Abstract
Biological age reflects actual aging and overall health, but current aging clocks are often complex and difficult to interpret, limiting their clinical application. In this study, we introduced a Gompertz law-based biological age (GOLD BioAge) model that simplified aging assessment. We estimated GOLD BioAge using clinical biomarkers and found significant associations of the difference from chronological age (BioAgeDiff) with risks of morbidity and mortality in NHANES. Moreover, we developed GOLD ProtAge and MetAge using proteomics and metabolomics data, which outperformed the clinical-only model in predicting mortality and chronic disease risks in UK Biobank. Benchmark analysis illustrated that our models exceeded common aging clocks in predicting mortality across diverse age groups in both NHANES and UK Biobank. The results demonstrated that the GOLD BioAge algorithm effectively applied to both clinical and omics data, showing excellent performance in predicting age-related outcomes. Additionally, we created a simplified version called the Light BioAge, which used three biomarkers for aging assessment. The Light model reliably captured mortality risks in three validation cohorts (CHARLS, RuLAS, CLHLS). It significantly predicted the onset of frailty, stratified frail individuals, and collectively identified individuals at high risk of mortality. In summary, the algorithm of GOLD BioAge could provide a valuable framework for aging assessment in public health and clinical practice.
Highlights
The algorithm of Gompertz law based biological age (GOLD BioAge) was proposed to construct biological aging clocks with convenient and interpretable calculations, which had better performance in predicting mortality risks.
Our approach was applicable to proteomics and metabolomics, yielding ProtAge and MetAge with great clinical prospect to improve accuracy of aging assessment and prevent age-related diseases.
The Light BioAge, a simplified version, was developed using age and three biomarkers, and it independently predicted mortality in three cohorts.
The Light BioAgeDiff significantly predicted the onset of frailty, stratified frail individuals, and collectively identified individuals at high risk of mortality.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China-Youth Science Fund (82301768, 32300533, 32100510), the Shanghai Sailing Program (23YF1430500).
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:
Our study used the data of NHANES 1999-2018, UKB, CHARLS, CLHLS, and RuLAS. The US NHANES is a nationally representative cross-sectional survey of civilian living in the US, approved by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) Ethics Review Board30. The UK Biobank is large-scale perspective cohort that collected data from over 500,000 participants across 22 centers in England, Scotland, and Wales. UKB received ethics approval from the North West Multicenter Research Ethics Commitee31. The CHARLS is an ongoing prospective population-based longitudinal cohort study of middle-aged and older Chinese adults. CHARLS was approved by the Ethics Review Board of Peking University, which was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and other relevant guidelines and regulations32. The CLHLS is a nationwide longitudinal study of old-aged Chinese population. The project was approved by the Biomedical Ethics Committee of Peking University, China (IRB00001052-13074)33. The Rugao Longevity and Ageing Study (RuLAS) is a population-based perspective study, which consisted of a longevity cohort and an aging cohort in Rugao, China34. The RuLAS was approved by the Human Ethics Committee of Fudan University School of Life Sciences. All participants provided written informed consent. And This study followed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) reporting guidelines for cohort studies35.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
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, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data of RulAS are available through reasonable request from the corresponding author. The data from CLHLS are available at https://opendata.pku.edu.cn/dataset.xhtml. The data from CHARLS are available at https://charls.charlsdata.com/pages/data/111/zh-cn.html. The data from the NHANES are available at www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis/index.htm, and the data from the UK Biobank are available upon application at www.ukbiobank.ac.uk/register-apply. This research was conducted using UK Biobank Resource under Application Number 103791.
