Skip to content
Open access · OA via OpenAlex

Eleven Telomere, Epigenetic Clock, and Biomarker-Composite Quantifications of Biological Aging: Do They Measure the Same Thing?

Daniel W. Belsky, Terrie E. Moffitt, Alan A. Cohen, David L. Corcoran, Morgan E. Levine, Joseph A. Prinz, Jonathan D. Schaefer, Karen Sugden, Benjamin Williams, Richie Poulton, Avshalom Caspi

American Journal of Epidemiology · 2017 · ▲ 431 citations

Abstract

The geroscience hypothesis posits that therapies to slow biological processes of aging can prevent disease and extend healthy years of life. To test such "geroprotective" therapies in humans, outcome measures are needed that can assess extension of disease-free life span. This need has spurred development of different methods to quantify biological aging. But different methods have not been systematically compared in the same humans. We implemented 7 methods to quantify biological aging using repeated-measures physiological and genomic data in 964 middle-aged humans in the Dunedin Study (New Zealand; persons born 1972-1973). We studied 11 measures in total: telomere(definition)-length and erosion, 3 epigenetic-clocks and their ticking rates, and 3 biomarker-composites. Contrary to expectation, we found low agreement between different measures of biological aging. We next compared associations between biological aging measures and outcomes that geroprotective therapies seek to modify: physical functioning, cognitive decline, and subjective signs of aging, including aged facial appearance. The 71-cytosine-phosphate-guanine epigenetic clock(definition) and biomarker composites were consistently related to these aging-related outcomes. However, effect sizes were modest. Results suggested that various proposed approaches to quantifying biological aging may not measure the same aspects of the aging process. Further systematic evaluation and refinement of measures of biological aging is needed to furnish outcomes for geroprotector trials.

◌ CITATION ONLY
Full text is not openly licensed for redistribution here. Read it at the source:

Read at source →

Provenance

Source
OpenAlex
DOI
10.1093/aje/kwx346
Canonical
link ↗
Fetched
2026-09-16 MST

Cite this

APA
Belsky, D.W., Moffitt, T.E., Cohen, A.A., Corcoran, D.L., Levine, M.E., Prinz, J.A., Schaefer, J.D., Sugden, K., Williams, B., Poulton, R., &amp; Caspi, A. (2017). Eleven Telomere, Epigenetic Clock, and Biomarker-Composite Quantifications of Biological Aging: Do They Measure the Same Thing?. <em>American Journal of Epidemiology</em>. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwx346
Vancouver
Belsky DW, Moffitt TE, Cohen AA, Corcoran DL, Levine ME, Prinz JA, et al. Eleven Telomere, Epigenetic Clock, and Biomarker-Composite Quantifications of Biological Aging: Do They Measure the Same Thing?. American Journal of Epidemiology. 2017. doi:10.1093/aje/kwx346.
BibTeX
@article{daniel2017Eleven, title = {Eleven Telomere, Epigenetic Clock, and Biomarker-Composite Quantifications of Biological Aging: Do They Measure the Same Thing?}, author = {Daniel W. Belsky and Terrie E. Moffitt and Alan A. Cohen and David L. Corcoran and Morgan E. Levine and Joseph A. Prinz and Jonathan D. Schaefer and Karen Sugden and Benjamin Williams and Richie Poulton and Avshalom Caspi}, journal = {American Journal of Epidemiology}, year = {2017}, doi = {10.1093/aje/kwx346}, }

Research neighborhood

References, citing works, and semantically nearest findings. Click a node to open it.

Related findings