this application refers to a test implemented by the following method. First, 15 kinds of graphics are displayed and remembered, and then the remembered graphics are found from 30 graphics including new graphics.

[0110] The standardized score of the comprehensive memory in the invention of this application refers to the score obtained by calculating the standard score of the comprehensive memory score under the normal distribution with an average value (mean) of 100 and a standard deviation value (standard deviation) of 15 based on the measured value. In addition, during the calculation, a chronological correction was performed with a 5-year age group as a unit. For example, if the measured value is the same as the average value of the same age group, the standardized score is 100 points; if it is 1σ better than the average value, the standardized score is 115 points; if it is 2σ better than the average value, the standardized score is 130 points. The higher the standardized score of the comprehensive memory, the better the comprehensive memory.

[0111] The improvement of the comprehensive memory in the invention of this application refers to the overall improvement of the memory that combines memory related to language and visual memory related to graphics, etc. Specifically, it refers to an increase in the standardized score of the comprehensive memory in the Cognitrax examination. An increase or decrease of 10 points or more in the standardized score of the comprehensive memory means that the comprehensive memory has improved or deteriorated with medical (clinical) significance.

[0112] Those with a standardized score of the comprehensive memory in the invention of this application lower than 90 points refer to those whose standardized comprehensive memory score is lower than 90 points when grouping the subjects by 5-year age groups and calculating the standardized comprehensive memory score according to the Cognitrax examination. In addition, regarding the calculation method of the standardized score of the comprehensive memory, refer to the examples described later. A standardized score of the comprehensive memory of a subject lower than 90 points means that the subject's cognitive function regarding memory is relatively low compared to those with average cognitive function.

[0113] Those with a standardized score of the comprehensive memory in the invention of this application lower than 83.5 points refer to those whose standardized comprehensive memory score after standardization according to the above method is lower than 83.5 points. A standardized score of the comprehensive memory of a subject lower than 83.5 points means that the subject's cognitive function regarding memory is quite low compared to those with average cognitive function.

[0114] Those with a standardized score of the comprehensive memory in the invention of this application between 90 points and less than 100 points refer to those whose standardized comprehensive memory score is between 90 points and less than 100 points when grouping the subjects by 5-year age groups and calculating the standardized comprehensive memory score according to the Cognitrax examination. A standardized score of the comprehensive memory of a subject between 90 points and less than 100 points means that the subject's cognitive function regarding memory is slightly lower, but it is judged to be within the normal range.

[0115] The verbal memory in the invention of this application refers to the cognitive function area measured by the Verbal Memory Test (VBM) in the Cognitrax examination. Specifically, the verbal memory score is defined as the score measured by the following calculation formula in the Cognitrax examination.

[0116] Verbal memory score = Number of correct hits in VBM (immediate) + Number of correct passes in VBM (immediate) + Number of correct hits in VBM (delayed) + Number of correct passes in VBM (delayed)

[0117] In the present invention, those with a standardized verbal memory score lower than 90 points refer to those whose standardized verbal memory scores are calculated according to the Cognitrax examination when the subjects are grouped by age in 5-year age groups and the standardized verbal memory scores are lower than 90 points. A subject with a standardized verbal memory score lower than 90 points means that the cognitive function of the subject regarding verbal memory is low, for example, the ability to appropriately recall language information is declining, etc.

[0118] The executive function in the present invention refers to the ability to understand rules, concepts and make decisions quickly.

[0119] In addition, the executive function in the present invention means the comprehensive attention measured by the Shifting Attention Test (SAT) in the Cognitrax examination for measuring the ability to respond quickly and accurately to instructions. Specifically, the executive function score is defined as the score measured by the following calculation formula in the Cognitrax examination.

[0120] Executive function score = Correct response in SAT - Incorrect response in SAT

[0121] The Shifting Attention Test (SAT) in the present invention refers to a test implemented by the following method. Three figures are displayed on the screen, one on top and two at the bottom. The figures are squares or circles, and the colors are red or blue. Select the figure that fits the figure on top from the bottom, and the rule changes to the case where "shape" matches or "color" is the same.

[0122] The cognitive flexibility in the present invention refers to the ability to flexibly change one's mind in response to stimuli from the external environment.

[0123] In addition, the cognitive flexibility in the present invention means the cognitive function area measured by two indicators composed of the Stroop Test (ST) for measuring cognitive flexibility, etc. and the Shifting Attention Test (SAT) for measuring the ability to respond quickly and accurately to instructions in the Cognitrax examination. Specifically, the cognitive flexibility score is defined as the score measured by the following calculation formula in the Cognitrax examination.

[0124] Cognitive flexibility score = Correct response in SAT - Incorrect response in SAT - Stroop incorrect response in ST

[0125] The Stroop Test (ST) in the invention of this application refers to a test implemented by the following method. The ST is a test composed of three parts. In the first part, press the space key as quickly as possible when the text appears on the screen. In the second part, display the words red, yellow, blue, and green in colored text, and press the space key when the color of the text is consistent with the meaning of the text. In the third part, press the space key only when the color of the text is inconsistent with the meaning of the text.

[0126] The comprehensive attention in the invention of this application refers to the ability to maintain attention and respond accurately.

[0127] In addition, the comprehensive attention in the invention of this application means the comprehensive attention measured by three indicators composed of the Stroop Test (ST) for measuring executive functions and the like, the Attention Switching Test (SAT) for measuring the ability to respond quickly and accurately to instructions, and the Continuous Performance Test (CPT) for measuring the persistence of attention in the Cognitrax examination. Specifically, the comprehensive attention score is defined as the score measured by the following calculation formula in the Cognitrax examination.

[0128] Comprehensive attention score = Stroop false response of ST + wrong answer of SAT + false response of CPT + number of missed correct answers of CPT

[0129] The Continuous Performance Test (CPT) in the invention of this application refers to a test implemented by the following method. Within 5 minutes, randomly display text on the screen and respond only when the letter "B" appears.

[0130] The working memory in the invention of this application refers to the function of temporarily holding the required information for various changing purposes and performing other processing tasks in parallel.

[0131] In addition, the working memory in the invention of this application means the intellectual function measured by the 4-Part Continuous Performance Test (FPCPT) in the Cognitrax examination. Specifically, it is defined as the score measured by the following calculation formula in the Cognitrax examination.

[0132] Working memory score = correct response of part 4 of FPCPT - wrong response of part 4 of FPCPT

[0133] The 4-Part Continuous Processing Test (FPCPT) in the present invention is a test implemented by the following method. The FPCPT is a test composed of 4 parts. In the first part, press the space bar as quickly as possible when a figure appears on the screen. In the second part, press the space bar as quickly as possible when a green circle appears on the screen. In the third part, figures are displayed using combinations of figure elements (circle, triangle, square, star) and color elements (red, blue, yellow, green), and answer the previously displayed figure. In the fourth part, figures are displayed using combinations of figure elements (circle, triangle, square, star) and color elements (red, blue, yellow, green), and answer the figure displayed two figures before. As described above, working memory is evaluated based on the correct / incorrect responses in the fourth part.

[0134] The cognitive function speed in the present invention is an index of the ability to quickly perceive, act, and process visual information.

[0135] In addition, the cognitive function speed in the present invention means the intellectual function measured by the Finger Tapping Test (FTT (Finger Tapping)) and the SDC Test (SDC (Symbol Digit Coding)) in the Cognitrax examination. Specifically, it is defined as the score measured by the following calculation formula in the Cognitrax examination.

[0136] Cognitive function speed score = average of the right hand in FTT + average of the left hand in FTT + correct responses in SDC

[0137] The following is an overview of the Finger Tapping Test (FTT). Tap the space bar as quickly as possible with the index fingers of the right and left hands for 10 seconds respectively.

[0138] The following is an overview of the SDC Test (SDC). A legend showing 8 symbols and corresponding numbers is displayed at the upper part of the screen, and a table consisting of 8 figures and 8 blank columns is displayed at the lower part. The subject inputs the numbers corresponding to the symbols into the empty table below.

[0139] The processing speed in the present invention is an index of the ability to quickly process information.

[0140] In addition, the processing speed in the present invention means the intellectual function measured by the SDC Test (SDC) in the Cognitrax examination. Specifically, it is defined as the score measured by the following calculation formula in the Cognitrax examination.

[0141] Processing speed score = correct responses in SDC - incorrect responses in SDC

[0142] The neurocognitive function in the invention of this application refers to the general intellectual function that comprehensively integrates a wide range of functional areas such as memory, cognitive function speed, executive function, attention, and cognitive flexibility.

[0143] In addition, the neurocognitive function in the invention of this application means a function that can be objectively measured by using the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (hereinafter sometimes referred to as NCI) in the Cognitrax examination. The calculation method of the NCI standardized score will be described below.

[0144] To calculate the NCI standardized score, the scores of the following 5 cognitive functions need to be calculated: comprehensive memory, cognitive function speed, reaction time, comprehensive attention, and cognitive flexibility. Among them, comprehensive memory, cognitive function speed, comprehensive attention, and cognitive flexibility are the same as those described above.

[0145] The reaction time in the invention of this application is an index of the ability to quickly respond to instructions.

[0146] In addition, the reaction time in the invention of this application means an intellectual function measured by the Stroop test (ST) in the Cognitrax examination. Specifically, it is defined as the score measured by the following calculation formula in the Cognitrax examination.

[0147] Reaction time score = (Compound reaction time (correct answer) of ST + Stroop reaction time (correct answer) of ST) / 2

[0148] By the following method, the scores of each cognitive function are converted into standardized scores. Standardized score: Calculate the standard score under the normal distribution with an average value of 100 and a standard deviation value of 15 according to the measured value. In addition, during the calculation, age correction is performed in one-year age groups with 5 years as a segment. For example, if the measured value is the same as the average value of the same age group, the standardized score is 100 points; if it is 1σ better than the average value, the standardized score is 115 points; if it is 2σ better than the average value, the standardized score is 130 points.

[0149] Regarding the standardized score of NCI, which is an index of the general intellectual function that comprehensively integrates a wide range of functional areas such as memory, cognitive function speed, executive function, attention, and cognitive flexibility, it is calculated by using the following calculation formula.

[0150] NCI standardized score = (Comprehensive memory standardized score + Cognitive function speed standardized score + Reaction time standardized score + Comprehensive attention standardized score + Cognitive flexibility standardized score) / 5

[0151] A healthy person in the invention of this application refers to a person who has not suffered from a disease that damages cognitive function. In this application specification, diseases that damage cognitive function refer to the following diseases.

[0152] Central nervous system degenerative diseases: Alzheimer's dementia, frontotemporal dementia, Lewy body dementia / Parkinson's disease, progressive supranuclear palsy, corticobasal degeneration, Huntington's disease, argyrophilic grain dementia, neurofibrillary change senile dementia.

[0153] Vascular dementia: multi-infarct dementia, vascular dementia caused by a single lesion in a critical area, small vessel disease dementia, hypoperfusion vascular dementia, hemorrhagic vascular dementia, chronic subdural hematoma.

[0154] Brain tumors: primary brain tumors, metastatic brain tumors, carcinomatous meningitis.

[0155] Normal pressure hydrocephalus.

[0156] Head trauma.

[0157] Hypoxic encephalopathy.

[0158] Nervous system infections: acute viral encephalitis (herpes simplex encephalitis, Japanese encephalitis, etc.), HIV infection (AIDS), Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, subacute sclerosing panencephalitis / subacute rubella panencephalitis, progressive paralysis (neurosyphilis), acute suppurative meningitis, subacute / chronic meningitis (tuberculosis, fungal), brain abscess, cerebral parasites.

[0159] Visceral organ failure and related diseases: renal failure, dialysis encephalopathy, liver failure, portosystemic shunt, chronic heart failure, chronic respiratory failure.

[0160] Endocrine dysfunction and related diseases: hypothyroidism, hypopituitarism, adrenocortical hypofunction, hyperparathyroidism or hypoparathyroidism, Cushing's syndrome, recurrent hypoglycemia.

[0161] Deficiency diseases / toxic diseases / metabolic diseases: alcoholism, Marchiafava-Bignami disease, carbon monoxide poisoning, vitamin B1 deficiency (Wernicke-Korsakoff syndrome), vitamin B12 deficiency, vitamin D deficiency, folic acid deficiency, niacin deficiency (pellagra), drug poisoning, metal poisoning (mercury, manganese, lead, etc.), Wilson's disease, late-onset urea cycle enzyme deficiency.

[0162] Autoimmune diseases such as demyelinating diseases: multiple sclerosis, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, Behcet's disease, Sjogren's syndrome.

[0163] Storage diseases: late-onset sphingolipidosis, adrenoleukodystrophy, cerebrotendinous xanthomatosis, neuronal ceroid lipofuscinosis, diabetes.

[0164] Other diseases: mitochondrial encephalomyopathy, progressive muscular dystrophy, Fahr's disease.

[0165] The agent of the present invention contains uridylic acid as an active ingredient. From the viewpoints of safety as a food, etc. and easy absorption by the body, uridylic acid is suitable as the active ingredient of the present invention.

[0166] Uridylic acid (uridine 5′-phosphate, UMP) is a compound with a CAS registration number of 58-97-9. When described as uridylic acid in this specification, the concept also includes salts of uridylic acid.

[0167] In this specification, when expressing the mass of uridylic acid, it means the mass converted to uridylic acid disodium salt (UMP,2Na). When expressing the concentration (%) of uridylic acid, unless otherwise specified, it is the mass / volume percentage concentration (w / v%), and the mass of UMP,2Na converted mass is used as the mass of uridylic acid. When selecting a salt other than disodium salt, or in the case of a free acid that does not form a salt, based on the amount of substance of uridylic acid, it is the mass converted to UMP,2Na.

[0168] The concept of uridylic acid in the present invention includes salts as described above. Examples of salts of uridylic acid include: alkali metal salts such as sodium salts and potassium salts; alkaline earth metal salts such as calcium salts, magnesium salts, and barium salts; basic amino acid salts such as arginine and lysine; ammonium salts such as ammonium salts and tricyclohexylammonium salts; various alkanolamine salts such as monoethanolamine salt, diethanolamine salt, triethanolamine salt, monoisopropanolamine salt, diisopropanolamine salt, and triisopropanolamine salt, etc. The salt of uridylic acid is preferably an alkali metal salt such as a sodium salt. As the alkali metal salt of this uridylic acid, specifically, uridylic acid 1-sodium and uridylic acid 2-sodium can be exemplified, and among them, uridylic acid 2-sodium is preferred from the aspect of ease of operation.

