Agent and method for improving composite memory of normal person

Abstract

Provided is an agent for improving the composite memory of a normal person, which contains uridylic acid as an active ingredient.

Description

Agent and method for improving overall memory in healthy subjects

[0001] The present invention relates to an agent and method for improving the overall memory of healthy subjects.

[0002] Cognitive function refers to all intellectual functions, such as comprehension, judgment, and logic, and is an ability that is directly related to daily life. For example, in the classification of neurocognitive disorders (NCDs) in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) published by the American Psychiatric Association, the cognitive function areas impaired in NCD patients are categorized into six areas: complex attention, executive function, learning and memory, language, perceptual-motor, and social cognition. It can be said that improving cognitive function is a universal desire shared by people of all ages and genders.

[0003] Research into improving cognitive function can be broadly divided into two directions: one is "maintaining and restoring impaired cognitive function," and the other is "improving cognitive function in healthy individuals."

[0004] Until now, the mainstream research into improving cognitive function has been "maintaining and restoring declined cognitive function."

[0005] In recent years, the factor that has attracted the most attention as a cause of cognitive decline is "dementia." "Dementia" is defined as "a condition in which intellectual function that was once acquired is generally declined due to an acquired brain dysfunction, causing interference with social and daily life, even in the absence of impaired consciousness" (Non-Patent Document 1).

[0006] A factor that can cause cognitive decline alongside dementia is "normal age-related cognitive decline (physiological amnesia)." "Normal age-related cognitive decline (physiological amnesia)" is typically a partial forgetting of experiences, and is distinguished from dementia by the following characteristics: it does not progress or, if progressed, is mild, awareness of the illness is maintained, orientation to time and day is maintained, and it rarely interferes with daily life (Non-Patent Document 2).

[0007] Regarding the decline in cognitive function with aging, it is known that functional improvements are observed in visual-spatial cognition, language function, and verbal memory up until the age of 50, but from the age of 60 onwards, numerical processing, verbal memory, perceptual speed, visual-spatial cognition, reasoning, and language function decline rapidly with age (Non-Patent Document 3).

[0008] Numerous studies have been conducted to date on improving cognitive function, but most of them have focused on recovery from or prevention of cognitive decline. In other words, with the global increase in life expectancy and the spread of the concept of healthy lifespan, there has been an increasing demand for recovery of cognitive function declined by the aforementioned "dementia" and "normal cognitive decline associated with aging (physiological amnesia)," as well as the maintenance of cognitive function by preventing "dementia" and "normal cognitive decline associated with aging (physiological amnesia)," and numerous studies have been conducted. However, there has not been much research into further improving cognitive function from a healthy state.

[0009] However, recently, attention has been focused on "improving cognitive function in healthy individuals." This differs from the recovery and maintenance of cognitive function that has been studied up until now, and aims to further improve the cognitive function that healthy individuals inherently possess.

[0010] In order to continuously enjoy the effects of improving cognitive function in healthy individuals, it is necessary to ingest agents / ingredients that have this effect on a daily basis. Therefore, active research is being conducted into the improvement of cognitive function using food ingredients that are suitable for daily intake.

[0011] As mentioned above, cognitive function is an intellectual function consisting of several areas, and it is extremely difficult to improve all of them with a single agent. Therefore, recent research into improving cognitive function using food ingredients has sought to clarify the areas of cognitive function that can be improved by the food ingredient, and to achieve the desired cognitive function improvement effect by ingesting foods that improve the desired functional area or by combining multiple food ingredients. Examples of clarification of the areas of cognitive function that can be improved by food ingredients include Patent Document 1, which revealed that visual memory is improved by ingesting Bifidobacterium strain N61, and Non-Patent Document 4, which revealed that attention and concentration are improved by ingesting blackcurrant-derived polyphenols.

[0012] Some food ingredients have improving effects across multiple cognitive function domains, but in reality, when the desired cognitive function-improving effects are different, they are used for different purposes. For example, the functional food ingredient theanine (L-theanine) has been submitted by the same business operator in a notification of functional food claim for three cognitive function-improving effects: "It has the function of improving attention (the ability to sustain attention and continue one activity) and judgment (the accuracy and speed of judgment, and the ability to process appropriately in changing situations)" (Non-Patent Document 5) with a recommended daily intake of 50.3 mg or more, "It supports verbal fluency in individuals with low verbal fluency, which is part of cognitive function, by appropriately and quickly recalling a large amount of verbal information" (Non-Patent Document 6), and "It temporarily supports working memory (the ability to retain and correctly process multiple pieces of information necessary for problem solving)" (Non-Patent Document 7) with a recommended daily intake of 100 mg.

[0013] In the above examples, different effects corresponding to the desired cognitive functions are exerted, the content of the active ingredient, theanine, is adjusted according to the cognitive function area, and the appeal points, consumers, and sales locations of the foods and beverages containing the food ingredients are also different, so although they have one thing in common, which is the improvement of cognitive function, they are completely distinct in terms of their uses.

[0014] Uridylic acid is a type of nucleotide that is widely contained in living organisms and in foods, and is also added to them. It is extremely safe and is an ideal material for adding to foods.

[0015] Patent Document 2 describes a composition that improves the composite score of the neuropsychological test battery (NTB), which contains i) uridines and the like, and ii) docosahexaenoic acid and the like. However, Patent Document 2 does not state at all whether uridines and the like are effective alone. In addition, the invention described in Patent Document 2 is intended for patients with Alzheimer's disease or dementia, and is not intended for healthy individuals.

[0016] Patent Document 3 describes a composition for improving executive function that contains i) uridines and the like, and ii) docosahexaenoic acid and the like. However, Patent Document 3 does not state at all whether uridines and the like are effective alone. In addition, the invention described in Patent Document 3 is intended for Alzheimer's or dementia patients, and is not intended for healthy individuals.

[0017] Patent Document 4 describes an agent for improving learning and memory decline containing uridylic acid, etc. However, the invention described in Patent Document 4 is intended for people whose learning and memory decline has suddenly occurred due to aging and / or disease such as senile dementia.

[0018] Therefore, there has been insufficient knowledge as to whether uridylic acid alone has an overall memory-improving effect on healthy individuals.

[0019] Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 2020-188755 Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 2014-532696 Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 2014-534226

[0020] Haruo Hanyu et al., "Answering Questions from the Field: Q&A on Memory Loss Treatment (1 page)," Chugai Medical Publishing, July 2020; Dementia Treatment Guidelines 2017 (8 pages), Igaku-Shoin, August 1, 2017; Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn. 2004 June; 11(2-3): 304-324. Japan Journal of Health Development, Vol. 42, 2021, pp. 37-48; Form I: Basic Information on the Scientific Basis of Notified Foods (for General Consumers) Application Number F568; Form I: Basic Information on the Scientific Basis of Notified Foods (for General Consumers) Application Number G600; Form I: Basic Information on the Scientific Basis of Notified Foods (for General Consumers) Application Number G1323

[0021] The present invention aims to provide a novel and highly safe agent (comprehensive memory improving agent) that, when used as a food, pharmaceutical, quasi-drug, etc., has the effect of improving the comprehensive memory of healthy subjects, and a method for improving the comprehensive memory of healthy subjects using this agent.

[0022] As a result of extensive research conducted by the present inventors to achieve the above-mentioned object, they discovered for the first time that uridylic acid has an overall memory-improving effect not only on individuals whose learning and memory abilities have rapidly declined due to aging and / or disease, such as senile dementia, as has been conventionally known, but also on healthy individuals, and have thus made the present invention.

[0023] That is, the present invention is an agent for improving the overall memory of healthy subjects (an overall memory improving agent) which contains uridylic acid as an active ingredient.

[0024] The present invention also provides a method for improving the overall memory of healthy subjects using the agent.

[0025] The agent of the present invention containing uridylic acid as an active ingredient exhibits an effect of improving the overall memory ability of healthy subjects, and is novel and highly safe when used as a food, pharmaceutical, quasi-drug, etc. In particular, use of this agent will provide a new means of improving the overall memory ability of healthy subjects, thereby contributing to improving QOL and increasing the productivity of intellectual activities.

[0026] FIG. 1 shows the change in the standardized overall memory score for all subjects before and after the test, as described in Example 2-1. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized overall memory score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates a p-value of <0.05, indicating a significant difference relative to the placebo group. FIG. 2 shows the change in the standardized executive function score for all subjects before and after the test, as described in Example 2-2. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized executive function score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. FIG. 3 shows the change in the standardized cognitive flexibility score for all subjects before and after the test, as described in Example 2-3. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized cognitive flexibility score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 4 shows the change in working memory standardized score for all subjects before and after the test as described in Examples 2-4. The vertical axis shows the change in working memory standardized score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "*" in the figure indicates a p-value of <0.10, indicating a significant trend relative to the placebo group. Figure 5 shows the change in processing speed standardized score for all subjects before and after the test as described in Examples 2-5. The vertical axis shows the change in processing speed standardized score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 6 shows the change in NCI standardized score for all subjects before and after the test as described in Examples 2-6. The vertical axis represents the change in NCI standardized score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 7 shows the change in the overall memory standardized score for subjects under 60 years of age before and after the test, as described in Example 3-1.The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized overall memory score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "*" in the figure indicates a p-value of <0.10, indicating a significant trend relative to the placebo group. Figure 8 shows the change in the standardized executive function score for subjects under 60 years of age before and after the test, as described in Example 3-2. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized executive function score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 9 shows the change in the standardized cognitive flexibility score for subjects under 60 years of age before and after the test, as described in Example 3-3. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized cognitive flexibility score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. In the figure, the symbol "*" indicates a p-value of <0.10, indicating a significant trend relative to the placebo group. Figure 10 shows the change in the standardized total attention score between before and after the test for subjects under 60 years of age, as described in Examples 3-4. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized total attention score between before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 11 shows the change in the standardized working memory score between before and after the test for subjects under 60 years of age, as described in Examples 3-5. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized working memory score between before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 12 shows the change in the standardized processing speed score between before and after the test for subjects under 60 years of age, as described in Examples 3-6. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized processing speed score between before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 13 shows the change in NCI standardized scores before and after the test for subjects under 60 years of age, as described in Examples 3-7. The vertical axis shows the change in NCI standardized scores before and after the test for each test group.In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates a p-value of <0.05, indicating a significant difference relative to the placebo group. Figure 14 shows the change in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test for subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, as described in Example 4-1. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized overall memory score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "*" in the figure indicates a p-value of <0.10, indicating a significant tendency relative to the placebo group. Figure 15 shows the change in the standardized executive function score before and after the test for subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, as described in Example 4-2. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized executive function score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "*" in the figure indicates a p-value of <0.10, indicating a significant trend relative to the placebo group. Figure 16 shows the change in the standardized cognitive flexibility score before and after the test for subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, as described in Example 4-3. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized cognitive flexibility score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates a p-value of <0.05, indicating a significant difference relative to the placebo group. Figure 17 shows the change in the standardized overall attention score before and after the test for subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, as described in Example 4-4. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized overall attention score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 18 shows the change in working memory standardized score before and after the test for subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, as described in Examples 4 and 5. The vertical axis shows the change in working memory standardized score before and after the test for each test group.In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 19 shows the change in NCI-standardized score before and after the test for subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, as described in Examples 4-6. The vertical axis shows the change in NCI-standardized score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 20 shows the change in standardized overall memory score before and after the test for subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points, as described in Example 5-1. The vertical axis shows the change in standardized overall memory score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. In the figure, the symbol "**" indicates a p-value of <0.05, indicating a significant difference relative to the placebo group. Figure 21 shows the change in the executive function standardized score before and after the test for subjects with a total memory standardized score of less than 83.5 points, as described in Example 5-2. The vertical axis shows the change in the executive function standardized score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "*" in the figure indicates a p-value of <0.10, indicating a significant trend relative to the placebo group. Figure 22 shows the change in the cognitive flexibility standardized score before and after the test for subjects with a total memory standardized score of less than 83.5 points, as described in Example 5-3. The vertical axis shows the change in the cognitive flexibility standardized score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates a p-value of <0.05, indicating a significant difference relative to the placebo group. 23 shows the change in the standardized overall attention score before and after the test for subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points, as described in Example 5-4. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized overall attention score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1.In the figure, the symbol "*" indicates a p-value of <0.10, indicating a significant trend relative to the placebo group. Figure 24 shows the change in NCI-standardized score before and after the test for subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points, as described in Example 5-5. The vertical axis shows the change in NCI-standardized score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. In the figure, the symbol "**" indicates a p-value of <0.05, indicating a significant difference relative to the placebo group. Figure 25 shows the change in standardized overall memory score before and after the test for subjects under 60 years old with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, as described in Example 6-1. The vertical axis shows the change in standardized overall memory score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 26 shows the change in the executive function standardized score before and after the test for subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, as described in Example 6-2. The vertical axis shows the change in the executive function standardized score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates a p-value of <0.05, indicating a significant difference relative to the placebo group. Figure 27 shows the change in the cognitive flexibility standardized score before and after the test for subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, as described in Example 6-3. The vertical axis shows the change in the cognitive flexibility standardized score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates a p-value of <0.05, indicating a significant difference relative to the placebo group. 28 shows the change in the standardized overall attention score before and after the test for subjects under 60 years old with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, as described in Example 6-4. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized overall attention score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1.Figure 29 shows the change in processing speed standardized score before and after the test for subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, as described in Example 6-5. The vertical axis shows the change in processing speed standardized score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 30 shows the change in NCI standardized score before and after the test for subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, as described in Example 6-6. The vertical axis shows the change in NCI standardized score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. In the figure, the symbol "**" indicates a p-value of <0.05, indicating a significant difference compared to the placebo group. Figure 31 shows the change in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test for subjects under 60 years of age who had a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points, as described in Example 7-1. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 32 shows the change in the standardized executive function score before and after the test for subjects under 60 years of age who had a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points, as described in Example 7-2. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized executive function score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. In the figure, the symbol "*" indicates a p-value of <0.10, indicating a significant trend relative to the placebo group. Figure 33 shows the change in cognitive flexibility standardized score before and after the test for subjects under 60 years old with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points, as described in Example 7-3. The vertical axis shows the change in cognitive flexibility standardized score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. In the figure, the symbol "**" indicates a p-value of <0.05, indicating a significant difference compared to the placebo group.Figure 34 shows the change in the standardized overall attention score before and after the test for subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points, as described in Example 7-4. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized overall attention score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates a p-value of <0.05, indicating a significant difference relative to the placebo group. Figure 35 shows the change in the NCI standardized score before and after the test for subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points, as described in Example 7-5. The vertical axis shows the change in the NCI standardized score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. In the figure, the symbol "**" indicates a p-value of <0.05, indicating a significant difference compared to the placebo group. Figure 36 shows the change in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test for subjects with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to less than 100 points, as described in Example 8-1. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 37 shows the change in the standardized processing speed score before and after the test for subjects with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to less than 100 points, as described in Example 8-2. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized processing speed score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 38 shows the change in the cognitive function speed standardized score before and after the test for subjects with a total memory standardized score of 90 to less than 100 points, as described in Example 8-3. The vertical axis shows the change in the cognitive function speed standardized score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 39 shows the change in the NCI standardized score before and after the test for subjects with a total memory standardized score of 90 to less than 100 points, as described in Example 8-4. The vertical axis shows the change in the NCI standardized score before and after the test for each test group.In the figure, test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 40 shows the change in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test for subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to less than 100 points, as described in Example 9-1. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized overall memory score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 41 shows the change in the standardized executive function score before and after the test for subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to less than 100 points, as described in Example 9-2. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized executive function score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 42 shows the change in the standardized overall attention score before and after the test for subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to 100 points, as described in Example 9-3. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized overall attention score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 43 shows the change in the standardized working memory score before and after the test for subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to 100 points, as described in Example 9-4. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized working memory score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 44 shows the change in the standardized processing speed score before and after the test for subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to 100 points, as described in Example 9-5. The vertical axis represents the change in the standardized processing speed score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 45 shows the change in the standardized cognitive function speed score before and after the test for individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to 100 points, as described in Example 9-6.The vertical axis represents the change in the cognitive function speed standardized score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "*" in the figure indicates a p-value of <0.10, indicating a significant trend relative to the placebo group. Figure 46 shows the change in the NCI standardized score before and after the test for subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to less than 100 points, as described in Examples 9-7. The vertical axis represents the change in the NCI standardized score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 47 shows the change in the working memory standardized score before and after the test for subjects with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 to less than 100 points, 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. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates a p-value of <0.05, indicating a significant difference compared to the placebo group. Figure 48 shows the change in the standardized processing speed score before and after the test for subjects with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 to 100 points, as described in Reference Example 2. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized processing speed score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 49 shows the change in the standardized cognitive function speed score before and after the test for subjects with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 to 100 points, as described in Reference Example 3. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized cognitive function speed score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 50 shows the change in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test for subjects under 60 years old with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 to 100 points, as described in Reference Example 4. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized overall memory score for each test group before and after the test.In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 51 shows the change in working memory standardized score before and after the test for subjects under 60 years of age and with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 to 100 points, as described in Reference Example 5. The vertical axis shows the change in working memory standardized score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates a p-value of <0.05, indicating a significant difference compared to the placebo group. Figure 52 shows the change in processing speed standardized score before and after the test for subjects under 60 years of age and with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 to 100 points, as described in Reference Example 6. The vertical axis shows the change in processing speed standardized score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "*" in the figure indicates a p-value of <0.10, indicating a significant trend relative to the placebo group. Figure 53 shows the change in the standardized cognitive function speed score before and after the test for subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 to 100 points, as described in Reference Example 7. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized cognitive function speed score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 54 shows the change in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test for subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points, as described in Example 10-1. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates a p-value of <0.05, indicating a significant difference compared to the placebo group. Figure 55 shows the amount of change in the standardized executive function score before and after the test for subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points, as described in Example 10-2. The vertical axis represents the amount of change in the standardized executive function score before and after the test for each test group.In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "*" in the figure indicates a p-value of <0.10, indicating a significant trend relative to the placebo group. Figure 56 shows the change in the standardized cognitive flexibility score before and after the test for subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points, as described in Example 10-3. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized cognitive flexibility score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates a p-value of <0.05, indicating a significant difference relative to the placebo group. Figure 57 shows the change in the standardized total attention score before and after the test for subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points, as described in Example 10-4. The vertical axis shows the change in the standardized total attention score for each test group before and after the test. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. The symbol "**" in the figure indicates a p-value of <0.05, indicating a significant difference compared to the placebo group. Figure 58 shows the change in working memory standardized score before and after testing for subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points, as described in Example 10-5. The vertical axis shows the change in working memory standardized score before and after testing for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 59 shows the change in processing speed standardized score before and after testing for subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points, as described in Example 10-6. The vertical axis shows the change in processing speed standardized score before and after testing for each test group. In the figure, Test Food Group 1, Test Food Group 2, and Placebo Group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1. Figure 60 shows the change in NCI-standardized score before and after the test for subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points, as described in Example 10-7. The vertical axis shows the change in NCI-standardized score before and after the test for each test group. In the figure, test food group 1, test food group 2, and placebo group refer to the corresponding groups described in Example 1.In the figure, the symbol "**" indicates a p-value of <0.05, which indicates a significant difference compared to the placebo group.

