| Literature DB >> 26678252 |
Steve Horvath1,2, Chiara Pirazzini3,4, Maria Giulia Bacalini3,4,5, Davide Gentilini6, Anna Maria Di Blasio6, Massimo Delledonne5,7, Daniela Mari8,9, Beatrice Arosio8,9, Daniela Monti10, Giuseppe Passarino11, Francesco De Rango11, Patrizia D'Aquila11, Cristina Giuliani12, Elena Marasco3,4, Sebastiano Collino13, Patrick Descombes14, Paolo Garagnani3,4,15, Claudio Franceschi3,4,16,17.
Abstract
Given the dramatic increase in ageing populations, it is of great importance to understand the genetic and molecular determinants of healthy ageing and longevity. Semi-supercentenarians (subjects who reached an age of 105-109 years) arguably represent the gold standard of successful human ageing because they managed to avoid or postpone the onset of major age-related diseases. Relatively few studies have looked at epigenetic determinants of extreme longevity in humans. Here we test whether families with extreme longevity are epigenetically distinct from controls according to an epigenetic biomarker of ageing which is known as "epigenetic clock". We analyze the DNA methylation levels of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) from Italian families constituted of 82 semi-supercentenarians (mean age: 105.6 ± 1.6 years), 63 semi-supercentenarians' offspring (mean age: 71.8 ± 7.8 years), and 47 age-matched controls (mean age: 69.8 ± 7.2 years). We demonstrate that the offspring of semi-supercentenarians have a lower epigenetic age than age-matched controls (age difference=5.1 years, p=0.00043) and that centenarians are younger (8.6 years) than expected based on their chronological age. By contrast, no significant difference could be observed for estimated blood cell counts (such as naïve or exhausted cytotoxic T cells or helper T cells). Future studies will be needed to replicate these findings in different populations and to extend them to other tissues. Overall, our results suggest that epigenetic processes might play a role in extreme longevity and healthy human ageing.Entities:
Keywords: DNA methylation; biomarker of ageing; epigenetic clock; semi-supercentenarians; semi-supercentenarians offspring
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26678252 PMCID: PMC4712339 DOI: 10.18632/aging.100861
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Aging (Albany NY) ISSN: 1945-4589 Impact factor: 5.682
Figure 1Epigenetic age analysis of PBMCs from centenarians and controls
(A) Scatter plot relating the DNAm age of each PBMC sample (y-axis) versus chronological age (x-axis). Points are colored by status. The color of each dot corresponds to the status of each PBMC sample: red for centenarians, orange for offspring of centenarians, grey for controls. The black line corresponds to y=x. The orange line depicts the regression line based on the offspring of centenarians and centenarians (orange and red dots). The vertical distance to the orange line corresponds to the universal measure of age acceleration Age Accel. The bar plots depict group status (x-axis) versus (B, C) universal age acceleration, (D, E) intrinsic age acceleration, (F) extrinsic age acceleration. Each bar plot depicts the mean value, one standard error, and reports the p-value results from a non-parametric group comparison test (Kruskal Wallis test).
Multivariate model of DNAm age in non-centenarians
| Covariate | Coefficient | Std. Error | T statistic | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Offspring | −3.804 | 1.043 | −3.647 | 0.00043 |
| Age | 0.743 | 0.071 | 10.442 | < 2×10−16 |
| Sex (female) | 0.174 | 1.065 | 0.163 | 0.87 |
| Naïve CD8+T cell | −0.007 | 0.011 | −0.617 | 0.54 |
| Exhausted CD8+ T cell | −0.044 | 0.159 | −0.274 | 0.79 |
| Plasma Blast cell | −7.62 | 3.706 | −2.055 | 0.042 |
| Helper T cell (CD4) | −28.3 | 8.728 | −3.247 | 0.0016 |
| Natural Killer cell | 12.5 | 7.962 | 1.572 | 0.13 |
| Monocyte | −9.2 | 9.313 | −0.988 | 0.33 |
Coefficients and p-values from regressing DNAm age on offspring status, age, sex, and various blood cell counts in non-centenarian subjects (subjects younger than 90). The model explained 67% of the variance. The offspring of centenarians are 5.1 years (=3.804/0.743) younger than age matched controls.
Multivariate model of DNA methylation age in all subjects
| Covariate | Coefficient | Std. Error | T statistic | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| StatusControlvsCentenarian | 6.583 | 2.98 | 2.208 | 0.029 |
| StatusOffspringvsCentenarian | 3.03 | 2.84 | 1.069 | 0.29 |
| Age | 0.765 | 0.080 | 9.578 | < 2×10−16 |
| Sex (female) | −1.025 | 1.02 | −1.005 | 0.32 |
| Naïve CD8+T cell | −0.014 | 0.010 | −1.444 | 0.15 |
| Exhausted CD8+ T cell | −0.118 | 0.142 | −0.832 | 0.41 |
| Plasma Blast cell | −6.046 | 2.83 | −2.135 | 0.034 |
| Helper T cell (CD4) | −38.069 | 7.53 | −5.054 | 1.1×10−6 |
| Natural Killer cell | −1.926 | 7.25 | −0.265 | 0.79 |
| Monocyte | −14.782 | 8.00 | −1.848 | 0.066 |
Coefficients and p-values from regressing DNAm age on offspring status, age, sex, and various blood cell counts in non-centenarian subjects (subjects younger than 90). The model explained 85% of the variance. Centenarians are 8.6 years (=6.583/0.765) younger than expected based on chronological age.
Figure 2Blood cell counts in offspring of semi-supercentenarians versus age matched controls
Group status (offspring of semi-supercentenarian or control) versus estimated abundance of (A) exhausted cytotoxic T cells, (B) naïve cytotoxic T cells, (C) naïve helper T cells, (D) cytotoxic T cells, (E) helper T cells, (F) natural killer cells, (G) B cells, (H) monocytes. Each bar plot reports the mean value and one standard error. The p-value results from a non-parametric group comparison test (Kruskal Wallis). The abundance measures of blood cell counts were estimated based on DNA methylation levels using the epigenetic clock software. Roughly speaking, the y-axis of (A) reports a percentage while that for (B, C) corresponds to counts but it is best to interpret the y-axis in (A-C) as ordinal abundance measure. The y-axis in (D-H) reports estimated proportions based on the Houseman method [78].
Figure 3Blood cell counts across three groups
Group status (semi-supercentenarian, offspring of semi-supercentenarian, or control) versus estimated abundance of (A) exhausted cytotoxic T cells, (B) naïve cytotoxic T cells, (C) naïve helper T cells, (D) cytotoxic T cells, (E) helper T cells, (F) natural killer cells, (G) B cells, (H) monocytes. Each bar plot reports the mean value and one standard error. The p-value results from a non-parametric group comparison test (Kruskal Wallis). Roughly speaking, the y-axis of (A) reports a percentage while that for (B, C) corresponds to counts but it is best to interpret the y-axis in (A-C) as ordinal abundance measure. The y-axis in (D-H) reports estimated proportions based on the Houseman method [78].