[0169] The uridylic acid used in the present invention can be used in combination with other active ingredients or can be used alone. Among them, since uridylic acid alone exhibits a significant comprehensive memory improvement effect, it is preferably used alone.

[0170] The source of the uridylic acid used in the present invention is not particularly limited, and it is preferably from natural products such as yeast, bacteria, fish and shellfish, animals, and plants.

[0171] The agent of the present invention can be put into practical use as a supplement, or as an additive (raw material) for compositions such as food and drink products, formulated milk powder, enteral nutritional agents, health food and drink products (including foods for specified health use, functionally labeled foods), pharmaceuticals, etc.

[0172] When the agent of the present invention is used in food and drink products, health food and drink products, or formulated milk powder, etc., a food and drink product, etc. having a comprehensive memory improvement effect can be prepared by appropriately adding the agent of the present invention to known food and drink products, etc. Examples of the food and drink products as the target can include milk / dairy products, seasonings, beverages, confectioneries, breads, noodles, oils and fats, processed meat products, processed fishery products, processed agricultural products, frozen foods, convenience foods, etc.

[0173] In addition, it can also be mixed into the raw materials of food and drink products to manufacture new food and drink products having a comprehensive memory improvement effect. Regarding the shape of the food and drink products as the target, various shapes such as tablet shape, granular shape, capsule shape, powder shape, solution shape, syrup shape, milk shape, paste shape, etc. can be selected. In the manufacture of these food and drink products, various excipients, flavoring components, etc. that can be used as foods can be appropriately added in addition to the active ingredient of the present invention.

[0174] The food and drink product can be provided and sold as a food and drink product labeled with the health use of improving comprehensive memory. The "labeling" act includes all acts aimed at informing consumers of the said use, and as long as it is an expression that can make people associate and infer the said use, regardless of the purpose of labeling, the content of labeling, the object of labeling, the medium, etc., it belongs to the "labeling" act of the present technology.

[0175] The said "labeling" is preferably carried out by a form of expression that allows consumers to directly recognize the above use. Specifically, it can include: acts of transferring, delivering, displaying for the purpose of transfer or delivery, importing a commodity or commodity package related to food and drink products that records the said use; acts of displaying or publishing an advertisement, price list or transaction document related to the commodity that records the above use, or recording the above use in the information having them as the content and providing it by electromagnetic (Internet, etc.) methods, etc.

[0176] As the labeling content, it is preferably a labeling approved by the government, etc. (for example, a labeling approved based on various systems formulated by the government and carried out in a manner based on such approval, etc.). In addition, it is preferable to attach such labeling content to sales site promotional materials such as packages, containers, product catalogs, brochures, POPs, and other documents.

[0177] In addition, when the agent of the present invention is put into actual use as a supplement or added to pharmaceuticals, enteral nutritional agents, etc., the agent of the present invention can be formulated alone, or the agent of the present invention can be formulated together with other components such as pharmaceutical adjuvants. As the administration method of the preparation, it can be oral administration or parenteral administration, but oral administration or enteral administration is preferred.

[0178] As the shape of the preparation, for oral administration, it can be made into tablets, granules, capsules, instant granules, powders, solutions, syrups, emulsions, etc., and for parenteral administration, it can be made into injections, sprays, ointments, patches, etc.

[0179] In the preparation, in addition to the active ingredient of the present invention, any pharmaceutical adjuvants such as excipients, binders, disintegrants, lubricants, flavoring agents, solubilizers, suspending agents, coating agents, etc. can be appropriately combined and used according to their respective administration forms.

[0180] The mixing (addition) amount of the active ingredient in the agent of the present invention can be appropriately selected from the range of 0.1 to 99% (W / W) according to the purpose of use, the age of the subject, the administration or intake method, the dosage form, etc.

[0181] The content of uridine monophosphate in the agent of the present invention can be appropriately set. As the daily uridine monophosphate dose (administered amount) (or intake amount), 10 mg to 1000 mg can be exemplified. As can be seen from the examples described later, as the uridine monophosphate increases, the improvement effect of comprehensive memory has a tendency to increase. Therefore, the uridine monophosphate dose is preferably 50 mg or more, more preferably 100 mg or more, further preferably 150 mg or more, still further preferably 200 mg or more, still further preferably 300 mg or more, still further preferably 400 mg or more, still further preferably 450 mg or more, particularly preferably 500 mg or more, and most preferably 600 mg or more. From the perspective of the high comprehensive memory improvement effect confirmed in the examples described later, a range of about 300 mg and / or 600 mg is preferred, more preferably a range of about 600 mg, further preferably 450 mg to less than 750 mg, still further preferably 500 mg to 700 mg, particularly preferably 550 mg to 650 mg, and most preferably 600 mg.

[0182] Regarding the administration or intake period of the agent of the present invention, there is no particular limitation. However, since uridine monophosphate contained as an active ingredient has high safety as a food, etc., it is preferably administered or ingested continuously. As a suitable administration or intake period, it is preferably 1 week or more, more preferably 2 weeks or more, further preferably 4 weeks or more, still further preferably 8 weeks or more, and particularly preferably 12 weeks or more from the aspect of the effect confirmed in the examples described later.

[0183] The subjects whose overall memory is improved by the agent of the present invention are healthy individuals who do not suffer from diseases that cause cognitive decline, such as dementia.

[0184] Regarding the subjects whose overall memory is improved by the agent of the present invention, from the perspective that the present invention has an effect of improving overall memory even on those who do not show cognitive decline associated with aging, it is preferably a person who does not show symptoms of normal age-related cognitive decline (physiological forgetfulness), more preferably a person less than 60 years old who has a high probability of not having normal age-related cognitive decline (physiological forgetfulness). From the perspective that a significant (obvious) and clear improvement effect of overall memory can be observed as is clear from the examples described later, it is further preferably a person in their 40s and 50s.

[0185] The dosage or intake of the agent of the present invention varies depending on the age, weight, overall memory level, verbal memory level, desired cognitive function area, etc. of the subject, and thus can be appropriately selected.

[0186] Regarding the cognitive function areas that are expected to be improved together with overall memory by the present invention, examples include executive function, cognitive flexibility, divided attention, working memory, processing speed, and cognitive function speed. It is preferred that overall memory and one or more of the above-exemplified cognitive function areas are improved simultaneously, more preferably two or more of them are improved, further preferably three or more of them are improved, and particularly preferably four or more of them are improved. Furthermore, it is more preferred that the NCI, which is a comprehensive index of neurocognitive function, is improved.

[0187] The following exemplifies specific combinations of the dosage or intake of the agent of the present invention, the age of the subject, the overall memory level, the verbal memory level, the desired cognitive function area, etc.

[0188] As confirmed in Example 2-1 described later, when the daily dose or intake of uridine is 450 mg to less than 750 mg for healthy subjects, the overall memory of healthy subjects is significantly improved in a medically significant manner and can be determined to have a significant difference. At this dose or intake, as described in Examples 2-2 to 2-6 later, while improving overall memory, it is expected to improve executive function, cognitive flexibility, processing speed, and neurocognitive function. Since the effects were confirmed in the examples, from the perspective of being able to more reliably expect the effects, the daily dose or intake of uridine is preferably 500 mg to 700 mg, more preferably 550 mg to 650 mg, and further preferably 600 mg.

[0189] As confirmed in Example 2-1 described below, when the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate for healthy subjects is 150 mg to less than 450 mg, the comprehensive memory of healthy subjects is improved. At this dose or intake, as described in Examples 2-2 to 2-6 below, while improving the comprehensive memory, it is expected to improve executive function, cognitive flexibility, working memory, and neurocognitive function. Since the effects were confirmed in the examples, from the viewpoint of being able to more reliably expect the effects, the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate is preferably 200 mg to 400 mg, more preferably 250 mg to 350 mg, and further preferably 300 mg.

[0190] As confirmed in Example 3-1 described below, when the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate for healthy subjects less than 60 years old is 450 mg to less than 750 mg, the comprehensive memory of healthy subjects less than 60 years old is significantly improved with medical significance and can be determined to have a significant trend. At this dose or intake, as described in Examples 3-2 to 3-7 below, while improving the comprehensive memory, it is expected to improve executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, processing speed, and neurocognitive function. Since the effects were confirmed in the examples, from the viewpoint of being able to more reliably expect the effects, the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate is preferably 500 mg to 700 mg, more preferably 550 mg to 650 mg, and further preferably 600 mg.

[0191] As confirmed in Example 3-1 described below, when the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate for healthy subjects less than 60 years old is 150 mg to less than 450 mg, the comprehensive memory of healthy subjects less than 60 years old is improved. At this dose or intake, as described in Examples 2-2 to 2-6 below, while improving the comprehensive memory, it is expected to improve executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, working memory, processing speed, and neurocognitive function. Among them, for cognitive flexibility and neurocognitive function, it can be determined to have a significant difference or significant trend and is clearly improved. Since the effects were confirmed in the examples, from the viewpoint of being able to more reliably expect the effects, the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate is preferably 200 mg to 400 mg, more preferably 250 mg to 350 mg, and further preferably 300 mg.

[0192] As confirmed in Example 4-1 described below, for healthy subjects with a standardized score of comprehensive memory before administration or ingestion of uridine monophosphate less than 90 points, when the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate is 450 mg to less than 750 mg, the comprehensive memory is significantly improved with medical significance and can be determined to have a significant trend of improvement. At this dose or intake, as described in Examples 4-2 to 4-6 below, while improving the comprehensive memory, it is expected to improve executive function, cognitive flexibility, working memory, and neurocognitive function, etc. Since the effects were confirmed in the examples, from the perspective of being able to more reliably expect the effects, as the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate, it is preferably 500 mg to 700 mg, more preferably 550 mg to 650 mg, and further preferably 600 mg.

[0193] As confirmed in Example 4-1 described below, for healthy subjects with a standardized score of comprehensive memory before administration or ingestion of uridine monophosphate less than 90 points, when the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate is 150 mg to less than 450 mg, the comprehensive memory is significantly improved with medical significance. At this dose or intake, as described in Examples 4-2 to 4-6 below, while improving the comprehensive memory, it is expected to improve executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, working memory, and neurocognitive function, etc. Among them, regarding executive function and cognitive flexibility, they are significantly improved with medical significance and can be determined to have a significant difference. Since the effects were confirmed in the examples, from the perspective of being able to more reliably expect the effects, as the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate, it is preferably 200 mg to 400 mg, more preferably 250 mg to 350 mg, and further preferably 300 mg.

[0194] As confirmed in Example 5-1 described below, for healthy subjects with a standardized score of comprehensive memory before administration or ingestion of uridine monophosphate less than 83.5 points, when the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate is 450 mg to less than 750 mg, the comprehensive memory is significantly improved with medical significance and can be determined to have a significant difference. At this dose or intake, as described in Examples 5-2 to 5-5 below, while improving the comprehensive memory, it is expected to improve executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, and neurocognitive function. Since the effects were confirmed in the examples, from the perspective of being able to more reliably expect the effects, as the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate, it is preferably 500 mg to 700 mg, more preferably 550 mg to 650 mg, and further preferably 600 mg.

[0195] As confirmed in Example 5-1 described below, for healthy subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 points before administration or ingestion of uridine monophosphate, when the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate is 150 mg to less than 450 mg, the comprehensive memory is significantly improved in a medically meaningful way and can be determined to have a significant difference. At this dose or intake, as described in Examples 5-2 to 5-5 below, while improving the comprehensive memory, significant improvements can be expected in executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, and neurocognitive function, which can be determined to have a significant difference or a significant trend. Furthermore, focusing on comprehensive memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, and comprehensive attention, there are significant improvements in a medically meaningful way and can be determined to have a significant difference or a significant trend. Since the effects were confirmed in the examples, from the perspective of being able to more reliably expect the effects, as the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate, it is preferably 200 mg to 400 mg, more preferably 250 mg to 350 mg, and further preferably 300 mg.

[0196] As confirmed in Example 6-1 described below, for healthy subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points and less than 60 years old before administration or ingestion of uridine monophosphate, when the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate is 450 mg to less than 750 mg, the comprehensive memory is significantly improved in a medically meaningful way. At this dose or intake, as described in Examples 6-2 to 6-6 below, while improving the comprehensive memory, improvements in executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, processing speed, and neurocognitive function are expected. Since the effects were confirmed in the examples, from the perspective of being able to more reliably expect the effects, as the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate, it is preferably 500 mg to 700 mg, more preferably 550 mg to 650 mg, and further preferably 600 mg.

[0197] As confirmed in Example 6-1 described below, for healthy subjects under 60 years old with a standardized score of comprehensive memory before administration or ingestion of uridine monophosphate less than 90 points, when the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate is 150 mg to less than 450 mg, the comprehensive memory is significantly improved with medical significance. At this dose or intake, as described in Examples 6-2 to 6-6 below, while improving the comprehensive memory, it is expected to improve executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, and neurocognitive function. Among them, for executive function, cognitive flexibility, and neurocognitive function, it can be determined that there is a significant difference and thus a clear improvement. Since the effects were confirmed in the examples, from the viewpoint of being able to more reliably expect the effects, as the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate, it is preferably 200 mg to 400 mg, more preferably 250 mg to 350 mg, and further preferably 300 mg.

[0198] As confirmed in Example 7-1 described below, for healthy subjects under 60 years old with a standardized score of comprehensive memory before administration or ingestion of uridine monophosphate less than 83.5 points, when the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate is 450 mg to less than 750 mg, the comprehensive memory is improved. At this dose or intake, as described in Examples 7-2 to 7-5 below, while improving the comprehensive memory, it is expected to improve executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, and neurocognitive function. Since the effects were confirmed in the examples, from the viewpoint of being able to more reliably expect the effects, as the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate, it is preferably 500 mg to 700 mg, more preferably 550 mg to 650 mg, and further preferably 600 mg.

[0199] As confirmed in Example 7-1 described below, for healthy subjects under 60 years old with a standardized score of comprehensive memory before administration or ingestion of uridine monophosphate less than 83.5 points, when the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate is 150 mg to less than 450 mg, the comprehensive memory is improved. At this dose or intake, as described in Examples 7-2 to 7-5 below, while improving the comprehensive memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, and neurocognitive function can be determined to have a significant difference and thus a clear improvement. Since the effects were confirmed in the examples, from the viewpoint of being able to more reliably expect the effects, as the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate, it is preferably 200 mg to 400 mg, more preferably 250 mg to 350 mg, and further preferably 300 mg.