[0027] The present invention relates to an agent for improving the overall memory of healthy subjects (an overall memory improving agent) which contains uridylic acid as an active ingredient.

[0028] In the present invention, the term "general memory ability" refers to the overall memory ability that combines memory related to language and visual memory related to figures and the like.

[0029] Furthermore, the term "overall memory" in the present invention refers to the cognitive function domain measured from two indices consisting of a Verbal Memory Test (VBM) for measuring verbal memory etc. in the Cognitrax test, and a Visual Memory Test (VIM) for measuring visual memory etc. Specifically, the overall memory score is defined as being measured by the following calculation formula in the Cognitrax test: Overall 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)

[0030] In the present invention, Cognitrax refers to a cognitive function testing service designed for Japan based on the cognitive function testing technology developed by CNS Vital Signs. The content of Cognitrax is also referred to in the following document: CNS Vital Signs LLC. CNS Vital Signs Interpretation Guide. 2019. (https: / / www.cnsvs.com / WhitePapers / CNSVS-BriefInterpretationGuide.pdf) Throughout this specification, the term "Cognitrax test" has the same meaning as "Cognitrax."

[0031] The verbal memory test (VBM) in the present invention is a test carried out in the following manner: First, 15 words are displayed and must be memorized, and then the memorized word is found from a list of 30 words, including new words.

[0032] The visual memory test (VIM) in the present invention is a test carried out in the following manner: First, 15 types of figures are displayed and must be memorized, and then the memorized figure must be found from 30 figures, including new figures.

[0033] The comprehensive memory standardized score in the present invention means a normalized score calculated from actual measured values ​​in a normal distribution with a mean comprehensive memory score of 100 and a standard deviation of 15. The calculation was performed with age correction in 5-year increments. For example, if the actual measured value is the same as the average for the same age group, the standardized score is 100, if it is 1σ better than the average, it is 115, and if it is 2σ better than the average, it is 130. A higher comprehensive memory standardized score indicates better comprehensive memory.

[0034] In the present invention, improvement of overall memory ability means an improvement in overall memory ability that combines verbal memory and visual memory of figures, etc., and specifically means an increase in the standardized overall memory score in the Cognitrax test. An increase or decrease in the standardized overall memory score of 10 points or more means a medically significant improvement or deterioration in overall memory ability.

[0035] In the present invention, a subject with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points refers to a subject whose overall memory score is less than 90 points when the subjects are grouped by 5-year age increments and a standardized overall memory score is calculated using the Cognitrax test. For the calculation method of the standardized overall memory score, see the Examples below. A subject whose standardized overall memory score is less than 90 points means that the subject's cognitive function related to memory is relatively low compared to a subject with average cognitive function.

[0036] In the present invention, a subject with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points refers to a subject whose overall memory score standardized by the above-mentioned method is less than 83.5 points. A subject's standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points means that the subject's cognitive function related to memory is significantly lower than that of a subject with average cognitive function.

[0037] In the present invention, a subject with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to less than 100 points refers to a subject whose overall memory score is 90 to less than 100 points when the subjects are divided into groups by 5-year age and a standardized overall memory score is calculated using the Cognitrax test. A subject's standardized overall memory score of 90 to less than 100 points means that although their cognitive function related to memory is slightly low, it is determined that their cognitive function related to memory is within the normal range.

[0038] In the present invention, verbal memory refers to the cognitive function domain measured by the verbal memory test (VBM) in the Cognitrax test. Specifically, the verbal memory score is defined as the score measured by the following formula in the Cognitrax test: 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).

[0039] In the present invention, a subject with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points refers to a subject whose standardized verbal memory score, standardized by the Cognitrax test, is calculated by dividing the subjects into groups by 5-year age. A subject's standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points indicates that the subject's cognitive function related to verbal memory is low, such as a decline in the ability to appropriately recall verbal information.

[0040] In the present invention, executive function refers to the ability to understand rules and concepts and make quick decisions.

[0041] Furthermore, the executive function in the present invention refers to the overall ability to pay attention as measured by the Shifting Attention Test (SAT), which measures the ability to respond quickly and accurately to instructions in the Cognitrax test. The executive function score is specifically defined as the score measured by the following formula in the Cognitrax test: Executive function score = Correct responses on the SAT - Incorrect responses on the SAT

[0042] The Shift Attention Test (SAT) in the present invention is a test carried out by the following method. Three figures are displayed on the screen, one on top and two on the bottom. The figures are squares or circles, colored red or blue. The subject is asked to select a figure from the bottom that matches the figure on top, but the rules change to require that the "shape" match or that the "color" be the same.

[0043] Cognitive flexibility in the present invention refers to the ability to flexibly change one's way of thinking in response to stimuli from the external environment.

[0044] Furthermore, cognitive flexibility in the present invention refers to the cognitive function domain measured from two indices consisting of the Stroop Test (ST), which measures cognitive flexibility in the Cognitrax test, and the Shifting Attention Test (SAT), which measures the ability to respond quickly and accurately to instructions. Specifically, the cognitive flexibility score is defined as being measured by the following formula in the Cognitrax test: Cognitive flexibility score = SAT correct responses - SAT incorrect responses - ST Stroop incorrect responses

[0045] The Stroop Test (ST) in the present invention is a test carried out in the following manner. The ST is a test consisting of three parts. In the first part, the subject presses the space bar as quickly as possible when a letter appears on the screen. In the second part, red, yellow, blue, and green letters are displayed in color, and the subject presses the space bar when the color of the letter matches the meaning of the letter. In the third part, the subject presses the space bar only when the color of the letter does not match the meaning of the letter.

[0046] In the present invention, the term "general attention ability" refers to the ability to maintain attention and respond accurately.

[0047] Furthermore, the term "overall attention" in the present invention refers to the overall attention measured from three indices consisting of the Stroop Test (ST) for measuring executive functions in the Cognitrax test, the Shifting Attention Test (SAT) for measuring the ability to respond quickly and accurately to instructions, and the Continuous Processing Test (CPT) for measuring the sustainability of attention. Specifically, the overall attention score is defined as being measured by the following calculation formula in the Cognitrax test: Overall attention score = Stroop errors in the ST + incorrect answers in the SAT + incorrect answers in the CPT + number of correct answers missed in the CPT

[0048] The sustained processing test (CPT) in the present invention is a test carried out by the following method: A response is made only when "B" is displayed among letters randomly displayed on the screen for 5 minutes.

[0049] In the present invention, the working memory refers to a function for temporarily holding information required for variously changing purposes while simultaneously carrying out other processing tasks.

[0050] Furthermore, in the present invention, working memory refers to intellectual function measured by the Four-Part Continuous Processing Test (FPCPT) in the Cognitrax test, and is specifically defined as being measured by the following calculation formula in the Cognitrax test: Working memory score = correct responses in part 4 of the FPCPT - incorrect responses in part 4 of the FPCPT

[0051] The Four-Part Continuous Processing Test (FPCPT) in the present invention is a test administered by the following method. The FPCPT is a test consisting of four parts. In the first part, subjects press the space bar as quickly as possible when a figure appears on the screen. In the second part, subjects press the space bar as quickly as possible when a green circle appears on the screen. In the third part, figures are displayed using a combination of geometric elements (circles, triangles, squares, and stars) and color elements (red, blue, yellow, and green), and subjects are asked to identify the figure that was displayed just before. In the fourth part, figures are displayed using a combination of geometric elements (circles, triangles, squares, and stars) and color elements (red, blue, yellow, and green), and subjects are asked to identify the figure that was displayed two figures before. Working memory is assessed by correct / incorrect responses in the fourth part, as described above.

[0052] In the present invention, the cognitive function speed refers to an index of the ability to quickly perceive, act on and process visual information.

[0053] Furthermore, the cognitive function speed in the present invention refers to intellectual function measured from the Finger Tapping Test (FTT) and SDC Test (SDC) in the Cognitrax test, and is specifically defined as being measured by the following calculation formula in the Cognitrax test: Cognitive function speed score = FTT right hand average + FTT left hand average + SDC correct response

[0054] The outline of the finger tapping test (FTT) is as follows: Tap the space bar with the index finger of your right hand and the index finger of your left hand as quickly as possible for 10 seconds.

[0055] The outline of the SDC test (SDC) is as follows: A legend showing eight symbols and their corresponding numbers is displayed at the top of the screen, and a table consisting of eight figures and their corresponding eight blank spaces is displayed at the bottom. The subject enters the numbers corresponding to the symbols in the blank space below.

[0056] In the present invention, processing speed refers to an index of the ability to process information quickly.

[0057] Furthermore, in the present invention, processing speed refers to intellectual function measured from the SDC test (SDC) in the Cognitrax test, and is specifically defined as being measured using the following calculation formula in the Cognitrax test: Processing speed score = Correct responses in SDC - Incorrect responses in SDC

[0058] In the present invention, neurocognitive function refers to a general intellectual function that integrates a wide range of functional areas such as memory, cognitive speed, executive function, attention, and cognitive flexibility.

[0059] Furthermore, the neurocognitive function in the present invention means a function that can be objectively measured using the Neurocognitive Index (hereinafter sometimes abbreviated as NCI) standardized score in the Cognitrax test as an index. A method for calculating the NCI standardized score will be described below.

[0060] To calculate the NCI standardized score, the following five cognitive function scores were calculated: overall memory, cognitive speed, reaction time, overall attention, and cognitive flexibility. Of these, overall memory, cognitive speed, overall attention, and cognitive flexibility are the same as those previously described.

[0061] Reaction time in the present invention means an index of the ability to react quickly to a command.

[0062] Furthermore, the reaction time in the present invention refers to intellectual function measured from the Stroop test (ST) in the Cognitrax test, and is specifically defined as being measured by the following calculation formula in the Cognitrax test: Reaction time score = (ST composite reaction time (correct answer) + ST Stroop reaction time (correct answer)) / 2

[0063] Scores for each cognitive function were converted to standardized scores using the following method. Standardized score: A normalized score was calculated from the actual measured value using a normal distribution with a mean value of 100 and a standard deviation of 15. Note that the calculation was performed with age correction in 5-year increments. For example, if the actual measured value is the same as the average for the same age group, the standardized score would be 100; if it is 1σ better than the average, it would be 115; and if it is 2σ better than the average, it would be 130.

[0064] The NCI standardized score, which is an index of overall intellectual function that integrates a wide range of functional areas such as memory, cognitive speed, executive function, attention, and cognitive flexibility, was calculated using the following formula: NCI standardized score = (total memory standardized score + cognitive speed standardized score + reaction time standardized score + total attention standardized score + cognitive flexibility standardized score) / 5.

