Epigenetic and Metabolomic Biomarkers for Biological Age: A Comparative Analysis of Mortality and Frailty Risk.
Lieke M KuiperHarmke A Polinder-BosDaniele BizzarriDina VojinovicCostanza L VallergaMarian BeekmanMartijn E T DolléMohsen GhanbariTrudy G VoortmanMarcel J T ReindersW M Monique VerschurenP Eline SlagboomErik Ben van den AkkerJoyce B J van MeursPublished in: The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences (2023)
Biological age captures a person's age-related risk of unfavorable outcomes using biophysiological information. Multivariate biological age measures include frailty scores and molecular biomarkers. These measures are often studied in isolation, but here we present a large-scale study comparing them. In two prospective cohorts (n=3,222), we compared epigenetic (DNAm Horvath, DNAm Hannum, DNAm Lin, DNAm epiTOC, DNAm PhenoAge, DNAm DunedinPoAm, DNAm GrimAge, and DNAm Zhang) and metabolomic-based (MetaboAge, MetaboHealth) biomarkers in reflection of biological age, as represented by five frailty measures and overall mortality. Biomarkers trained on outcomes with biophysiological and/or mortality information outperformed age-trained biomarkers in frailty reflection and mortality prediction. DNAm GrimAge and MetaboHealth, trained on mortality, showed the strongest association with these outcomes. The associations of DNAm GrimAge and MetaboHealth with frailty and mortality were independent of each other and of the frailty score mimicking clinical geriatric assessment. Epigenetic, metabolomic, and clinical biological age markers seem to capture different aspects of aging. These findings suggest that mortality-trained molecular markers may provide novel phenotype reflecting biological age and strengthen current clinical geriatric health and well-being assessment.