Biological Age: Difference between revisions
Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" |MLR is the preliminary method and is easy to operate | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |MLR is the preliminary method and is easy to operate | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" |(1) The standards of aging biomarkers lead to the paradox of CA | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |(1) The standards of aging biomarkers lead to the paradox of CA | ||
(2) MLR also distorts the BA at the regression edge and ignores discontinuity in the aging rate | (2) MLR also distorts the BA at the regression edge and ignores discontinuity in the aging rate{{pmid|6873212}}{{pmid|3226152}}{{pmid|950448}} | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" | | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |Hollingsworth et al{{pmid|5841151}} and Kroll and Saxtrup{{pmid|11708217}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" |PCA | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |PCA | ||
Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" |1985 | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |1985 | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" |PCA uses fewer uncorrelated variables to explain the main variance | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |PCA uses fewer uncorrelated variables to explain the main variance | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" | | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |(1) Biomarkers are uncorrelated variables{{pmid|16318865}} | ||
(2) PCA avoids the influence of regression edge in MLR | (2) PCA avoids the influence of regression edge in MLR{{pmid|3226152}} | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" | | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |PCA cannot avoid the paradox of CA and some statistical deficiencies of MLR{{pmid|16318865}} | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" | | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |Nakamura et al,{{pmid|2737197}}{{pmid|2282902}} Nakamura and Miyao,{{pmid|12634284}} Nakamura et al,{{pmid|8026568}}{{pmid|9762521}} Nakamura and Miyao,{{pmid|17921421}} Nakamura et al,{{pmid|3226152}} Nakamura,<ref>75. Nakamura E. The assessment of physiological age based upon a principal component analysis of various physiological variables. J Kyoto Pref Univ Med. 1985;94:757–769. [Google Scholar]</ref> Nakamura and Miyao,{{pmid|18840798}} Nakamura et al,{{pmid|8803500}} Park et al,{{pmid|18597867}} Bai et al,{{pmid|19940465}} and Zhang{{pmid|25470806}}–{{pmid|24659482}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" |Hochschild’s method | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |Hochschild’s method | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" |Hochschild | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |Hochschild | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" |1989 | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |1989 | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" | | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |Hochschild’s method aims to select aging biomarkers according to their effects on life expectancy{{pmid|2684676}} | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" |(1) Hochschild’s method solves the paradox of CA | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |(1) Hochschild’s method solves the paradox of CA | ||
(2) Hochschild’s method avoids statistical problems of MLR | (2) Hochschild’s method avoids statistical problems of MLR | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" |(1) Hochschild’s method is nonstandard and relatively complicated | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |(1) Hochschild’s method is nonstandard and relatively complicated | ||
(2) Hochschild’s method is not based on the definition of BA | (2) Hochschild’s method is not based on the definition of BA | ||
(3) A large number of subjects are required when this approach is adopted for another system | (3) A large number of subjects are required when this approach is adopted for another system{{pmid|20005245}} | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" | | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |Hochschild{{pmid|2684676}}{{pmid|2583248}}<ref>76. Hochschild R. Validating Biomarkers of Aging-Mathematical Approaches and Results of a 2462-Person Study. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 1994. [Google Scholar]</ref> | ||
|- | |- | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" |KDM | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |KDM | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" |Klemera and Doubal | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |Klemera and Doubal | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" |2006 | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |2006 | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" |KDM is based on minimizing the distance between ''m'' regression lines and ''m'' biomarker points in an ''m'' | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |KDM is based on minimizing the distance between ''m'' regression lines and ''m'' biomarker points in an ''m''-dimensional space of all biomarkers{{pmid|16318865}} | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" | | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |(1) KDM performed better than CA{{pmid|23213031}} | ||
