Lower germline mutation rates in young adults predict longer lives and longer reproductive lifespans ==================================================================================================== * Richard M. Cawthon * Huong D. Meeks * Thomas A. Sasani * Ken R. Smith * Richard A. Kerber * Elizabeth O’Brien * Aaron R. Quinlan * Lynn B. Jorde ## ABSTRACT **BACKGROUND** Genome sequencing of large three-generation families allows identification of *de novo* mutations (DNMs) in the middle-generation and their attribution to the specific grandparental germlines in which they arose. We hypothesized that germline DNM accumulation during aging may limit the duration of childbearing in women, and if accompanied by mutation accumulation in somatic tissues, reflect aging rates generally in both sexes. Here we test whether germ cell DNMs present in the grandparent generation when they were young adults predict two clinically important outcomes in those same individuals: survival in both sexes, and age-related fertility decline in women. **METHODS** Germline DNM counts were determined in 122 grandparents from 33 three-generation Utah families and converted to DNM rates by normalizing each subject’s DNM counts to the callable fraction of their genome. Age at death, cause of death, cancer incidence, and reproductive histories were provided by the Utah Population Database and the Utah Cancer Registry. Fertility analyses were restricted to the 53 grandmothers whose age at last birth (ALB) was at least 30 years, the approximate age when the decline in female fertility ending with menopause begins. **RESULTS** After adjusting for birth year, sex and parental age effects in Cox proportional hazard regression models, a one standard deviation increase in DNM rates was significantly associated with higher all-cause mortality in both sexes combined (hazard ratio [HR], 1.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12-3.46; p=0.019). Women in the top 75% of DNM rates had higher all-cause mortality than women in the bottom 25% (HR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.03-4.46; p=0.043); and men in the top 25% of DNM rates had higher all-cause mortality than men in the bottom 25% (HR, 4.37; 95% CI, 1.54-12.44; p=0.006). Among women with ALB ≥ 30 years, those in the top 50% of DNM rates had significantly fewer live births than those in the bottom 25% (p=0.026), and higher DNM rates were significantly associated (p=0.036) with a younger ALB (< 25th percentile, 34.8 years). **CONCLUSIONS** Germline mutation accumulation rates in healthy young adults may provide a measure of both reproductive and systemic aging. The data further suggest that inter-individual differences in mutation accumulation rates are established around puberty, just when DNA repair genes’ expression levels are known to begin their lifelong decline. ## INTRODUCTION The somatic mutation theory of aging1 proposes that somatic mutations accumulate throughout life, resulting in apoptosis, cellular senescence, tumorigenesis, or other cellular pathologies, followed by tissue dysfunction, chronic disease, and death. DNA damage is continuous,2 and while most of it is repaired, several classes of DNA damage are known to accumulate with age.3-5 Serum levels of insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) peak during puberty,6 suppressing the FOXO transcription factors and the DNA repair genes they upregulate.7 DNA repair systems continue to decline throughout adult life.8 Furthermore, developmental deficiency of the GH/IGF-1 axis in dwarf mice prevents the normal decline in DNA repair of adulthood and significantly extends lifespan.9 These observations fit well with the evolutionary biology principle that the force of natural selection to maintain robust health begins to decline once the reproductive phase of life is attained.10,11 Several monogenic segmental progeroid syndromes in humans are known to increase mutation accumulation rates and shorten the lifespan.12 However, no studies have yet tested whether inter-individual differences in either somatic or germline mutation accumulation rates in healthy young adults predict differences in remaining lifespan, as would be expected if mutation accumulation contributes significantly to aging. Fertility in healthy women declines after age 30;13 age at natural menopause varies from 40-60 years and is positively associated with longer lifespans;14 and women with a high age at last birth and their siblings enjoy increased longevity.15 Whether variation between healthy women in the decline and end of fertility may be attributable, at least in part, to differences in germline mutation accumulation rates is unknown. Similarly, while somatic mutations are known contributors to tumorigenesis,16 a connection between mutation accumulation rates in healthy young adults and