Open access · CC-BY
via OpenAlex
CROSS-TISSUE EPIGENETIC AGE COMPARISONS
Innovation in Aging · 2024
Abstract
Abstract Accurately measuring the process of biological aging – the progressive deterioration of cells, tissues and organs – is crucial in studying the effects of aging interventions. A common group of tools used to measure the process of biological aging are epigenetic clocks (i.e., algorithms that take advantage of the age-related changes observed in the DNA methylome to estimate an individual’s biological age). Although epigenetic clocks have been trained almost exclusively using blood-based tissues, there is a growing desire to estimate epigenetic age using less-invasive mouth-based tissues (i.e., buccal or saliva). However, by definition, differentiated cell types exhibit unique DNA methylation landscapes and age-related alterations to the DNA methylome. Therefore, using epigenetic age estimates via mouth-based tissues that rely on blood-based tissues can introduce errors when estimating biological age. We tested the within-person comparability of common epigenetic clocks across five tissue types: buccal epithelial, saliva, dry blood spots, buffy coat (i.e., leukocytes), and peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Our sample included individuals from 9-70 years old (N=83) across 284 distinct tissue samples. Overall, significant differences in mouth-based versus blood-based tissue estimates were observed, with differences of more than 30 years being observed in some clocks. In addition, most blood-based clocks exhibited a low correlation with buccal and saliva tissues, even after controlling for cellular proportions, indicating that buccal and saliva are both uniquely different from blood-based estimates. Our findings indicate the deviance of mouth-based versus blood-based epigenetic clock(definition) estimates, and highlight important differences of using diverse tissue types to estimate biological age.
◌ CITATION ONLY
Full text is not openly licensed for redistribution here. Read it at the source:
Provenance
- Source
- OpenAlex
- DOI
- 10.1093/geroni/igae098.2289
- Canonical
- link ↗
- Fetched
- 2026-10-14 MST
Cite this
APA
Apsley, A.T., & Shalev, I. (2024). CROSS-TISSUE EPIGENETIC AGE COMPARISONS. <em>Innovation in Aging</em>. https://doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igae098.2289
Vancouver
Apsley AT, Shalev I. CROSS-TISSUE EPIGENETIC AGE COMPARISONS. Innovation in Aging. 2024. doi:10.1093/geroni/igae098.2289.
BibTeX
@article{abner2024CROSST,
title = {CROSS-TISSUE EPIGENETIC AGE COMPARISONS},
author = {Abner T. Apsley and Idan Shalev},
journal = {Innovation in Aging},
year = {2024},
doi = {10.1093/geroni/igae098.2289},
}
Research neighborhood
References, citing works, and semantically nearest findings. Click a node to open it.
Related findings
Aging Cell 2025
Open access · CC-BY
Cross‐tissue comparison of epigenetic aging clocks in humans
bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) 2025
Preprint · CC-BY
Epigenetic age prediction using N6-methyladenine in the bumblebee Bombus terrestris
Stem Cell Reports 2024
Open access · CC-BY
Dissecting the impact of differentiation stage, replicative history, and cell type composition on epigenetic clocks
Iranian Journal of Pediatric Hematology & Oncology 2025
Citation only
Pediatric Buccal Epigenetic (PedBE) and Neonatal Epigenetic Estimator of Age (NEOage) Clocks: A Focus on Pediatric Oncology
bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) 2022
Preprint · CC-BY
Age related disorder in DNA methylation patterns underlies epigenetic clock signals, but displays distinct responses to epigenetic rejuvenation events
Aging 2017
Preprint · CC-BY