[0200] As confirmed in Example 8-1 described below, for healthy subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of 90 or more and less than 100 before administration or ingestion of uridylic acid, when the daily dose or intake of uridylic acid is 450 mg to less than 750 mg, the comprehensive memory is improved. At this dose or intake, as described in Examples 8-2 to 8-4 below, while improving the comprehensive memory, it is expected to improve the processing speed, cognitive function speed, and neurocognitive function. Since the effects were confirmed in the examples, from the viewpoint of being able to more reliably expect the effects, as the daily dose or intake of uridylic acid, it is preferably 500 mg to 700 mg, more preferably 550 mg to 650 mg, and further preferably 600 mg.

[0201] As confirmed in Example 8-1 described below, for healthy subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of 90 or more and less than 100 before administration or ingestion of uridylic acid, when the daily dose or intake of uridylic acid is 150 mg to less than 450 mg, the comprehensive memory is improved. At this dose or intake, as described in Examples 8-2 to 8-4 below, while improving the comprehensive memory, it is expected to improve the processing speed, cognitive function speed, and neurocognitive function. Since the effects were confirmed in the examples, from the viewpoint of being able to more reliably expect the effects, as the daily dose or intake of uridylic acid, it is preferably 200 mg to 400 mg, more preferably 250 mg to 350 mg, and further preferably 300 mg.

[0202] As confirmed in Example 9-1 described below, for healthy subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of 90 or more and less than 100 and less than 60 years old before administration or ingestion of uridylic acid, when the daily dose or intake of uridylic acid is 450 mg to less than 750 mg, the comprehensive memory is improved. At this dose or intake, as described in Examples 9-2 to 9-7 below, while improving the comprehensive memory, it is expected to improve the executive function, comprehensive attention, working memory, processing speed, cognitive function speed, and neurocognitive function. Since the effects were confirmed in the examples, from the viewpoint of being able to more reliably expect the effects, as the daily dose or intake of uridylic acid, it is preferably 500 mg to 700 mg, more preferably 550 mg to 650 mg, and further preferably 600 mg.

[0203] As confirmed in Example 9-1 described below, for healthy subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100 before administration or ingestion of uridine monophosphate and less than 60 years old, when the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate is 150 mg to less than 450 mg, the comprehensive memory is improved. At this dose or intake, as described in Examples 9-2 to 9-7 below, while improving the comprehensive memory, it is expected to improve executive function, comprehensive attention, working memory, processing speed, cognitive function speed, and neurocognitive function. Since the effects were confirmed in the examples, from the viewpoint of being able to more reliably expect the effects, as the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate, it is preferably 200 mg to 400 mg, more preferably 250 mg to 350 mg, and further preferably 300 mg.

[0204] As confirmed in Example 10-1 described below, for healthy subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 before administration or ingestion of uridine monophosphate, when the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate is 450 mg to less than 750 mg, the comprehensive memory is significantly improved with medical significance and can be determined to have a significant trend. At this dose or intake, as described in Examples 10-2 to 10-6 below, while improving the comprehensive memory, it is expected to improve executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, processing speed, and neurocognitive function. Since the effects were confirmed in the examples, from the viewpoint of being able to more reliably expect the effects, as the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate, it is preferably 500 mg to 700 mg, more preferably 550 mg to 650 mg, and further preferably 600 mg.

[0205] As confirmed in Example 10-1 described below, for healthy subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 before administration or ingestion of uridine monophosphate, when the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate is 150 mg to less than 450 mg, the comprehensive memory is improved. At this dose or intake, as described in Examples 10-2 to 10-6 below, while improving the comprehensive memory, it is expected to improve executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, working memory, and neurocognitive function. Since the effects were confirmed in the examples, from the viewpoint of being able to more reliably expect the effects, as the daily dose or intake of uridine monophosphate, it is preferably 200 mg to 400 mg, more preferably 250 mg to 350 mg, and further preferably 300 mg.

[0206] Regarding the effects of the invention of the present application, from the viewpoint of the improvement effect of comprehensive memory, it is summarized as follows.

[0207] As described later, in Example 2-1 where all subjects were analyzed, the change amount of the comprehensive memory standardized score was greater than that of the placebo group. Therefore, the invention of the present application widely shows the effect of improving comprehensive memory regardless of the attributes of the subjects. In the analysis of the subgroups of subjects in Examples 3-1 to 10-1 described later, this effect is also supported because the change amount of the comprehensive memory standardized score is greater than that of the placebo group.

[0208] Among them, according to the results of the examples described later, the invention of the present application can medically improve comprehensive memory under the following attributes of the subjects and / or uridine monophosphate intake.

[0209] All subjects: 450 mg to less than 750 mg

[0210] Less than 60 years old: 450 mg to less than 750 mg

[0211] Comprehensive memory standardized score before UMP intake is less than 90 points: 450 mg to less than 750 mg or 150 mg to less than 450 mg

[0212] Comprehensive memory standardized score before UMP intake is less than 83.5 points: 450 mg to less than 750 mg or 150 mg to less than 450 mg

[0213] Less than 60 years old and comprehensive memory standardized score before UMP intake is less than 90 points: 450 mg to less than 750 mg or 150 mg to less than 450 mg

[0214] Less than 60 years old and comprehensive memory standardized score before UMP intake is less than 83.5 points: 450 mg to less than 750 mg or 150 mg to less than 450 mg

[0215] Verbal memory standardized score before UMP intake is less than 90 points: 450 mg to less than 750 mg

[0216] Among them, according to the results of the examples described later, the invention of the present application can medically and significantly improve comprehensive memory under the following attributes of the subjects and / or uridine monophosphate intake, and can be determined to have a significant difference or a significant trend so clearly.

[0217] All subjects: 450 mg to less than 750 mg

[0218] Less than 60 years old: 450 mg to less than 750 mg

[0219] Comprehensive memory standardized score before UMP intake is less than 90 points: 450 mg to less than 750 mg

[0220] The standardized comprehensive memory score before UMP intake is less than 83.5 points: 450 mg to less than 750 mg or 150 mg to less than 450 mg

[0221] The standardized verbal memory score before UMP intake is less than 90 points: 450 mg to less than 750 mg

[0222] One aspect of the invention of the present application is a method for improving the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals. As confirmed in the embodiments described below, the invention of the present application can improve the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals.

[0223] Examples

[0224] Hereinafter, the invention of the present application will be described by way of examples and the like, but the invention of the present application is not limited by any of them.

[0225] (Example 1) Screening of test subjects and allocation to subgroups

[0226] In order to test the effect of uridine monophosphate on improving comprehensive memory, the screening of test subjects and the allocation to subgroups were carried out according to the following steps.

[0227] [Screening of test subjects]

[0228] As test subjects, 200 people who met the three conditions of Japanese (male and female), over 40 years old, and healthy were excluded from those who were considered unsuitable to participate in this test (for example: those who had ingested foods or supplements such as DHA / EPA, ginkgo biloba extract, tocotrienols, astaxanthin, GABA, phosphatidylserine, plasmalogens, etc. that might affect cognitive function; those who were using instruments, equipment, applications, etc. that might affect cognitive function; those who regularly took pharmaceuticals (including Chinese herbal medicines), supplements; pregnant women, lactating women, or those who intended to become pregnant during the test period, etc.), and 99 test subjects were selected.

[0229] [Allocation of test food group and placebo group]

[0230] The test subjects were allocated to 3 groups in such a way that the attributes of each age group, gender, etc. were as equal as possible, with 33 subjects in each group. Due to dropouts or violations of the protocol after allocation, 3 subjects were excluded from each group, and finally 30 subjects in each group became the analysis objects. The subjects allocated to test food group 1 were given foods containing 5'-UMP (4 capsules per day). The subjects allocated to test food group 2 were given foods containing 5'-UMP (2 capsules per day) and placebo (2 capsules per day). The subjects allocated to the placebo group were given placebo (4 capsules per day). The composition tables of the test food and placebo are shown in Table 1 below. The subjects ingested the allocated foods together with cold water or warm water at breakfast. This food intake was continued for 12 weeks. In addition, this test was carried out in a double-blind manner.

[0231] [Table 1]

[0232]

[0233] In addition, in the following description, the test food group 1 is sometimes denoted as the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg, and the test food group 2 is denoted as the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg.

[0234] [Implementation of Cognitive Function Tests]

[0235] Using the Cognitrax test, a cognitive function test service designed for Japan based on the cognitive function test technology developed by CNS Vital Signs, Inc., 10 tests were implemented (Verbal Memory Test (VBM), Visual Memory Test (VIM), Finger Tapping Test (FTT), SDC Test (SDC), Stroop Test (ST), Attention Switching Test (SAT), Continuous Performance Test (CPT), Four-Part Continuous Performance Test (FPCPT), Picture Object Episodic Memory Test (POET), Non-Verbal Reasoning Test (NVRT)). In the description of this application, regarding the content of the Cognitrax test, the content described in the following literature is also referred to.

[0236] CNS Vital Signs LLC. CNS Vital Signs Interpretation Guide. 2019.

[0237] [Calculation of Scores for Each Region]

[0238] According to the description in the literature that outlines the Cognitrax test as described above, based on the results of the 10 tests implemented, the following 8 regional scores and 1 comprehensive score for neurocognitive function were calculated: Composite Memory, Executive Function, Cognitive Flexibility, Composite Attention, Working Memory, Processing Speed, Cognitive Function Speed, Reaction Time, Neurocognitive Index (NCI). In addition, the calculation methods for each regional score are as follows.

[0239] [Calculation of Composite Memory Score]

[0240] Regarding the Composite Memory, which is an index of conventional memory that combines verbal memory and visual memory, it is calculated using the following formula.

[0241] Composite memory score = Number of correct hits in VBM (immediate) + Number of correct passes in VBM (immediate) + Number of correct hits in VBM (delayed) + Number of correct passes in VBM (delayed) + Number of correct hits in VIM (immediate) + Number of correct passes in VIM (immediate) + Number of correct hits in VIM (delayed) + Number of correct passes in VIM (delayed)

[0242] The following explains the outline of the Verbal Memory Test (VBM). First, 15 words are shown and remembered, and then the remembered words are found from 30 words that also include new words.

[0243] The following explains the outline of the Visual Memory Test (VIM). First, 15 kinds of figures are shown and remembered, and then the remembered figures are found from 30 figures that also include new figures.

[0244] [Calculation of executive function score]

[0245] Regarding the executive function that is an indicator of the ability to understand rules, concepts, and make decisions, it is calculated by the following formula.

[0246] Executive function score = Correct responses in SAT - Incorrect responses in SAT

[0247] The following explains the outline of the Switching Attention Test (SAT). Three figures are shown on the screen, one on top and two at the bottom. The figures are squares or circles, and the colors are red or blue. Select the figure from the bottom that matches the figure on the top, and the rule changes to the case where "shape" matches or "color" is the same.

[0248] [Calculation of cognitive flexibility score]

[0249] Regarding cognitive flexibility, which is an indicator of the ability to flexibly change one's mind in response to stimuli from the external environment, it is calculated by the following formula.

[0250] Cognitive flexibility score = Correct responses in SAT - Incorrect responses in SAT - Stroop incorrect responses in ST

[0251] [Calculation of working memory score]

[0252] Regarding the working memory score of the subject, it is measured by the following formula.

[0253] Working memory score = Correct responses in the 4th part of FPCPT - Incorrect responses in the 4th part of FPCPT

[0254] The following describes the outline of the Four-Part Continuous Performance Test (FPCPT). The FPCPT is a test consisting of four parts. In the first part, press the space bar as quickly as possible when a figure appears on the screen. In the second part, press the space bar as quickly as possible when a green circle appears on the screen. In the third part, figures are displayed using combinations of figure elements (circle, triangle, square, star) and color elements (red, blue, yellow, green), and answer the previously displayed figure. In the fourth part, figures are displayed using combinations of figure elements (circle, triangle, square, star) and color elements (red, blue, yellow, green), and answer the figure displayed two before the previous one.

[0255] [Calculation of the Composite Attention Score]

[0256] Regarding the composite attention, which is an indicator of the ability to maintain attention and respond accurately, it is calculated by the following formula.

[0257] Composite Attention Score = Stroop Incorrect Responses in ST + Incorrect Answers in SAT + Incorrect Responses in CPT + Number of Missed Correct Answers in CPT

[0258] In addition, regarding this indicator, the lower the value, the higher the composite attention, and the higher the value, the lower the composite attention.

[0259] The following describes the outline of the Continuous Performance Test (CPT). Within 5 minutes, words are randomly displayed on the screen, and respond only when the letter "B" appears.

[0260] Regarding the processing speed, which is an indicator of the ability to process information quickly, it is calculated by the following formula.

[0261] (Processing Speed Score) = (Correct Responses in SDC) - (Incorrect Answers in SDC)

[0262] The following describes the outline of the Symbol-Digit Coding Test (SDC). A legend showing 8 symbols and their corresponding numbers is displayed at the top of the screen, and a table consisting of 8 figures and 8 blank columns is displayed at the bottom. The subject enters the number corresponding to the symbol into the empty table below.

[0263] [Calculation of the Cognitive Function Speed Score]

[0264] Regarding the cognitive function speed, which is an indicator of the ability to quickly perceive, act, and process visual information, it is calculated by the following formula.

[0265] (Cognitive Function Speed Score) = (Average of the Right Hand in FTT) + (Average of the Left Hand in FTT) + (Average of the Left Hand in SDC)

[0266] The following describes the outline of the Finger Tapping Test (FTT). Tap the space bar with the index finger of the right hand and the left hand as quickly as possible for 10 seconds respectively.

[0267] [Calculation of reaction time score]

[0268] Regarding the reaction time, which is an indicator of the ability to quickly respond to instructions, it is calculated by the following formula.

[0269] (Reaction time score) = (Compound reaction time (correct answer) of ST + Stroop reaction time (correct answer) of ST) / 2

[0270] The following describes the outline of the Stroop Test (ST). ST is a test composed of three parts. In the first part, press the space bar as quickly as possible when the text appears on the screen. In the second part, the words red, yellow, blue, and green are displayed in colored text, and press the space bar when the color of the text is the same as the meaning of the text. In the third part, press the space bar only when the color of the text is inconsistent with the meaning of the text.

[0271] [Method for standardizing each score]

[0272] By the following method, the measured values of each test and each index are converted into standardized scores.

[0273] Standardized score: Calculate the standard score under the normal distribution with an average value of 100 and a standard deviation value of 15 based on the measured value. In addition, during the calculation, age correction is performed in one-year age groups with 5 years as a segment. For example, if the measured value is the same as the average value of the same age group, the standardized score is 100 points. If it is 1σ better than the average value, the standardized score is 115 points. If it is 2σ better than the average value, the standardized score is 130 points. An increase or decrease of more than 10 points in the standardized score means that the cognitive function has improved or deteriorated medically significantly.

