Author: Jylhävä J1, Pedersen NL2, Hägg S3
Affiliation: <sup>1</sup>Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. Electronic address: juulia.jylhava@ki.se.
<sup>2</sup>Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. Electronic address: nancy.pedersen@ki.se.
<sup>3</sup>Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. Electronic address: sara.hagg@ki.se.
Conference/Journal: EBioMedicine.
Date published: 2017 Apr 1
Other:
Pages: S2352-3964(17)30142-1 , Special Notes: doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2017.03.046. [Epub ahead of print] , Word Count: 150
The search for reliable indicators of biological age, rather than chronological age, has been ongoing for over three decades, and until recently, largely without success. Advances in the fields of molecular biology have increased the variety of potential candidate biomarkers that may be considered as biological age predictors. In this review, we summarize current state-of-the-art findings considering six potential types of biological age predictors: epigenetic clocks, telomere length, transcriptomic predictors, proteomic predictors, metabolomics-based predictors, and composite biomarker predictors. Promising developments consider multiple combinations of these various types of predictors, which may shed light on the aging process and provide further understanding of what contributes to healthy aging. Thus far, the most promising, new biological age predictor is the epigenetic clock; however its true value as a biomarker of aging requires longitudinal confirmation.
Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier B.V.
KEYWORDS: Aging; Biomarker; Epigenetic clock; Prediction; Telomere length
PMID: 28396265 DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2017.03.046