Abstract
With no known treatments or vaccine, COVID-19 presents a major threat, particularly to older adults, who account for the majority of severe illness and deaths. The age-related susceptibility is partly explained by increased comorbidities including dementia and type II diabetes [1]. While it is unclear why these diseases predispose risk, we hypothesize that increased biological age, rather than chronological age, may be driving disease-related trends in COVID-19 severity with age. To test this hypothesis, we applied our previously validated biological age measure (PhenoAge) [2] composed of chronological age and nine clinical chemistry biomarkers to data of 347,751 participants from a large community cohort in the United Kingdom (UK Biobank), recruited between 2006 and 2010. Other data included disease diagnoses (to 2017), mortality data (to 2020), and the UK national COVID-19 test results (to May 31, 2020) [3]. Accelerated aging 10-14 years prior to the start of the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with test positivity (OR=1.15 per 5-year acceleration, 95% CI: 1.08 to 1.21, p=3.2×10−6) and all-cause mortality with test-confirmed COVID-19 (OR=1.25, per 5-year acceleration, 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.44, p=0.002) after adjustment for demographics including current chronological age and pre-existing diseases or conditions. The corresponding areas under the curves were 0.669 and 0.803, respectively. Biological aging, as captured by PhenoAge, is a better predictor of COVID-19 severity than chronological age, and may inform risk stratification initiatives, while also elucidating possible underlying mechanisms, particularly those related to inflammaging.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The authors are supported by grants funded by the National Institute on Aging, National Institute of Health: R00AG052604 for CLK and MEL; R21AG060018 for CLK, LCP, GAK, and DM; R33AG061456 for GAK. DM and LCP are supported by the University of Exeter Medical School, and in part by the University of Connecticut School of Medicine. JLA is funded by the UK Medical Research Council (MR/S009892/1). JM is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), (NIHR Doctoral Research Fellowship, DRF-2014-07-177). UK Biobank received an approval from the UK Biobank Research Ethics Committee (REC; REC reference 11/NW/0382). All the participants provided written informed consent to participate in the study and for their data to be used in future research. This research was conducted using the UK Biobank resource, under the application 14631. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health and social care.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Project is not human subject research and IRB involvement is not required.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
This research was conducted using the UK Biobank resource, under the application 14631.
