Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37120669›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2023

Clinical biomarker-based biological aging and risk of cancer in the UK Biobank.

Jonathan K L Mak, Christopher E McMurran, Ralf Kuja-Halkola, Per Hall, Kamila Czene, Juulia Jylhävä, Sara Hägg

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 82 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
82citing papers in PubMed
21.7field-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

82 citing papers in PubMed, 141 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Urinary metabolic age from high-resolution nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy reveals longitudinal aging patterns.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

22 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Jonathan K L MakDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. jonathan.mak@ki.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4454-8580
Christopher E McMurranDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Ralf Kuja-HalkolaDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3765-2067
Per HallDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Kamila CzeneDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Juulia JylhäväDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Sara HäggDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Karolinska Institutet · SETampere University · FIUniversity of Cambridge · GB

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite a clear link between aging and cancer, there has been inconclusive evidence on how biological age (BA) may be associated with cancer incidence.

methodsWe studied 308,156 UK Biobank participants with no history of cancer at enrolment. Using 18 age-associated clinical biomarkers, we computed three BA measures (Klemera-Doubal method [KDM], PhenoAge, homeostatic dysregulation [HD]) and assessed their associations with incidence of any cancer and five common cancers (breast, prostate, lung, colorectal, and melanoma) using Cox proportional-hazards models.

resultsA total of 35,426 incident cancers were documented during a median follow-up of 10.9 years. Adjusting for common cancer risk factors, 1-standard deviation (SD) increment in the age-adjusted KDM (hazard ratio = 1.04, 95% confidence interval = 1.03-1.05), age-adjusted PhenoAge (1.09, 1.07-1.10), and HD (1.02, 1.01-1.03) was significantly associated with a higher risk of any cancer. All BA measures were also associated with increased risks of lung and colorectal cancers, but only PhenoAge was associated with breast cancer risk. Furthermore, we observed an inverse association between BA measures and prostate cancer, although it was attenuated after removing glycated hemoglobin and serum glucose from the BA algorithms.

conclusionsAdvanced BA quantified by clinical biomarkers is associated with increased risks of any cancer, lung cancer, and colorectal cancer.

Indexed as

Biological Specimen BanksBreast NeoplasmsAgingBiomarkersHumansMaleRisk FactorsUnited KingdomBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID37120669
PMCPMC10307789
OpenAlexW4367367363

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.