cancer risks has not yet been established. *De novo* mutations (DNMs) in an individual’s germline DNA can be found by genome sequencing of DNA extracted from somatic tissue samples (usually blood or saliva) collected from trios consisting of both parents and one of their offspring, identifying high-confidence sequence changes in the offspring not present in either parent, and finally attributing each mutation to the parental germline in which it arose [refs. 17,18 and Sasani et al. 2019, bioRxiv [https://doi.org/10.1101/552117](https://doi.org/10.1101/552117)]. The number of parental germline DNMs increases with parental age, and increases more rapidly in the paternal germline than in the maternal germline. The higher mutation accumulation rate in men is expected, because there is a risk of mutation each time a cell divides, and cell divisions and spermatogenesis are ongoing in the male germline throughout adulthood, while oogenesis in the female is completed before she is born. For both sexes, at a given parental age the range of germline DNM counts can vary more than two-fold between individuals [ref. 18 and Sasani et al. 2019 (see link above)]. Here, we used genome sequencing of 33 three-generation Utah families to identify mutations that were present in the germ cells of the grandparent generation when they were healthy young adults. We then tested whether the counts of autosomal DNMs are associated with two clinically important life history traits tracked in these same individuals over decades of follow-up: lifespan in both sexes and the duration of childbearing in women, as would be expected if germline DNM accumulation reflects rates of aging generally. ## METHODS ### HUMAN SUBJECTS The subjects were 122 grandparents (61 women and 61 men) from 33 of the 46 three-generation Utah families enrolled in the early 1980s for the purpose of building the first comprehensive human genetic linkage map.19,20 All participants provided written informed consent, and studies were conducted with University of Utah Institutional Review Board approval. Each of these Utah CEPH (Centre d’Etude du Polymorphisme Humain) families consist of 5–15 siblings in the youngest generation, their two parents, and two to four grandparents. DNA was extracted from blood draws collected on all members of these three-generation pedigrees. Examples of CEPH pedigrees are shown in Sasani et al. 2019, Figures 1a, 3a, and 3b. ![Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2019/08/13/19004184/F1.medium.gif) [Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2019/08/13/19004184/F1) Figure 1. Adjusted Survival in relation to Germline *de novo* Mutation Rates. Time was measured in years from parental age at the birth of the index child to time of death or last known living date. Top panel, women; bottom panel, men. ### GERMLINE *DE NOVO* MUTATION RATES The full genome sequencing of whole blood DNA from 603 individuals from the 33 three-generation families, identification and validation of autosomal DNMs in the middle-generation (single base substitutions and insertions and deletions of length 10 basepairs or less), and specific attribution of each mutation to the germline of each grandparent is presented in Sasani et al. 2019. Instead of using simple DNM counts, here we use the DNM rate (number of DNMs / number of diploid autosomal callable basepairs) as the variable of interest, to adjust for minor differences between subjects in the portion of the genome that met our requirements for validating DNMs (described in Sasani et al. 2019). Differences between grandparents in their germline DNM rates are unlikely to be due to differences across the cohort in the presence or absence or degree of progression of various terminal illnesses, since all of the grandparents survived more than 20 years past the age at which their DNMs were transmitted to their offspring. Furthermore, it is unlikely that any of the DNMs analyzed here are strongly deleterious, since all of the grandparents’ offspring in whom the DNMs were identified are known to have reached maturity and subsequently conceived several children of their own. ### OUTCOMES Subjects were linked to the Utah Population Database (UPDB), a large and comprehensive resource of linked population-based information for demographic, genetic, and epidemiological studies ([https://uofuhealth.utah.edu/huntsman/utah-population-database/acknowledging-updb.php](https://uofuhealth.utah.edu/huntsman/utah-population-database/acknowledging-updb.php)). The UPDB is a dynamic genealogical and medical database that receives annual updates of Utah birth, death and cause of death, driver’s license and health records. All research access to the UPDB requires the approval of the University of Utah’s Resource for Genetic and Epidemiologic Research (RGE) and its Institutional Review