(2) KDM is precise when compared with other methods | (2) KDM is precise when compared with other methods{{pmid|23213031}}{{pmid|20005245}}{{pmid|28110151}} | ||
(3) KDM solves the paradox of CA | (3) KDM solves the paradox of CA{{pmid|23213031}}{{pmid|20005245}} | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" | | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |The calculation of KDM is complicated{{pmid|20005245}} | ||
| colspan="1" rowspan="1" | | | colspan="1" rowspan="1" |Klemera and Doubal,{{pmid|16318865}} Levine,{{pmid|23213031}} Levine and Crimmins,{{pmid|25088793}} Cho et al{{pmid|20005245}} and Jee and Park{{pmid|28110151}} | ||
|} | |} | ||
====Comparison and Discussion==== | ====Comparison and Discussion==== | ||
While MLR and PCA treat CA as a criterion for biomarker selection, Hochschild’s method and KDM consider CA as an independent variable. The choice of method depends on the specific research goals and the nature of the available data. MLR and PCA are more straightforward and are often used in initial studies, while Hochschild’s method and KDM provide a more nuanced view of the aging process. | While MLR and PCA treat CA as a criterion for biomarker selection, Hochschild’s method and KDM consider CA as an independent variable. The choice of method depends on the specific research goals and the nature of the available data. MLR and PCA are more straightforward and are often used in initial studies, while Hochschild’s method and KDM provide a more nuanced view of the aging process. | ||
== Todo == | == Todo == | ||
Revision as of 02:46, 30 January 2024
Biological Age (BA) is a concept used to assess an individual's aging status, offering a more nuanced understanding than Chronological Age (CA). CA refers simply to the amount of time that has elapsed since a person's birth, while BA provides a measure of aging based on various physiological, biochemical, and molecular factors. This distinction is crucial because individuals of the same CA can exhibit significantly different aging processes and health statuses.
Key Aspects of Biological Age
- Biomarkers: BA is typically determined by analyzing a range of biomarkers. These can include genetic markers, epigenetic alterations, cellular senescence, telomere length, metabolic markers, and more. The specific biomarkers chosen depend on the method of estimation and the focus of the study.
- Health and Functionality: BA reflects the functional state of an individual's organs and systems. A lower BA compared to CA might indicate better health and lower risk for age-related diseases, whereas a higher BA suggests accelerated aging and potentially increased health risks.
- Variability: Unlike CA, which is uniform and progresses at a constant rate (one year per year), BA can vary significantly between individuals. Factors such as lifestyle, genetics, environment, and disease can influence the rate at which a person's biological systems age.
Importance in Research and Medicine
- Research Tool: In scientific research, BA is valuable for understanding the aging process, identifying aging biomarkers, and evaluating the effectiveness of anti-aging interventions.
- Clinical Applications: In a clinical setting, BA can be used to assess an individual's overall health status, predict the risk of age-related diseases, and personalize healthcare and treatment plans.
Estimation Methods
Biological age estimation has emerged as a significant tool in gerontology, aiming to provide a more accurate measure of aging than chronological age.
The accurate estimation of BA has significant implications for clinical practice, including predicting disease onset and prognosis, improving the quality of life for the elderly, and promoting successful aging. Each method offers unique insights, and a comprehensive understanding of these methods can lead to better clinical decision-making and more effective interventions for aging-related conditions.
Various methods have been developed to estimate BA, each with its unique approach and criteria:[1]
- Multiple Linear Regression (MLR) is a statistical technique that estimates BA by relating several independent variables (biomarkers) to a dependent variable (CA). In this method, CA is used as a criterion for selecting biomarkers and is treated as an independent index.
- Principal Component Analysis (PCA) is another statistical technique used in BA estimation. PCA reduces the dimensionality of the data by transforming multiple biomarkers into a set of linearly uncorrelated variables, known as principal components.
- Hochschild’s Method differs from MLR and PCA by making CA an independent variable. It aims to estimate BA by adjusting CA based on specific biomarkers.
- Klemera and Doubal’s Method (KDM) shares a similar concept with Hochschild’s method but uses a more complex statistical approach. It treats CA as an independent variable and incorporates multiple biomarkers to estimate BA.
