Advertisement

Practical Detection of Biological Age: Why It Is not a Trivial Task

  • Boris Veytsman
  • Tiange Cui
  • Ancha BaranovaEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Healthy Ageing and Longevity book series (HAL, volume 10)

Abstract

The determination of the “biological age” is one the most interesting problems in the biology of aging. The improvement of the biomarkers of aging is a very important problem. The necessity to use synthetic (i.e. holistic), rather than analytic (i.e. specific) measurements strongly contributes to a deeply complicated relationship between conventional biomedicine and a plethora of anti-aging interventions which are inferred from experimental studies of animals and observational studies of humans. Intrinsically holistic “omics” profiles, however, are subject to the “curse of dimensionality”, discussed in this chapter. It is expected that an increase in the reliability of biomarkers of aging would be achieved by concerted efforts of biostatisticians, who would successfully combine data-driven and knowledge-based approaches, and the biologists who would be instrumental in critically evaluating insights generated in silico and ensure a discernible biological rationale for the metrics of biological age.

Keywords

Biological age Biomarkers Curse of dimensionality Omics Holistic measures 

Notes

Acknowledgements

AB is grateful for great discussions of biomarker concepts with many colleagues, with most important thoughtful contributions being made by Prof. Eytan Domany (Weizmann Institute of Science, Israel) and Prof. Alessandro Giuliani (Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Italy). AB and TC acknowledge an important contribution of Dr. Ganiraju Manyam (The UT MD Anderson Cancer, USA) who developed an initial pipeline for distance analysis.