[0065] In the present invention, a healthy subject refers to a person who is not suffering from a disease that impairs cognitive function. In this specification, a disease that impairs cognitive function refers to the following diseases: central neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer's dementia, frontotemporal dementia, dementia with Lewy bodies / Parkinson's disease, progressive supranuclear palsy, corticobasal degeneration, Huntington's disease, argyrophilic grain dementia, and neurofibrillary tangle senile dementia; vascular dementias such as multi-infarct dementia, vascular dementia due to a single strategic lesion, small vessel lesion dementia, hypoperfusion vascular dementia, cerebral hemorrhagic vascular dementia, and chronic subdural hematoma; brain tumors such as primary brain tumors, metastatic brain tumors, and carcinomatous meningitis; normal pressure hydrocephalus; head trauma; and anoxic or hypoxic encephalopathy. Neurological infections include 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 and chronic meningitis (tuberculosis, fungal), brain abscess, and brain parasites. Organ failure and related diseases include renal failure, dialysis encephalopathy, liver failure, portohepatic venous shunt, chronic heart failure, and chronic respiratory failure. Endocrine dysfunction and related diseases include hypothyroidism, hypopituitarism, hypoadrenocorticism, hyperparathyroidism or hypoparathyroidism, Cushing's syndrome, and recurrent hypoglycemia. Deficiency, toxic, and metabolic diseases include 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, and late-onset urea cycle enzyme deficiency. Autoimmune diseases, including demyelinating diseases, include multiple sclerosis, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, Behcet's disease, and Sjogren's syndrome. Storage diseases include late-onset sphingolipidosis, adrenoleukodystrophy, cerebrotendinous xanthomatosis, intraneuronal ceroid lipofuscinosis, and diabetes. Other diseases include mitochondrial encephalomyopathy, progressive muscular dystrophy, and Fahr's disease.

[0066] The agent of the present invention contains uridylic acid as an active ingredient. Uridylic acid is suitable as an active ingredient of the present invention from the viewpoints of safety as a food product and ease of absorption into the body.

[0067] Uridylic acid (uridine 5'-phosphate, UMP) is a compound designated by CAS Registry Number 58-97-9. When referring to uridylic acid in this specification, this concept also encompasses salts of uridylic acid.

[0068] In this specification, when the mass of uridylic acid is mentioned, it refers to the mass converted into uridylic acid disodium salt (UMP, 2Na). When the concentration (%) of uridylic acid is mentioned, unless otherwise specified, it is assumed to be a mass volume percent concentration (w / v%), and the mass of uridylic acid is the mass converted into UMP, 2Na. When a salt other than the disodium salt is selected, or in the case of a free acid that does not form a salt, the mass is taken as the mass converted into UMP, 2Na based on the amount of substance of uridylic acid.

[0069] As mentioned above, the concept of uridylic acid in the present invention encompasses salts. Examples of salts of uridylic acid include alkali metal salts such as sodium salt and potassium salt; alkaline earth metal salts such as calcium salt, magnesium salt, and barium salt; basic amino acid salts such as arginine and lysine; ammonium salts such as ammonium salt and tricyclohexylammonium salt; and various alkanolamine salts such as monoethanolamine salt, diethanolamine salt, triethanolamine salt, monoisopropanolamine salt, diisopropanolamine salt, and triisopropanolamine salt. The salt of uridylic acid is preferably an alkali metal salt such as sodium salt. Specific examples of such alkali metal salts of uridylic acid include monosodium uridylate and disodium uridylate, with disodium uridylate being preferred from the standpoint of ease of handling.

[0070] The uridylic acid used in the present invention can be used in combination with other active ingredients or alone, but is preferably used alone because uridylic acid alone exerts a significant overall memory improving effect.

[0071] There are no particular limitations on the origin of the uridylic acid used in the present invention, and those derived from natural sources such as yeast, bacteria, seafood, animals, and plants are suitable.

[0072] The agent of the present invention can be put to practical use as a supplement, or as an additive (raw material) for compositions such as foods and beverages, infant formula, enteral nutrients, health foods and beverages (including foods for specified health uses and foods with functional claims), and pharmaceuticals.

[0073] When the agent of the present invention is used in foods and beverages, health foods and beverages, or formulated powdered milk, etc., the agent of the present invention can be appropriately added to known foods and beverages, etc. to produce foods and beverages, etc. that have a comprehensive memory-improving effect. Target foods and beverages include milk and dairy products, seasonings, beverages, confectioneries, breads, noodles, oils and fats, processed meat products, processed seafood products, processed agricultural products, frozen foods, instant foods, etc.

[0074] It can also be mixed into the ingredients of foods and beverages to produce new foods and beverages that have the effect of improving overall memory. The target forms of foods and beverages can be selected from various forms such as tablets, granules, capsules, powders, solutions, syrups, milks, pastes, etc. In producing these foods and beverages, in addition to the active ingredient of the present invention, various excipients, seasoning ingredients, etc. that can be used in foods can be added as appropriate.

[0075] The food and drink may be provided and sold as a food and drink labeled with the health use of improving overall memory. The act of "labeling" includes all acts for informing consumers of the use, and any expression that can evoke or infer the use falls under the act of "labeling" of this technology, regardless of the purpose of the labeling, the content of the labeling, the object or medium on which it is displayed, etc.

[0076] The "labeling" is preferably done in a manner that allows consumers to directly recognize the intended use. Specifically, examples include the act of transferring, delivering, displaying for the purpose of transferring or delivering, or importing food and beverage products or product packaging on which the intended use is stated, displaying or distributing advertisements, price lists, or transaction documents related to the products and including the intended use, or providing information containing the above-mentioned content by electromagnetic means (such as the Internet).

[0077] The content of the labeling is preferably a labeling approved by the government, etc. (for example, a labeling approved based on various systems established by the government and made in a manner based on such approval.) It is also preferable that such a labeling content be attached to promotional materials at the point of sale such as packaging, containers, catalogs, pamphlets, and POP, as well as other documents.

[0078] Furthermore, when the agent of the present invention is used in practice as a supplement or by adding it to a pharmaceutical or enteral nutritional supplement, the agent of the present invention can be formulated either alone or in combination with other components such as formulation adjuvants. The method of administration of the formulation may be oral or parenteral, but oral or enteral administration is preferred.

[0079] The formulation may be in the form of tablets, granules, capsules, granules, powders, solutions, syrups, emulsions, etc. for oral administration, and in the form of injections, sprays, ointments, patches, etc. for parenteral administration.

[0080] In the formulation, in addition to the active ingredient of the present invention, any formulation auxiliary such as an excipient, a binder, a disintegrant, a lubricant, a flavoring agent, a solubilizing agent, a suspending agent, a coating agent, etc. may be used in appropriate combination according to the respective delivery form.

[0081] The amount of the active ingredient in the agent of the present invention may be appropriately selected from the range of 0.1 to 99% (W / W) depending on the purpose of use, the age of the subject, the method of administration or ingestion, the dosage form, etc.

[0082] The content of uridylic acid in the agent of the present invention can be appropriately set, and the daily dosage (or intake) of uridylic acid is, for example, 10 mg to 1,000 mg. As will be understood from the Examples described later, the effect of improving overall memory tends to increase with an increase in uridylic acid content, so the dosage of uridylic acid is preferably 50 mg or more, more preferably 100 mg or more, even more preferably 150 mg or more, even more preferably 200 mg or more, even more preferably 300 mg or more, even more preferably 400 mg or more, even more preferably 450 mg or more, particularly preferably 500 mg or more, and most preferably 600 mg or more. From the viewpoint that a high overall memory improvement effect has been demonstrated in the examples described below, a range of around 300 mg and / or 600 mg is preferred, a range of around 600 mg is more preferred, 450 mg to less than 750 mg is even more preferred, 500 mg to 700 mg is even more preferred, 550 mg to 650 mg is particularly preferred, and 600 mg is most preferred.

[0083] There are no particular limitations on the administration or intake period of the agent of the present invention, but continuous administration or intake is preferred because uridylic acid contained as an active ingredient is highly safe as a food, etc. A suitable administration or intake period is preferably 1 week or more, more preferably 2 weeks or more, even more preferably 4 weeks or more, even more preferably 8 weeks or more, and particularly preferably 12 weeks or more, as the effects have been demonstrated in the examples described below.

[0084] Subjects whose overall memory is improved by the agent of the present invention are healthy individuals who are not suffering from diseases that cause a decline in cognitive function, such as dementia.

[0085] The subjects for whom overall memory is improved by the agent of the present invention are preferably those who do not show symptoms of normal age-related decline in cognitive function (physiological amnesia), from the viewpoint that the present invention is effective in improving overall memory even in those who do not show decline in cognitive function due to aging, more preferably those under 60 years of age who are likely not experiencing normal age-related decline in cognitive function (physiological amnesia), and even more preferably those in their 40s and 50s, from the viewpoint that a significant and clear effect of improving overall memory is observed, as will be apparent from the examples described below.

[0086] The amount of administration or intake of the agent of the present invention can be selected appropriately, as it varies depending on the subject's age, weight, overall memory level, verbal memory level, desired cognitive function area, etc.

[0087] The cognitive function areas that are expected to be improved simultaneously with overall memory by the present invention include executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, working memory, processing speed, and cognitive function speed. It is preferable that overall memory and one or more of the above-mentioned cognitive function areas are improved simultaneously, more preferably two or more, even more preferably three or more, and particularly preferably four or more. Furthermore, it is more preferable that the NCI, a comprehensive index of neurocognitive function, is improved.

[0088] Specific combinations of the administration or intake amount of the agent of the present invention, the age of the subject, the level of overall memory, the level of verbal memory, the desired cognitive function area, etc. are exemplified below.

[0089] As demonstrated in Example 2-1 below, when a daily administration or intake of uridylic acid is between 450 mg and less than 750 mg in healthy subjects, the overall memory of the healthy subjects is significantly and clearly improved to the extent that it is determined to be a significant difference with medical significance. At this administration or intake amount, as described in Examples 2-2 to 2-6 below, improvements in overall memory are expected, as well as improvements in executive function, cognitive flexibility, processing speed, and neurocognitive function. Since the effects have been demonstrated in the examples, from the perspective of more reliably expecting effects, the daily administration or intake of uridylic acid is preferably between 500 mg and 700 mg, more preferably between 550 mg and 650 mg, and even more preferably 600 mg.

[0090] As demonstrated in Example 2-1 below, when a daily administration or intake amount of uridylic acid is 150 mg to less than 450 mg in healthy subjects, overall memory improves in the healthy subjects. At this administration or intake amount, as described in Examples 2-2 to 2-6 below, improvements in overall memory are expected, as well as improvements in executive function, cognitive flexibility, working memory, and neurocognitive function. Since the effects have been demonstrated in the examples, from the perspective of more reliably expecting effects, the daily administration or intake amount of uridylic acid is preferably 200 mg to 400 mg, more preferably 250 mg to 350 mg, and even more preferably 300 mg.

[0091] As demonstrated in Example 3-1 below, when a daily administration or intake of uridylic acid is between 450 mg and less than 750 mg in healthy individuals under 60 years of age, the overall memory of the individuals is significantly and clearly improved to the extent that it is determined to have a significant tendency and is medically significant. At this administration or intake amount, as described in Examples 3-2 to 3-7 below, improvements in overall memory are expected, as well as improvements in executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, processing speed, and neurocognitive function. Since the effects have been demonstrated in the examples, from the perspective of more reliably expecting effects, the daily administration or intake of uridylic acid is preferably between 500 mg and 700 mg, more preferably between 550 mg and 650 mg, and even more preferably 600 mg.

[0092] As demonstrated in Example 3-1 below, when a daily administration or intake of uridylic acid is 150 mg to less than 450 mg in healthy individuals under 60 years of age, overall memory improves in those individuals. At this administration or intake amount, as described in Examples 2-2 to 2-6 below, improvements in overall memory are expected, as well as improvements in executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, working memory, processing speed, and neurocognitive function. In particular, cognitive flexibility and neurocognitive function show clear improvements, to the extent that significant differences or significant trends are determined. Since the effects have been demonstrated in the examples, from the perspective of more reliably expecting effects, a daily administration or intake of uridylic acid of 200 mg to 400 mg is preferred, 250 mg to 350 mg is more preferred, and 300 mg is even more preferred.

[0093] As demonstrated in Example 4-1 below, in healthy subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points before administration or ingestion of uridylic acid, when the daily administration or intake of uridylic acid is between 450 mg and less than 750 mg, overall memory improves significantly and is judged to be significantly significant. At this administration or intake amount, as described in Examples 4-2 to 4-6 below, improvements in overall memory are expected, as well as improvements in executive function, cognitive flexibility, working memory, neurocognitive function, and the like. Since the effects have been demonstrated in the examples, from the perspective of more reliably expecting effects, the daily administration or intake of uridylic acid is preferably between 500 mg and 700 mg, more preferably between 550 mg and 650 mg, and even more preferably 600 mg.

[0094] As demonstrated in Example 4-1 below, in healthy individuals with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points before administration or ingestion of uridylic acid, a daily administration or intake of uridylic acid of 150 mg to less than 450 mg results in a significant and medically significant improvement in overall memory. At this administration or intake amount, as described in Examples 4-2 to 4-6 below, improvements in executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, working memory, neurocognitive function, and the like are expected in addition to improvements in overall memory. In particular, improvements in executive function and cognitive flexibility are so clear that they are deemed to be medically significant and significant. Since the effectiveness has been demonstrated in the examples, from the perspective of more reliably expecting effective results, a daily administration or intake of uridylic acid of 200 mg to 400 mg is preferred, 250 mg to 350 mg is more preferred, and 300 mg is even more preferred.

[0095] As demonstrated in Example 5-1 below, in healthy individuals with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points before administration or ingestion of uridylic acid, when the daily administration or intake of uridylic acid is between 450 mg and less than 750 mg, overall memory is significantly and clearly improved to the extent that it is determined to be significantly different and of medical significance. At this administration or intake amount, as described in Examples 5-2 to 5-5 below, improvements in overall memory are expected, as well as improvements in executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, and neurocognitive function. Since the effects have been demonstrated in the examples, from the perspective of more reliably expecting effects, the daily administration or intake of uridylic acid is preferably between 500 mg and 700 mg, more preferably between 550 mg and 650 mg, and even more preferably 600 mg.

[0096] As demonstrated in Example 5-1 below, in healthy individuals with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points before administration or ingestion of uridylic acid, when the daily administration or ingestion amount of uridylic acid is between 150 mg and less than 450 mg, overall memory improves significantly and is medically significant. At this administration or ingestion amount, as described in Examples 5-2 to 5-5 below, not only is overall memory improved, but executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, and neurocognitive function are also expected to improve significantly and are clinically significant. Furthermore, when focusing on overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, and overall attention, improvements are observed significantly and are medically significant and are clinically significant. Since the effects have been demonstrated in the examples, from the viewpoint of being able to expect more reliable effects, the daily administration or intake amount of uridylic acid is preferably 200 mg to 400 mg, more preferably 250 mg to 350 mg, and even more preferably 300 mg.

[0097] As demonstrated in Example 6-1 below, in healthy individuals under 60 years of age who had a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points before administration or ingestion of uridylic acid, a daily administration or intake of uridylic acid of 450 mg to less than 750 mg resulted in a significant, medically significant improvement in overall memory. At this administration or intake amount, as described in Examples 6-2 to 6-6 below, improvements in executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, processing speed, and neurocognitive function are expected in addition to improvements in overall memory. Since the effects have been demonstrated in the examples, from the perspective of more reliably expecting effects, a daily administration or intake of uridylic acid of 500 mg to 700 mg is preferred, 550 mg to 650 mg is more preferred, and 600 mg is even more preferred.