Board (IRB). Mortality was ascertained based on Utah death certificates linked to UPDB. Causes of death were available in International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes version 9-10 and aggregated into larger categories representing the leading causes of deaths. Cancer incidence records were from the Utah Cancer Registry ([https://uofuhealth.utah.edu/utah-cancer-registry/](https://uofuhealth.utah.edu/utah-cancer-registry/)). Fertility was assessed by parity (number of live births) and age at last birth, both derived from the UPDB. The University of Utah’s RGE and IRB have approved this study. ### STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Demographic characteristics of male and female subjects were compared using t-tests for continuous variables and chi-square tests for categorical variables. Sex-specific Cox proportional hazard models with adjustments for subject’s birth year and subject’s parental age, i.e. their age when the child in whom the DNMs were discovered (the index child) was born, were used to estimate the effects of germline DNM rates, treated as a continuous and categorical variable, on mortality and cancer risks, expressed as hazard ratios (HR). Results for both sexes combined were also adjusted for sex. Time was measured in years from parental age at the birth of the index child to time of death or last known living dates (2018). Cause-specific mortality was analyzed by fitting cause-specific hazard regression models with Cox regression, treating failures from the cause of death of interest as events and failure from other causes of deaths or those still living as right-censored observations.21 For mortality and cancer incidence analyses, subjects were censored at age at death or age at last follow-up, whichever occurred first. Poisson regression models were used to assess the effect of DNM rates on number of live births. Logistic regression models were used to assess the association between DNM rates and age at last birth. All fertility analyses in women were adjusted for subject’s birth year and subject’s parental age and only included women with an age at last birth of at least 30 years, since cessation of childbearing prior to age 30 is unlikely due to reproductive aging.13 ## RESULTS ### CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SUBJECTS All 122 subjects were from the grandparent generation of 33 three-generation Utah CEPH pedigrees. Each such pedigree consists of a large sibship with 5-15 children, their parents, and their living grandparents at the time of sample collection in the 1980s. For developing genetic linkage maps, the large sibship size allowed the segregation of genetic markers to be replicated in informative families, and the inclusion of grandparents helped to phase genetic loci being investigated.19,20 The families were not selected for any disease, but for large sibship size. Selecting for large sibships may select somewhat for higher than average fertility, and selecting for living grandparents may select somewhat for higher than average lifespan; however, large sibships are common in Utah, and more than half of the grandparents were younger than age 72 at the time of the initial enrollment. Therefore, these families are unlikely to be strongly enriched for factors contributing to longer reproductive lifespans and longer life. Furthermore, since the same selection criteria were applied across all of the collected families, these criteria are not expected to introduce any biases that would affect the current study. Nearly all of the CEPH grandparents are of Northern European descent. Table 1 presents the demographic characteristics of the 61 women and 61 men who participated in this study. View this table: [Table 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2019/08/13/19004184/T1) Table 1. Demographic Characteristics of CEPH Grandparents (N = 122). ### SURVIVAL ANALYSES The associations of DNM rates with all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality and non-CVD mortality are presented in Table 2. All categorical comparisons used < 25th percentile of DNM rates as the reference category. The analyses of both sexes combined, and of women only, found that germline DNM rates < 25th percentile were associated with lower all-cause mortality than DNM rates ≥ 25th percentile; in men DNM rates < 25th percentile were associated with lower all-cause mortality than DNM rates > 75th percentile. Tests for trend showed that for the full sample and for males, increasing DNM rates were significantly associated with greater mortality risk; for females this trend was not significant. Cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality, which includes deaths from heart disease, stroke, and hypertension, was significantly increased only in men with DNM rates > 75th percentile; this is supported by the test for trend (p=0.052). Non-CVD mortality increased significantly with increased DNM rates in both sexes combined (p=0.004), and in women analyzed independently (p=0.002). Non-CVD mortality is a category in which no single cause of death dominates. These results suggest a model whereby germline mutation rates correlate with somatic mutation rates across multiple tissues, with the accumulation of somatic mutations contributing to the development of a diverse set of aging-related lethal diseases. View this table: [Table 2.