[0274] [Calculation of the standardized score of the Neurocognitive Index (NCI)]

[0275] Regarding the standardized score of the NCI, which is an indicator of the general intellectual function that comprehensively combines extensive functional areas such as memory, cognitive function speed, executive function, attention, and cognitive flexibility, it is calculated using the following formula.

[0276] NCI standardized score = (Comprehensive memory standardized score + Cognitive function speed standardized score + Reaction time standardized score + Comprehensive attention standardized score + Cognitive flexibility standardized score) / 5

[0277] [Statistical processing]

[0278] For the scores among the experimental groups obtained by the above method, the mean and standard deviation were calculated, and ANCOVA with the scores at the screening and pre-intake examination (baseline) as covariates was used for between-group comparison with the placebo group. All statistical analyses were performed by two-sided tests, and a p-value less than 0.05 was considered significant. The software used was Ver23 or higher of SPSS Statistics, and other validated statistical software was used as needed.

[0279] [Subgroup setting]

[0280] To analyze the results of this trial in detail, for those with a standardized comprehensive memory score below 90 points before UMP intake, those with a standardized comprehensive memory score below 83.5 points before UMP intake, subjects with a standardized verbal memory score below 90 points before the trial, subjects under 60 years old (in their 40s and 50s), and combinations of each attribute, the trial results were extracted separately and statistically processed by the same method as above. In Cognitrax, generally, a standardized comprehensive memory score below 90 points means a person with relatively low cognitive function related to memory. A standardized comprehensive memory score below 83.5 points means a person with quite low cognitive function related to memory. A standardized verbal memory score below 90 points means a person with relatively low cognitive function related to verbal memory. Regarding subjects under 60 years old (specifically those in their 40s and 50s), as described in Non-Patent Document 3, it refers to subjects in the age range where no decline in cognitive function associated with aging is observed.

[0281] (Example 2) Improvement effect of standardized scores in each cognitive region of all subjects

[0282] The improvement effects of the comprehensive memory and within each cognitive region of all subjects in this trial were verified.

[0283] (Example 2-1) Improvement effect of standardized comprehensive memory score for all ages (all age groups)

[0284] Regarding the comprehensive memory, which is an indicator of cognitive function related to memory, the change amount of the standardized comprehensive memory score of all subjects before and after the trial is shown in Figure 1 and Table 2.

[0285] [Table 2]

[0286]

[0287] In either the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) or the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized score of comprehensive memory before and after the test was greater compared to the placebo group.

[0288] Among them, in the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg), the increase in the standardized score of comprehensive memory before and after the test exceeded 13.0 of 10, which is regarded as medically significant, and the p-value was in the range of p < 0.05, which was determined to be significantly different.

[0289] Based on the results of this example, it is obvious that even alone, UMP shows an effect of improving comprehensive memory. Among the groups with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg, it is obvious that a significant and meaningful effect of improving comprehensive memory is shown.

[0290] (Example 2-2) Effect of improving the standardized score of executive function for all ages

[0291] The effect of improving executive function, which can be seen as an indicator of the ability to understand rules, concepts, and make decisions quickly, was studied.

[0292] Regarding the change in the standardized score of executive function of all the subjects before and after the test, it is shown in Figure 2 and Table 3.

[0293] [Table 3]

[0294]

[0295] When analyzing all the subjects, in the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a tendency for an increase in the change in the standardized score of executive function was observed compared to the placebo group.

[0296] When comparing the test food group 1 and the test food group 2, it is obvious that in the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the change is greater. In the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg, the change in the standardized score of executive function exceeded 10.

[0297] Based on the results of this example, it suggests the possibility of improving executive function by ingesting UMP. Furthermore, it suggests the possibility that a daily UMP intake of 300 mg shows a higher effect of improving executive function than an intake of 600 mg. In the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg, executive function was significantly improved with medical significance.

[0298] (Example 2-3) Improvement effect on the standardized score of cognitive flexibility across all ages

[0299] The improvement effect on cognitive flexibility, which can be seen as an indicator of the ability to flexibly change one's mind in response to stimuli from the external environment, was studied.

[0300] Regarding the change in the standardized score of cognitive flexibility of all the subjects before and after the test, the results are shown in Figure 3 and Table 4.

[0301] [Table 4]

[0302]

[0303] In the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a tendency for an increased change in the standardized score of cognitive flexibility was observed compared to the placebo group. Comparing the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg with the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg, it is obvious that the change is greater in the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg.

[0304] In the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg, the change in the standardized score of cognitive flexibility exceeded 10, which is regarded as having medical significance.

[0305] Based on the results of this example, the possibility of improving cognitive flexibility by ingesting UMP was suggested. Furthermore, the possibility that a daily UMP intake of 300 mg shows a higher improvement effect on cognitive flexibility than an intake of 600 mg was suggested. In the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg, cognitive flexibility was significantly improved with medical significance.

[0306] (Example 2-4) Improvement effect on the standardized score of working memory across all ages

[0307] The improvement effect on working memory, which can be seen as an indicator of the function of temporarily holding the required information according to variously changing purposes and performing other processing tasks in parallel, was studied.

[0308] Regarding the change in the standardized score of working memory of all the subjects before and after the test, the results are shown in Figure 4 and Table 5.

[0309] [Table 5]

[0310]

[0311] In the test food group 1 (the group with a UMP intake of 600 mg), compared with the placebo group, the increase in the standardized score of working memory before and after the test was small, and no improvement effect on working memory was observed. On the other hand, in the test food group 2 (the group with a UMP intake of 300 mg), compared with the placebo group, the increase in the standardized score of working memory before and after the test was large, and an improvement effect on working memory with a significant trend (p-value: 0.099) was observed.

[0312] Thus, it was confirmed that UMP has an effect of improving working memory, and a particularly strong effect of improving working memory is achieved when the daily intake is about 300 mg.

[0313] (Example 2-5) Improvement effect on the standardized score of processing speed for all ages

[0314] The improvement effect on the processing speed, which is an index of the ability to quickly process information, was studied.

[0315] Regarding the change in the standardized score of processing speed before and after the test for all the subjects, the results are shown in Figure 5 and Table 6.

[0316] [Table 6]

[0317]

[0318] In the test food group 1 (the group with a UMP intake of 600 mg), compared with the placebo group, an increase in the standardized score of processing speed before and after the test was observed.

[0319] Thus, it was confirmed that an effect of improving processing speed is achieved when the daily UMP intake is about 600 mg.

[0320] (Example 2-6) Improvement effect on the standardized score of neurocognitive index (NCI) for all ages

[0321] Regarding the NCI, which is an index of general intellectual function that comprehensively includes extensive functional areas such as memory, cognitive function speed, executive function, attention, and cognitive flexibility, the change in the standardized score of NCI for all the subjects before and after the test is shown in Figure 6 and Table 7.

[0322] [Table 7]

[0323]

[0324] In either of the test food groups 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), when compared with the placebo group, a tendency for an increased increase in the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) starting from the pre-intake examination was observed.

[0325] (Example 3) Improvement effect of the standardized score of each cognitive region in people under 60 years old

[0326] To verify what effects the invention of the present application would have on people who are not affected by age-related normal decline in cognitive function (physiological forgetfulness), an analysis was conducted focusing on subjects under 60 years old.

[0327] (Example 3-1) Improvement effect of the standardized score of the comprehensive memory in people under 60 years old

[0328] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of the comprehensive memory of people under 60 years old were extracted. The change amount of the standardized score of the comprehensive memory of the subjects under 60 years old before and after the test is shown in Figure 7 and Table 8.

[0329] [Table 8]

[0330]

[0331] In either of the test food groups 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), compared with the placebo group, the increase in the standardized score of the comprehensive memory before and after the test increased.

[0332] Especially in the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg), the increase in the standardized score of the comprehensive memory before and after the test was 13.1, which exceeded 10 considered to have medical significance, and the p-value was in the range of p < 0.10, which was judged to show a significant trend.

[0333] Based on the results of this example, it is obvious that UMP also shows an improvement effect on the comprehensive memory in people under 60 years old. Among them, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg, it is obvious that a significant and meaningful improvement effect on the comprehensive memory is shown.

[0334] (Example 3-2) Improvement effect of the standardized score of the executive function in people under 60 years old

[0335] In the tests conducted by the method described in Example 1, results related to the standardized scores of executive function of people under 60 years old were extracted. The change amounts of the standardized scores of executive function of subjects under 60 years old before and after the test are shown in Figure 8 and Table 9.

[0336] [Table 9]

[0337]

[0338] Even in the subgroup of people under 60 years old, in Test Food Group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and Test Food Group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a trend of an increased change amount of the standardized score of executive function was observed compared with the placebo group.

[0339] Comparing Test Food Group 1 and Test Food Group 2, it is obvious that in Test Food Group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the change amount is larger. In the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg, the increase amount of the standardized score of executive function is 11.7, which exceeds 10 considered to have medical significance.

[0340] Comparing the results of Example 2-2 with the results of this example, it is obvious that the increase range of the standardized score of executive function of the subgroup of people under 60 years old in this example is greater than that of all subjects in Example 2-2.

[0341] Thus, it is shown that UMP has a stronger effect on improving the executive function of subjects under 60 years old.

[0342] (Example 3-3) Improvement effect on the standardized score of cognitive flexibility of people under 60 years old

[0343] In the tests conducted by the method described in Example 1, results related to the standardized scores of cognitive flexibility of people under 60 years old were extracted. The change amounts of the standardized scores of cognitive flexibility of subjects under 60 years old before and after the test are shown in Figure 9 and Table 10.

[0344] [Table 10]

[0345]

[0346] When analyzing by subjects under 60 years old, in Test Food Group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and Test Food Group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a trend of an increased change amount of the standardized score of cognitive flexibility was observed compared with the placebo group.

[0347] Among them, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg among subjects under 60 years old, the increase in the standardized score of cognitive flexibility was 12.7, which exceeded 10 considered to have medical significance, and the p-value was in the range of p < 0.10, which was judged to show a significant trend.

[0348] Furthermore, comparing the results of Examples 2-3 with the results of this example, in both Test Food Groups 1 and 2, the p-values were significantly smaller, and the change amounts of the scores also increased.

[0349] Thus, it is shown that UMP has a better effect on improving the cognitive flexibility of subjects under 60 years old.

[0350] (Example 3-4) Improvement effect on the standardized score of comprehensive attention of people under 60 years old

[0351] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of comprehensive attention of people under 60 years old were extracted. The change amounts of the standardized scores of comprehensive attention of subjects under 60 years old before and after the test are shown in Figure 10 and Table 11.

[0352] [Table 11]

[0353]

[0354] Among subjects under 60 years old, regardless of whether it was Test Food Group 1 or Test Food Group 2, when compared with the placebo group, the change amounts of the standardized scores of comprehensive attention increased.

[0355] Among them, in Test Food Group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a significant improvement trend in comprehensive attention was observed.

[0356] Thus, it is shown that UMP has an improvement effect on the comprehensive attention of subjects under 60 years old.

[0357] (Example 3-5) Improvement effect on the standardized score of working memory of people under 60 years old

[0358] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of working memory of people under 60 years old were extracted. The change amounts of the standardized scores of working memory of subjects under 60 years old before and after the test are shown in Figure 11 and Table 12.

[0359] [Table 12]

[0360]

[0361] Among the subjects under 60 years old, in Test Food Group 2, when compared with the placebo group, the change amount of the standardized score of working memory increased.

[0362] Furthermore, when comparing the results of Examples 2 - 4 with the results of this example, the change amount of the standardized score of working memory in this example increased.

[0363] Thus, it was confirmed that UMP has a higher effect on improving the working memory of people under 60 years old, and has a particularly strong effect on improving working memory when the daily intake is about 300 mg.

[0364] (Examples 3 - 6) Improvement effect on the standardized score of processing speed of people under 60 years old

[0365] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of processing speed of people under 60 years old were extracted. The change amount of the standardized score of processing speed of the subjects under 60 years old before and after the test is shown in Figure 12 and Table 13.

[0366] [Table 13]

[0367]

[0368] Among the subjects under 60 years old, regardless of whether it is Test Food Group 1 or Test Food Group 2, when compared with the placebo group, the change amount of the standardized score of processing speed increased.

[0369] Among them, in Test Food Group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg), a significant improvement trend in processing speed was observed.

[0370] Thus, it was shown that UMP has an effect on improving the processing speed of subjects under 60 years old.

[0371] (Examples 3 - 7) Improvement effect on the standardized score of neurocognitive index (NCI) of people under 60 years old

[0372] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of neurocognitive index (NCI) of people under 60 years old were extracted. The change amount of the standardized score of neurocognitive index (NCI) of the subjects under 60 years old before and after the test is shown in Figure 13 and Table 14.

[0373] [Table 14]

[0374]

[0375] In either of the test food groups, Group 1 (with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and Group 2 (with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), when compared with the placebo group, a tendency for an increased increase in the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) was observed.

[0376] Particularly in the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg, a significant and meaningful (p-value: 0.033) improvement effect on the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) was observed.

[0377] Thus, it is obvious that the comprehensive memory improver of the present invention has a significant effect on people under 60 years old, specifically those in their 40s and 50s.

[0378] Among them, it is obvious that when the daily UMP intake is 300 mg, it has a significant and meaningful effect on healthy people under 60 years old.

[0379] (Example 4) Improvement effect on the standardized scores of each cognitive region of those with a comprehensive memory standardized score lower than 90 points

[0380] To verify the effect of the present invention on people with relatively low cognitive functions related to memory, an analysis was conducted focusing on subjects with a comprehensive memory standardized score lower than 90 points before UMP intake.

[0381] (Example 4-1) Improvement effect on the comprehensive memory standardized score of those with a comprehensive memory standardized score lower than 90 points

[0382] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the comprehensive memory standardized score of those with a comprehensive memory standardized score lower than 90 points before UMP intake were extracted. The change amount of the comprehensive memory standardized score before and after the test is shown in Figure 14 and Table 15.

[0383] [Table 15]

[0384]

[0385] In either of the test food groups, Group 1 (with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and Group 2 (with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), compared with the placebo group, the increase in the comprehensive memory standardized score before and after the test increased.

[0386] In the two groups of Test Food Group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and Test Food Group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized score of comprehensive memory before and after the test also exceeded 10, which is regarded as having medical significance. Especially in Test Food Group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg), the increase in the standardized score of comprehensive memory was 17.0, which greatly exceeded 10 regarded as having medical significance, and the p-value was in the range of p < 0.10, which was judged to have a significant trend.

