Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34375949›Full record

ArticleAging2021

Epigenetic age prediction in semen - marker selection and model development.

Aleksandra Pisarek, Ewelina Pośpiech, Antonia Heidegger, Catarina Xavier, Anna Papież, Danuta Piniewska-Róg, Vivian Kalamara, Ramya Potabattula, Michał Bochenek, Marta Sikora-Polaczek and 9 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Aging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Forensic genetics in the omics era.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Trends in forensic investigation of seminal fluid- a scoping review.Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

19 authors at 7 institutions in 5 countries.

Aleksandra PisarekMalopolska Centre of Biotechnology, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland.
Ewelina PośpiechMalopolska Centre of Biotechnology, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland.
Antonia HeideggerInstitute of Legal Medicine, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Catarina XavierInstitute of Legal Medicine, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Anna PapieżDepartment of Data Science and Engineering, The Silesian University of Technology, Gliwice, Poland.
Danuta Piniewska-RógDepartment of Legal Medicine, Medical College, Krakow, Poland.
Vivian KalamaraDepartment of Genetic Identification, Erasmus MC University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Ramya PotabattulaInstitute of Human Genetics, Julius Maximilians University, Würzburg, Germany.
Michał BochenekMalopolska Centre of Biotechnology, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland.
Marta Sikora-PolaczekThe Fertility Partnership Macierzynstwo, Krakow, Poland.
Aneta MacurPARENS Fertility Centre, Krakow, Poland.
Anna WoźniakCentral Forensic Laboratory of the Police, Warsaw, Poland.
Jarosław JaneczkoPARENS Fertility Centre, Krakow, Poland.
Christopher PhillipsDepartment of Legal Medicine, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Thomas HaafInstitute of Human Genetics, Julius Maximilians University, Würzburg, Germany.
Joanna PolańskaDepartment of Data Science and Engineering, The Silesian University of Technology, Gliwice, Poland.
Walther ParsonInstitute of Legal Medicine, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Manfred KayserDepartment of Genetic Identification, Erasmus MC University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Wojciech BranickiMalopolska Centre of Biotechnology, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland.
Jagiellonian University · PLErasmus MC · NLSilesian University of Technology · PLUniversität Innsbruck · ATCentralne Laboratorium Kryminalistyczne Policji · PLInnsbruck Medical University · ATUniversidade de Santiago de Compostela · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

DNA methylation analysis is becoming increasingly useful in biomedical research and forensic practice. The discovery of differentially methylated sites (DMSs) that continuously change over an individual's lifetime has led to breakthroughs in molecular age estimation. Although semen samples are often used in forensic DNA analysis, previous epigenetic age prediction studies mainly focused on somatic cell types. Here, Infinium MethylationEPIC BeadChip arrays were applied to semen-derived DNA samples, which identified numerous novel DMSs moderately correlated with age. Validation of the ten most age-correlated novel DMSs and three previously known sites in an independent set of semen-derived DNA samples using targeted bisulfite massively parallel sequencing, confirmed age-correlation for nine new and three previously known markers. Prediction modelling revealed the best model for semen, based on 6 CpGs from newly identified genes

Indexed as

DNA MethylationEpigenesis, GeneticModels, GeneticSemenAdultAge FactorsCpG IslandsForensic GeneticsHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansLinear ModelsMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsYoung Adultamplicon bisulfite sequencingDNA methylationepigenetic ageepigenetic age estimationsemen

Identifiers

PMID34375949
PMCPMC8386575
OpenAlexW3189556913

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.