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2019/08/13/19004184/T2) Table 2. Effect of Germline DNM Rates on Mortality Risk. Adjusted survival curves by quartile of germline DNM rate showed that the median survival advantage for subjects with DNM rates < 25th percentile vs. those with DNM rates > 75th percentile was 8 years for women and 13 years for men (Figure 1). Time was measured in years from parental age at the birth of the index child to time of death or last known living dates (2018). ### CANCER INCIDENCE In the set of 122 CEPH grandparents, there were 16 women and 18 men who received at least one cancer diagnosis in their lifetimes. We sought to test the hypothesis that in the full cohort of 122 subjects, lower sex- and parental age-adjusted germline DNM rates would be associated with lower age-specific cancer risks (Supplementary Appendix, Table S1), as would be expected if germline mutation accumulation rates reflect somatic mutation accumulation rates. Associations were tested with germline DNM rates treated as a continuous variable and separately, as a categorical variable where the cancer risk in each higher quartile of DNM rates is compared to the cancer risk in the lowest quartile. No significant associations of DNM rates with cancer risk were found. Similar DNM and cancer incidence data from larger cohorts are needed to further investigate this hypothesis. ### FERTILITY OF WOMEN The fertility analysis was restricted to the 53 grandmothers whose age at last birth (ALB) was at least 30 years, since cessation of childbearing prior to age 30 is unlikely to be due to reproductive aging.13 We hypothesized that germline DNM accumulation may contribute to oocyte atresia, lower rates of fertilization, higher rates of miscarriage, earlier menopause, and consequently shorter reproductive lifespans. Therefore, we tested whether women with higher germline DNM rates gave birth to fewer children, and also gave birth to their last child at younger ages, than women with lower germline DNM rates. The cut points for DNM rates (25th percentile = 1.941 x 10-9, 50th percentile = 2.343 x 10-9, and 75th percentile = 3.097 x 10-9) and the cut point for ALB < 25th percentile (34.8 years) were calculated using the 53 CEPH grandmothers with age at last birth ≥ 30. Among women with ALB ≥ 30 years, those in the top 50% of DNM rates had significantly fewer live births than those in the bottom 25% (p=0.026, Table 3), and higher DNM rates were significantly associated (p=0.036, Table 4) with a younger ALB (< 25th percentile). View this table: [Table 3.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2019/08/13/19004184/T3) Table 3. Effect of germline DNM rates on number of live births to women with ALB ≥30 years. View this table: [Table 4.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2019/08/13/19004184/T4) Table 4. Effect of germline DNM rates on the relative risk (RR) of being in the bottom quartile for age at last birth (i.e. ALB < 25th percentile, 34.8 years). We also tested the effect of germline DNM rates as a continuous or categorical variable on ALB as a continuous variable (Supplementary Appendix Table S2), and no significant association was found. ## DISCUSSION Here we show that lower sex- and parental age-adjusted germline DNM counts in young adults are associated with longer lifespans in both sexes, and higher parity and older age at last birth in women. Therefore, germline mutation accumulation rates in young adults may provide a measure, at least in part, of the rates of both reproductive and systemic aging. Corrections for multiple comparisons were not included in the analyses presented in Tables 2-4 for several reasons: 1) our comparisons are focused on a single prediction - that higher sex- and age-adjusted germline DNM counts are associated with the earlier occurrence of key milestones of aging (i.e. cessation of childbearing and death); 2) the comparisons are complementary, i.e. the same key prediction (more DNMs, earlier aging-related event) is being tested in several different ways - in both sexes, in each sex tested independently, in three categories of mortality, and in reproductive history - and all comparisons showing unadjusted significant differences support the prediction; and 3) the tests for trend that we