[0387] Compared with the results of Example 2-1, in the two groups of Test Food Group 1 and 2, the increase in the standardized score of comprehensive memory became larger.

[0388] According to the results of this example, it is obvious that UMP shows a stronger improvement effect on comprehensive memory for those with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 90 points. Among them, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg, it is obvious that a significant and meaningful improvement effect on comprehensive memory is shown.

[0389] (Example 4-2) Improvement effect of the standardized score of executive function for those with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 90 points

[0390] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of executive function for those with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 90 points were extracted. The change amount of the standardized score of executive function before and after the test is shown in Figure 15 and Table 16.

[0391] [Table 16]

[0392]

[0393] Even in the subgroup with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 90 points, in Test Food Group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and Test Food Group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a trend of an increased change amount of the standardized score of executive function compared with the placebo group can be seen.

[0394] Comparing Test Food Group 1 with Test Food Group 2, it is obvious that in Test Food Group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the change amount is larger.

[0395] Among them, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg among the subjects with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 90 points, the increase amount of the standardized score of executive function was 16.0, which greatly exceeded 10 regarded as having medical significance, and the p-value was in the range of 0.05 ≤ p < 0.10, which was judged to show a significant trend.

[0396] Comparing the results of Example 2-2 with those of this example, it is obvious that the increase in the standardized score of executive function in the subgroup with a standardized comprehensive memory score below 90 points in this example is greater than the increase in the standardized score of executive function of all the subjects in Example 2-2.

[0397] Thus, it is shown that UMP has a better effect on improving the executive function of subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score below 90 points.

[0398] (Example 4-3) Improvement effect of the standardized score of cognitive flexibility in subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score below 90 points

[0399] In the experiment conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of cognitive flexibility of subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score below 90 points were extracted. The change amount of the standardized score of cognitive flexibility before and after the experiment is shown in Figure 16 and Table 17.

[0400] [Table 17]

[0401]

[0402] Even in the subgroup with a standardized comprehensive memory score below 90 points, in Test Food Group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and Test Food Group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a trend of an increased change amount of the standardized score of cognitive flexibility can be seen compared with the placebo group.

[0403] Among them, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg among subjects (all ages) with a standardized comprehensive memory score below 90 points, the increase amount of the standardized score of cognitive flexibility is 17.5, which is much higher than 10 considered to have medical significance, and the p-value is in the range of p < 0.05, which is judged to have a significant difference.

[0404] Furthermore, comparing the results of Example 2-3 with those of this example, in both Test Food Groups 1 and 2, the p-value becomes significantly smaller, and the change amount of the score also increases.

[0405] Thus, it is shown that UMP has a better effect on improving the cognitive flexibility of subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score below 90 points.

[0406] (Example 4-4) Improvement effect of the standardized score of comprehensive attention in subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score below 90 points

[0407] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized comprehensive attention scores of those with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points were extracted. The change amounts of the standardized comprehensive attention scores before and after the test are shown in Figure 17 and Table 18.

[0408] [Table 18]

[0409]

[0410] Even in the subgroup with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points, in Test Food Group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a tendency for an increase in the change amount of the standardized comprehensive attention score was observed as compared with the placebo group.

[0411] Thus, it was shown that UMP has an effect of improving comprehensive attention in subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points.

[0412] (Example 4 - 5) Effect of improving the standardized working memory score in those with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points

[0413] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized working memory scores of those with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points were extracted. The change amounts of the standardized working memory scores before and after the test are shown in Figure 18 and Table 19.

[0414] [Table 19]

[0415]

[0416] Even in the subgroup with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points, in Test Food Group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a tendency for an increase in the change amount of the standardized working memory score was observed as compared with the placebo group.

[0417] Thus, it was shown that UMP has an effect of improving working memory in subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points.

[0418] (Example 4 - 6) Effect of improving the standardized neurocognitive index (NCI) score in those with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points

[0419] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized neurocognitive index (NCI) scores of those with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points were extracted. The change amounts of the standardized neurocognitive index (NCI) scores before and after the test are shown in Figure 19 and Table 20.

[0420] [Table 20]

[0421]

[0422] In either the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) or the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), when compared with the placebo group, a tendency for an increased increase in the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) was observed.

[0423] Particularly in the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg, the change amount of the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) exceeded 10, which was evaluated as significantly improved with medical significance.

[0424] Thus, it was shown that UMP had a significant effect on improving the neurocognitive function in healthy subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points.

[0425] Among them, it was obvious that when the daily UMP intake was 300 mg, it had a significant effect on healthy subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points, and the neurocognitive function was significantly improved with medical significance.

[0426] (Example 5) Improvement effect of the standardized score of each cognitive region in subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 points

[0427] In order to verify the effect of the invention of the present application on people with a relatively low cognitive function related to memory, an analysis was carried out focusing on subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 points before UMP intake.

[0428] (Example 5-1) Improvement effect of the standardized comprehensive memory score in subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 points

[0429] In the test carried out by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized comprehensive memory score of subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 points before UMP intake were extracted. The change amount of the standardized comprehensive memory score before and after the test is shown in Figure 20 and Table 21.

[0430] [Table 21]

[0431]

[0432] In either the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) or the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), compared with the placebo group, the increase in the standardized comprehensive memory score before and after the test increased.

[0433] In the two groups of Test Food Group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and Test Food Group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized score of comprehensive memory before and after the test also significantly exceeded 10, which is regarded as having medical significance. Regarding the p-values of the two groups, they were also in the range of p < 0.05, which was determined to be significantly different.

[0434] When compared with the results of Examples 2-1 and 3-1, the increase in the standardized score of comprehensive memory became greater in both Test Food Group 1 and Test Food Group 2.

[0435] Based on the results of this example, it is obvious that UMP shows a significant and meaningful improvement effect on comprehensive memory for people under 60 years old with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 83.5 points.

[0436] (Example 5-2) Improvement effect of the standardized score of executive function for those with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 83.5 points

[0437] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of executive function of those with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 83.5 points before UMP intake were extracted. The change amount of the standardized score of executive function before and after the test is shown in Figure 21 and Table 22.

[0438] [Table 22]

[0439]

[0440] In Test Food Group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized score of comprehensive memory before and after the test was 21.2, which significantly exceeded 10, which is regarded as having medical significance. The p-value was in the range of p < 0.10, which was determined to show a significant trend.

[0441] Regarding Test Food Group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), when compared with the results of Examples 2-2 and 4-2, the increase in the standardized score of executive function became greater.

[0442] Based on the results of this example, it is obvious that for people with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 83.5 points, when the daily UMP intake is about 300 mg, UMP shows a significant and meaningful improvement effect on executive function. This effect is higher than that for all subjects and those with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 90 points. Therefore, it can be considered that UMP shows a higher improvement effect on executive function for people with low cognitive function related to memory.

[0443] (Example 5-3) Improvement effect on the standardized score of cognitive flexibility in those with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 points

[0444] In the trial conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of cognitive flexibility in those with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 points before UMP intake were extracted. The change amount of the standardized score of cognitive flexibility before and after the trial is shown in Figure 22 and Table 23.

[0445] [Table 23]

[0446]

[0447] In any one of the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase rate of the standardized comprehensive memory score before and after the trial was greater than that of the placebo group.

[0448] Among them, in the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase rate of the standardized comprehensive memory score before and after the trial was 23.3, which was significantly more than 10 regarded as having medical significance. The p-value was in the range of p < 0.05, which was judged to be significantly different.

[0449] For the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), when compared with the results of Examples 2-3 and 4-3, the increase rate of the standardized score of executive function became larger.

[0450] According to the results of this example, it is obvious that for those with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 points, when the daily UMP intake is about 300 mg, UMP shows a significant and meaningful improvement effect on cognitive flexibility. This effect is higher than that on all subjects and those with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points. Therefore, it can be considered that UMP shows a higher improvement effect on cognitive flexibility in those with low cognitive function related to memory.

[0451] (Example 5-4) Improvement effect on the standardized score of comprehensive attention in those with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 points

[0452] In the trial conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of comprehensive attention in those with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 points before UMP intake were extracted. The change amount of the standardized score of comprehensive attention before and after the trial is shown in Figure 23 and Table 24.

[0453] [Table 24]

[0454]

[0455] In either the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) or the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized score of the comprehensive memory before and after the test was greater than that in the placebo group.

[0456] Among them, in the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized score of the comprehensive memory before and after the test was 27.8, which was significantly higher than 10 considered to have medical significance. The p-value was in the range of p < 0.10 where a significant trend was judged to be visible.

[0457] For the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), when compared with the results of Example 4-4, the increase in the standardized score of the executive function became greater.

[0458] According to the results of this example, it is obvious that for those with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 83.5 points, when the daily UMP intake is about 300 mg, UMP shows a significant and meaningful improvement effect on comprehensive attention. This effect is higher than that for all subjects and those with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 90 points. Therefore, it can be considered that UMP shows a higher improvement effect on comprehensive attention for those with low cognitive function related to memory.

[0459] (Example 5-5) Improvement effect of the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) for those with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 83.5 points

[0460] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) for those with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 83.5 points before UMP intake were extracted. The change amount of the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) before and after the test is shown in Figure 24 and Table 25.

[0461] [Table 25]

[0462]

[0463] Regardless of whether it was in the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) or the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), when compared with the placebo group, a trend of an increased increase in the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) was observed.

[0464] Among them, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg, the increase in the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) was 15.1, which significantly exceeded 10 considered to have medical significance, and the p-value was in the range of p < 0.05, which was judged to be significantly different.

[0465] Furthermore, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg, when compared with Examples 2-6 that surveyed all subjects and Examples 4-6 that surveyed those with a standardized comprehensive memory score lower than 90 points, the change in the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) increased.

[0466] Thus, it is obvious that UMP has a significant and meaningful effect on those with a standardized comprehensive memory score lower than 83.5 points. For the subjects who ingested UMP, the neurocognitive function was significantly improved in a medically meaningful way.

[0467] (Example 6) Improvement effect of the standardized scores of each cognitive region of those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score lower than 90 points

[0468] In order to verify the effect of the present invention on people with two attributes in association with the effect on people under 60 years old verified in Example 3 and the effect on people with relatively low cognitive function related to memory verified in Example 4, an analysis was conducted on subjects under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score lower than 90 points before UMP intake.

[0469] (Example 6-1) Improvement effect of the standardized comprehensive memory score of those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score lower than 90 points

[0470] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized comprehensive memory score of those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score lower than 90 points before UMP intake were extracted. The change in the standardized comprehensive memory score before and after the test is shown in Figure 25 and Table 26.

[0471] [Table 26]

[0472]

[0473] In both the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized comprehensive memory score before and after the test was greater than that in the placebo group.

[0474] In both of the two test food groups, i.e., test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized score of comprehensive memory before and after the test also exceeded 10, which is regarded as having medical significance. In particular, in test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg), the increase in the standardized score of comprehensive memory was 16.1, which greatly exceeded 10 regarded as having medical significance.

[0475] When compared with the results of Example 2-1, the increase in the standardized score of comprehensive memory became greater in both of the two test food groups, i.e., test food group 1 and test food group 2.

[0476] Based on the results of this example, it is obvious that UMP shows a stronger effect of improving comprehensive memory on people under 60 years old with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 90 points. Among them, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg, it is obvious that a significant effect of improving comprehensive memory is shown.

[0477] (Example 6-2) Improvement effect of the standardized score of executive function on those under 60 years old with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 90 points

[0478] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of executive function of those under 60 years old with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 90 points before UMP intake were extracted. The change amount of the standardized score of executive function before and after the test is shown in Figure 26 and Table 27.

[0479] [Table 27]

[0480]

[0481] Even in the subgroup with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 90 points and under 60 years old, in test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a trend of an increased change amount of the standardized score of executive function can be seen compared with the placebo group.

[0482] Among them, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg among the subjects with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 90 points and under 60 years old, the increase amount of the standardized score of executive function was 17.4, which greatly exceeded 10 regarded as having medical significance, and the p-value was in the range of p < 0.05, which was judged to have a significant difference.

[0483] Therefore, it is shown that UMP has a significant and meaningful effect of improving executive function on the subjects with a standardized score of comprehensive memory lower than 90 points and under 60 years old (in their 40s and 50s).

[0484] The results of Examples 2-2, 3-2 and 4-2 were compared with the results of this Example. Obviously, in Test Food Group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized score of executive function in this Example was greater than that in Examples 2-2, 3-2 and 4-2. Regarding the p-value, the p-value of this Example also became the smallest result.

[0485] Thus, it is shown that UMP has a stronger effect on improving the executive function of subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points and less than 60 years old.

[0486] (Example 6-3) Improvement effect of standardized cognitive flexibility score in subjects less than 60 years old and with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points

[0487] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized cognitive flexibility score of subjects less than 60 years old and with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points before UMP intake were extracted. The change amount of the standardized cognitive flexibility score before and after the test is shown in Figure 27 and Table 28.

[0488] [Table 28]

[0489]

[0490] Even in the subgroup with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points and less than 60 years old, in Test Food Group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and Test Food Group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a trend of an increased change amount of the standardized cognitive flexibility score was also observed compared with the placebo group.

[0491] Among them, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg among subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points and less than 60 years old, the increase amount of the standardized cognitive flexibility score was 18.9, which far exceeded 10 considered to have medical significance, and the p-value was in the range of p < 0.05, which was judged to have a significant difference.

[0492] Thus, it is shown that UMP has a significant and meaningful effect on improving the cognitive flexibility of subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points and less than 60 years old.

[0493] (Example 6-4) Improvement effect of standardized comprehensive attention score in subjects less than 60 years old and with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points

[0494] In the experiment conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized comprehensive attention score were extracted for those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score lower than 90 points before UMP intake. The change amount of the standardized comprehensive attention score before and after the experiment is shown in Figure 28 and Table 29.

[0495] [Table 29]

[0496]

[0497] Even in the subgroup with a standardized comprehensive memory score lower than 90 points and under 60 years old, in Test Food Group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and Test Food Group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a tendency of an increased change amount of the standardized comprehensive attention score was observed compared with the placebo group.

[0498] Among them, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg among the subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score lower than 90 points and under 60 years old, the increase amount of the standardized comprehensive attention score was 20.9, which far exceeded 10 considered to have medical significance.

[0499] Thus, it is shown that UMP has a significant and meaningful improvement effect on the comprehensive attention of subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score lower than 90 points and under 60 years old.

