Daniel C Parker1,2, Cathleen Colόn-Emeric1,2, Janet L Huebner3, Ching-Heng Chou3, Virginia Byers Kraus2,4,5, Carl F Pieper2,6, Richard Sloane2, Heather E Whitson1,2,3, Denise Orwig6, Donna M Crabtree7, Jay Magaziner6, James R Bain3, Michael Muehlbauer3, Olga R Ilkayeva3, Kim M Huffman2,3,4. 1. Division of Geriatrics, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina. 2. Center for the Study of Aging and Human Development, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. 3. Duke University School of Medicine, Duke Molecular Physiology Institute, Durham, North Carolina. 4. Division of Rheumatology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina. 5. Department of Biostatistics, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina. 6. Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore. 7. Duke Office of Clinical Research, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clinically similar older adults demonstrate variable responses to health stressors, heterogeneity attributable to differences in physical resilience. However, molecular mechanisms underlying physical resilience are unknown. We previously derived a measure of physical resilience after hip fracture-the expected recovery differential (ERD)-that captures the difference between actual recovery and predicted recovery. Starting with biomarkers associated with physical performance, morbidity, mortality, and hip fracture, we evaluated associations with the ERD to identify biomarkers of physical resilience after hip fracture. METHODS: In the Baltimore Hip Studies (N = 304) sera, we quantified biomarkers of inflammation (TNFR-I, TNFR-II, sVCAM-1, and IL-6), metabolic and mitochondrial function (non-esterified fatty acids, lactate, ketones, acylcarnitines, free amino acids, and IGF-1), and epigenetic dysregulation (circulating microRNAs). We used principal component analysis, canonical correlation, and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression (LASSO) to identify biomarker associations with better-than-expected recovery (greater ERD) after hip fracture. RESULTS: Participants with greater ERD were more likely to be women and less disabled at baseline. The complete biomarker set explained 37% of the variance in ERD (p < .001) by canonical correlation. LASSO regression identified a biomarker subset that accounted for 27% of the total variance in the ERD and included a metabolic factor (aspartate/asparagine, C22, C5:1, lactate, glutamate/mine), TNFR-I, miR-376a-3p, and miR-16-5p. CONCLUSIONS: We identified a set of biomarkers that explained 27% of the variance in ERD-a measure of physical resilience after hip fracture. These ERD-associated biomarkers may be useful in predicting physical resilience in older adults facing hip fracture and other acute health stressors.
BACKGROUND: Clinically similar older adults demonstrate variable responses to health stressors, heterogeneity attributable to differences in physical resilience. However, molecular mechanisms underlying physical resilience are unknown. We previously derived a measure of physical resilience after hip fracture-the expected recovery differential (ERD)-that captures the difference between actual recovery and predicted recovery. Starting with biomarkers associated with physical performance, morbidity, mortality, and hip fracture, we evaluated associations with the ERD to identify biomarkers of physical resilience after hip fracture. METHODS: In the Baltimore Hip Studies (N = 304) sera, we quantified biomarkers of inflammation (TNFR-I, TNFR-II, sVCAM-1, and IL-6), metabolic and mitochondrial function (non-esterified fatty acids, lactate, ketones, acylcarnitines, free amino acids, and IGF-1), and epigenetic dysregulation (circulating microRNAs). We used principal component analysis, canonical correlation, and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression (LASSO) to identify biomarker associations with better-than-expected recovery (greater ERD) after hip fracture. RESULTS:Participants with greater ERD were more likely to be women and less disabled at baseline. The complete biomarker set explained 37% of the variance in ERD (p < .001) by canonical correlation. LASSO regression identified a biomarker subset that accounted for 27% of the total variance in the ERD and included a metabolic factor (aspartate/asparagine, C22, C5:1, lactate, glutamate/mine), TNFR-I, miR-376a-3p, and miR-16-5p. CONCLUSIONS: We identified a set of biomarkers that explained 27% of the variance in ERD-a measure of physical resilience after hip fracture. These ERD-associated biomarkers may be useful in predicting physical resilience in older adults facing hip fracture and other acute health stressors.
Authors: Xintong Zuo; Alison Luciano; Carl F Pieper; James R Bain; Virginia B Kraus; William E Kraus; Miriam C Morey; Harvey J Cohen Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2018-05-08 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Shabnam Salimi; Michelle Shardell; Ram Miller; Ann L Gruber-Baldini; Denise Orwig; Neal Fedarko; Marc C Hochberg; Jack M Guralnik; Jay Magaziner Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2018-06-15 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Heather E Whitson; Harvey J Cohen; Kenneth E Schmader; Miriam C Morey; George Kuchel; Cathleen S Colon-Emeric Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2018-03-25 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Sheryl Zimmerman; William G Hawkes; J Richard Hebel; Kathleen M Fox; Eva Lydick; Jay Magaziner Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Ram R Miller; Michelle D Shardell; Gregory E Hicks; Anne R Cappola; William G Hawkes; Janet A Yu-Yahiro; Jay Magaziner Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2008-04-11 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Svetlana Ukraintseva; Konstantin Arbeev; Matt Duan; Igor Akushevich; Alexander Kulminski; Eric Stallard; Anatoliy Yashin Journal: Mech Ageing Dev Date: 2020-12-16 Impact factor: 5.432
Authors: Melissa D Hladek; Jiafeng Zhu; Deidra C Crews; Mara A McAdams-DeMarco; Brian Buta; Ravi Varadhan; Tariq Shafi; Jeremy D Walston; Karen Bandeen-Roche Journal: Kidney Int Rep Date: 2022-06-23
Authors: Heather E Whitson; Donna Crabtree; Carl F Pieper; Christine Ha; Sandra Au; Miles Berger; Harvey J Cohen; Jody Feld; Patrick Smith; Katherine Hall; Daniel Parker; Virginia Byers Kraus; William E Kraus; Kenneth Schmader; Cathleen Colón-Emeric Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2021-07-29 Impact factor: 5.562