Elisabeth A Goldman1, Geeta N Eick1, Devan Compton1, Paul Kowal1,2, J Josh Snodgrass1, Dan T A Eisenberg3,4, Kirstin N Sterner1. 1. Department of Anthropology, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon 97403. 2. World Health Organization, Seattle, Washington 98105. 3. Department of Anthropology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98105. 4. The Center for Studies in Demography, and Ecology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98105.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Telomere length (TL) is a biomarker of aging and age-related decline. Although venous blood is considered the "gold standard" for TL measurement, its collection is often not feasible or desired in nonclinical settings. Saliva and dried blood spots (DBS) have been used as alternatives when venipuncture cannot be performed. However, it is not known whether these sample types yield TL measurements comparable to those obtained from venous blood. We sought to determine whether different samples from the same individual yield comparable TL measurements. METHODS: We extracted DNA from matched buffy coat, saliva (Oragene and Oasis), and DBS (venous and capillary) samples from 40 women aged 18-77 years. We used the monochrome multiplex qPCR (MMQPCR) assay to measure TL in all sample types for each participant and applied quality control measures to retain only high-quality samples for analysis. We then compared TL from buffy coat and saliva to examine how these measurements differ and to test if TL is correlated across sample types. RESULTS: TL differed significantly across buffy coat, Oragene saliva, and Oasis saliva samples. TL from buffy coat and Oragene saliva was moderately correlated (ρ = 0.48, P = .002) and the most similar in size. Oasis saliva TL was not correlated with buffy coat or Oragene saliva TL, and was the shortest. DBS DNA yields were inadequate for TL measurement using the MMQPCR assay. CONCLUSIONS: Using a matched dataset we demonstrate that sample type significantly influences the TL measurement obtained using the MMQPCR assay.
OBJECTIVES: Telomere length (TL) is a biomarker of aging and age-related decline. Although venous blood is considered the "gold standard" for TL measurement, its collection is often not feasible or desired in nonclinical settings. Saliva and dried blood spots (DBS) have been used as alternatives when venipuncture cannot be performed. However, it is not known whether these sample types yield TL measurements comparable to those obtained from venous blood. We sought to determine whether different samples from the same individual yield comparable TL measurements. METHODS: We extracted DNA from matched buffy coat, saliva (Oragene and Oasis), and DBS (venous and capillary) samples from 40 women aged 18-77 years. We used the monochrome multiplex qPCR (MMQPCR) assay to measure TL in all sample types for each participant and applied quality control measures to retain only high-quality samples for analysis. We then compared TL from buffy coat and saliva to examine how these measurements differ and to test if TL is correlated across sample types. RESULTS: TL differed significantly across buffy coat, Oragene saliva, and Oasis saliva samples. TL from buffy coat and Oragene saliva was moderately correlated (ρ = 0.48, P = .002) and the most similar in size. Oasis saliva TL was not correlated with buffy coat or Oragene saliva TL, and was the shortest. DBS DNA yields were inadequate for TL measurement using the MMQPCR assay. CONCLUSIONS: Using a matched dataset we demonstrate that sample type significantly influences the TL measurement obtained using the MMQPCR assay.
Authors: Mitchell H Gail; Tim Sheehy; Mark Cosentino; David Pee; Norma A Diaz-Mayoral; Montserrat Garcia-Closas; Neil E Caporaso; Karen Pitt; Regina G Ziegler Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2013-07-14 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Colter Mitchell; John Hobcraft; Sara S McLanahan; Susan Rutherford Siegel; Arthur Berg; Jeanne Brooks-Gunn; Irwin Garfinkel; Daniel Notterman Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2014-04-07 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: David H Chae; Amani M Nuru-Jeter; Nancy E Adler; Gene H Brody; Jue Lin; Elizabeth H Blackburn; Elissa S Epel Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2014-02 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: H Vaziri; W Dragowska; R C Allsopp; T E Thomas; C B Harley; P M Lansdorp Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 1994-10-11 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Ana P Nunes; Isabel O Oliveira; Betânia R Santos; Cristini Millech; Liziane P Silva; David A González; Pedro C Hallal; Ana M B Menezes; Cora L Araújo; Fernando C Barros Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2012-05-04 Impact factor: 4.615
Authors: Barry J McDonnell; Lee Butcher; John R Cockcroft; Ian B Wilkinson; Jorge D Erusalimsky; Carmel M McEniery Journal: J Physiol Date: 2017-01-24 Impact factor: 5.182
Authors: Michelle Bosquet Enlow; Finola Kane-Grade; Immaculata De Vivo; Carter R Petty; Charles A Nelson Journal: Psychoneuroendocrinology Date: 2020-02-20 Impact factor: 4.905
Authors: Arline T Geronimus; John Bound; Colter Mitchell; Aresha Martinez-Cardoso; Linnea Evans; Landon Hughes; Lisa Schneper; Daniel A Notterman Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-08-18 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Peter H Rej; Madison H Bondy; Jue Lin; Aric A Prather; Brandon A Kohrt; Carol M Worthman; Dan T A Eisenberg Journal: Am J Hum Biol Date: 2020-03-18 Impact factor: 1.937
Authors: Michelle Bosquet Enlow; Carter R Petty; Michele R Hacker; Heather H Burris Journal: Psychoneuroendocrinology Date: 2020-11-04 Impact factor: 4.905