Epigenetic and Metabolomic Biomarkers for Biological Age
A Comparative Analysis of Mortality and Frailty Risk
L.M. Kuiper (TU Delft - Pattern Recognition and Bioinformatics, Erasmus MC, Center for Nutrition)
Harmke A. Polinder-Bos (Erasmus MC)
D. Bizzarri (TU Delft - Pattern Recognition and Bioinformatics, Leiden University Medical Center)
Dina Vojinovic (Leiden University Medical Center, Erasmus MC)
Costanza L. Vallerga (Erasmus MC)
M.J.T. Reinders (TU Delft - Pattern Recognition and Bioinformatics, Leiden University Medical Center)
P. Eline Slagboom (Max Planck Institute for Biology of Ageing, Leiden University Medical Center)
Erik Ben van den Akker (TU Delft - Pattern Recognition and Bioinformatics, Leiden University Medical Center)
More authors (External organisation)
More Info
expand_more
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.
Abstract
Biological age captures a person's age-related risk of unfavorable outcomes using biophysiological information. Multivariate biological age measures include frailty scores and molecular biomarkers. These measures are often studied in isolation, but here we present a large-scale study comparing them. In 2 prospective cohorts (n = 3 222), we compared epigenetic (DNAm Horvath, DNAm Hannum, DNAm Lin, DNAm epiTOC, DNAm PhenoAge, DNAm DunedinPoAm, DNAm GrimAge, and DNAm Zhang) and metabolomic-based (MetaboAge and MetaboHealth) biomarkers in reflection of biological age, as represented by 5 frailty measures and overall mortality. Biomarkers trained on outcomes with biophysiological and/or mortality information outperformed age-trained biomarkers in frailty reflection and mortality prediction. DNAm GrimAge and MetaboHealth, trained on mortality, showed the strongest association with these outcomes. The associations of DNAm GrimAge and MetaboHealth with frailty and mortality were independent of each other and of the frailty score mimicking clinical geriatric assessment. Epigenetic, metabolomic, and clinical biological age markers seem to capture different aspects of aging. These findings suggest that mortality-trained molecular markers may provide novel phenotype reflecting biological age and strengthen current clinical geriatric health and well-being assessment.
help_outline