[0098] As demonstrated in Example 6-1 below, in healthy individuals under 60 years of age who had a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points before administration or ingestion of uridylic acid, a daily administration or intake of uridylic acid of 150 mg to less than 450 mg resulted in a significant, medically significant improvement in overall memory. At this administration or intake amount, as described in Examples 6-2 to 6-6 below, improvements in executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, and neurocognitive function are expected in addition to improvements in overall memory. In particular, improvements in executive function, cognitive flexibility, and neurocognitive function were so clear that significant differences were determined to exist. Since the effectiveness has been demonstrated in the examples, from the perspective of more reliably expecting effective results, a daily administration or intake of uridylic acid of 200 mg to 400 mg is preferred, 250 mg to 350 mg is more preferred, and 300 mg is even more preferred.

[0099] As demonstrated in Example 7-1 below, in healthy individuals under 60 years of age who had a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points before administration or ingestion of uridylic acid, a daily administration or intake of uridylic acid of 450 mg to less than 750 mg improved overall memory. At this administration or intake amount, as described in Examples 7-2 to 7-5 below, improvements in executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, and neurocognitive function are expected in addition to improvements in overall memory. Since the effects have been demonstrated in the examples, from the perspective of more reliably expecting effects, a daily administration or intake of uridylic acid of 500 mg to 700 mg is preferred, 550 mg to 650 mg is more preferred, and 600 mg is even more preferred.

[0100] As demonstrated in Example 7-1 below, in healthy individuals under 60 years of age who had a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points before administration or ingestion of uridylic acid, overall memory improved when the daily administration or ingestion amount of uridylic acid was less than 150 mg to 450 mg. At this administration or ingestion amount, as described in Examples 7-2 to 7-5 below, improvements in overall memory were not only achieved, but also in executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, and neurocognitive function, so clearly improved that they were determined to be significantly different. Since the effectiveness has been demonstrated in the examples, from the perspective of more reliably expecting effects, the daily administration or ingestion amount of uridylic acid is preferably 200 mg to 400 mg, more preferably 250 mg to 350 mg, and even more preferably 300 mg.

[0101] As demonstrated in Example 8-1 below, in healthy subjects with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to less than 100 points before administration or ingestion of uridylic acid, overall memory improved when the daily administration or ingestion amount of uridylic acid was 450 mg to less than 750 mg. At this administration or ingestion amount, as described in Examples 8-2 to 8-4 below, improvements in overall memory are expected, as well as improvements in processing speed, cognitive function speed, and neurocognitive function. Since the effects have been demonstrated in the examples, from the perspective of more reliably expecting effects, the daily administration or ingestion amount of uridylic acid is preferably 500 mg to 700 mg, more preferably 550 mg to 650 mg, and even more preferably 600 mg.

[0102] As demonstrated in Example 8-1 below, in healthy subjects with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to less than 100 points before administration or ingestion of uridylic acid, overall memory improved when the daily administration or ingestion amount of uridylic acid was 150 mg to less than 450 mg. At this administration or ingestion amount, as described in Examples 8-2 to 8-4 below, improvements in overall memory are expected, as well as improvements in processing speed, cognitive function speed, and neurocognitive function. Since the effects have been demonstrated in the examples, from the perspective of more reliably expecting effects, the daily administration or ingestion amount of uridylic acid is preferably 200 mg to 400 mg, more preferably 250 mg to 350 mg, and even more preferably 300 mg.

[0103] As demonstrated in Example 9-1 below, in healthy individuals under 60 years of age who had a standardized overall memory score of 90 to less than 100 points before administration or ingestion of uridylic acid, a daily administration or intake of uridylic acid of 450 mg to less than 750 mg improved overall memory. At this administration or intake amount, as described in Examples 9-2 to 9-7 below, improvements in overall memory are expected, as well as improvements in executive function, overall attention, working memory, processing speed, cognitive function speed, and neurocognitive function. Since the effects have been demonstrated in the examples, from the perspective of more reliably expecting effects, a daily administration or intake of uridylic acid of 500 mg to 700 mg is preferred, 550 mg to 650 mg is more preferred, and 600 mg is even more preferred.

[0104] As demonstrated in Example 9-1 below, in healthy individuals under 60 years of age who had a standardized overall memory score of 90 to less than 100 points before administration or ingestion of uridylic acid, overall memory improved when the daily administration or ingestion amount of uridylic acid was 150 mg to less than 450 mg. At this administration or ingestion amount, as described in Examples 9-2 to 9-7 below, overall memory improved, as well as executive function, overall attention, working memory, processing speed, cognitive function speed, and neurocognitive function. Since the effects have been demonstrated in the examples, from the perspective of more reliably expecting effects, the daily administration or ingestion amount of uridylic acid is preferably 200 mg to 400 mg, more preferably 250 mg to 350 mg, and even more preferably 300 mg.

[0105] As demonstrated in Example 10-1 below, in healthy subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points before administration or ingestion of uridylic acid, when the daily administration or intake of uridylic acid is between 450 mg and less than 750 mg, comprehensive memory is significantly and clearly improved to the extent that it is determined to have a significant tendency and is medically significant. At this administration or intake amount, as described in Examples 10-2 to 10-6 below, improvements in comprehensive memory are expected, as well as improvements in executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, processing speed, and neurocognitive function. Since the effects have been demonstrated in the examples, from the perspective of more reliably expecting effective results, the daily administration or intake of uridylic acid is preferably between 500 mg and 700 mg, more preferably between 550 mg and 650 mg, and even more preferably 600 mg.

[0106] As demonstrated in Example 10-1 below, in healthy subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points before administration or ingestion of uridylic acid, a daily administration or intake of uridylic acid of 150 mg to less than 450 mg improves overall memory. At this administration or intake amount, as described in Examples 10-2 to 10-6 below, improvements in executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, working memory, and neurocognitive function are expected, as well as improvements in overall memory. Since the effects have been demonstrated in the examples, from the perspective of more reliably expecting effects, the daily administration or intake of uridylic acid is preferably 200 mg to 400 mg, more preferably 250 mg to 350 mg, and even more preferably 300 mg.

[0107] The effects of the present invention can be summarized as follows from the perspective of improving overall memory ability.

[0108] As will be described later, in Example 2-1, in which the entire subject group was analyzed, the amount of change in the standardized overall memory score was greater than that in the placebo group, demonstrating the effectiveness of the present invention in improving overall memory broadly regardless of the subject's attributes. This effect is also supported by the fact that the amount of change in the standardized overall memory score was greater than that in the placebo group in the analyses of the subject subgroups in Examples 3-1 to 10-1, which will be described later.

[0109] In particular, the results of the examples described below show that the present invention improves overall memory in a medically significant manner when the following subject attributes and / or uridylic acid intake amounts are used: All subjects: 450mg to less than 750mg Under 60 years old: 450mg to less than 750mg Standardized overall memory score before UMP intake of less than 90 points: 450mg to less than 750mg or 150mg to less than 450mg Standardized overall memory score before UMP intake of less than 83.5 points: 450mg to less than 750mg or 150mg to less than 450mg Under 60 years old and standardized overall memory score before UMP intake of less than 90 points: 450mg to less than 750mg or 150mg to less than 450mg Under 60 years old and standardized overall memory score before UMP intake of less than 83.5 points: 450mg to less than 750mg or 150mg to less than 450mg Standardized verbal memory score before UMP intake of less than 90 points: 450mg to less than 750mg

[0110] In particular, based on the results of the Examples described below, the present invention improves overall memory so clearly that it can be determined that there is a significant difference or significant tendency with medical significance in the following subject attributes and / or uridylic acid intake amounts: All subjects: 450 mg to less than 750 mg; Under 60 years old: 450 mg to less than 750 mg; Standardized overall memory score before UMP intake of less than 90 points: 450 mg to less than 750 mg; Standardized overall memory score before UMP intake of less than 83.5 points: 450 mg to less than 750 mg or 150 mg to less than 450 mg; Standardized verbal memory score before UMP intake of less than 90 points, 450 mg to less than 750 mg;

[0111] One aspect of the present invention is a method for improving the overall memory ability of a healthy subject. As demonstrated in the Examples below, the present invention can improve the overall memory ability of a healthy subject.

[0112] The present invention will be described below with reference to examples, but the present invention is not limited to these examples. (Example 1) Screening of test subjects and allocation to subgroups In order to test the effect of uridylic acid on improving overall memory, test subjects were screened and allocated to subgroups in the following manner.

[0113] [Screening of test subjects] From 200 test subjects who met the following criteria: Japanese (both men and women), 40 years of age or older, and healthy individuals, 99 test subjects were selected after excluding those deemed ineligible for this study (e.g., those taking foods or supplements that may affect cognitive function, such as DHA / EPA, ginkgo leaf extract, tocotrienol, astaxanthin, GABA, phosphatidylserine, plasmalogen, etc.; those using instruments, devices, apps, etc. that may affect cognitive function; those who regularly use medicines (including herbal medicines) or supplements; those who are pregnant, breastfeeding, or intend to become pregnant during the study period, etc.).

[0114] [Allocation of test food and placebo groups] The test subjects were allocated to three groups of 33 people each, with the aim of achieving equality in terms of age, gender, and other attributes. Three people from each group were excluded due to dropouts after allocation or non-compliance with the protocol, leaving 30 people in each group for analysis. Subjects allocated to test food group 1 consumed 5'-UMP-containing food (4 tablets / day). Subjects allocated to test food group 2 consumed 5'-UMP-containing food (2 tablets / day) and a placebo (2 tablets / day). Subjects allocated to the placebo group consumed a placebo (4 tablets / day). The composition of the test food and placebo is shown in Table 1 below. Subjects consumed the assigned food with water or lukewarm water at breakfast. The food intake continued for 12 weeks. This study was conducted as a double-blind study.

[0115]

[0116] In the following specification, test food group 1 may be referred to as the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg, and test food group 2 may be referred to as the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg.

[0117] [Cognitive Function Testing] Ten tests (Verbal Memory Test (VBM), Visual Memory Test (VIM), Finger Tapping Test (FTT), Self-Directed Discriminatory Test (SDC), Stroop Test (ST), Shifting Attention Test (SAT), Continuous Processing Test (CPT), Four-Part Continuous Processing Test (FPCPT), Facial Expression Recognition Test (POET), and Nonverbal Reasoning Test (NVRT)) were administered using Cognitrax, a cognitive function testing service designed for Japan based on cognitive function testing technology developed by CNS Vital Signs. In this specification, the content of the Cognitrax tests is also incorporated by reference to the following literature: CNS Vital Signs LLC. CNS Vital Signs Interpretation Guide. 2019.

[0118] [Calculation of scores for each domain] According to the description in the literature outlining the Cognitrax test, the following eight domain scores and one overall score for neurocognitive function were calculated from the results of the ten types of tests performed: Overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, working memory, processing speed, cognitive function speed, reaction time, and Neurocognitive Index (NCI). The method for calculating scores for each domain is as follows:

[0119] [Calculation of Overall Memory Score] Overall memory, which is an index of overall memory combining verbal memory and visual memory, was calculated using the following formula: Overall memory score = VBM correct hits (immediate) + VBM correct passes (immediate) + VBM correct hits (delayed) + VBM correct passes (delayed) + VIM correct hits (immediate) + VIM correct passes (immediate) + VIM correct hits (delayed) + VIM correct passes (delayed).

[0120] The outline of the Verbal Memory Test (VBM) is as follows: First, 15 words are displayed and must be memorized, and then the participant must find the memorized word from a list of 30 words, including new words.

[0121] The outline of the visual memory test (VIM) is as follows: First, 15 different shapes are displayed and participants are asked to memorize them, and then they are asked to find the memorized shape from 30 shapes, including new shapes.

[0122] [Calculation of Executive Function Score] Executive function, which is an index of the ability to understand rules and concepts and make decisions, was calculated using the following formula: Executive Function Score = Correct SAT Answers - Incorrect SAT Answers

[0123] The outline of the Shift of Attention Test (SAT) is explained below. Three shapes are displayed on the screen, one on top and two on the bottom. The shapes are either squares or circles, and are colored red or blue. The participant must select the shape from the bottom that matches the shape of the top picture, but the rules change depending on whether the shape matches or the color is the same.

[0124] [Calculation of cognitive flexibility score] Cognitive flexibility, which is an index of the ability to flexibly change one's way of thinking in response to stimuli from the external environment, was calculated using the following formula: Cognitive flexibility score = SAT correct answers - SAT incorrect answers - ST Stroop incorrect responses

[0125] [Calculation of Working Memory Score] The working memory score of each subject was calculated using the following formula: Working memory score = correct responses in part 4 of the FPCPT - incorrect responses in part 4 of the FPCPT.

[0126] An overview of the Four-Part Continuous Processing Test (FPCPT) is provided below. The FPCPT consists of four parts. In the first part, subjects press the space bar as quickly as possible when a figure appears on the screen. In the second part, subjects press the space bar as quickly as possible when a green circle appears on the screen. In the third part, figures are displayed using a combination of geometric elements (circles, triangles, squares, stars) and color elements (red, blue, yellow, green), and subjects are asked to identify the figure that was displayed two figures earlier. In the fourth part, figures are displayed using a combination of geometric elements (circles, triangles, squares, stars) and color elements (red, blue, yellow, green), and subjects are asked to identify the figure that was displayed two figures earlier.

[0127] [Calculation of Overall Attention Score] Overall attention, which is an index of the ability to maintain attention and respond accurately, was calculated using the following formula: Overall attention score = ST Stroop errors + SAT incorrect answers + CPT incorrect responses + CPT correct answers overlooked Note that in this index, a lower value means higher overall attention, and a higher value means lower overall attention.

[0128] The outline of the Continuous Processing Test (CPT) is as follows: A subject is asked to respond only when the letter "B" appears among the randomly displayed letters on the screen for 5 minutes.

[0129] Processing speed, which is an index of the ability to process information quickly, was calculated using the following formula: (Processing speed score) = (SDC correct responses) - (SDC incorrect responses)

[0130] The outline of the SDC test (SDC) is as follows: A legend showing eight symbols and their corresponding numbers is displayed at the top of the screen, and a table consisting of eight figures and their corresponding eight blank spaces is displayed at the bottom. The subject enters the numbers corresponding to the symbols in the blank space below.

[0131] [Calculation of cognitive function speed score] Cognitive function speed, which is an index of the ability to quickly perceive, act on, and process visual information, was calculated using the following formula: (cognitive function speed score) = (average of right hand FTT) + (average of left hand FTT) + (average of left hand SDC)

[0132] The outline of the finger tapping test (FTT) is as follows: Tap the space bar with the index finger of your right hand and the index finger of your left hand as quickly as possible for 10 seconds.

[0133] [Calculation of Reaction Time Score] Reaction time, which is an index of the ability to quickly respond to instructions, was calculated using the following formula: (Reaction time score) = (ST composite reaction time (correct answer) + ST Stroop reaction time (correct answer)) / 2

[0134] An overview of the Stroop Test (ST) is given below. The ST is a test consisting of three parts. In the first part, the subject presses the space bar as quickly as possible when a letter appears on the screen. In the second part, red, yellow, blue, and green letters are displayed in color, and the subject presses the space bar when the color of the letter matches the meaning of the letter. In the third part, the subject presses the space bar only when the color of the letter does not match the meaning of the letter.

