Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33300551›Full record

ArticleBrain : a journal of neurology2020

Recalibrating the epigenetic clock: implications for assessing biological age in the human cortex.

Gemma L Shireby, Jonathan P Davies, Paul T Francis, Joe Burrage, Emma M Walker, Grant W A Neilson, Aisha Dahir, Alan J Thomas, Seth Love, Rebecca G Smith and 7 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain : a journal of neurology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 134 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
134citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
8.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

134 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 193 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Multivariate Random Forests for Cross-Modal Multi-Omics Integration.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article

74 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

17 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Gemma L ShirebyUniversity of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Jonathan P DaviesUniversity of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Paul T FrancisUniversity of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Joe BurrageUniversity of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Emma M WalkerUniversity of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Grant W A NeilsonUniversity of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Aisha DahirUniversity of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Alan J ThomasTranslational and Clinical Research Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.
Seth LoveDementia Research Group, Institute of Clinical Neurosciences, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Rebecca G SmithUniversity of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Katie LunnonUniversity of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Meena KumariInstitute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex, Colchester, UK.
Leonard C SchalkwykSchool of Life Sciences, University of Essex, Colchester, UK.
Kevin MorganHuman Genetics, School of Life Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Keeley BrookesSchool of Science and Technology, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK.
Eilis HannonUniversity of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Jonathan MillUniversity of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
University of Exeter · GBUniversity of Essex · GBKing's College London · GBNewcastle University · GBNottingham Trent University · GBUniversity of Bristol · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GB

Funding

Infectious Diseases/Basic Microbial Pathogenic MechanismsT32AI007172 · NIAID · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI Daniel E. Goldberg, JENNIFER A PHILIPS · 1985 to 2026
$13.0M
Medical Research Council G0400074Medical Research Council G0502157Medical Research Council G0900652Medical Research Council G1100540Medical Research Council K013807Medical Research Council M008924Medical Research Council MC_PC_14095Medical Research Council MC_PC_18025Medical Research Council MR/M008924/1Medical Research Council MR/M024784/1Medical Research Council MR/R005176/1NIAID NIH HHS T32 AI007172
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human DNA methylation data have been used to develop biomarkers of ageing, referred to as 'epigenetic clocks', which have been widely used to identify differences between chronological age and biological age in health and disease including neurodegeneration, dementia and other brain phenotypes. Existing DNA methylation clocks have been shown to be highly accurate in blood but are less precise when used in older samples or in tissue types not included in training the model, including brain. We aimed to develop a novel epigenetic clock that performs optimally in human cortex tissue and has the potential to identify phenotypes associated with biological ageing in the brain. We generated an extensive dataset of human cortex DNA methylation data spanning the life course (n = 1397, ages = 1 to 108 years). This dataset was split into 'training' and 'testing' samples (training: n = 1047; testing: n = 350). DNA methylation age estimators were derived using a transformed version of chronological age on DNA methylation at specific sites using elastic net regression, a supervised machine learning method. The cortical clock was subsequently validated in a novel independent human cortex dataset (n = 1221, ages = 41 to 104 years) and tested for specificity in a large whole blood dataset (n = 1175, ages = 28 to 98 years). We identified a set of 347 DNA methylation sites that, in combination, optimally predict age in the human cortex. The sum of DNA methylation levels at these sites weighted by their regression coefficients provide the cortical DNA methylation clock age estimate. The novel clock dramatically outperformed previously reported clocks in additional cortical datasets. Our findings suggest that previous associations between predicted DNA methylation age and neurodegenerative phenotypes might represent false positives resulting from clocks not robustly calibrated to the tissue being tested and for phenotypes that become manifest in older ages. The age distribution and tissue type of samples included in training datasets need to be considered when building and applying epigenetic clock algorithms to human epidemiological or disease cohorts.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAgingAlgorithmsBiological ClocksCell CountCerebral CortexChildChild, PreschoolDatabases, FactualDNADNA MethylationEpigenesis, GeneticFemaleDNAagebrainclockcortexDNA methylation

Identifiers

PMID33300551
PMCPMC7805794
OpenAlexW3111314674

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.