Viola Vaccarino1,2, Minxuan Huang1, Zeyuan Wang1, Qin Hui1, Amit J Shah1,2,3, Jack Goldberg4, Nicholas Smith4, Belal Kaseer1, Nancy Murrah1, Oleksiy M Levantsevych1, Lucy Shallenberger1, Emily Driggers1, J Douglas Bremner3,5, Yan V Sun1,3,6. 1. Department of Epidemiology, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, Georgia, US. 2. Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, US. 3. Atlanta Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Decatur, Georgia, US. 4. Vietnam Era Twin Registry, Seattle Epidemiologic Research and Information Center, US Department of Veterans Affairs, Seattle, Washington, US. 5. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, US. 6. Department of Biomedical Informatics, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, US.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little is known about the role of DNA methylation (DNAm) epigenetic age acceleration in cognitive decline. Using a twin study design, we examined whether DNAm age acceleration is related to cognitive decline measured longitudinally in persons without a clinical diagnosis of dementia. METHODS: We studied 266 paired male twins (133 pairs) with a mean age of 56 years at baseline. Of these, 114 paired twins returned for a follow-up after an average of 11.5 years. We obtained 6 indices of DNAm age acceleration based on epigenome-wide data from peripheral blood lymphocytes. At both baseline and follow-up, we administered a battery of cognitive measures and constructed 2 composite scores, one for executive function and one for memory function. We fitted multivariable mixed regression models to examine the association of DNAm age acceleration markers with cognitive function within pairs. RESULTS: In cross-sectional analyses at baseline, there was no association between DNAm age acceleration and cognitive function scores. In longitudinal analyses, however, comparing twins within pairs, each additional year of age acceleration using the Horvath's method was associated with a 3% decline (95% CI, 1%-5%) in the composite executive function score and a 2.5% decline (95% CI, 0.01%-4.9%) in the memory function score. These results did not attenuate after adjusting for education and other risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: Middle-aged men who had older DNAm age relative to their brothers of the same demographic age showed a faster rate of cognitive decline in the subsequent 11.5 years. These results point to the role of epigenetic modifications in cognitive aging.
BACKGROUND: Little is known about the role of DNA methylation (DNAm) epigenetic age acceleration in cognitive decline. Using a twin study design, we examined whether DNAm age acceleration is related to cognitive decline measured longitudinally in persons without a clinical diagnosis of dementia. METHODS: We studied 266 paired male twins (133 pairs) with a mean age of 56 years at baseline. Of these, 114 paired twins returned for a follow-up after an average of 11.5 years. We obtained 6 indices of DNAm age acceleration based on epigenome-wide data from peripheral blood lymphocytes. At both baseline and follow-up, we administered a battery of cognitive measures and constructed 2 composite scores, one for executive function and one for memory function. We fitted multivariable mixed regression models to examine the association of DNAm age acceleration markers with cognitive function within pairs. RESULTS: In cross-sectional analyses at baseline, there was no association between DNAm age acceleration and cognitive function scores. In longitudinal analyses, however, comparing twins within pairs, each additional year of age acceleration using the Horvath's method was associated with a 3% decline (95% CI, 1%-5%) in the composite executive function score and a 2.5% decline (95% CI, 0.01%-4.9%) in the memory function score. These results did not attenuate after adjusting for education and other risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: Middle-aged men who had older DNAm age relative to their brothers of the same demographic age showed a faster rate of cognitive decline in the subsequent 11.5 years. These results point to the role of epigenetic modifications in cognitive aging.
Authors: Yan Jiang; Brett Langley; Farah D Lubin; William Renthal; Marcelo A Wood; Dag H Yasui; Arvind Kumar; Eric J Nestler; Schahram Akbarian; Andrea C Beckel-Mitchener Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2008-11-12 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: Melyssa Tsai; Alaina M Mori; Christopher W Forsberg; Nicole Waiss; Jennifer L Sporleder; Nicholas L Smith; Jack Goldberg Journal: Twin Res Hum Genet Date: 2012-11-26 Impact factor: 1.587
Authors: May A Beydoun; Danielle Shaked; Salman M Tajuddin; Jordan Weiss; Michele K Evans; Alan B Zonderman Journal: Neurology Date: 2019-12-26 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Gabriel Oh; Sasha Ebrahimi; Matthew Carlucci; Aiping Zhang; Akhil Nair; Daniel E Groot; Viviane Labrie; Peixin Jia; Edward S Oh; Richie H Jeremian; Miki Susic; Tenjin C Shrestha; Martin R Ralph; Juozas Gordevičius; Karolis Koncevičius; Art Petronis Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2018-02-13 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Morgan E Levine; Ake T Lu; Austin Quach; Brian H Chen; Themistocles L Assimes; Stefania Bandinelli; Lifang Hou; Andrea A Baccarelli; James D Stewart; Yun Li; Eric A Whitsel; James G Wilson; Alex P Reiner; Abraham Aviv; Kurt Lohman; Yongmei Liu; Luigi Ferrucci; Steve Horvath Journal: Aging (Albany NY) Date: 2018-04-18 Impact factor: 5.682
Authors: Steve Horvath; Michael Gurven; Morgan E Levine; Benjamin C Trumble; Hillard Kaplan; Hooman Allayee; Beate R Ritz; Brian Chen; Ake T Lu; Tammy M Rickabaugh; Beth D Jamieson; Dianjianyi Sun; Shengxu Li; Wei Chen; Lluis Quintana-Murci; Maud Fagny; Michael S Kobor; Philip S Tsao; Alexander P Reiner; Kerstin L Edlefsen; Devin Absher; Themistocles L Assimes Journal: Genome Biol Date: 2016-08-11 Impact factor: 13.583
Authors: Ake T Lu; Eilis Hannon; Morgan E Levine; Eileen M Crimmins; Katie Lunnon; Jonathan Mill; Daniel H Geschwind; Steve Horvath Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2017-05-18 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Aladdin H Shadyab; Linda K McEvoy; Steve Horvath; Eric A Whitsel; Stephen R Rapp; Mark A Espeland; Susan M Resnick; JoAnn E Manson; Jiu-Chiuan Chen; Brian H Chen; Wenjun Li; Kathleen M Hayden; Wei Bao; Cynthia D J Kusters; Andrea Z LaCroix Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2022-06-01 Impact factor: 6.591
Authors: Karen Sugden; Avshalom Caspi; Maxwell L Elliott; Kyle J Bourassa; Kartik Chamarti; David L Corcoran; Ahmad R Hariri; Renate M Houts; Meeraj Kothari; Stephen Kritchevsky; George A Kuchel; Jonathan S Mill; Benjamin S Williams; Daniel W Belsky; Terrie E Moffitt Journal: Neurology Date: 2022-07-06 Impact factor: 11.800
Authors: Stephanie Shiau; Stephen M Arpadi; Yanhan Shen; Anyelina Cantos; Christian Vivar Ramon; Jayesh Shah; Grace Jang; Jennifer J Manly; Adam M Brickman; Andrea A Baccarelli; Michael T Yin Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2021-12-06 Impact factor: 20.999