[0135] [Method for standardizing each score] Each test value and each index was converted into a standardized score using the following method. Standardized score: A normalized score with a normal distribution, with a mean value of 100 and a standard deviation of 15, was calculated from the actual measured value. Note that the calculation was performed with age correction in 5-year increments. For example, if the actual measured value is the same as the average for the same age group, the standardized score is 100; if it is 1σ better than the average, it is 115; and if it is 2σ better than the average, it is 130. An increase or decrease in the standardized score of 10 points or more indicates a medically significant improvement or deterioration of the cognitive function in question.

[0136] [Calculation of Neurocognitive Index (NCI) Standardized Score] The NCI standardized score, which is an index of overall intellectual function that integrates a wide range of functional domains such as memory, cognitive speed, executive function, attention, and cognitive flexibility, was calculated using the following formula: NCI standardized score = (total memory standardized score + cognitive speed standardized score + reaction time standardized score + total attention standardized score + cognitive flexibility standardized score) / 5

[0137] [Statistical Processing] The mean and standard deviation of the scores obtained by the above method for each test group were calculated, and an ANCOVA was used to compare the scores with the placebo group using the screening and pre-intake test score (baseline) as a covariate. All statistical analyses were performed using two-sided tests, and a p value of less than 0.05 was considered significant. SPSS Statistics version 23 or higher was used, and other verified statistical software was used as necessary.

[0138] [Subgroup Setting] In order to analyze the results of this test in detail, test results were extracted for subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points before UMP intake, subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points before UMP intake, subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points before the test, subjects under 60 years old (in their 40s and 50s), and combinations of attributes, and statistical processing was performed in the same manner as above. In Cognitrax, a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points generally indicates a subject with relatively low cognitive function related to memory. A standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points indicates a subject with significantly low cognitive function related to memory. A standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points indicates a subject with relatively low cognitive function related to verbal memory. Subjects under 60 years old (specifically, subjects in their 40s and 50s) refer to subjects in an age group in which cognitive function does not decline with age, as described in Non-Patent Document 3.

[0139] (Example 2) Effect of improving standardized scores in each cognitive domain in all subjects The effect of improving overall memory ability and each cognitive domain in all subjects in this study was examined.

[0140] (Example 2-1) Effect of improving the standardized overall memory score in all ages Regarding overall memory, which is an index of cognitive function related to memory, the change in the standardized overall memory score for all subjects before and after the test is shown in FIG. 1 and Table 2.

[0141]

[0142] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test was greater than in the placebo group.

[0143] In particular, in test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg), the increase in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test was 13.0, exceeding the 10 considered to have medical significance, and the p-value was in the range of p<0.05, which is determined to be a significant difference.

[0144] The results of this example revealed that UMP alone showed an effect of improving overall memory ability, and in particular, the group that took in 600 mg of UMP per day showed a remarkable and significant effect of improving overall memory ability.

[0145] (Example 2-2) Effect of improving standardized executive function scores in all ages An investigation was conducted to determine whether there was an effect of improving executive function, which is an index of the ability to understand rules and concepts and make quick decisions.

[0146] The change in the standardized executive function scores from pre- to post-test for all subjects is shown in Figure 2 and Table 3.

[0147]

[0148] When the analysis was conducted across all subjects, there was a tendency for test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg) to show a greater change in executive function standardized scores than the placebo group.

[0149] Comparing test food group 1 and test food group 2, test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg) showed a greater change in its executive function standardized score than the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg.

[0150] The results of this example suggest that UMP intake may improve executive function. Furthermore, it was suggested that a daily intake of 300 mg of UMP may be more effective at improving executive function than a daily intake of 600 mg of UMP. In the group that took 300 mg of UMP per day, significant improvements in executive function were observed that were medically significant.

[0151] (Example 2-3) Effect of improving cognitive flexibility standardized score in all ages We investigated whether there was an effect of improving cognitive flexibility, which is an index of the ability to flexibly change one's way of thinking in response to stimuli from the external environment.

[0152] The results of the change in the standardized cognitive flexibility scores for all subjects from before to after the test are shown in Figure 3 and Table 4.

[0153]

[0154] Test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg) tended to show a greater change in cognitive flexibility standardized scores than 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 was clear that the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg showed a greater change.

[0155] In the group receiving 300 mg of UMP per day, the change in cognitive flexibility standardized score exceeded 10, which is considered medically significant.

[0156] The results of this example suggest that UMP intake may improve cognitive flexibility. Furthermore, it was suggested that a daily intake of 300 mg of UMP may be more effective at improving cognitive flexibility than a daily intake of 600 mg of UMP. In the group that took 300 mg of UMP per day, cognitive flexibility improved significantly and with medical significance.

[0157] (Example 2-4) Effect of improving standardized working memory scores across all ages We investigated whether there was an effect of improving working memory, which is an index of the ability to temporarily hold information required for diverse and changing purposes while simultaneously performing other processing tasks.

[0158] The results of the change in the standardized working memory scores from before to after the test for all subjects are shown in Figure 4 and Table 5.

[0159]

[0160] In test food group 1 (group with 600 mg of UMP intake), the increase in working memory standardized score from before to after the test was smaller than in the placebo group, and no improvement in working memory was observed.On the other hand, in test food group 2 (group with 300 mg of UMP intake), the increase in working memory standardized score from before to after the test was larger than in the placebo group, and a significant improvement in working memory was observed (p-value: 0.099).

[0161] This confirmed that UMP has a working memory improving effect, and that a particularly strong working memory improving effect is achieved when the daily intake is around 300 mg.

[0162] (Example 2-5) Effect of improving standardized scores for processing speed in all ages An investigation was carried out to see whether there was an effect of improving processing speed, which is an index of the ability to process information quickly.

[0163] The results of the change in the standardized processing speed score from before to after the test for all subjects are shown in Figure 5 and Table 6.

[0164]

[0165] In test food group 1 (group with 600 mg of UMP intake), an increase in processing speed standardized score was observed before and after the test compared to the placebo group.

[0166] This confirmed that a daily intake of around 600 mg of UMP was effective in improving processing speed.

[0167] (Example 2-6) Effect of Improving Neurocognitive Index (NCI) Standardized Scores at All Ages The NCI is an index of overall intellectual function that combines a wide range of functional areas, including memory, cognitive speed, executive function, attention, and cognitive flexibility. The changes in the NCI standardized scores of all subjects before and after the test are shown in Figure 6 and Table 7.

[0168]

[0169] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily intake of 600 mg of UMP) and test food group 2 (group with a daily intake of 300 mg of UMP), a tendency for the increase in Neurocognitive Index (NCI) standardized scores from the pre-intake test to be greater was observed compared to the placebo group.

[0170] (Example 3) Effect of improving standardized scores in each cognitive domain in subjects under 60 years of age In order to verify the effect of the present invention on subjects who are not affected by normal age-related cognitive decline (physiological amnesia), an analysis was conducted focusing on subjects under 60 years of age. (Example 3-1) Effect of improving standardized comprehensive memory scores in subjects under 60 years of age In a test conducted using the method described in Example 1, results regarding the standardized comprehensive memory scores of subjects under 60 years of age were extracted. The amount of change in the standardized comprehensive memory scores of subjects under 60 years of age before and after the test is shown in Figure 7 and Table 8.

[0171]

[0172] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily intake of 600 mg of UMP) and test food group 2 (group with a daily intake of 300 mg of UMP), the increase in the standardized overall memory score from before to after the test was greater than in the placebo group.

[0173] In particular, in test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg), the increase in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test was 13.1, exceeding the 10 that is considered to have medical significance, and the p-value was in the range of p<0.10, which is determined to indicate a significant trend.

[0174] The results of this example revealed that UMP has the effect of improving overall memory even in people under 60 years of age, and in particular, the group that took in 600 mg of UMP per day showed a remarkable and significant effect of improving overall memory.

[0175] (Example 3-2) Effect of improving the standardized executive function score in subjects under 60 years of age In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized executive function score in subjects under 60 years of age were extracted. The amount of change in the standardized executive function score in subjects under 60 years of age before and after the test is shown in FIG. 8 and Table 9.

[0176]

[0177] Even in the subgroup of people under 60 years old, there was a tendency for test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg) to show a greater change in executive function standardized scores than the placebo group.

[0178] Comparing test food group 1 and test food group 2, it was clear that test food group 2 (the group that took 300 mg of UMP per day) showed a greater change. In the group that took 300 mg of UMP per day, the increase in the standardized executive function score was 11.7, which exceeds the 10 that is considered medically significant.

[0179] Comparing the results of Example 2-2 with those of this Example, it became clear that the increase in the executive function standardized score in the subgroup under 60 years of age in this Example was greater than the increase in the executive function standardized score in all subjects in Example 2-2.

[0180] This indicates that UMP has a stronger effect on improving executive function in subjects under 60 years of age.

[0181] (Example 3-3) Effect of improving standardized cognitive flexibility scores in subjects under 60 years of age In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized cognitive flexibility scores of subjects under 60 years of age were extracted. The change in the standardized cognitive flexibility scores of subjects under 60 years of age before and after the test is shown in FIG. 9 and Table 10.

[0182]

[0183] When analyzing subjects under 60 years of age, there was a tendency for test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg) to show a greater change in cognitive flexibility standardized scores than the placebo group.

[0184] In particular, among subjects under 60 years of age, the group that took 300 mg of UMP per day saw an increase in cognitive flexibility standardized score of 12.7, exceeding the 10 considered medically significant, and the p-value was in the range of p<0.10, which is judged to indicate a significant trend.

[0185] Furthermore, when comparing the results of Example 2-3 with the results of this Example, the p-value was significantly smaller in both test food groups 1 and 2, and the amount of change in score also increased.

[0186] This indicates that UMP has a greater effect on improving cognitive flexibility in subjects under 60 years of age.

[0187] (Example 3-4) Effect of improving the standardized total attention score in subjects under 60 years of age In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized total attention score in subjects under 60 years of age were extracted. The amount of change in the standardized total attention score of subjects under 60 years of age before and after the test is shown in FIG. 10 and Table 11.

[0188]

[0189] In subjects under 60 years of age, both test food groups 1 and 2 showed an increased change in the total attention standardized score compared to the placebo group.

[0190] In particular, a significant trend toward improvement in overall attention was observed in test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg).

[0191] This indicates that UMP has the effect of improving overall attention in subjects under 60 years of age.

[0192] (Examples 3-5) Effect of improving standardized working memory scores in subjects under 60 years of age In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized working memory scores of subjects under 60 years of age were extracted. The amount of change in the standardized working memory scores of subjects under 60 years of age before and after the test is shown in FIG. 11 and Table 12.

[0193]

[0194] In subjects under 60 years of age, the change in standardized working memory scores was greater in test food group 2 compared to the placebo group.

[0195] Furthermore, when the results of Examples 2-4 and the results of this Example were compared, the amount of change in the standardized working memory score was greater in this Example.

[0196] This confirms that UMP has a greater effect on improving working memory in people under 60 years of age, and that a particularly strong effect on improving working memory is achieved when the daily intake is around 300 mg.

[0197] (Examples 3-6) Effect of improving standardized processing speed scores in subjects under 60 years of age In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized processing speed scores of subjects under 60 years of age were extracted. The amount of change in the standardized processing speed scores of subjects under 60 years of age before and after the test is shown in FIG. 12 and Table 13.

[0198]

[0199] In subjects under 60 years of age, both test food groups 1 and 2 showed increased changes in processing speed standardized scores compared to the placebo group.

[0200] In particular, a significant trend toward improvement in processing speed was observed in test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg).

[0201] This indicates that UMP has the effect of improving processing speed in subjects under 60 years of age.

[0202] (Examples 3-7) Effect of Improving Neurocognitive Index (NCI) Standardized Score in Subjects Under 60 Years Old In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the Neurocognitive Index (NCI) standardized score in subjects under 60 years old were extracted. The change in the Neurocognitive Index (NCI) standardized score of subjects under 60 years old before and after the test is shown in FIG. 13 and Table 14.

[0203]

[0204] In both test food group 1 (group with daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a tendency for the increase in neurocognitive index (NCI) standardized scores to be greater was observed compared to the placebo group.

[0205] In particular, a significant and significant (p value: 0.033) improvement in the neurocognitive index (NCI) standardized score was observed in the group receiving 300 mg of UMP per day.

[0206] This demonstrates that the comprehensive memory improving agent of the present invention has a significant effect on people under 60 years of age, specifically people in their 40s and 50s.

[0207] In particular, it was revealed that a daily intake of 300 mg of UMP produced a remarkable and significant effect in healthy individuals under 60 years of age.

[0208] (Example 4) Effect of improving standardized scores in each cognitive domain in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points In order to verify the effect of the present invention on subjects with relatively low cognitive function related to memory, an analysis was conducted focusing on subjects whose standardized overall memory score before taking UMP was less than 90 points.

[0209] (Example 4-1) Effect of improving the standardized overall memory score in subjects whose standardized overall memory score was less than 90 points In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized overall memory score were extracted from subjects whose standardized overall memory score before UMP intake was less than 90 points. The change in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 14 and Table 15.

[0210]

[0211] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the overall memory standardized score from before to after the test was greater than in the placebo group.

[0212] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized overall memory score from before to after the test exceeded the medically significant value of 10. In particular, in test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg), the increase in the standardized overall memory score was 17.0, which greatly exceeds the medically significant value of 10, and the p-value was in the range of p<0.10, which is determined to indicate a significant trend.

[0213] Compared with the results of Example 2-1, the increase in the standardized overall memory score was greater in both test food groups 1 and 2.

[0214] The results of this example revealed that UMP showed a stronger effect of improving overall memory in individuals with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, and in particular, the group that consumed 600 mg of UMP per day showed a remarkable and significant effect of improving overall memory.

[0215] (Example 4-2) Effect of improving the standardized executive function score in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized executive function score of subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points were extracted. The change in the standardized executive function score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 15 and Table 16.

[0216]

[0217] Even in the subgroup with a total memory standardized score of less than 90 points, there was a tendency for test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg) to show a greater change in executive function standardized score than the placebo group.

[0218] Comparing test food group 1 and test food group 2, it was revealed that test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg) showed a greater amount of change.

[0219] In particular, among subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, the increase in the standardized executive function score in the group that took in 300 mg of UMP per day was 16.0, significantly exceeding the 10 considered medically significant, and the p-value was in the range of 0.05≦p<0.10, which is determined to indicate a significant trend.

[0220] Comparing the results of Example 2-2 with those of this Example, it became clear that the increase in the executive function standardized score in the subgroup of this Example with a total memory standardized score of less than 90 points was greater than the increase in the executive function standardized score for all subjects in Example 2-2.

[0221] This indicates that UMP has a greater effect on improving executive function in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points.

[0222] (Example 4-3) Effect of improving the standardized cognitive flexibility score in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized cognitive flexibility score of subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points were extracted. The change in the standardized cognitive flexibility score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 16 and Table 17.