Comparisons among MLR, PCA, Hochschild’s method, and KDM
Method | Proposer | Year | Core concept | Advantage | Disadvantage | Main researchers |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MLR | More than 50 years ago | Aging biomarkers are determined by the correlation with CA using MLR model | MLR is the preliminary method and is easy to operate | (1) The standards of aging biomarkers lead to the paradox of CA
(2) MLR also distorts the BA at the regression edge and ignores discontinuity in the aging rate[2][3][4] |
Hollingsworth et al[5] and Kroll and Saxtrup[6] | |
PCA | Nakamura | 1985 | PCA uses fewer uncorrelated variables to explain the main variance | (1) Biomarkers are uncorrelated variables[7]
(2) PCA avoids the influence of regression edge in MLR[3] |
PCA cannot avoid the paradox of CA and some statistical deficiencies of MLR[7] | Nakamura et al,[8][9] Nakamura and Miyao,[10] Nakamura et al,[11][12] Nakamura and Miyao,[13] Nakamura et al,[3] Nakamura,[14] Nakamura and Miyao,[15] Nakamura et al,[16] Park et al,[17] Bai et al,[18] and Zhang[19]–[20] |
Hochschild’s method | Hochschild | 1989 | Hochschild’s method aims to select aging biomarkers according to their effects on life expectancy[21] | (1) Hochschild’s method solves the paradox of CA
(2) Hochschild’s method avoids statistical problems of MLR |
(1) Hochschild’s method is nonstandard and relatively complicated
(2) Hochschild’s method is not based on the definition of BA (3) A large number of subjects are required when this approach is adopted for another system[22] |
Hochschild[21][23][24] |
KDM | Klemera and Doubal | 2006 | KDM is based on minimizing the distance between m regression lines and m biomarker points in an m-dimensional space of all biomarkers[7] | (1) KDM performed better than CA[25]
(2) KDM is precise when compared with other methods[25][22][26] (3) KDM solves the paradox of CA[25][22] |
The calculation of KDM is complicated[22] | Klemera and Doubal,[7] Levine,[25] Levine and Crimmins,[27] Cho et al[22] and Jee and Park[26] |
Comparison and Discussion
While MLR and PCA treat CA as a criterion for biomarker selection, Hochschild’s method and KDM consider CA as an independent variable. The choice of method depends on the specific research goals and the nature of the available data. MLR and PCA are more straightforward and are often used in initial studies, while Hochschild’s method and KDM provide a more nuanced view of the aging process.
Todo
- 2017, Common methods of biological age estimation [1]
See Also
- Epigenetic Clocks
- Wikipedia - Biomarkers of aging
References
- ↑ Jump up to: 1.0 1.1 Jia L et al.: Common methods of biological age estimation. Clin Interv Aging 2017. (PMID 28546743) [PubMed] [DOI] [Full text] Abstract
- ↑ Dubina TL et al.: Biological age and its estimation. II. Assessment of biological age of albino rats by multiple regression analysis. Exp Gerontol 1983. (PMID 6873212) [PubMed] [DOI] Abstract
- ↑ Jump up to: 3.0 3.1 3.2 Nakamura E et al.: Assessment of biological age by principal component analysis. Mech Ageing Dev 1988. (PMID 3226152) [PubMed] [DOI] Abstract
- ↑ Webster IW & Logie AR: A relationship between functional age and health status in female subjects. J Gerontol 1976. (PMID 950448) [PubMed] [DOI] Abstract
- ↑ Hollingsworth JW et al.: Correlations between tests of aging in Hiroshima subjects--an attempt to define "physiologic age". Yale J Biol Med 1965. (PMID 5841151) [PubMed] [Full text]
- ↑ Krøll J & Saxtrup O: On the use of regression analysis for the estimation of human biological age. Biogerontology 2000. (PMID 11708217) [PubMed] [DOI] Abstract
- ↑ Jump up to: 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 Klemera P & Doubal S: A new approach to the concept and computation of biological age. Mech Ageing Dev 2006. (PMID 16318865) [PubMed] [DOI] Abstract
- ↑ Nakamura E et al.: Biological age versus physical fitness age. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 1989. (PMID 2737197) [PubMed] [DOI] Abstract