[0500] (Example 6 - 5) Improvement effect on the standardized processing speed score of those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score lower than 90 points

[0501] In the experiment conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized processing speed score were extracted for those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score lower than 90 points before UMP intake. The change amount of the standardized processing speed score before and after the experiment is shown in Figure 29 and Table 30.

[0502] [Table 30]

[0503]

[0504] Even in the subgroup with a standardized comprehensive memory score lower than 90 points and under 60 years old, in Test Food Group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg), a tendency of an increased change amount of the standardized processing speed score was observed compared with the placebo group.

[0505] Comparing the results of Example 2 - 5 with the results of this example, the increase amount of the standardized processing speed score increased.

[0506] Thus, it is shown that UMP has an effect of improving processing speed in subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 and less than 60 years old.

[0507] (Example 6-6) Improvement effect of the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) in those less than 60 years old and with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90

[0508] In the experiment conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) of those less than 60 years old and with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 before UMP intake were extracted. The change amount of the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) before and after the experiment is shown in Figure 30 and Table 31.

[0509] [Table 31]

[0510]

[0511] In either the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) or the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), when compared with the placebo group, a tendency of an increased increase in the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) was observed.

[0512] Among them, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg in subjects less than 60 years old and with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90, the increase in the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) was 11.8, which exceeded 10 considered to have medical significance. Compared with Examples 2-6, 3-7, and 4-6, the increase in the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) also became larger. The p-value was in the range of p < 0.05, which was determined to be significantly different.

[0513] Thus, it is obvious that the comprehensive memory improver of the present invention has a significant effect on those less than 60 years old and with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 before UMP intake, and the neurocognitive function is significantly improved with medical significance.

[0514] Among them, it is obvious that when the daily UMP intake is about 300 mg, it has a significant and meaningful effect on healthy people less than 60 years old and with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90, and the neurocognitive function is significantly improved with medical significance.

[0515] (Example 7) Improvement effect of the standardized score of each cognitive region in those less than 60 years old and with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5

[0516] In order to verify the effects of the invention of the present application on people with two attributes in association with the effects on people under 60 years old verified in Example 3 and the effects on people with relatively low cognitive function related to memory verified in Example 5, an analysis was conducted on subjects who were under 60 years old and had a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 points before UMP intake.

[0517] (Example 7-1) Improvement effect of the standardized comprehensive memory score in those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 points

[0518] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized comprehensive memory score of those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 points before UMP intake were extracted. The change amount of the standardized comprehensive memory score before and after the test is shown in Figure 31 and Table 32.

[0519] [Table 32]

[0520]

[0521] In either the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) or the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized comprehensive memory score before and after the test was greater compared to the placebo group.

[0522] In both the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized comprehensive memory score before and after the test also greatly exceeded 10, which is regarded as having medical significance.

[0523] Based on the results of this example, it is obvious that UMP shows a stronger improvement effect on the comprehensive memory of people under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 points. Among them, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg, it is obvious that a significant improvement effect on the comprehensive memory is shown.

[0524] (Example 7-2) Improvement effect of the standardized executive function score in those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 points

[0525] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized executive function score of those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 points before UMP intake were extracted. The change amount of the standardized executive function score before and after the test is shown in Figure 32 and Table 33.

[0526] [Table 33]

[0527]

[0528] Among the subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score below 90 and under 60 years old, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg, the increase in the standardized executive function score was 22.4, which significantly exceeded 10 considered to have medical significance, and the p-value was in the range of p < 0.10, which was judged to have a significant trend.

[0529] Therefore, it was shown that for subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score below 83.5 and under 60 years old (in their 40s and 50s), when the daily UMP intake was about 300 mg, UMP had a significant and meaningful effect on improving executive function.

[0530] Therefore, it was shown that UMP had a stronger effect on improving executive function in subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score below 83.5 and under 60 years old.

[0531] (Example 7-3) Improvement effect of the standardized cognitive flexibility score in those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score below 83.5

[0532] In the experiment conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized cognitive flexibility score of those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score below 83.5 before UMP intake were extracted. The change in the standardized cognitive flexibility score before and after the experiment is shown in Figure 33 and Table 34.

[0533] [Table 34]

[0534]

[0535] Even in the subgroup with a standardized comprehensive memory score below 83.5 and under 60 years old, in Test Food Group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and Test Food Group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a trend of an increased change in the standardized cognitive flexibility score was observed compared to the placebo group.

[0536] Among them, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg among the subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score below 83.5 and under 60 years old, the increase in the standardized cognitive flexibility score was 24.7, which significantly exceeded 10 considered to have medical significance, and the p-value was in the range of p < 0.05, which was judged to have a significant difference.

[0537] Thus, it is shown that UMP has a significant and meaningful improvement effect on the cognitive flexibility of subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 and less than 60 years old.

[0538] (Example 7-4) Improvement effect on the standardized comprehensive attention score of those less than 60 years old and with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5

[0539] In the experiment conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized comprehensive attention score of those less than 60 years old and with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 before UMP intake were extracted. The change amount of the standardized comprehensive attention score before and after the experiment is shown in Figure 34 and Table 35.

[0540] [Table 35]

[0541]

[0542] Regarding the subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 and less than 60 years old (in their 40s and 50s), the standardized comprehensive attention score decreased before and after the experiment in the placebo group. In contrast, in Test Food Groups 1 and 2, the standardized comprehensive attention score increased.

[0543] Among them, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg among the subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 and less than 60 years old, the increase amount of the standardized comprehensive attention score was 28.7, which greatly exceeded 10 considered to have medical significance, and the p-value was in the range of p < 0.05 determined to be significantly different.

[0544] Thus, it is shown that UMP has a significant and meaningful improvement effect on the comprehensive attention of subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 and less than 60 years old.

[0545] Furthermore, comparing the results of Test Food Group 2 in this example with the results of Test Food Group 2 in Examples 3-4 and 5-4, the change amount of the standardized comprehensive attention score before and after the experiment in this example was the largest, and the p-value in this example was the smallest. Thus, it is shown that UMP has a particularly strong improvement effect on the comprehensive attention of subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 and less than 60 years old.

[0546] (Example 7-5) Improvement effect on the standardized neurocognitive index (NCI) score of those less than 60 years old and with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5

[0547] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, results related to the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) were extracted for those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score before UMP intake lower than 83.5 points. The change amount of the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) before and after the test is shown in Figure 35 and Table 36.

[0548] [Table 36]

[0549]

[0550] In either the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) or the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), when compared with the placebo group, a tendency of an increased increase in the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) was observed.

[0551] Among them, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg, the increase amount of the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) was 15.3, which greatly exceeded 10 considered to have medical significance, and the p-value was in the range of p < 0.05, which was judged to have a significant difference.

[0552] Furthermore, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg, when compared with Example 6-6 that investigated those under 60 years old with a comprehensive memory standardized score lower than 90 points and Example 5-5 that investigated those with a comprehensive memory standardized score lower than 83.5 points, the change amount of the NCI standardized score increased.

[0553] Thus, it is obvious that the comprehensive memory improver of the present invention has a more significant and meaningful effect on those under 60 years old with a comprehensive memory standardized score lower than 83.5 points, and the neurocognitive function is significantly improved with medical significance.

[0554] (Example 8) Improvement effect of the standardized score of each cognitive region for those with a comprehensive memory standardized score of 90 or more and less than 100 points

[0555] In Cognitrax, those with a comprehensive memory standardized score of 90 or more and less than 100 points are judged to have cognitive functions related to memory within the normal range. However, in order to verify the effect of UMP on such people, an analysis was conducted focusing on those with a comprehensive memory standardized score of 90 or more and less than 100 points before UMP intake.

[0556] (Example 8-1) Improvement effect of the comprehensive memory standardized score for those with a comprehensive memory standardized score of 90 or more and less than 100 points

[0557] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of comprehensive memory were extracted from those with a standardized score of comprehensive memory above 90 and below 100 before UMP intake. The change amount of the standardized score of comprehensive memory before and after the test is shown in Figure 36 and Table 37.

[0558] [Table 37]

[0559]

[0560] In both the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase rate of the standardized score of comprehensive memory before and after the test increased compared with the placebo group.

[0561] According to the results of this example, it is obvious that UMP also shows an improvement effect on comprehensive memory in people with a standardized score of comprehensive memory above 90 and below 100. Among them, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg, it is obvious that a higher improvement effect on comprehensive memory is shown.

[0562] (Example 8-2) Improvement effect on the standardized score of processing speed in those with a standardized score of comprehensive memory above 90 and below 100

[0563] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of processing speed were extracted from those with a standardized score of comprehensive memory above 90 and below 100 before UMP intake. The change amount of the standardized score of processing speed before and after the test is shown in Figure 37 and Table 38.

[0564] [Table 38]

[0565]

[0566] In both the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase rate of the standardized score of processing speed before and after the test increased compared with the placebo group.

[0567] Thus, it is obvious that UMP also shows an improvement effect on processing speed in people with a standardized score of comprehensive memory above 90 and below 100.

[0568] (Example 8-3) Improvement effect on the standardized score of cognitive function speed in those with a standardized score of comprehensive memory above 90 and below 100

[0569] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, results related to the standardized score of cognitive function speed were extracted from those with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100 before UMP intake. The change amount of the standardized score of cognitive function speed before and after the test is shown in Figure 38 and Table 39.

[0570] [Table 39]

[0571]

[0572] In both the test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and the test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase rate of the standardized score of cognitive function speed before and after the test was increased compared with the placebo group.

[0573] Therefore, it is obvious that UMP also shows an improvement effect on cognitive function speed in those with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100.

[0574] (Example 8-4) Improvement effect on the standardized score of neurocognitive index (NCI) in those with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100

[0575] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, results related to the standardized score of neurocognitive index (NCI) were extracted from those with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100 before UMP intake. The change amount of the standardized score of neurocognitive index (NCI) before and after the test is shown in Figure 39 and Table 40.

[0576] [Table 40]

[0577]

[0578] In the test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg), when compared with the placebo group, a tendency of an increased increase rate of the standardized score of neurocognitive index (NCI) was observed.

[0579] Therefore, it is obvious that UMP also shows an improvement effect on neurocognitive function in those with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100.

[0580] (Example 9) Improvement effect on the standardized score of each cognitive region in those less than 60 years old and with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100

[0581] Analysis was carried out focusing on those less than 60 years old and with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100 before UMP intake.

[0582] (Example 9-1) Improvement effect on the standardized comprehensive memory score of those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100

[0583] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized comprehensive memory score of those with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100 before UMP intake were extracted. The change amount of the standardized comprehensive memory score before and after the test is shown in Figure 40 and Table 41.

[0584] [Table 41]

[0585]

[0586] In either the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) or the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized comprehensive memory score before and after the test was greater compared to the placebo group.

[0587] Based on the results of this example, it is obvious that UMP also shows an improvement effect on the comprehensive memory of those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100. Among them, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg, it is obvious that a higher improvement effect on the comprehensive memory is shown.

[0588] (Example 9-2) Improvement effect on the standardized executive function score of those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100

[0589] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized executive function score of those with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100 before UMP intake were extracted. The change amount of the standardized executive function score before and after the test is shown in Figure 41 and Table 42.

[0590] [Table 42]

[0591]

[0592] In the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg), the increase in the standardized executive function score before and after the test was greater compared to the placebo group.

[0593] Based on the results of this example, it is obvious that UMP also shows an improvement effect on the executive function of those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100.

[0594] (Example 9-3) Improvement effect of the standardized score of comprehensive attention for those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100

[0595] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of comprehensive attention were extracted for those with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100 before UMP intake. The change amount of the standardized score of comprehensive attention before and after the test is shown in Figure 42 and Table 43.

[0596] [Table 43]

[0597]

[0598] In the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg), compared with the placebo group, the increase rate of the standardized score of executive function before and after the test increased.

[0599] Based on the results of this example, it is obvious that UMP also shows an improvement effect on comprehensive attention for people under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100.

[0600] (Example 9-4) Improvement effect of the standardized score of working memory for those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100

[0601] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of working memory were extracted for those with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100 before UMP intake. The change amount of the standardized score of working memory before and after the test is shown in Figure 43 and Table 44.

[0602] [Table 44]

[0603]

[0604] In either the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) or the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), compared with the placebo group, the increase rate of the standardized score of executive function before and after the test increased.

[0605] Based on the results of this example, it is obvious that UMP also shows an improvement effect on working memory for people under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100.

[0606] (Example 9-5) Improvement effect of the standardized score of processing speed for those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100

[0607] In the experiment conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of processing speed for those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100 before UMP intake were extracted. The change amount of the standardized score of processing speed before and after the experiment is shown in Figure 44 and Table 45.

[0608] [Table 45]

[0609]

[0610] In both the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized score of processing speed before and after the experiment was greater compared to the placebo group.

[0611] Therefore, it is obvious that UMP also shows an improvement effect on the processing speed for those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100.

[0612] (Example 9-6) Improvement effect of the standardized score of cognitive function speed for those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100

[0613] In the experiment conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of cognitive function speed for those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100 before UMP intake were extracted. The change amount of the standardized score of cognitive function speed before and after the experiment is shown in Figure 45 and Table 46.

[0614] [Table 46]

[0615]

[0616] In the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized score of cognitive function speed before and after the experiment was greater compared to the placebo group. The increase in the standardized score of cognitive function speed exceeded 10, which is regarded as having medical significance, and the p-value was in the range of p < 0.10, where a significant trend was judged to be visible.

[0617] Therefore, it is obvious that UMP also shows an improvement effect on the cognitive function speed for those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 90 and less than 100.

[0618] (Example 9-7) Improvement effect of the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) for those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score above 90 and below 100

[0619] In the experiment conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) were extracted for those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score above 90 and below 100 before UMP intake. The change in the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) before and after the experiment is shown in Figure 46 and Table 47.

[0620] [Table 47]

[0621]

[0622] In both the test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and the test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized score of the neurocognitive index (NCI) before and after the experiment was greater compared to the placebo group.

[0623] Therefore, it is obvious that UMP also shows an improvement effect on neurocognitive function in people under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score above 90 and below 100.

[0624] Regarding those with a standardized comprehensive memory score above 83.5 and below 100 before UMP intake, there are cognitive regions where a high improvement effect can be seen, so it is described as a reference example.

[0625] (Reference Example 1) Improvement effect of the standardized score of working memory for those with a standardized comprehensive memory score above 83.5 and below 100

[0626] In the experiment conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of working memory were extracted for those with a standardized comprehensive memory score above 83.5 and below 100 before UMP intake. The change in the standardized score of working memory before and after the experiment is shown in Figure 47 and Table 48.

