Evaluation of epigenetic and metabolomic biomarkers indicating biological age

preprint OA: gold CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0
📄 Open PDF View at publisher

Abstract

Biological age captures a person’s age-related risk of unfavorable outcomes using biophysiological information. Multivariate biological age measures include frailty scores and molecular biomarkers. These measures are often studied in isolation, but here we present a large-scale study comparing them. In two prospective cohorts ( n =3,196), we compared epigenetic (DNAm Horvath, DNAm Hannum, DNAm PhenoAge, DNAm GrimAge) and metabolomic-based (MetaboAge, MetaboHealth) biomarkers in reflection of biological age, as represented by five frailty measures and overall mortality. We observed that mortality-trained biological age markers, DNAm GrimAge and MetaboHealth, outperformed age-trained biomarkers in frailty reflection and mortality prediction. The associations of DNAm GrimAge and MetaboHealth with frailty and mortality were independent of each other and of the frailty score mimicking clinical geriatric assessment. Epigenetic, metabolomic, and clinical biological age markers seem to capture different aspects of aging. These findings suggest that mortality-trained molecular markers may provide novel phenotype reflecting biological age and strengthen current clinical geriatric health and well-being assessment.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-19T01:45:01.086888+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-05-21T05:10:58.409756+00:00
License: CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0