[0223]

[0224] Even in the subgroup with a total memory standardized score of less than 90 points, there was a tendency for test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg) to show a greater change in cognitive flexibility standardized score than the placebo group.

[0225] Among subjects (of all ages) with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, the increase in standardized cognitive flexibility score in the group that consumed 300 mg of UMP per day was 17.5, significantly exceeding the 10 level considered medically significant, and the p-value was in the range of p<0.05, which is deemed to indicate a significant difference.

[0226] Furthermore, when comparing the results of Example 2-3 with the results of this Example, the p-value was significantly smaller in both test food groups 1 and 2, and the amount of change in score also increased.

[0227] This indicates that UMP has a greater effect on improving cognitive flexibility in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points.

[0228] (Example 4-4) Effect of improving the standardized overall attention score in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized overall attention score of subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points were extracted. The change in the standardized overall attention score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 17 and Table 18.

[0229]

[0230] Even in the subgroup with a total memory standardized score of less than 90 points, there was a tendency for test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg) to show a greater change in the total attention standardized score than the placebo group.

[0231] This indicates that UMP has the effect of improving overall attention in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points.

[0232] (Examples 4-5) Effect of improving the standardized working memory score in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized working memory score of subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points were extracted. The change in the standardized working memory score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 18 and Table 19.

[0233]

[0234] Even in the subgroup with a total memory standardized score of less than 90 points, there was a tendency for test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg) to show a greater change in working memory standardized score than the placebo group.

[0235] This indicates that UMP has the effect of improving working memory in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points.

[0236] (Examples 4-6) Effect of Improving Neurocognitive Index (NCI) Standardized Score in Subjects with a Standardized Overall Memory Score of Less than 90 Points In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the Neurocognitive Index (NCI) standardized score of subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points were extracted. The change in the Neurocognitive Index (NCI) standardized score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 19 and Table 20.

[0237]

[0238] In both test food group 1 (group with daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a tendency for the increase in neurocognitive index (NCI) standardized scores to be greater was observed compared to the placebo group.

[0239] In particular, in the group receiving 300 mg of UMP per day, the change in the standardized Neurocognitive Index (NCI) score exceeded 10, which is considered to be a significant improvement with medical significance.

[0240] This demonstrates that UMP has a significant effect of improving neurocognitive function in healthy individuals with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points.

[0241] In particular, it was found that a daily intake of 300 mg of UMP produced a significant effect on healthy individuals with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, resulting in a significant improvement in neurocognitive function with medical significance.

[0242] (Example 5) Effect of improving standardized scores in each cognitive domain in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points In order to verify the effect of the present invention on subjects with significantly low cognitive function related to memory, an analysis was conducted focusing on subjects whose standardized overall memory score before taking UMP was less than 83.5 points.

[0243] (Example 5-1) Effect of improving the standardized overall memory score in subjects whose standardized overall memory score was less than 83.5 points In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized overall memory score were extracted from subjects whose standardized overall memory score before UMP intake was less than 83.5 points. The change in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 20 and Table 21.

[0244]

[0245] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the overall memory standardized score from before to after the test was greater than in the placebo group.

[0246] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in standardized overall memory score from before to after the test far exceeded the medically significant level of 10. The p-values ​​for both groups were also within the range of p<0.05, which is determined to indicate a significant difference.

[0247] Compared with the results of Examples 2-1 and 3-1, the increase in the standardized overall memory score was greater in both test food groups 1 and 2.

[0248] The results of this example revealed that UMP exhibited a remarkable and significant effect of improving overall memory in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points.

[0249] (Example 5-2) Effect of improving the standardized executive function score in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized executive function score were extracted from subjects whose standardized overall memory score before UMP intake was less than 83.5 points. The change in the standardized executive function score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 21 and Table 22.

[0250]

[0251] In test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized overall memory score from before to after the test was 21.2, far exceeding the medically significant value of 10. The p-value was in the range of p<0.10, which is determined to indicate a significant trend.

[0252] Regarding test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the executive function standardized score was greater compared to the results of Examples 2-2 and 4-2.

[0253] The results of this example revealed that UMP significantly improved executive function in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points when taken at a daily intake of approximately 300 mg. This effect was greater than that seen in all subjects and in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, suggesting that UMP may be more effective in improving executive function in subjects with poor memory-related cognitive function.

[0254] (Example 5-3) Effect of improving standardized cognitive flexibility score in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, results regarding the standardized cognitive flexibility score were extracted from subjects whose standardized overall memory score before UMP intake was less than 83.5 points. The change in the standardized cognitive flexibility score before and after the test is shown in Figure 22 and Table 23.

[0255]

[0256] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test was greater than that of the placebo group.

[0257] In particular, in test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized overall memory score from before to after the test was 23.3, far exceeding the medically significant value of 10. The p-value was in the range of p<0.05, which is determined to be a significant difference.

[0258] Regarding test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the executive function standardized score was greater than the results of Examples 2-3 and 4-3.

[0259] The results of this example revealed that UMP exhibited a remarkable and significant effect of improving cognitive flexibility in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points when the daily intake of UMP was around 300 mg. This effect was greater than the effect on all subjects and on subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, suggesting that UMP exhibits a greater effect of improving cognitive flexibility in subjects with poor memory-related cognitive function.

[0260] (Example 5-4) Effect of improving the standardized total attention score in subjects with a standardized total memory score of less than 83.5 points In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized total attention score were extracted from subjects whose standardized total memory score before UMP intake was less than 83.5 points. The change in the standardized total attention score before and after the test is shown in Figure 23 and Table 24.

[0261]

[0262] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test was greater than that of the placebo group.

[0263] In particular, in test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized overall memory score from before to after the test was 27.8, far exceeding the medically significant value of 10. The p-value was in the range of p<0.10, which is determined to indicate a significant trend.

[0264] As for test food group 2 (group with a daily intake of 300 mg of UMP), the increase in the executive function standardized score was greater than the results in Example 4-4.

[0265] The results of this example revealed that UMP exhibited a remarkable and significant effect of improving overall attention in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points when the daily intake of UMP was around 300 mg. This effect was greater than the effect on all subjects and on subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, suggesting that UMP exhibits a greater effect of improving overall attention in subjects with poor memory-related cognitive function.

[0266] (Example 5-5) Effect of Improving Neurocognitive Index (NCI) Standardized Score in Subjects with a Standardized Total Memory Score of Less than 83.5 Points In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, results regarding the Neurocognitive Index (NCI) standardized score were extracted from subjects whose standardized total memory score before UMP intake was less than 83.5 points. The change in the Neurocognitive Index (NCI) standardized score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 24 and Table 25.

[0267] In both test food group 1 (group with daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a tendency for the increase in neurocognitive index (NCI) standardized scores to be greater was observed compared to the placebo group.

[0268] In particular, in the group that took 300 mg of UMP per day, the increase in the standardized Neurocognitive Index (NCI) score was 15.1, significantly exceeding the 10 score considered medically significant, and the p-value was in the range of p<0.05, which is considered to indicate a significant difference.

[0269] Furthermore, in the group with a daily intake of 300 mg of UMP, the change in the neurocognitive index (NCI) standardized score was increased when compared to Examples 2-6, which investigated all subjects, and Examples 4-6, which investigated subjects with a total memory standardized score of less than 90 points.

[0270] This demonstrates that UMP has a remarkable and significant effect on individuals with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points, and that subjects who took UMP experienced a significant, medically significant improvement in neurocognitive function.

[0271] (Example 6) Effect of improving standardized scores in each cognitive domain in subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points In relation to the effect on subjects under 60 years of age verified in Example 3 and the effect on subjects with relatively low cognitive function related to memory verified in Example 4, in order to verify what effect the present invention has on subjects with both attributes, an analysis was conducted focusing on subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points before taking UMP.

[0272] (Example 6-1) Effect of improving the standardized overall memory score in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized overall memory score were extracted for individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points before taking UMP. The change in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 25 and Table 26.

[0273]

[0274] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the overall memory standardized score from before to after the test was greater than in the placebo group.

[0275] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized overall memory score from before to after the test exceeded the medically significant value of 10. In particular, in test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg), the increase in the standardized overall memory score was 16.1, far exceeding the medically significant value of 10.

[0276] Compared with the results of Example 2-1, the increase in the standardized overall memory score was greater in both test food groups 1 and 2.

[0277] The results of this example revealed that UMP showed a stronger effect of improving overall memory in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, and that the group that took in 600 mg of UMP per day showed a particularly significant effect of improving overall memory.

[0278] (Example 6-2) Effect of improving the standardized executive function score in subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, results regarding the standardized executive function score were extracted for subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points before taking UMP. The change in the standardized executive function score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 26 and Table 27.

[0279]

[0280] Even in the subgroup with a total memory standardized score of less than 90 points and under 60 years of age, there was a tendency for test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg) to show a greater change in executive function standardized scores than the placebo group.

[0281] In particular, among subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, the increase in the standardized executive function score in the group that took in 300 mg of UMP per day was 17.4, significantly exceeding the 10 considered medically significant, and the p-value was in the range of p<0.05, which is deemed to be a significant difference.

[0282] This indicates that UMP has a remarkable and significant effect of improving executive function in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points and who are under 60 years old (in their 40s and 50s).

[0283] Comparing the results of Examples 2-2, 3-2, and 4-2 with the results of this Example, it was revealed that in test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the executive function standardized score in this Example was greater than the increase in the executive function standardized score in Examples 2-2, 3-2, and 4-2. The p-value of this Example was also the smallest.

[0284] This indicates that UMP has a stronger effect on improving executive function in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points and who are under 60 years old.

[0285] (Example 6-3) Effect of improving the standardized cognitive flexibility score in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points In a test conducted using the method described in Example 1, results were extracted regarding the standardized cognitive flexibility score of individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points before taking UMP. The change in the standardized cognitive flexibility score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 27 and Table 28.

[0286]

[0287] Even in the subgroup with a total memory standardized score of less than 90 points and under 60 years of age, there was a tendency for test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg) to show a greater change in cognitive flexibility standardized score than the placebo group.

[0288] In particular, among subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, the increase in standardized cognitive flexibility score in the group that took in 300 mg of UMP per day was 18.9, significantly exceeding the 10 considered medically significant, and the p-value was in the range of p<0.05, which is deemed to be a significant difference.

[0289] This indicates that UMP has a remarkable and significant effect of improving cognitive flexibility in subjects under 60 years of age who have a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points.

[0290] (Example 6-4) Effect of improving the standardized overall attention score in subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized overall attention score were extracted for subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points before taking UMP. The change in the standardized overall attention score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 28 and Table 29.

[0291]

[0292] Even in the subgroup with a total memory standardized score of less than 90 points and under 60 years of age, there was a tendency for test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg) to show a greater change in the total attention standardized score than the placebo group.

[0293] In particular, among subjects under 60 years of age with a total memory standardized score of less than 90 points, the increase in total attention standardized score in the group that took in 300 mg of UMP per day was 20.9, far exceeding the 10 considered medically significant.

[0294] This indicates that UMP has a remarkable and significant effect of improving overall attention in subjects under 60 years of age who have a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points.

[0295] (Example 6-5) Effect of improving standardized processing speed score in subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, results regarding the standardized processing speed score were extracted for subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points before taking UMP. The change in the standardized processing speed score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 29 and Table 30.

[0296]

[0297] Even in the subgroup with a total memory standardized score of less than 90 points and under 60 years of age, there was a tendency for test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) to show a greater change in processing speed standardized score than the placebo group.

[0298] Comparing the results of Examples 2-5 with those of this example, the increase in the processing speed standardized score was greater.

[0299] This indicates that UMP has the effect of improving processing speed in subjects under 60 years of age who have a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points.

[0300] (Example 6-6) Effect of Improving Neurocognitive Index (NCI) Standardized Score in Subjects Under 60 Years Old with a Standardized Overall Memory Score of Less than 90 Points In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, results regarding the Neurocognitive Index (NCI) standardized score were extracted for subjects under 60 years old with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points before taking UMP. The change in the Neurocognitive Index (NCI) standardized score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 30 and Table 31.

[0301]

[0302] In both test food group 1 (group with daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a tendency for the increase in neurocognitive index (NCI) standardized scores to be greater was observed compared to the placebo group.

[0303] Among the subjects under 60 years old with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90, the group that took in 300 mg of UMP per day saw an increase in the neurocognitive index (NCI) standardized score of 11.8, exceeding the medically significant value of 10, and showing a greater increase in the neurocognitive index (NCI) standardized score than in Examples 2-6, 3-7, and 4-6. The p-value was in the range of p<0.05, which is determined to be a significant difference.

[0304] From this, it became clear that the comprehensive memory improvement agent of the present invention had a significant effect on people under 60 years of age who had a comprehensive memory standardized score of less than 90 points before taking UMP, and that neurocognitive function was significantly improved in a medically significant way.

[0305] In particular, it was found that when the daily intake of UMP was around 300 mg, a remarkable and significant effect was observed in healthy individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, and neurocognitive function was significantly improved with medical significance.

[0306] (Example 7) Effect of improving standardized scores in each cognitive domain in subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points In relation to the effect on subjects under 60 years of age verified in Example 3 and the effect on subjects with significantly low cognitive function related to memory verified in Example 5, in order to verify what effect the present invention has on subjects with both attributes, an analysis was conducted focusing on subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points before taking UMP.

[0307] (Example 7-1) Effect of improving the standardized overall memory score in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized overall memory score were extracted for individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points before taking UMP. The change in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 31 and Table 32.

[0308]

[0309] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the overall memory standardized score from before to after the test was greater than in the placebo group.

[0310] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test far exceeded 10, which is considered to have medical significance.

[0311] The results of this example revealed that UMP showed a stronger effect of improving overall memory in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points, and that the group that took in 600 mg of UMP per day showed a particularly significant effect of improving overall memory.

[0312] (Example 7-2) Effect of improving the standardized executive function score in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, results regarding the standardized executive function score were extracted for individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points before taking UMP. The change in the standardized executive function score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 32 and Table 33.

[0313]

[0314] Among subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, the increase in the standardized executive function score in the group that took in 300 mg of UMP per day was 22.4, significantly exceeding the medically significant increase of 10, and the p-value was in the range of p<0.10, which is considered to indicate a significant trend.

[0315] This showed that for subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points and under 60 years of age (in their 40s and 50s), when the daily intake of UMP was around 300 mg, UMP had a remarkable and significant effect on improving executive function.

[0316] This indicates that UMP has a stronger effect on improving executive function in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points and who are under 60 years old.

[0317] (Example 7-3) Effect of improving the standardized cognitive flexibility score in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points In a test conducted using the method described in Example 1, results were extracted regarding the standardized cognitive flexibility score of individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points before taking UMP. The change in the standardized cognitive flexibility score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 33 and Table 34.

[0318]

[0319] Even in the subgroup with a total memory standardized score of less than 83.5 points and under 60 years of age, there was a tendency for test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg) to show a greater change in cognitive flexibility standardized score than the placebo group.