[0627] [Table 48]

[0628]

[0629] When analyzing subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score above 83.5 and below 100, the standardized working memory score decreased before and after the trial in the placebo group. In contrast, in Test Food Group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and Test Food Group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the standardized working memory score increased significantly.

[0630] In the group with a UMP intake of 300 mg, a significant (p: 0.031) improvement effect on working memory was observed.

[0631] Therefore, it is obvious that for subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score above 83.5 and below 100, UMP has an effect of improving working memory. Among them, when the daily intake is about 300 mg, it has a significant and meaningful effect on improving working memory.

[0632] (Reference Example 2) Improvement effect of the standardized processing speed score for those with a standardized comprehensive memory score above 83.5 and below 100

[0633] In the trial conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized processing speed score of those with a standardized comprehensive memory score above 83.5 and below 100 before UMP intake were extracted. The change amount of the standardized processing speed score before and after the trial is shown in Figure 48 and Table 49.

[0634] [Table 49]

[0635]

[0636] In both Test Food Group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and Test Food Group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase rate of the standardized processing speed score before and after the trial increased compared with the placebo group.

[0637] Among them, in Test Food Group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg), the increase rate of the standardized processing speed score exceeded 10, which is regarded as having medical significance.

[0638] Therefore, it is obvious that UMP also shows an improvement effect on the processing speed of those with a standardized comprehensive memory score above 83.5 and below 100.

[0639] (Reference Example 3) Improvement effect of the standardized cognitive function speed score for those with a standardized comprehensive memory score above 83.5 and below 100

[0640] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, results related to the standardized score of cognitive function speed were extracted from those with a comprehensive memory standardized score of more than 83.5 and less than 100 points before UMP intake. The change amount of the standardized score of cognitive function speed before and after the test is shown in Figure 49 and Table 50.

[0641] [Table 50]

[0642]

[0643] In both the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized score of cognitive function speed before and after the test was greater compared to the placebo group.

[0644] Therefore, it is obvious that UMP also shows an improvement effect on cognitive function speed in people with a comprehensive memory standardized score of more than 83.5 and less than 100 points.

[0645] (Reference Example 4) Improvement effect on the comprehensive memory standardized score of those under 60 years old and with a comprehensive memory standardized score of more than 83.5 and less than 100 points

[0646] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, results related to the comprehensive memory standardized score were extracted from those under 60 years old and with a comprehensive memory standardized score of more than 83.5 and less than 100 points before UMP intake. The change amount of the comprehensive memory standardized score before and after the test is shown in Figure 50 and Table 51.

[0647] [Table 51]

[0648]

[0649] In both the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the comprehensive memory standardized score before and after the test was greater compared to the placebo group.

[0650] Therefore, it is obvious that UMP also shows an improvement effect on comprehensive memory in people under 60 years old and with a comprehensive memory standardized score of more than 83.5 and less than 100 points.

[0651] (Reference Example 5) Improvement effect on the working memory standardized score of those under 60 years old and with a comprehensive memory standardized score of more than 83.5 and less than 100 points

[0652] In the tests conducted by implementing the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized working memory scores were extracted for those who were less than 60 years old and had a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 83.5 and less than 100 before UMP intake. The change amount of the standardized working memory scores before and after the test is shown in Figure 51 and Table 52.

[0653] [Table 52]

[0654]

[0655] In either the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) or the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized comprehensive memory score before and after the test was greater compared to the placebo group.

[0656] In the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a significant (p: 0.018) improvement effect on working memory was observed.

[0657] Thus, it is obvious that UMP also shows an improvement effect on working memory in people who are less than 60 years old and have a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 83.5 and less than 100.

[0658] (Reference Example 6) Improvement effect on the standardized processing speed score in those who are less than 60 years old and have a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 83.5 and less than 100

[0659] In the tests conducted by implementing the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized processing speed scores were extracted for those who were less than 60 years old and had a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 83.5 and less than 100 before UMP intake. The change amount of the standardized processing speed scores before and after the test is shown in Figure 52 and Table 53.

[0660] [Table 53]

[0661]

[0662] In either the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) or the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized processing speed score before and after the test was greater compared to the placebo group.

[0663] Thus, it is obvious that UMP also shows an improvement effect on processing speed in people who are less than 60 years old and have a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 83.5 and less than 100.

[0664] (Reference Example 7) Improvement effect of the standardized score of cognitive function speed for those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 83.5 and less than 100

[0665] In the experiment conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of cognitive function speed of those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 83.5 and less than 100 before UMP intake were extracted. The change amount of the standardized score of cognitive function speed before and after the experiment is shown in Figure 53 and Table 54.

[0666] [Table 54]

[0667]

[0668] In either the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) or the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase rate of the standardized score of cognitive function speed before and after the experiment was increased compared with the placebo group.

[0669] Therefore, it is obvious that UMP also shows an improvement effect on the cognitive function speed for those under 60 years old with a standardized comprehensive memory score of more than 83.5 and less than 100.

[0670] (Example 10) Improvement effect of the standardized score of each cognitive region for those with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90

[0671] In order to verify the effect of the invention of the present application on those with relatively low cognitive function related to verbal memory, an analysis was conducted focusing on the subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 before UMP intake.

[0672] (Example 10-1) Improvement effect of the standardized comprehensive memory score for those with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90

[0673] In the experiment conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized comprehensive memory score of those with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 before UMP intake were extracted. The change amount of the standardized comprehensive memory score before and after the experiment is shown in Figure 54 and Table 55.

[0674] [Table 55]

[0675]

[0676] In both the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized score of comprehensive memory before and after the test was greater compared to the placebo group.

[0677] In the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg), the increase in the standardized score of comprehensive memory before and after the test was 15.8, which was significantly higher than 10 considered to have medical significance. The p-value was in the range of p < 0.05, which was determined to be significantly different.

[0678] Based on the results of this example, it is obvious that UMP shows an improvement effect on comprehensive memory in people with a standardized score of verbal memory lower than 90 points. Among them, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg, it is obvious that a significant and meaningful improvement effect on comprehensive memory is shown.

[0679] (Example 10-2) Improvement effect of the standardized score of executive function in those with a standardized score of verbal memory lower than 90 points

[0680] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of executive function in those with a standardized score of verbal memory lower than 90 points were extracted. The change amount of the standardized score of executive function before and after the test is shown in Figure 55 and Table 56.

[0681] [Table 56]

[0682]

[0683] Even in the subgroup with a standardized score of verbal memory lower than 90 points, in the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a trend of an increased change amount of the standardized score of executive function compared to the placebo group was observed.

[0684] Comparing the test food group 1 and the test food group 2, it is obvious that in the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the change amount was greater.

[0685] In the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg among those with a standardized score of verbal memory lower than 90 points, the increase amount of the standardized score of executive function was 12.3, which was higher than 10 considered to have medical significance. The p-value was in the range of 0.05 ≤ p < 0.10, which was determined to show a significant trend.

[0686] When comparing the results of Test Food Group 2 in Example 2-2 with those of Test Food Group 2 in this example, it is obvious that the increase in the standardized score of executive function in the subgroup with a standardized score of verbal memory below 90 in this example is greater than that in all the subjects in Example 2-2.

[0687] Thus, it is shown that UMP has a better effect of improving executive function on subjects with a standardized score of verbal memory below 90.

[0688] (Example 10-3) Improvement effect of standardized score of cognitive flexibility on those with a standardized score of verbal memory below 90

[0689] In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of cognitive flexibility of those with a standardized score of verbal memory below 90 were extracted. The change amount of the standardized score of cognitive flexibility before and after the test is shown in Figure 56 and Table 57.

[0690] [Table 57]

[0691]

[0692] Even in the subgroup with a standardized score of verbal memory below 90, in Test Food Group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and Test Food Group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a trend of an increased change amount of the standardized score of cognitive flexibility can be seen compared with the placebo group.

[0693] Among them, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg among those with a standardized score of verbal memory below 90 (all ages), the increase amount of the standardized score of cognitive flexibility is 13.4, which exceeds 10 considered to have medical significance, and the p-value is in the range of p < 0.05, which is judged to have a significant difference.

[0694] Furthermore, when comparing the results of Example 2-3 with those of this example, the change amount of the score increased in Test Food Group 2.

[0695] Thus, it is shown that UMP has a better effect of improving cognitive flexibility on subjects with a standardized score of verbal memory below 90.

[0696] (Example 10-4) Improvement effect of standardized score of comprehensive attention on those with a standardized score of verbal memory below 90

[0697] In the experiment conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized comprehensive attention score of those with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points were extracted. The change amount of the standardized comprehensive attention score before and after the experiment is shown in Figure 57 and Table 58.

[0698] [Table 58]

[0699]

[0700] Even in the subgroup with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points, in either the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) or the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a tendency for an increase in the change amount of the standardized comprehensive attention score compared to the placebo group was observed.

[0701] Among them, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg among the subjects (all ages) with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points, the increase amount of the standardized comprehensive attention score was 13.5, which exceeded 10 considered to have medical significance. In either the test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) or the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the p-value was within the range of p < 0.05, which was determined to be significantly different.

[0702] Therefore, it was shown that UMP has an effect of improving comprehensive attention in subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points.

[0703] (Example 10-5) Improvement effect of the standardized working memory score in those with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points

[0704] In the experiment conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized working memory score of those with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points were extracted. The change amount of the standardized working memory score before and after the experiment is shown in Figure 58 and Table 59.

[0705] [Table 59]

[0706]

[0707] Even in the subgroup with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points, in the test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a tendency for an increase in the change amount of the standardized working memory score compared to the placebo group was observed.

[0708] Therefore, it was shown that UMP has an effect of improving working memory in subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points.

[0709] (Example 10-6) Improvement effect on the standardized score of processing speed for those with a standardized score of verbal memory below 90 points

[0710] In the experiment conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of processing speed for those with a standardized score of verbal memory below 90 points were extracted. The change amount of the standardized score of processing speed before and after the experiment is shown in Figure 59 and Table 60.

[0711] [Table 60]

[0712]

[0713] In the subgroup with a standardized score of verbal memory below 90 points, in Test Food Group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg), a tendency of an increased change amount of the standardized score of processing speed compared with the placebo group was observed.

[0714] Therefore, it is shown that UMP has an improvement effect on the processing speed of subjects with a standardized score of verbal memory below 90 points.

[0715] (Example 10-7) Improvement effect on the standardized score of neurocognitive index (NCI) for those with a standardized score of verbal memory below 90 points

[0716] In the experiment conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results related to the standardized score of neurocognitive index (NCI) for those with a standardized score of verbal memory below 90 points were extracted. The change amount of the standardized score of neurocognitive index (NCI) before and after the experiment is shown in Figure 60 and Table 61.

[0717] [Table 61]

[0718]

[0719] In either Test Food Group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) or Test Food Group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), when compared with the placebo group, a tendency of an increased increase rate of the standardized score of neurocognitive index (NCI) was observed.

[0720] In either Test Food Group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) or Test Food Group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the p-value is within the range of p < 0.05 which is judged to be significantly different.

[0721] Therefore, it is obvious that UMP has a significant effect on improving the neurocognitive function of healthy individuals with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points.

[0722] Focusing on the improvement effect of comprehensive memory, the content of Examples 2 to 10 shown above is summarized.

[0723] Regarding the improvement effect of comprehensive memory, in Example 2-1 where all subjects were analyzed, the change in the standardized comprehensive memory score was greater than that of the placebo group, thus showing the improvement effect of comprehensive memory brought by UMP. This result was also supported in the analysis of Examples 3-1 to 10-1 by subject subgroups because the change in the standardized comprehensive memory score was also greater than that of the placebo group.

[0724] Among them, in the following subject subgroups, the increase in the standardized comprehensive memory score exceeded 10, thus indicating that UMP significantly improved comprehensive memory. In addition, the corresponding examples are indicated in parentheses.

[0725] All subjects: 600 mg (Example 2-1)

[0726] Less than 60 years old: 600 mg (Example 3-1)

[0727] Standardized comprehensive memory score before UMP intake was less than 90 points: 600 mg (Example 4-1) or 300 mg (Example 4-1)

[0728] Standardized comprehensive memory score before UMP intake was less than 83.5 points: 600 mg (Example 5-1) or 300 mg (Example 5-1)

[0729] Less than 60 years old and standardized comprehensive memory score before UMP intake was less than 90 points: 600 mg (Example 6-1) or 300 mg (Example 6-1)

[0730] Less than 60 years old and standardized comprehensive memory score before UMP intake was less than 83.5 points: 600 mg (Example 7-1) or 300 mg (Example 7-1)

[0731] Standardized verbal memory score before UMP intake was less than 90 points: 600 mg (Example 10-1)

[0732] Among them, in the following subject subgroups, the increase in the standardized comprehensive memory score exceeded 10 and the p-value was less than 0.10, thus indicating that UMP significantly improved comprehensive memory and was clearly judged to have a significant difference or significant trend.

[0733] All subjects: 600 mg (Example 2-1)

[0734] Less than 60 years old: 600 mg (Example 3-1)

[0735] The standardized score of comprehensive memory before UMP intake is less than 90 points: 600 mg (Example 4-1)

[0736] The standardized score of comprehensive memory before UMP intake is less than 83.5 points: 600 mg (Example 5-1) or 300 mg (Example 5-1)

[0737] The standardized score of verbal memory before UMP intake is less than 90 points: 600 mg (Example 10-1)

[0738] Based on the above results, the present invention can be in the following ways.

[0739] [1] An agent for improving the comprehensive memory of healthy subjects, which contains uridylic acid as an active ingredient.

[0740] [2] The agent according to [1], wherein the active ingredient is only uridylic acid.

[0741] [3] The agent according to [1] or [2], which simultaneously improves one or more selected from executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, working memory, processing speed, and cognitive function speed, in addition to the comprehensive memory of healthy subjects.

[0742] [4] The agent according to [1] or [2], which simultaneously improves two or more selected from executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, working memory, processing speed, and cognitive function speed, in addition to the comprehensive memory of healthy subjects.

[0743] [5] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], wherein the content of uridylic acid, converted into a daily uridylic acid dose, is 450 mg or more and less than 750 mg.

[0744] [6] The agent according to [5], which improves all of the comprehensive memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, processing speed, and neurocognitive function of healthy subjects.

[0745] [7] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], wherein the content of uridylic acid, converted into a daily uridylic acid dose, is 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg.

[0746] [8] The agent according to [7], which improves all of the comprehensive memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, working memory, and neurocognitive function of healthy subjects.

[0747] [9] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], when the content of uridylic acid is converted into a daily uridylic acid dose of more than 450 mg and less than 750 mg, improves the overall memory of healthy subjects less than 60 years old.