References

  1. Aviv A, Valdes AM, Spector TD (2006) Human telomere biology: pitfalls of moving from the laboratory to epidemiology. Int J Epidemiol 35(6):1424–1429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Balietti M, Giuli C, Fattoretti P, Fabbietti P, Papa R, Postacchini D, Conti F (2017) Effect of a comprehensive intervention on plasma BDNF in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. J Alzheimers Dis 57:7–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balietti M, Giuli C, Conti F (2018) Peripheral blood brain-derived neurotrophic factor as a biomarker of Alzheimer’s disease: are there methodological biases? Mol Neurobiol 55(8):6661–6672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bartlett JW, Frost C, Mattsson N, Skillbäck T, Blennow K, Zetterberg H, Schott JM (2012) Determining cut-points for Alzheimer’s disease biomarkers: statistical issues, methods and challenges. Biomark. Med. 6(4):391–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bellman RE (1957) Dynamic programming. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  6. Böttcher MA, Dingli D, Werner B, Traulsen A (2018) Replicative cellular age distributions in compartmentalized tissues. J R Soc Interface 15:20180272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ein-Dor L, Kela I, Getz G, Givol D, Domany E (2005) Outcome signature genes in breast cancer: is there a unique set? Bioinformatics 21(2):171–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ein-Dor L, Zuk O, Domany E (2006) Thousands of samples are needed to generate a robust gene list for predicting outcome in cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103(15):5923–5928CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Eisenberg DT, Salpea KD, Kuzawa CW, Hayes MG, Humphries SE, European Atherosclerosis Research Study IIG (2011) Substantial variation in qPCR measured mean blood telomere lengths in young men from eleven European countries. Am J Hum Biol 23(2):228–231Google Scholar
  10. Goodfellow I, Bengio Y, Courville A (2016) Deep learning. In: Adaptive computation and machine learning series. The MIT PressGoogle Scholar
  11. Harries LW, Hernandez D, Henley W, Wood AR, Holly AC, Bradley-Smith RM et al (2011) Human aging is characterized by focused changes in gene expression and deregulation of alternative splicing. Aging Cell 10(5):868–878CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Juster RP, McEwen BS, Lupien SJ (2010) Allostatic load biomarkers of chronic stress and impact on health and cognition. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 35:2–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kupershmidt I, Su QJ, Grewal A, Sundaresh S, Halperin I, Flynn J et al (2010) Ontology-based meta-analysis of global collections of high-throughput public data. PLoS ONE 5(9):e13066CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lara J, Cooper R, Nissan J, Ginty AT, Khaw K-T, Deary IJ et al (2015) A proposed panel of biomarkers of healthy ageing. BMC Med 13:222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Levada OA, Cherednichenko NV, Trailin AV, Troyan AS (2016) Plasma brain-derived neurotrophic factor as a biomarker for the main types of mild neurocognitive disorders and treatment efficacy: a preliminary study. Dis Mark 2016(4095723)Google Scholar
  16. Lin Y, Damjanovic A, Metter EJ, Nguyen H, Truong T, Najarro K et al (2015) Age-associated telomere attrition of lymphocytes in vivo is co-ordinated with changes in telomerase activity, composition of lymphocyte subsets and health conditions. Clin Sci 128:367–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lin J, Cheon J, Brown R, Coccia M, Puterman E, Aschbacher K et al (2016) Systematic and cell-type specific telomere length changes in subsets of lymphocytes. J Immunol Res 2016(5371050)Google Scholar
  18. Mather KA, Jorm AF, Parslow RA, Christensen H (2009) Is telomere length a biomarker of aging? A review. J Gerontol Biol Sci 66A:202–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mayer G, Heinze G, Mischak H, Hellemons ME, Heerspink HJ, Bakker SJ et al (2011) Omics-bioinformatics in the context of clinical data. Methods Mol Biol 719:479–497Google Scholar
  20. McDermott JE, Wang J, Mitchell H, Webb-Robertson BJ, Hafen R, Ramey J, Rodland KD (2013) Challenges in biomarker discovery: combining expert insights with statistical analysis of complex omics data. Expert Opin Med Diagn 7(1):37–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Neshatdoust S, Saunders C, Castle SM, Vauzour D, Williams C, Butler L et al (2016) High-flavonoid intake induces cognitive improvements linked to changes in serum brain-derived neurotrophic factor: two randomised, controlled trials. Nutr Healthy Aging 4:81–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Palmieri D, Cafueri G, Mongelli F, Pezzolo A, Pistoia V, Palombo D (2014) Telomere shortening and increased oxidative stress are restricted to venous tissue in patients with varicose veins: a merely local disease? Vasc Med 19:125–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ragnauth CD, Warren DT, Liu Y, McNair R, Tajsic T, Figg N et al (2010) Prelamin A acts to accelerate smooth muscle cell senescence and is a novel biomarker of human vascular aging. Circulation 121:2200–2210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Saeys Y, Inza I, Larraaga P (2007) A review of feature selection techniques in bioinformatics. Bioinformatics 23(19):2507–2517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Simm A, Nass N, Bartling B, Hofmann B, Silber RE, Navarrete Santos A (2008) Potential biomarkers of ageing. Biol Chem 389:257–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Southworth LK, Owen AB, Kim SK (2009) Aging mice show a decreasing correlation of gene expression within genetic modules. PLoS Genet 5:e1000776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Thomassen M, Tan Q, Eiriksdottir F, Bak M, Cold S, Kruse TA (2007) Comparison of gene sets for expression profiling: prediction of metastasis from low-malignant breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 13(18 Pt 1):5355–5360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. van’t Veer LJ, Dai H, van de Vijver MJ, He YD, Hart AA, Mao M, Peterse HL, van der Kooy K, Marton MJ, Witteveen AT, Schreiber GJ, Kerkhoven RM, Roberts C, Linsley PS, Bernards R, Friend SH (2002) Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature 415(6871):530–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Venet D, Dumont JE, Detours V (2011) Most random gene expression signatures are significantly associated with breast cancer outcome. PLoS Comput Biol 7(10):e1002240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Veytsman B, Wang L, Cui T, Bruskin S, Baranova A (2014) Distance-based classifiers as potential diagnostic and prediction tools for human diseases. BMC Genom 15(Suppl 12):S10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Vijg J, Kennedy BK (2016) The essence of aging. Gerontology 62(4):381–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wang Y, Klijn JG, Zhang Y, Sieuwerts AM, Look MP, Yang F et al (2005) Gene-expression profiles to predict distant metastasis of lymph-node-negative primary breast cancer. Lancet 365(9460):671–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Xia X, Chen W, McDermott J, Han JJ (2017) Molecular and phenotypic biomarkers of aging. F1000Research 6:860CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yashin AI, Jazwinski SM (2015) Aging and health—a systems biology perspective. In: Interdisciplinary topics in gerontology, vol 40. Karger, BaselGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chronic Metabolic and Rare Diseases Systems Biology Initiative (ChroMe RaDSBIn)George Mason UniversityFairfaxUSA
  2. 2.Research Centre for Medical Genetics, Russian Academy of Medical SciencesMoscowRussia
  3. 3.Chronic Metabolic and Rare Diseases Systems Biology Initiative (ChroMe RaDSBIn), School of System BiologyGeorge Mason UniversityFairfaxUSA

Personalised recommendations