ArticleScientific reports2025
Evaluating the potential of phenotypic age to enhance cardiovascular risk prediction over chronological age in the UK Biobank.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nocturia is Associated with Biological Age not Chronological Age.Journal of community health · 2026Article
- Longitudinal digital phenotyping of activity rhythms and biological aging using commercial wearables.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Phenotypic age acceleration and genetic risk synergistically increase age-related eye disease risk in the UK Biobank.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The mediating role of biological age acceleration in the associations between lifestyle factors and incident digestive system cancers: A Prospective Cohort Study from the UK Biobank.The journal of nutrition, health & aging · 2026Article
- Phenotypic age acceleration and omega-6/omega-3 PUFA ratio in dynamic atrial fibrillation-heart failure transitions: a multistate analysis.The journal of nutrition, health & aging · 2026Article
- The role of biological age in stroke prediction: evidence from CHARLS and machine learning models.BMC neurology · 2026Article
- Modifiable lifestyle factors and 4.9-Year changes in phenotypic age in the Taiwan biobank.Frontiers in aging · 2026Article
- Targeted therapies in lung cancer: personalizing treatment across the age spectrum.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Association Between Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Accelerated Biological Aging Estimated by PhenoAge.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Phenotypic Age Acceleration and Risk of All-Cause and Cardiovascular Mortality in US Adults With Asthma: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Phenotypic age acceleration (PhenoAgeAccel) is a novel biological indicator estimates an individual's mortality risk. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the association between PhenoAge and PhenoAgeAccel with incident cardiovascular diseases (CVD) in the UK Biobank cohort. We analyzed data from 114,517 UK Biobank participants free of CVD history at baseline. PhenoAgeAccel of was obtained by regressing PhenoAge on chronological age (ChronoAge). We applied a Cox regression model with time-dependent variables to assess the association between PhenoAgeAccel and incident CVD. The predictive value of PhenoAge and PhenoAgeAccel was evaluated with reference to the Framingham Risk Score (FRS) model using Kaplan-Meier curves, receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC), and Harrel's C-index. The positive PhenoAgeAccel comprised of 36.5% of the cohort. The mean ChronoAge and PhenoAge of participants in the positive PhenoAgeAccel group was 57.5 years and 61.7 years, respectively. The mean ChronoAge and PhenoAge of participants in the negative PhenoAgeAccel group was 56.1 years and 52.5 years, respectively. Incident CVD occurred at a higher rate in the positive PhenoAgeAccel group (44.8% vs. 33.1%) at a comparatively shorter period (11.2 years vs. 12.4 years). The AUC of PhenoAge in predicting incident CVD was lower than the FRS but higher than ChronoAge (69.3% vs. 70.9% vs. 68.1%, respectively). Discriminative performance was assessed using Harrell's C-index. The model including established cardiovascular risk factors yielded a C-index of 0.670, compared to 0.674 for the model incorporating PhenoAgeAccel (difference = 0.0049, p < 0.001). Separately, the Framingham Risk Score (FRS) model achieved a higher C-index of 0.697 versus 0.674 for the PhenoAgeAccel model (difference = 0.022, p < 0.001). Kaplein-Meier survival patterns of the positive PhenoAgeAccel group was similar to the high-risk group of FRS level. At time points year 4, 8, 12, and 16, the freedom-from-CVD probability for positive PhenoAgeAccel groups versus FRS high risk groups were 86.2% vs. 85.7%, 72.6% vs. 71.1%, 60.0% vs. 57.4%, and 54.8% vs. 51.7% respectively. Positive PhenoAgeAccel was associated with higher 10-year CVD risk, suggesting its potential as an adjunct in CVD risk assessment. PhenoAge, by incorporating biological aging markers, may offer more nuanced risk insights compared to ChronoAge. These findings are primarily applicable to men, given the male predominance in the cohort, and should be interpreted with caution for women.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.