[0748]

[10] The agent according to [9] improves all of the overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, processing speed, and neurocognitive function of healthy subjects.

[0749]

[11] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], when the content of uridylic acid is converted into a daily uridylic acid dose of more than 150 mg and less than 450 mg, improves the overall memory of healthy subjects less than 60 years old.

[0750]

[12] The agent according to

[11] improves all of the overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, working memory, processing speed, and neurocognitive function of healthy subjects.

[0751]

[13] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], when the content of uridylic acid is converted into a daily uridylic acid dose of more than 450 mg and less than 750 mg, improves the overall memory of healthy subjects with an overall memory standardized score of less than 90 points.

[0752]

[14] The agent according to

[13] improves all of the overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, and neurocognitive function of healthy subjects.

[0753]

[15] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], when the content of uridylic acid is converted into a daily uridylic acid dose of more than 150 mg and less than 450 mg, improves the overall memory of healthy subjects with an overall memory standardized score of less than 90 points.

[0754]

[16] The agent according to

[15] improves all of the overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, working memory, and neurocognitive function of healthy subjects.

[0755]

[17] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], when the content of uridylic acid is converted into a daily uridylic acid dose of more than 450 mg and less than 750 mg, improves the overall memory of healthy subjects with an overall memory standardized score of less than 83.5 points.

[0756]

[18] The agent according to

[17] improves all of the overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, and neurocognitive function of healthy subjects.

[0757]

[19] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], wherein the content of uridylic acid is converted into a daily uridylic acid dose of 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg, and improves the comprehensive memory of healthy subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 points.

[0758]

[20] The agent according to

[19] improves all of the comprehensive memory, cognitive flexibility, and comprehensive attention of healthy subjects.

[0759]

[21] The agent according to

[19] improves all of the comprehensive memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, and neurocognitive function of healthy subjects.

[0760]

[22] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], wherein the content of uridylic acid is converted into a daily uridylic acid dose of 450 mg or more and less than 750 mg, and improves the comprehensive memory of healthy subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points and less than 60 years old.

[0761]

[23] The agent according to

[22] improves all of the comprehensive memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, processing speed, and neurocognitive function of healthy subjects.

[0762]

[24] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], wherein the content of uridylic acid is converted into a daily uridylic acid dose of 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg, and improves the comprehensive memory of healthy subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 90 points and less than 60 years old.

[0763]

[25] The agent according to

[24] improves all of the comprehensive memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, and neurocognitive function of healthy subjects.

[0764]

[26] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], wherein the content of uridylic acid is converted into a daily uridylic acid dose of 450 mg or more and less than 750 mg, and improves the comprehensive memory of healthy subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 points and less than 60 years old.

[0765]

[27] The agent according to

[26] improves all of the comprehensive memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, and neurocognitive function of healthy subjects.

[0766]

[28] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], wherein the content of uridylic acid is converted into a daily uridylic acid dose of 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg, and improves the comprehensive memory of healthy subjects with a standardized comprehensive memory score of less than 83.5 points and less than 60 years old.

[0767]

[29] The agent according to

[28] improves the overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, and all of the neurocognitive functions in healthy individuals.

[0768]

[30] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], with the content of uridine converted to a daily uridine dose of 450 mg or more and less than 750 mg, improves the overall memory of healthy individuals with a standardized overall memory score of 90 or more and less than 100.

[0769]

[31] The agent according to

[30] improves the overall memory, processing speed, speed of cognitive function, and all of the neurocognitive functions in healthy individuals.

[0770]

[32] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], with the content of uridine converted to a daily uridine dose of 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg, improves the overall memory of healthy individuals with a standardized overall memory score of 90 or more and less than 100.

[0771]

[33] The agent according to

[32] improves the overall memory, processing speed, speed of cognitive function, and all of the neurocognitive functions in healthy individuals.

[0772]

[34] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], with the content of uridine converted to a daily uridine dose of 450 mg or more and less than 750 mg, improves the overall memory of healthy individuals with a standardized overall memory score of 90 or more and less than 100 and who are less than 60 years old.

[0773]

[35] The agent according to

[34] improves the overall memory, executive function, working memory, processing speed, speed of cognitive function, and all of the neurocognitive functions in healthy individuals.

[0774]

[36] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], with the content of uridine converted to a daily uridine dose of 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg, improves the overall memory of healthy individuals with a standardized overall memory score of 90 or more and less than 100 and who are less than 60 years old.

[0775]

[37] The agent according to

[36] improves the overall memory, executive function, overall attention, working memory, processing speed, speed of cognitive function, and all of the neurocognitive functions in healthy individuals.

[0776]

[38] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], with the content of uridine converted to a daily uridine dose of 450 mg or more and less than 750 mg, improves the overall memory of healthy individuals with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90.

[0777]

[39] The agent according to

[38] improves all of the comprehensive memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, processing speed, and neurocognitive function in healthy individuals.

[0778]

[40] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], wherein the content of uridine is converted to a daily uridine dose of 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg, and improves the comprehensive memory in healthy individuals with a standardized score of verbal memory lower than 90 points.

[0779]

[41] The agent according to

[40] improves all of the comprehensive memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, working memory, and neurocognitive function in healthy individuals.

[0780]

[42] The agent according to any one of [1] to

[41] is continuously ingested for 12 weeks or more.

[0781]

[43] A composition comprising the agent according to any one of [1] to

[42] .

[0782]

[44] The composition according to

[43] is a food or drink, modified milk powder, enteral nutritional agent, health food or drink, or pharmaceutical product.

[0783]

[45] A method for improving the comprehensive memory in healthy individuals using the agent according to any one of [1] to

[41] .

[0784]

[46] In the method according to

[45] , the agent is continuously ingested for 12 weeks or more.

[0785]

[47] A uridine for improving the comprehensive memory in healthy individuals.

[0786]

[48] The uridine according to

[47] is further used to simultaneously improve one or more selected from executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, working memory, neurocognitive function, processing speed, and cognitive function speed, in addition to the comprehensive memory in healthy individuals.

[0787]

[49] The uridine according to

[47] is further used to simultaneously improve two or more selected from executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, working memory, processing speed, and cognitive function speed, in addition to the comprehensive memory in healthy individuals.

[0788]

[50] An agent containing the uridine according to any one of

[47] to

[49] as an active ingredient.

[0789]

[51] In the agent according to

[50] , the active ingredient is only uridine.

[0790]

[52] For the agent according to

[50] or

[51] , the content of uridylic acid is converted into a daily uridylic acid dose of 10 mg to 1000 mg.

[0791]

[53] For the agent according to

[50] or

[51] , the content of uridylic acid is converted into a daily uridylic acid dose of 150 mg to less than 750 mg.

[0792]

[54] A composition comprising the agent according to any one of

[50] to

[53] .

[0793]

[55] The composition according to

[54] is a food or drink, a modified milk powder, an enteral nutritional agent, a health food or drink, or a pharmaceutical product.

[0794]

[56] Use of uridylic acid for improving the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals.

[0795]

[57] The use of uridylic acid according to

[56] , in addition to the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals, is also used to simultaneously improve one or more selected from executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, working memory, neurocognitive function, processing speed, and cognitive function speed.

[0796]

[58] The use of uridylic acid according to

[56] , in addition to the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals, is also used to simultaneously improve two or more selected from executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, working memory, processing speed, and cognitive function speed.

[0797]

[59] For the use of uridylic acid according to any one of

[56] to

[58] , uridylic acid is continuously ingested for 12 weeks or more.

Claims

1. An agent for improving the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals, which contains uridylic acid as an active ingredient.

2. The agent according to claim 1, wherein the active ingredient is only uridylic acid.

3. The agent according to claim 1 or 2, which, in addition to improving the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals, also simultaneously improves one or more selected from executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, working memory, processing speed, and cognitive function speed.

4. The agent according to claim 1 or 2, which, in addition to improving the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals, also simultaneously improves two or more selected from executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, working memory, processing speed, and cognitive function speed.

5. The agent according to any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein the content of uridylic acid, when converted to the daily uridylic acid dose, is 450 mg or more and less than 750 mg.

6. The agent according to claim 5, which improves all of the comprehensive memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, processing speed, and neurocognitive function of healthy individuals.

7. The agent according to any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein the content of uridylic acid, when converted to the daily uridylic acid dose, is 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg.

8. The agent according to claim 7, which improves all of the comprehensive memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, working memory, and neurocognitive function of healthy individuals.

9. The agent according to any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein the content of uridylic acid, when converted to the daily uridylic acid dose, is 450 mg or more and less than 750 mg, and it improves the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals less than 60 years old.

10. The agent according to claim 9, which improves all of the comprehensive memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, processing speed, and neurocognitive function of healthy individuals.

11. The agent according to any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein the content of uridylic acid, when converted to the daily uridylic acid dose, is 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg, and it improves the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals less than 60 years old.

12. The agent according to claim 11, which improves all of the comprehensive memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, working memory, processing speed, and neurocognitive function of healthy individuals.

13. The agent according to any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein the content of uridylic acid, when converted to the daily uridylic acid dose, is 450 mg or more and less than 750 mg, and it improves the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals with a standardized comprehensive memory score lower than 90 points.

14. The agent according to claim 13, which improves all of the comprehensive memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, and neurocognitive function of healthy individuals.

15. The agent according to any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein the content of uridylic acid, when converted to the daily uridylic acid dose, is 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg, and it improves the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals with a standardized comprehensive memory score lower than 90 points.

16. The agent according to claim 15, which improves all of the comprehensive memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, working memory, and neurocognitive function of healthy individuals.

17. The agent according to any one of claims 1 to 4, The content of uridine monophosphate is converted into a daily uridine monophosphate dose of more than 450 mg and less than 750 mg, improving the overall memory of healthy individuals with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points.

18. The agent according to claim 17, Improving all of the overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, and neurocognitive function of healthy individuals.

19. The agent according to any one of claims 1 to 4, The content of uridine monophosphate is converted into a daily uridine monophosphate dose of more than 150 mg and less than 450 mg, improving the overall memory of healthy individuals with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points.

20. The agent according to claim 19, Improving all of the overall memory, cognitive flexibility, and overall attention of healthy individuals.

21. The agent according to claim 19, Improving all of the overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, and neurocognitive function of healthy individuals.

22. The agent according to any one of claims 1 to 4, The content of uridine monophosphate is converted into a daily uridine monophosphate dose of more than 450 mg and less than 750 mg, improving the overall memory of healthy individuals with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points and less than 60 years old.

23. The agent according to claim 22, Improving all of the overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, processing speed, and neurocognitive function of healthy individuals.

24. The agent according to any one of claims 1 to 4, The content of uridine monophosphate is converted into a daily uridine monophosphate dose of more than 150 mg and less than 450 mg, improving the overall memory of healthy individuals with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points and less than 60 years old.

25. The agent according to claim 24, Improving all of the overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, and neurocognitive function of healthy individuals.

26. The agent according to any one of claims 1 to 4, The content of uridine monophosphate is converted into a daily uridine monophosphate dose of more than 450 mg and less than 750 mg, improving the overall memory of healthy individuals with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points and less than 60 years old.

27. The agent according to claim 26, Improving all of the overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, and neurocognitive function of healthy individuals.

28. The agent according to any one of claims 1 to 4, The content of uridine monophosphate is converted into a daily uridine monophosphate dose of more than 150 mg and less than 450 mg, improving the overall memory of healthy individuals with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points and less than 60 years old.

29. The agent according to claim 28, Improving all of the overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, and neurocognitive function of healthy individuals.

30. The agent according to any one of claims 1 to 4, The content of uridine monophosphate is converted into a daily uridine monophosphate dose of more than 450 mg and less than 750 mg, improving the overall memory of healthy individuals with a standardized overall memory score of 90 points or more and less than 100 points.

31. The agent according to claim 30, Improve the overall memory, processing speed, cognitive function speed, and all of the neurocognitive functions of healthy individuals.

32. The agent according to any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein the content of uridine monophosphate, when converted to a daily uridine monophosphate dose, is 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg, and it improves the overall memory of healthy individuals with a standardized overall memory score of 90 or more and less than 100.

33. The agent according to claim 32, Improve the overall memory, processing speed, cognitive function speed, and all of the neurocognitive functions of healthy individuals.

34. The agent according to any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein the content of uridine monophosphate, when converted to a daily uridine monophosphate dose, is 450 mg or more and less than 750 mg, and it improves the overall memory of healthy individuals with a standardized overall memory score of 90 or more and less than 100 and less than 60 years old.

35. The agent according to claim 34, Improve the overall memory, executive function, working memory, processing speed, cognitive function speed, and all of the neurocognitive functions of healthy individuals.

36. The agent according to any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein the content of uridine monophosphate, when converted to a daily uridine monophosphate dose, is 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg, and it improves the overall memory of healthy individuals with a standardized overall memory score of 90 or more and less than 100 and less than 60 years old.

37. The agent according to claim 36, Improve the overall memory, executive function, overall attention, working memory, processing speed, cognitive function speed, and all of the neurocognitive functions of healthy individuals.

38. The agent according to any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein the content of uridine monophosphate, when converted to a daily uridine monophosphate dose, is 450 mg or more and less than 750 mg, and it improves the overall memory of healthy individuals with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90.

39. The agent according to claim 38, Improve the overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, processing speed, and all of the neurocognitive functions of healthy individuals.

40. The agent according to any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein the content of uridine monophosphate, when converted to a daily uridine monophosphate dose, is 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg, and it improves the overall memory of healthy individuals with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90.

41. The agent according to claim 40, Improve the overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, working memory, and all of the neurocognitive functions of healthy individuals.

42. The agent according to any one of claims 1 to 41, Continuously ingested for 12 weeks or more.

43. A composition comprising the agent according to any one of claims 1 to 42.

44. A method for improving the overall memory of healthy individuals using the agent according to any one of claims 1 to 41.

45. The method according to claim 44, Continuously ingest the agent for 12 weeks or more.

46. A uridine monophosphate for improving the overall memory of healthy individuals.

47. The uridine monophosphate according to claim 46, In addition to the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals, it is also used to simultaneously improve one or more selected from executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, working memory, neurocognitive function, processing speed, and speed of cognitive function.

48. Use of uridine for improving the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals.

49. The use of uridine according to claim 48, In addition to the comprehensive memory of healthy individuals, it is also used to simultaneously improve one or more selected from executive function, cognitive flexibility, comprehensive attention, working memory, neurocognitive function, processing speed, and speed of cognitive function.

Images