Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30660189›Full record

ArticleClinical epigenetics2019

Leisure-time physical activity and DNA methylation age-a twin study.

Elina Sillanpää, Miina Ollikainen, Jaakko Kaprio, Xiaoling Wang, Tuija Leskinen, Urho M Kujala, Timo Törmäkangas

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical epigenetics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Elina SillanpääGerontology Research Center, Faculty of Sport and Health Sciences, University of Jyväskylä, P.O. Box 35 (VIV), FI-40014, Jyväskylä, Finland. elina.Sillanpaa@jyu.fi.ORCID 0000-0001-6375-959X
Miina OllikainenInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Jaakko KaprioInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Xiaoling WangGeorge Prevention Institute, Department of Pediatrics, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA.
Tuija LeskinenDepartment of Public Health, University of Turku and Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland.
Urho M KujalaFaculty of Sport and Health Sciences, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Timo TörmäkangasGerontology Research Center, Faculty of Sport and Health Sciences, University of Jyväskylä, P.O. Box 35 (VIV), FI-40014, Jyväskylä, Finland.
University of Helsinki · FIUniversity of Jyväskylä · FIAugusta University · USInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland · FIUniversity of Turku · FI

Funding

A GENOME-WIDE METHYLATION STUDY ON ESSENTIAL HYPERTENSIONR01HL104125 · NHLBI · AUGUSTA UNIVERSITY · PI WANG, XIAOLING · 2011 to 2015
$2.9M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL104125
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEpigenetic clocks may increase our understanding on human aging and how genetic and environmental factors regulate an individual aging process. One of the most promising clocks is Horvath's DNA methylation (DNAm) age. Age acceleration, i.e., discrepancy between DNAm age and chronological age, tells us whether the person is biologically young or old compared to his/her chronological age. Several environmental and lifestyle factors have been shown to affect life span. We investigated genetic and environmental predictors of DNAm age in young and older monozygotic (MZ) and dizygotic (DZ) twins with a focus on leisure time physical activity.

resultsQuantitative genetic modeling revealed that the relative contribution of non-shared environmental factors was larger among older compared with younger twin pairs [47% (95% CI 35, 63) vs. 26% (95% CI: 19, 35), p < 0.001]. Correspondingly, genetic variation accounted for less of the variance in older [53% (95% CI 37, 65)] compared with younger pairs [74% (95% CI 65, 82)]. We tested the hypothesis that leisure time physical activity is one of the non-shared environmental factors that affect epigenetic aging. A co-twin control analysis with older same-sex twin pairs (seven MZ and nine DZ pairs, mean age 60.4 years) who had persistent discordance in physical activity for 32 years according to reported/interviewed physical-activity data showed no differences among active and inactive co-twins, DNAm age being 60.7 vs. 61.8 years, respectively [between-group mean-difference: - 1.17 (95%CI - 3.43,1.10)]. Results from the younger cohort of twins supported findings that LTPA is not associated with DNAm age acceleration.

conclusionsIn older subjects, a larger amount of variance in DNAm age acceleration was explained by non-shared environmental factors compared to young individuals. However, leisure time physical activity during adult years has at most a minor effect on DNAm age acceleration. This is consistent with recent findings that long-term leisure time physical activity in adulthood has little effect on mortality after controlling for genetic factors.

Indexed as

DNA MethylationExerciseAdultAgedAge DistributionAge FactorsCohort StudiesEpigenesis, GeneticFemaleHumansLife StyleMaleMiddle AgedTwins, DizygoticTwins, MonozygoticYoung AdultEpigenetic clockMethylationPhysical activityQuantitative geneticsTwin design

Identifiers

PMID30660189
PMCPMC6339334
OpenAlexW2917601557

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.