A Novel Proteomic Aging Clock

By now there are most likely dozens of published aging clocks constructed from various omics databases. The proliferation of new clocks isn't helping to solve the fundamental problem with this approach to assessing biological age, which is that the predicted biological age produced by a clock isn't actionable, as no-one yet understands how the clocks relate to causative processes of aging. Thus factions within the research community are arguing for standardization to a single clock, followed by focused effort on understand how those clock measurements relate to underlying processes of aging.

Using a large proteomic cohort in the UK Biobank, we aimed to develop a proteomic aging clock for all-cause mortality risk as a proxy of biological age (BA). Participants in the UK Biobank Pharma Proteomics Project were included with ages between 39 and 70 years (n = 53,021). We developed a proteomic aging clock (PAC) for all-cause mortality risk as a surrogate of BA using a combination of Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) penalized Cox regression and Gompertz proportional hazards models. The validation for PAC included assessing its age-adjusted associations with, and predictions for all-cause mortality and 18 incident diseases, and head-to-head comparisons with two biological age measures (PhenoAge and BioAge) and leukocyte telomere length (LTL). Additionally, a functional analysis was performed to identify gene sets and tissues enriched with genes associated with BA deviation, based on different BA measures.

The Spearman correlation between PAC proteomic age and chronological age was 0.76. 10.9% of the combined training and test samples died during a mean follow-up of 13.3 years, with the mean age at death 70.1 years. PAC proteomic age, after controlling for age and other covariates, showed stronger associations than PhenoAge, BioAge, and LTL, with mortality and multiple incident diseases in the test set sample and in disease-free participants, such as mortality, heart failure, pneumonia, delirium, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), and dementia. Additionally, PAC proteomic age showed higher predictive power for the conditions above compared to chronological age, PhenoAge, and BioAge. Proteins associated with PAC proteomic age deviation (from chronological age) are enriched in various hallmarks of biological aging, including immunoinflammatory responses, cellular senescence, extracellular matrix remodeling, cellular response to stressors, and vascular biology.

Link: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.12.19.23300228

Comments

I'd argue for a lot of different clocks, and all the data they are derived from, to be fed to a, yet to be developed, biomedical AI.
Hopefuly this will cause unexpected abilities to appear, 'emergent properties', and allows the AI to develop a better clock and understand how its clock relates to causative processes of aging.
It would be helpful to the AI if it also got fed with different clock data measured from the same group of people. The more the better. This would mean testing thoudsands of people with different clocks.

Posted by: Ray at January 20th, 2024 5:32 AM
Comment Submission

Post a comment; thoughtful, considered opinions are valued. New comments can be edited for a few minutes following submission. Comments incorporating ad hominem attacks, advertising, and other forms of inappropriate behavior are likely to be deleted.

Note that there is a comment feed for those who like to keep up with conversations.