| Literature DB >> 25633388 |
Riccardo E Marioni1,2,3, Sonia Shah4,5, Allan F McRae6,7, Brian H Chen8,9, Elena Colicino10, Sarah E Harris11,12, Jude Gibson13, Anjali K Henders14, Paul Redmond15, Simon R Cox16,17, Alison Pattie18, Janie Corley19, Lee Murphy20, Nicholas G Martin21, Grant W Montgomery22, Andrew P Feinberg23,24, M Daniele Fallin25,26, Michael L Multhaup27, Andrew E Jaffe28,29, Roby Joehanes30,31,32, Joel Schwartz33,34, Allan C Just35, Kathryn L Lunetta36,37, Joanne M Murabito38,39, John M Starr40,41, Steve Horvath42,43, Andrea A Baccarelli44,45, Daniel Levy46,47, Peter M Visscher48,49,50, Naomi R Wray51, Ian J Deary52,53.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: DNA methylation levels change with age. Recent studies have identified biomarkers of chronological age based on DNA methylation levels. It is not yet known whether DNA methylation age captures aspects of biological age.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25633388 PMCID: PMC4350614 DOI: 10.1186/s13059-015-0584-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genome Biol ISSN: 1474-7596 Impact factor: 13.583
Summary details of the four analysis cohorts
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | 446 | 920 | 2,635 | 657 |
| ndeaths | 292 | 106 | 238 | 226 |
| Time to death (years) | 7.2 (3.5) | 4.4 (2.2) | 6.0 (1.2) | 10.5 (3.3) |
| Age (years) | 79.1 (0.6) | 69.5 (0.8) | 66.3 (8.9) | 72.9 (6.9) |
| Sex (male) | 176 (40%) | 465 (51%) | 1200 (46%) | 657 (100%) |
| Hannum methylation age (years) | 85.0 (5.6) | 75.8 (5.0) | 68.2 (8.7) | 77.6 (6.7) |
| Hannum Δage (years) | 5.9 (5.6) | 6.2 (5.1) | 1.9 (4.8) | 4.6 (4.8) |
| Hannum median error (years) | 5.5 | 6.4 | 1.9 | 4.6 |
| Horvath methylation age (years) | 73.7 (6.2) | 66.0 (5.8) | 65.7 (8.3) | 73.5 (7.4) |
| Horvath Δage (years) | −5.4 (6.3) | −3.6 (5.8) | −0.6 (5.2) | 0.6 (5.8) |
| Horvath median error (years) | 6.0 | 4.7 | 0.69 | 3.4 |
| Tissue sample | Whole blood | Whole blood | Whole blood | Buffy coat |
| Methylation array | Illumina 450 k | Illumina 450 k | Illumina 450 k | Illumina 450 k |
FHS: Framingham Heart Study, LBC: Lothian Birth Cohort, NAS: Normative Aging Study.
Figure 1Plot of predicted methylation age against chronological age and plot of Hannum versus Horvath predicted methylation age. *To prevent the potential identification of individual participants, only FHS data points with chronological ages between 45 and 85, and NAS data points between ages 56 and 100 are displayed. r = Pearson correlation coefficient. FHS: Framingham Heart Study, LBC: Lothian Birth Cohort, NAS: Normative Aging Study.
Figure 2Meta-analysis results of Δ versus mortality. The basic adjusted models controlled for chronological age, sex (NAS had only male participants), and laboratory batch (FHS only). The fully adjusted models controlled for chronological age, sex, smoking, education, childhood IQ (LBC1921 and LBC1936 only), social class (LBC1921 and LBC1936 only), APOE (LBC1921, LBC1936, and NAS only), cardiovascular disease, high blood pressure, and diabetes. CI: confidence interval, FHS: Framingham Heart Study, HR: hazard ratio, LBC: Lothian Birth Cohort, NAS: Normative Aging Study, W: fixed effect weight.
Figure 3Survival probability by quartiles of Δ in LBC1921 adjusted for sex, and chronological age. LBC: Lothian Birth Cohort.
Figure 4Heritability of methylation Δ . (A) Intra-class correlation of Hannum and Horvath Δage across relationship class. (B) Heritability of Hannum and Horvath Δage in BSGS data. Both plots show estimates with standard errors. *Pseudo-independent pairs. r represents the degree of relatedness.