[0320] In particular, among subjects under 60 years of age whose overall memory standardized score was less than 83.5 points, the increase in cognitive flexibility standardized score in the group that took in 300 mg of UMP per day was 24.7, significantly exceeding the 10 considered to be medically significant, and the p-value was in the range of p<0.05, which is determined to be a significant difference.

[0321] This indicates that UMP has a remarkable and significant effect of improving cognitive flexibility in subjects under 60 years of age whose standardized overall memory score is less than 83.5 points.

[0322] (Example 7-4) Effect of improving the standardized overall attention score in subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized overall attention score were extracted for subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points before taking UMP. The change in the standardized overall attention score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 34 and Table 35.

[0323]

[0324] In subjects under 60 years of age (in their 40s and 50s) with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points, the standardized overall attention score in the placebo group decreased before and after the test, whereas the standardized overall attention score in both test food groups 1 and 2 improved.

[0325] In particular, among subjects under 60 years of age whose overall memory standardized score was less than 83.5 points, in the group that took in 300 mg of UMP per day, the increase in overall attention standardized score was 28.7, which is significantly greater than the 10 considered to have medical significance, and the p-value was in the range of p<0.05, which is determined to be a significant difference.

[0326] This indicates that UMP has a remarkable and significant effect of improving overall attention in subjects under 60 years of age who have a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points.

[0327] Furthermore, when the results of Test Food Group 2 in this Example were compared with the results of Test Food Group 2 in Examples 3-4 and 5-4, the amount of change in the standardized overall attention score before and after the test was the largest in this Example, and the p-value for this Example was the smallest. This indicates that UMP has a particularly strong effect on improving overall attention in subjects under 60 years old who had a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points.

[0328] (Example 7-5) Effect of Improving Neurocognitive Index (NCI) Standardized Score in Subjects Under 60 Years Old with a Standardized Overall Memory Score of Less than 83.5 Points In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, results regarding the Neurocognitive Index (NCI) standardized score were extracted for subjects under 60 years old with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points before UMP intake. The change in the Neurocognitive Index (NCI) standardized score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 35 and Table 36.

[0329]

[0330] In both test food group 1 (group with daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a tendency for the increase in neurocognitive index (NCI) standardized scores to be greater was observed compared to the placebo group.

[0331] In particular, in the group that took 300 mg of UMP per day, the increase in the standardized Neurocognitive Index (NCI) score was 15.3, significantly exceeding the 10 score considered medically significant, and the p-value was in the range of p<0.05, which is considered to indicate a significant difference.

[0332] Furthermore, in the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg, the change in NCI standardized score was greater when compared to Example 6-6, which surveyed individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points, and Example 5-5, which surveyed individuals with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points.

[0333] From this, it became clear that the comprehensive memory improvement agent of the present invention had a more pronounced and significant effect on those under 60 years of age with a comprehensive memory standardized score of less than 83.5 points, and that neurocognitive function was significantly improved in a medically significant manner.

[0334] (Example 8) Effect of improving the standardized scores of each cognitive domain in individuals with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to less than 100 points In Cognitrax, individuals with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to less than 100 points are judged to have cognitive function related to memory within the normal range. In order to verify the effect of UMP on such individuals, an analysis was conducted focusing on individuals whose standardized overall memory score before taking UMP was 90 to less than 100 points.

[0335] (Example 8-1) Effect of improving the standardized overall memory score in subjects whose standardized overall memory score was 90 to less than 100 points In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized overall memory score were extracted from subjects whose standardized overall memory score before UMP intake was 90 to less than 100 points. The change in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 36 and Table 37.

[0336]

[0337] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the overall memory standardized score from before to after the test was greater than in the placebo group.

[0338] The results of this example revealed that UMP has an effect of improving overall memory even in those with a standardized overall memory score of 90 or more but less than 100 points, and that the group that took in 600 mg of UMP per day showed a greater effect of improving overall memory.

[0339] (Example 8-2) Effect of improving standardized processing speed score in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to less than 100 points In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized processing speed score were extracted from subjects whose standardized overall memory score before UMP intake was 90 to less than 100 points. The change in the standardized processing speed score before and after the test is shown in Figure 37 and Table 38.

[0340]

[0341] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in processing speed standardized scores before and after the test was greater than in the placebo group.

[0342] This demonstrates that UMP has the effect of improving processing speed even for individuals with a standardized overall memory score of 90 or more but less than 100 points.

[0343] (Example 8-3) Effect of improving the standardized cognitive function speed score in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to less than 100 points In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized cognitive function speed score were extracted from subjects whose standardized overall memory score before UMP intake was 90 to less than 100 points. The change in the standardized cognitive function speed score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 38 and Table 39.

[0344]

[0345] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in cognitive function speed standardized scores before and after the test was greater than in the placebo group.

[0346] This demonstrates that UMP has the effect of improving cognitive function speed even in individuals with a standardized overall memory score of 90 or more but less than 100 points.

[0347] (Example 8-4) Effect of Improving Neurocognitive Index (NCI) Standardized Score in Subjects with a Standardized Overall Memory Score of 90 to Less than 100 In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, results were extracted regarding the Neurocognitive Index (NCI) standardized score of subjects whose standardized overall memory score before UMP intake was 90 to less than 100. The change in the Neurocognitive Index (NCI) standardized score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 39 and Table 40.

[0348]

[0349] A trend towards a greater increase in the Neurocognitive Index (NCI) standardized score was observed in test food group 1 (group with a daily intake of 600 mg of UMP) compared to the placebo group.

[0350] This demonstrates that UMP has an effect of improving neurocognitive function even in individuals with a standardized overall memory score of 90 or more but less than 100 points.

[0351] (Example 9) Effect of improving standardized scores in each cognitive domain in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to 100 points Analysis was conducted focusing on individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to 100 points before taking UMP.

[0352] (Example 9-1) Effect of improving the standardized overall memory score in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to less than 100 points In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized overall memory score were extracted from individuals whose standardized overall memory score before UMP intake was 90 to less than 100 points. The change in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 40 and Table 41.

[0353]

[0354] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the overall memory standardized score from before to after the test was greater than in the placebo group.

[0355] The results of this example revealed that UMP has an effect of improving overall memory even in people under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to 100 points, and that the group that took in 600 mg of UMP per day showed a greater effect of improving overall memory.

[0356] (Example 9-2) Effect of improving the standardized executive function score in subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to less than 100 points In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized executive function score were extracted from subjects whose standardized overall memory score before UMP intake was 90 to less than 100 points. The change in the standardized executive function score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 41 and Table 42.

[0357]

[0358] In test food group 1 (group with a daily intake of 600 mg of UMP), the increase in executive function standardized scores from before to after the test was greater than in the placebo group.

[0359] The results of this example revealed that UMP was effective in improving executive function even in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to 100 points.

[0360] (Example 9-3) Effect of improving the standardized overall attention score in subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to less than 100 points In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized overall attention score were extracted from subjects whose standardized overall memory score before UMP intake was 90 to less than 100 points. The change in the standardized overall attention score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 42 and Table 43.

[0361]

[0362] In test food group 1 (group with a daily intake of 600 mg of UMP), the increase in executive function standardized scores from before to after the test was greater than in the placebo group.

[0363] The results of this example reveal that UMP has an effect of improving overall attention even in those under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 points or more and less than 100 points.

[0364] (Example 9-4) Effect of improving standardized working memory score in subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to less than 100 points In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, results regarding the standardized working memory score were extracted from subjects whose standardized overall memory score before UMP intake was 90 to less than 100 points. The change in the standardized working memory score before and after the test is shown in Figure 43 and Table 44.

[0365]

[0366] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in executive function standardized scores before and after the test was greater than in the placebo group.

[0367] The results of this example revealed that UMP has an effect of improving working memory even in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to 100 points.

[0368] (Example 9-5) Effect of improving standardized processing speed score in subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to 100 points In a test conducted using the method described in Example 1, results were extracted regarding the standardized processing speed score in subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to 100 points before taking UMP. The change in the standardized processing speed score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 44 and Table 45.

[0369]

[0370] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in processing speed standardized scores before and after the test was greater than in the placebo group.

[0371] This demonstrates that UMP is effective in improving processing speed even in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to 100 points.

[0372] (Example 9-6) Effect of improving the standardized cognitive function speed score in subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to 100 points In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, results were extracted regarding the standardized cognitive function speed score in subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to 100 points before taking UMP. The change in the standardized cognitive function speed score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 45 and Table 46.

[0373]

[0374] In test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the standardized cognitive function speed score from before to after the test was greater than in the placebo group. The increase in the standardized cognitive function speed score exceeded 10, which is considered to have medical significance, and the p-value was in the range of p<0.10, which is determined to indicate a significant trend.

[0375] This demonstrates that UMP is effective in improving cognitive function speed even in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to 100 points.

[0376] (Example 9-7) Effect of Improving Neurocognitive Index (NCI) Standardized Score in Subjects Under 60 Years Old with a Standardized Overall Memory Score of 90 to Less than 100 Points In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, results were extracted regarding the Neurocognitive Index (NCI) standardized score of subjects under 60 years old with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to less than 100 points before taking UMP. The change in the Neurocognitive Index (NCI) standardized score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 46 and Table 47.

[0377]

[0378] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily intake of 600 mg of UMP) and test food group 2 (group with a daily intake of 300 mg of UMP), the increase in neurocognitive index (NCI) standardized scores from before to after the test was greater than in the placebo group.

[0379] This demonstrates that UMP has an effect of improving neurocognitive function even in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to 100 points.

[0380] In subjects whose standardized overall memory score before taking UMP was 83.5 points or more but less than 100 points, significant improvement was observed in some cognitive domains, and this is described as a reference example.

[0381] (Reference Example 1) Effect of improving the standardized working memory score in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 to less than 100 points In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized working memory score were extracted from subjects whose standardized overall memory score before UMP intake was 83.5 to less than 100 points. The change in the standardized working memory score before and after the test is shown in Figure 47 and Table 48.

[0382]

[0383] When subjects with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 or more but less than 100 were analyzed, the standardized working memory score in the placebo group decreased from before to after the test, whereas the standardized working memory score in test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg) increased significantly.

[0384] A significant (p: 0.031) improvement in working memory was observed in the group that received 300 mg of UMP intake.

[0385] This revealed that UMP has the effect of improving working memory in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 to 100 points, and that a daily intake of around 300 mg produced a remarkable and significant effect of improving working memory.

[0386] (Reference Example 2) Effect of improving standardized processing speed score in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 to less than 100 points In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized processing speed score were extracted from subjects whose standardized overall memory score before UMP intake was 83.5 to less than 100 points. The change in the standardized processing speed score before and after the test is shown in Figure 48 and Table 49.

[0387]

[0388] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in processing speed standardized scores before and after the test was greater than in the placebo group.

[0389] In particular, in test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg), the increase in processing speed standardized score exceeded 10, which is considered to have medical significance.

[0390] This demonstrates that UMP has the effect of improving processing speed even for individuals with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 points or more but less than 100 points.

[0391] (Reference Example 3) Effect of improving the standardized cognitive function speed score in subjects with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 to less than 100 points In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized cognitive function speed score were extracted from subjects whose standardized overall memory score before UMP intake was 83.5 to less than 100 points. The change in the standardized cognitive function speed score before and after the test is shown in Figure 49 and Table 50.

[0392]

[0393] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in cognitive function speed standardized scores before and after the test was greater than in the placebo group.

[0394] This demonstrates that UMP has the effect of improving cognitive function speed even in individuals with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 points or more but less than 100 points.

[0395] (Reference Example 4) Effect of improving the standardized overall memory score in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 to 100 points In a test conducted using the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized overall memory score were extracted for individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 to 100 points before taking UMP. The change in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test is shown in Figure 50 and Table 51.

[0396]

[0397] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the overall memory standardized score from before to after the test was greater than in the placebo group.

[0398] This demonstrates that UMP has an effect of improving overall memory even in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 points or more and less than 100 points.

[0399] (Reference Example 5) Effect of improving the standardized working memory score in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 to 100 points In a test conducted using the method described in Example 1, results were extracted regarding the standardized working memory score in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 to 100 points before taking UMP. The change in the standardized working memory score before and after the test is shown in Figure 51 and Table 52.

[0400]

[0401] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the overall memory standardized score from before to after the test was greater than in the placebo group.

[0402] In test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a significant (p: 0.018) improvement in working memory was observed.

[0403] This demonstrates that UMP has an effect of improving working memory even in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 to 100 points.

[0404] (Reference Example 6) Effect of improving standardized processing speed score in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 to 100 points In a test conducted using the method described in Example 1, results were extracted regarding the standardized processing speed score in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 to 100 points before taking UMP. The change in the standardized processing speed score before and after the test is shown in Figure 52 and Table 53.

[0405]

[0406] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in processing speed standardized scores before and after the test was greater than in the placebo group.

[0407] This demonstrates that UMP is effective in improving processing speed even in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 to 100 points.

[0408] (Reference Example 7) Effect of improving the standardized cognitive function speed score in subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 to 100 points In a test conducted using the method described in Example 1, results were extracted regarding the standardized cognitive function speed score in subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 to 100 points before taking UMP. The change in the standardized cognitive function speed score before and after the test is shown in Figure 53 and Table 54.

[0409]

[0410] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in cognitive function speed standardized scores before and after the test was greater than in the placebo group.

[0411] This demonstrates that UMP is effective in improving cognitive function speed even in individuals under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 83.5 to 100 points.

[0412] (Example 10) Effect of improving standardized scores in each cognitive domain in subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points In order to verify the effect of the present invention on subjects with relatively low cognitive function related to verbal memory, an analysis was conducted focusing on subjects whose standardized verbal memory score before taking UMP was less than 90 points.

[0413] (Example 10-1) Effect of improving the standardized overall memory score in subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points In a test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized overall memory score were extracted from subjects whose standardized verbal memory score before UMP intake was less than 90 points. The change in the standardized overall memory score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 54 and Table 55.

[0414]

[0415] In both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg), the increase in the overall memory standardized score from before to after the test was greater than in the placebo group.

[0416] In test food group 1 (the group that took 600 mg of UMP per day), the increase in the standardized overall memory score from before to after the test was 15.8, far exceeding the medically significant score of 10. The difference was within the range of p<0.05, which is considered to be significant.

[0417] The results of this example revealed that UMP has an effect of improving overall memory in individuals with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points, and in particular, it was revealed that the group that took in 600 mg of UMP per day showed a remarkable and significant effect of improving overall memory.

[0418] (Example 10-2) Effect of improving the standardized executive function score in subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized executive function score of subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points were extracted. The change in the standardized executive function score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 55 and Table 56.

[0419]

[0420] Even in the subgroup with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points, there was a tendency for test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg) to show a greater change in executive function standardized scores than the placebo group.

[0421] Comparing test food group 1 and test food group 2, it was revealed that test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg) showed a greater amount of change.

[0422] Among subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points, the increase in the standardized executive function score in the group that took in 300 mg of UMP per day was 12.3, exceeding the 10 level considered medically significant, and the p-value was in the range of 0.05≦p<0.10, which is considered to indicate a trend toward significance.

