Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36855161›Full record

ArticleGenome medicine2023

Refining epigenetic prediction of chronological and biological age.

Elena Bernabeu, Daniel L McCartney, Danni A Gadd, Robert F Hillary, Ake T Lu, Lee Murphy, Nicola Wrobel, Archie Campbell, Sarah E Harris, David Liewald and 9 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 83 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
83citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

83 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Translational Geroscience Strategies for Delaying Multimorbidity.ACS pharmacology & translational science · 2026
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

23 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

19 authors.

Elena BernabeuCentre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5848-5720
Daniel L McCartneyCentre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Danni A GaddCentre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Robert F HillaryCentre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Ake T LuDepartment of Human Genetics, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Lee MurphyEdinburgh Clinical Research Facility, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Nicola WrobelEdinburgh Clinical Research Facility, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Archie CampbellCentre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Sarah E HarrisDepartment of Psychology, Lothian Birth Cohorts, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
David LiewaldDepartment of Psychology, Lothian Birth Cohorts, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Caroline HaywardCentre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Cathie SudlowCentre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Simon R CoxDepartment of Psychology, Lothian Birth Cohorts, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Kathryn L EvansCentre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Steve HorvathDepartment of Human Genetics, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Andrew M McIntoshCentre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Matthew R RobinsonInstitute of Science and Technology Austria, Klosterneuburg, Austria.
Catalina A VallejosMedical Research Council Human Genetics Unit, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Riccardo E MarioniCentre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK. riccardo.marioni@ed.ac.uk.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/F019394/1Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/W008793/1Chief Scientist Office CZD/16/6Medical Research Council MC_UU_00007/10Medical Research Council MR/M01311/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 104036/Z/14/ZWellcome Trust 108890/Z/15/ZWellcome Trust 221890/Z/20/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEpigenetic clocks can track both chronological age (cAge) and biological age (bAge). The latter is typically defined by physiological biomarkers and risk of adverse health outcomes, including all-cause mortality. As cohort sample sizes increase, estimates of cAge and bAge become more precise. Here, we aim to develop accurate epigenetic predictors of cAge and bAge, whilst improving our understanding of their epigenomic architecture.

methodsFirst, we perform large-scale (N = 18,413) epigenome-wide association studies (EWAS) of chronological age and all-cause mortality. Next, to create a cAge predictor, we use methylation data from 24,674 participants from the Generation Scotland study, the Lothian Birth Cohorts (LBC) of 1921 and 1936, and 8 other cohorts with publicly available data. In addition, we train a predictor of time to all-cause mortality as a proxy for bAge using the Generation Scotland cohort (1214 observed deaths). For this purpose, we use epigenetic surrogates (EpiScores) for 109 plasma proteins and the 8 component parts of GrimAge, one of the current best epigenetic predictors of survival. We test this bAge predictor in four external cohorts (LBC1921, LBC1936, the Framingham Heart Study and the Women's Health Initiative study).

resultsThrough the inclusion of linear and non-linear age-CpG associations from the EWAS, feature pre-selection in advance of elastic net regression, and a leave-one-cohort-out (LOCO) cross-validation framework, we obtain cAge prediction with a median absolute error equal to 2.3 years. Our bAge predictor was found to slightly outperform GrimAge in terms of the strength of its association to survival (HR

conclusionsThe integration of multiple large datasets, EpiScores, non-linear DNAm effects, and new approaches to feature selection has facilitated improvements to the blood-based epigenetic prediction of biological and chronological age.

Indexed as

EpigenomeEpigenomicsAgingEpigenesis, GeneticFemaleHumansResearch Design

Identifiers

PMID36855161
PMCPMC9976489

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.