- ↑ Nakamura E et al.: Biological age versus physical fitness age in women. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 1990. (PMID 2282902) [PubMed] [DOI] Abstract
- ↑ Nakamura E & Miyao K: Further evaluation of the basic nature of the human biological aging process based on a factor analysis of age-related physiological variables. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2003. (PMID 12634284) [PubMed] [DOI] Abstract
- ↑ Nakamura E et al.: Evaluating measures of hematology and blood chemistry in male rhesus monkeys as biomarkers of aging. Exp Gerontol 1994. (PMID 8026568) [PubMed] [DOI] Abstract
- ↑ Nakamura E et al.: A strategy for identifying biomarkers of aging: further evaluation of hematology and blood chemistry data from a calorie restriction study in rhesus monkeys. Exp Gerontol 1998. (PMID 9762521) [PubMed] [DOI] Abstract
- ↑ Nakamura E & Miyao K: A method for identifying biomarkers of aging and constructing an index of biological age in humans. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2007. (PMID 17921421) [PubMed] [DOI] Abstract
- ↑ 75. Nakamura E. The assessment of physiological age based upon a principal component analysis of various physiological variables. J Kyoto Pref Univ Med. 1985;94:757–769. [Google Scholar]
- ↑ Nakamura E & Miyao K: Sex differences in human biological aging. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2008. (PMID 18840798) [PubMed] [DOI] Abstract
- ↑ Nakamura E et al.: Effects of habitual physical exercise on physiological age in men aged 20-85 years as estimated using principal component analysis. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 1996. (PMID 8803500) [PubMed] [DOI] Abstract
- ↑ Park J et al.: Developing a biological age assessment equation using principal component analysis and clinical biomarkers of aging in Korean men. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 2009. (PMID 18597867) [PubMed] [DOI] Abstract
- ↑ Bai X et al.: Evaluation of biological aging process - a population-based study of healthy people in China. Gerontology 2010. (PMID 19940465) [PubMed] [DOI] Abstract
- ↑ Zhang WG et al.: Association of Klotho and interleukin 6 gene polymorphisms with aging in Han Chinese population. J Nutr Health Aging 2014. (PMID 25470806) [PubMed] [DOI] Abstract
- ↑ Zhang WG et al.: Select aging biomarkers based on telomere length and chronological age to build a biological age equation. Age (Dordr) 2014. (PMID 24659482) [PubMed] [DOI] [Full text] Abstract
- ↑ Jump up to: 21.0 21.1 Hochschild R: Improving the precision of biological age determinations. Part 1: A new approach to calculating biological age. Exp Gerontol 1989. (PMID 2684676) [PubMed] [DOI] Abstract
- ↑ Jump up to: 22.0 22.1 22.2 22.3 22.4 Cho IH et al.: An empirical comparative study on biological age estimation algorithms with an application of Work Ability Index (WAI). Mech Ageing Dev 2010. (PMID 20005245) [PubMed] [DOI] Abstract
- ↑ Hochschild R: Improving the precision of biological age determinations. Part 2: Automatic human tests, age norms and variability. Exp Gerontol 1989. (PMID 2583248) [PubMed] [DOI] Abstract
- ↑ 76. Hochschild R. Validating Biomarkers of Aging-Mathematical Approaches and Results of a 2462-Person Study. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 1994. [Google Scholar]
- ↑ Jump up to: 25.0 25.1 25.2 25.3 Levine ME: Modeling the rate of senescence: can estimated biological age predict mortality more accurately than chronological age?. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2013. (PMID 23213031) [PubMed] [DOI] [Full text] Abstract
- ↑ Jump up to: 26.0 26.1 Jee H & Park J: Selection of an optimal set of biomarkers and comparative analyses of biological age estimation models in Korean females. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 2017. (PMID 28110151) [PubMed] [DOI] Abstract
- ↑ Levine ME & Crimmins EM: A comparison of methods for assessing mortality risk. Am J Hum Biol 2014. (PMID 25088793) [PubMed] [DOI] [Full text] Abstract