Abstract:BACKGROUND:An individual's rate of aging directly influences his/her susceptibility to morbidity and mortality. Thus, quantifying aging and disentangling how various factors coalesce to produce between-person differences in the rate of aging, have important implications for potential interventions. We recently developed and validated a novel multi-system-based aging measure, Phenotypic Age (PhenoAge), which has been shown to capture mortality and morbidity risk in the full US population and diverse subpopulations. The aim of this study was to evaluate associations between PhenoAge and a comprehensive set of factors, including genetic scores, childhood and adulthood circumstances, and health behaviors, to determine the relative contributions of these factors to variance in this aging measure.METHODS AND FINDINGS:Based on data from 2,339 adults (aged 51+ years, mean age 69.4 years, 56% female, and 93.9% non-Hispanic white) from the US Health and Retirement Study, we calculated PhenoAge and evaluated the multivariable associations for a comprehensive set of factors using 2 innovative approaches-Shapley value decomposition (the Shapley approach hereafter) and hierarchical clustering. The Shapley approach revealed that together all 11 study domains (4 childhood and adulthood circumstances domains, 5 polygenic score [PGS] domains, and 1 behavior domain, and 1 demographic domain) accounted for 29.2% (bootstrap standard error = 0.003) of variance in PhenoAge after adjustment for chronological age. Behaviors exhibited the greatest contribution to PhenoAge (9.2%), closely followed by adulthood adversity, which was suggested to contribute 9.0% of the variance in PhenoAge. Collectively, the PGSs contributed 3.8% of the variance in PhenoAge (after accounting for chronological age). Next, using hierarchical clustering, we identified 6 distinct subpopulations based on the 4 childhood and adulthood circumstances domains. Two of these subpopulations stood out as disadvantaged, exhibiting significantly higher PhenoAges on average. Finally, we observed a significant gene-by-environment interaction between a previously validated PGS for coronary artery disease and the seemingly most disadvantaged subpopulation, suggesting a multiplicative effect of adverse life course circumstances coupled with genetic risk on phenotypic aging. The main limitations of this study were the retrospective nature of self-reported circumstances, leading to possible recall biases, and the unrepresentative racial/ethnic makeup of the population.CONCLUSIONS:In a sample of US older adults, genetic, behavioral, and socioenvironmental circumstances during childhood and adulthood account for about 30% of differences in phenotypic aging. Our results also suggest that the detrimental effects of disadvantaged life course circumstances for health and aging may be further exacerbated among persons with genetic predisposition to coronary artery disease. Finally, our finding that behaviors had the largest contribution to PhenoAge highlights a potential policy target. Nevertheless, further validation of these findings and identification of causal links are greatly needed.

Quantification of biological aging in young adults

The Longitudinal Study of Aging in Human Young Adults: Knowledge Gaps and Research Agenda

Eleven Telomere, Epigenetic Clock, and Biomarker-Composite Quantifications of Biological Aging: Do They Measure the Same Thing?

Molecular and physiological manifestations and measurement of aging in humans

Aging Biomarkers and Novel Targets for Anti-Aging Interventions.

Associations of Genetics, Behaviors, and Life Course Circumstances with a Novel Aging and Healthspan Measure: Evidence from the Health and Retirement Study.

Translating Measures of Biological Aging to Test Effectiveness of Geroprotective Interventions: What Can We Learn from Research on Telomeres?

Clinical Trials Targeting Aging

Validation of biomarkers of aging

A genome-wide association study of aging

Undulating changes in human plasma proteome profiles across the lifespan

An epigenetic biomarker of aging for lifespan and healthspan

Measuring biological age using omics data

Evaluation of quantitative biomarkers of aging in human PBMCs

Quest for a summary measure of biological age: the health and retirement study

Comprehensive Insights from Molecular Targets and Biomarkers to Biological Clocks

Identifying biological markers and sociodemographic factors that influence the gap between phenotypic and chronological ages

Biological age in healthy elderly predicts aging-related diseases including dementia

Discovery of Thermodynamic Control Variables that Independently Regulate Healthspan and Maximum Lifespan

Molecular and phenotypic biomarkers of aging

Disparities in the pace of biological aging among midlife adults of the same chronological age have implications for future frailty risk and policy