ArticleNature medicine2026
Responsiveness of epigenetic aging biomarkers to longevity interventions in humans.
Article in Nature medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aging biomarkers can potentially allow researchers to rapidly monitor the impact of an aging intervention without the need for decade-spanning trials. However, before the use of aging biomarkers, such as epigenetic clocks, as surrogate endpoints, their responsiveness to interventions that target aging must be tested. Here we curate TranslAGE, a harmonized database of 51 public and private longitudinal interventional studies, and calculate a consistent set of 16 prominent epigenetic clocks for each study, along with 94 other DNA methylation (DNAm) biomarkers that can help explain the changes observed for each clock. Using this database, we discover patterns of responsiveness across a variety of interventions and DNAm biomarkers. For example, clocks trained to predict mortality or pace of aging show the strongest responses across all interventions and show consistent results with one another; pharmacological and lifestyle interventions drive the strongest responses from DNAm biomarkers; and the characteristics of the study population and study duration are key factors in determining the responsiveness of DNAm biomarkers to an intervention. Moreover, clocks with multiple subscores (that is 'explainable clocks') provide specificity and greater mechanistic insight into the responsiveness of interventions than single-score clocks. These findings can help to design future clinical trials by guiding the choice of interventions and of specific subsets of DNAm biomarkers to minimize multiple testing, study duration, study population and sample size, with the eventual aim of uncovering DNAm biomarkers that can be used as surrogate aging endpoints.
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.