[0423] Comparing the results of test food group 2 in Example 2-2 with the results of test food group 2 in this example, it became clear that the increase in the executive function standardized score in the subgroup of this example with a verbal memory standardized score of less than 90 points was greater than the increase in the executive function standardized score in all subjects in Example 2-2.

[0424] This indicates that UMP has a greater effect on improving executive function in subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points.

[0425] (Example 10-3) Effect of improving standardized cognitive flexibility score in subjects with standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, results regarding the standardized cognitive flexibility score of subjects with standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points were extracted. The change in the standardized cognitive flexibility score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 56 and Table 57.

[0426]

[0427] Even in the subgroup with a verbal memory standardized score of less than 90 points, there was a tendency for test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg) to show a greater change in cognitive flexibility standardized score than the placebo group.

[0428] In particular, among subjects (of all ages) with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points, the increase in the standardized cognitive flexibility score in the group that consumed 300 mg of UMP per day was 13.4, exceeding the 10 level considered medically significant, and the p-value was in the range of p<0.05, which is considered to be a significant difference.

[0429] Furthermore, when the results of Example 2-3 were compared with the results of this Example, the amount of change in score increased in test food group 2.

[0430] This indicates that UMP has a greater effect on improving cognitive flexibility in subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points.

[0431] (Example 10-4) Effect of improving the standardized total attention score in subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized total attention score of subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points were extracted. The change in the standardized total attention score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 57 and Table 58.

[0432]

[0433] Even in the subgroup with a verbal memory standardized score of less than 90 points, there was a tendency for the change in the overall attention standardized score to be greater in both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg) than in the placebo group.

[0434] Among subjects (of all ages) with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90, the increase in the standardized total attention score in the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg was 13.5, exceeding the medically significant increase of 10. The p-values ​​were in the range of p<0.05, which indicates a significant difference, for both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg).

[0435] This indicates that UMP has the effect of improving overall attention in subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points.

[0436] (Example 10-5) Effect of improving standardized working memory score in subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized working memory score of subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points were extracted. The change in the standardized working memory score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 58 and Table 59.

[0437]

[0438] Even in the subgroup with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points, there was a tendency for test food group 2 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg) to show a greater change in working memory standardized score than the placebo group.

[0439] This indicates that UMP has the effect of improving working memory in subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points.

[0440] (Example 10-6) Effect of improving standardized processing speed score in subjects with standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, the results regarding the standardized processing speed score of subjects with standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points were extracted. The change in the standardized processing speed score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 59 and Table 60.

[0441]

[0442] In the subgroup with a verbal memory standardized score of less than 90 points, there was a tendency for test food group 1 (the group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) to show a greater change in processing speed standardized score than the placebo group.

[0443] This indicates that UMP has the effect of improving processing speed for subjects with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points.

[0444] (Example 10-7) Effect of improving neurocognitive index (NCI) standardized score in subjects with a verbal memory standardized score of less than 90 points In the test conducted by the method described in Example 1, results regarding the neurocognitive index (NCI) standardized score of subjects with a verbal memory standardized score of less than 90 points were extracted. The change in neurocognitive index (NCI) standardized score before and after the test is shown in FIG. 60 and Table 61.

[0445]

[0446] In both test food group 1 (group with daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with daily UMP intake of 300 mg), a tendency for the increase in neurocognitive index (NCI) standardized scores to be greater was observed compared to the placebo group.

[0447] The p-values ​​were in the range of p<0.05, which indicates a significant difference in both test food group 1 (group with a daily UMP intake of 600 mg) and test food group 2 (group with a daily UMP intake of 300 mg).

[0448] This demonstrates that UMP has a significant effect of improving neurocognitive function in healthy individuals with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points.

[0449] The contents of Examples 2 to 10 shown above will be summarized with a focus on the effect of improving overall memory ability.

[0450] Regarding the effect of improving overall memory, in Example 2-1, in which the entire subject group was analyzed, the amount of change in the standardized overall memory score was greater than that of the placebo group, demonstrating the effect of UMP on improving overall memory. This result is also supported by the fact that the amount of change in the standardized overall memory score was greater than that of the placebo group in the analyses of the subject subgroups in Examples 3-1 to 10-1.

[0451] In particular, the following subgroups of subjects showed an increase in the standardized overall memory score of more than 10, indicating that UMP improves overall memory in a medically significant way. Note that the corresponding examples are shown in parentheses. All subjects: 600 mg (Example 2-1) Under 60 years old: 600 mg (Example 3-1) Standardized overall memory score before UMP intake of less than 90 points: 600 mg (Example 4-1) or 300 mg (Example 4-1) Standardized overall memory score before UMP intake of less than 83.5 points: 600 mg (Example 5-1) or 300 mg (Example 5-1) Under 60 years old and standardized overall memory score before UMP intake of less than 90 points: 600 mg (Example 6-1) or 300 mg (Example 6-1) Under 60 years old and standardized overall memory score before UMP intake of less than 83.5 points: 600 mg (Example 7-1) or 300 mg (Example 7-1) Standardized verbal memory score before UMP intake of less than 90 points: 600 mg (Example 10-1)

[0452] In particular, in the following subgroups of subjects, the increase in the standardized overall memory score exceeded 10 and the p-value was less than 0.10, clearly demonstrating that UMP improves overall memory to the extent that it was determined to be medically significant and to have a significant difference or significant tendency. All subjects: 600 mg (Example 2-1) Under 60 years old: 600 mg (Example 3-1) Standardized overall memory score less than 90 points before UMP intake: 600 mg (Example 4-1) Standardized overall memory score less than 83.5 points before UMP intake, 600 mg (Example 5-1) or 300 mg (Example 5-1) Standardized verbal memory score less than 90 points before UMP intake: 600 mg (Example 10-1)

[0453] Based on the above results, the present invention can be embodied in the following aspects.

[0454] [1] An agent for improving overall memory in healthy subjects, comprising uridylic acid as an active ingredient. [2] The agent according to [1], wherein the active ingredient is uridylic acid alone. [3] The agent according to [1] or [2], which simultaneously improves overall memory in healthy subjects as well as one or more selected from executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, working memory, processing speed, and cognitive function speed. [4] The agent according to [1] or [2], which simultaneously improves overall memory in healthy subjects as well as two or more selected from executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, working memory, processing speed, and cognitive function speed. [5] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], wherein the uridylic acid content is 450 mg or more but less than 750 mg, calculated as the daily uridylic acid dosage. [6] The agent according to [5], which improves all of overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, processing speed, and neurocognitive function in healthy subjects. [7] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], wherein the content of uridylic acid is 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg in terms of the daily uridylic acid dosage. [8] The agent according to [7], which improves all of overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, working memory, and neurocognitive function in healthy subjects. [9] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], wherein the content of uridylic acid is 450 mg or more and less than 750 mg in terms of the daily uridylic acid dosage, and improves overall memory in healthy subjects under 60 years of age.

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

[0455]

[11] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], wherein the uridylic acid content is 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg in terms of the daily uridylic acid dosage, and improves overall memory in a healthy subject under 60 years of age.

[12] The agent according to

[11] , wherein the uridylic acid content improves all of overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, working memory, processing speed, and neurocognitive function in a healthy subject.

[13] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], wherein the uridylic acid content is 450 mg or more and less than 750 mg in terms of the daily uridylic acid dosage, and improves overall memory in a healthy subject with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points.

[14] The agent according to

[13] , wherein the uridylic acid content improves all of overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, and neurocognitive function in a healthy subject.

[15] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], wherein the uridylic acid content is 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg in terms of the daily uridylic acid dosage, and wherein the agent improves overall memory in a healthy subject with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points.

[16] The agent according to

[15] , wherein the agent improves all of overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, working memory, and neurocognitive function in a healthy subject.

[17] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], wherein the uridylic acid content is 450 mg or more and less than 750 mg in terms of the daily uridylic acid dosage, and wherein the agent improves overall memory in a healthy subject with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points.

[18] The agent according to

[17] , wherein the agent improves all of overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, and neurocognitive function in a healthy subject.

[19] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], which contains uridylic acid at a content of 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg in terms of a daily uridylic acid dosage, and which improves overall memory in a healthy subject having a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points.

[20] The agent according to

[19] , which improves all of overall memory, cognitive flexibility, and overall attention in a healthy subject.

[0456]

[21] The agent according to

[19] , which improves all of overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, and neurocognitive function in healthy subjects.

[22] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], wherein the content of uridylic acid is 450 mg or more and less than 750 mg in terms of the daily uridylic acid dosage, and improves overall memory in healthy subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points.

[23] The agent according to

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

[24] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], wherein the content of uridylic acid is 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg in terms of the daily uridylic acid dosage, and improves overall memory in healthy subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 90 points.

[25] The agent according to

[24] , which improves all of overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, and neurocognitive function in healthy subjects.

[26] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], which contains uridylic acid at a concentration of 450 mg or more and less than 750 mg in terms of a daily uridylic acid dosage, improves overall memory in healthy subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points.

[27] The agent according to

[26] , which improves all of overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, and neurocognitive function in healthy subjects.

[28] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], which contains uridylic acid at a concentration of 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg in terms of a daily uridylic acid dosage, improves overall memory in healthy subjects under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of less than 83.5 points.

[29] The agent according to

[28] , which improves all of overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, and neurocognitive function in a healthy subject.

[30] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], which contains uridylic acid at a content of 450 mg or more and less than 750 mg in terms of a daily uridylic acid dosage, and which improves overall memory in a healthy subject with a standardized overall memory score of 90 points or more and less than 100 points.

[0457]

[31] The agent according to

[30] , which improves all of overall memory, processing speed, cognitive function speed, and neurocognitive function in a healthy subject.

[32] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], wherein the content of uridylic acid is 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg in terms of a daily uridylic acid dosage, and improves overall memory in a healthy subject with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to less than 100 points.

[33] The agent according to

[32] , which improves all of overall memory, processing speed, cognitive function speed, and neurocognitive function in a healthy subject.

[34] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], wherein the content of uridylic acid is 450 mg or more and less than 750 mg in terms of a daily uridylic acid dosage, and improves overall memory in a healthy subject under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to less than 100 points.

[35] The agent according to

[34] , which improves all of overall memory, executive function, working memory, processing speed, cognitive function speed, and neurocognitive function in a healthy subject.

[36] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], wherein the uridylic acid content is 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg in terms of a daily uridylic acid dosage, and improves overall memory in a healthy subject under 60 years of age with a standardized overall memory score of 90 to 100.

[37] The agent according to

[36] , which improves all of overall memory, executive function, overall attention, working memory, processing speed, cognitive function speed, and neurocognitive function in a healthy subject.

[38] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], wherein the uridylic acid content is 450 mg or more and less than 750 mg in terms of a daily uridylic acid dosage, and improves overall memory in a healthy subject with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90.

[39] The agent according to

[38] , which improves all of overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, processing speed, and neurocognitive function in a healthy subject.

[40] The agent according to any one of [1] to [4], which contains uridylic acid in an amount of 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg in terms of a daily uridylic acid dosage, and which improves overall memory in a healthy subject with a standardized verbal memory score of less than 90 points.

[0458]

[41] The agent according to

[40] , which improves all of overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, working memory, and neurocognitive function in a healthy subject.

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

[41] , which is taken continuously for 12 weeks or more.

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

[42] .

[44] The composition according to

[43] , which is a food or drink, an infant formula, an enteral nutritional supplement, a health food or drink, or a pharmaceutical product.

[45] A method for improving overall memory in a healthy subject using the agent according to any one of [1] to

[41] .

[46] The method according to

[45] , in which the agent is taken continuously for 12 weeks or more.

[47] Uridylic acid for improving overall memory in a healthy subject.

[48] Uridylic acid according to

[47] , for simultaneously improving overall memory in a healthy subject, as well as one or more selected from executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, working memory, neurocognitive function, processing speed, and cognitive function speed.

[49] The uridylic acid according to

[47] , which simultaneously improves two or more of executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, working memory, processing speed, and cognitive function speed in addition to overall memory in healthy subjects.

[50] An agent comprising the uridylic acid according to any one of

[47] to

[49] as an active ingredient.

[0459]

[51] The agent according to

[50] , wherein the active ingredient is uridylic acid alone.

[52] The agent according to

[50] or

[51] , wherein the content of uridylic acid is 10 mg to 1,000 mg, calculated as a daily uridylic acid dosage.

[53] The agent according to

[50] or

[51] , wherein the content of uridylic acid is 150 mg to less than 750 mg, calculated as a daily uridylic acid dosage.

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

[50] to

[53] .

[55] The composition according to

[54] , which is a food or drink, infant formula, enteral nutritional supplement, health food or drink, or pharmaceutical product.

[56] Use of uridylic acid for improving overall memory in healthy subjects.

[57] Use of uridylic acid according to

[56] , for simultaneously improving overall memory in healthy subjects as well as one or more selected from executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, working memory, neurocognitive function, processing speed, and cognitive function speed.

[58] Use of uridylic acid according to

[56] , which simultaneously improves two or more of executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, working memory, processing speed, and cognitive function speed in addition to overall memory ability in healthy subjects.

[59] Use of uridylic acid according to any one of

[56] to

[58] , which involves continuously taking uridylic acid for 12 weeks or more.

Claims

1. An agent for improving the overall memory of healthy individuals, containing uridylic acid as an active ingredient.

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

3. The agent according to claim 1 or 2, wherein the content of uridylic acid is 450 mg or more and less than 750 mg in terms of the daily uridylic acid dosage.

4. The agent according to claim 3, which improves all of the overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, processing speed, and neurocognitive function of healthy individuals.

5. The agent according to claim 1 or 2, wherein the content of uridylic acid is 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg in terms of the daily uridylic acid dosage.

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

7. The agent according to claim 1 or 2, wherein the content of uridylic acid is 450 mg or more and less than 750 mg in terms of the daily uridylic acid dosage, and which improves the overall memory of healthy individuals under 60 years old.

8. The agent according to claim 7, which improves all of the overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, overall attention, processing speed, and neurocognitive function of healthy individuals.

9. The agent according to claim 1 or 2, wherein the content of uridylic acid is 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg in terms of the daily uridylic acid dosage, and which improves the overall memory of healthy individuals under 60 years old.

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

11. The agent according to claim 1 or 2, wherein the content of uridylic acid is 450 mg or more and less than 750 mg in terms of the daily uridylic acid dosage, and which improves the overall memory of healthy individuals with an overall memory standardized score of less than 90 points.

12. The agent according to claim 11, which improves all of the overall memory, executive function, cognitive flexibility, and neurocognitive function of healthy individuals.

13. The agent according to claim 1 or 2, wherein the content of uridylic acid is 150 mg or more and less than 450 mg in terms of the daily uridylic acid dosage, and which improves the overall memory of healthy individuals with an overall memory standardized score of less than 90 points.

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

15. The agent according to claim 1 or 2, which is continuously ingested for 12 weeks or more.

16. A composition comprising the agent according to claim 1 or 2.

17. Uridine acid for improving the comprehensive memory of a healthy subject.

18. The uridine acid according to claim 17, for simultaneously improving 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 of a healthy subject.

19. Use of uridine acid for improving the comprehensive memory of a healthy subject.

20. Use of the uridine acid according to claim 19, for simultaneously improving 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 of a healthy subject.