performed across the categories of comparison also supported the key prediction, strongly suggesting that the low unadjusted p values we observed in several comparisons are unlikely due to chance alone. We encourage replications of our analyses in other populations, especially those with germline DNM counts and clinical follow-up data already in hand, to determine whether our findings and conclusions will be corroborated. It is unlikely that germline mutation accumulation rates directly influence the rate of systemic aging, at least in men, since the lifespans of castrated and non-castrated men do not differ.22 While mutation accumulation rates are lower in germline than in soma,23 the effectors of DNA damage and the repair systems defending against it are likely similar across tissues. Therefore, ranking sex- and age-matched individuals by their germline mutation accumulation rates may effectively also rank them by their somatic mutation accumulation rates, in which case the associations we have identified may be interpreted as providing strong support for the somatic mutation theory of aging. Epidemiological studies of large cohorts with archived DNA samples and comprehensive clinical follow-up data, using sequencing technologies4,5,24 that directly quantify somatic mutations in both nuclear and mitochondrial DNA, are needed to further investigate the role of somatically acquired mutations in the determination of the human healthspan and lifespan. In considering possible causes for the variation in germline autosomal DNM counts between sex- and age-matched individuals, two likely contributors come to mind: differences in DNM accumulation rates and differences in the timing of puberty, if the establishment of adult mutation accumulation rates is triggered by puberty. Cross-sectional data for DNM accumulation in men (Sasani et al. Figure 2a) clearly show variation in DNM counts increasing with paternal age, as would be expected if men differ in their mutation accumulation rates. Also, longitudinal data for germline DNM accumulation in parental couples (Sasani et al. Figure 3c), mainly reflecting DNM accumulation in the men’s germlines, reveal at least a 3-fold range of accumulation rates. Puberty timing may also influence DNM accumulation. In linear regression analysis of germline DNM counts (x axis) vs. parental age (y axis) for our 122 research subjects (Figure S1 in the Supplementary Appendix), the y intercepts (when DNM counts equal zero) represent approximate lower bounds for the parental ages when mutation accumulation becomes established at the rates approximated by the slopes of the regression lines. These y intercepts (about 18 years for women and 14 years for men) suggest that the germline mutation accumulation rates of young adulthood may become established around the time of puberty. Furthermore, Sasani et al. (Figure 3c) show that parental couples matched on mutation accumulation rates (slopes of the regression lines, mainly reflecting the fathers’ rates) and number of DNMs accumulated (y axis) nevertheless vary approximately five years in the paternal age (x axis) needed to accumulate those DNMs. This result is consistent with the mutation accumulation rates of adulthood becoming established around puberty, which is also known to have a five-year range for age of onset in both girls and boys.25 These cross-sectional and longitudinal germline DNM accumulation data, taken together, support a model whereby there is a plateau of DNM counts prepubertally, followed by a resumption of mutation accumulation, at different rates in different people, that is triggered by puberty. Importantly, polygenic risk scores for later onset of puberty are associated with longer lifespans in both sexes;26 and later puberty is associated with decreased all-cause mortality in women,27,28 later menopause,29 and reduced risk of cancer in both sexes;30 as would be expected if puberty triggers the resumption of mutation accumulation, and consequently aging, in both germline and somatic tissues. There are few studies to date of the dynamics of accumulation of somatic mutations in non-tumor tissues across the human lifespan. Surprisingly, at present most of the relevant available data come from analyzing DNA sequences from tumors, which include somatically acquired neutral (i.e. not tumor-promoting) mutations that were present in the cell of origin prior to tumorigenesis. By sequencing DNA from tumors that developed at various ages across the lifespan, it has been shown that somatic mutation accumulation begins in embryogenesis, pauses from approximately ages 5 to 14 years, and then doubles thereafter approximately every eight years.31,32 Remarkably, intrinsic mortality rates are also plateaued from approximately age 5 – 14 years, and double every eight years thereafter.33 Thus somatic mutation accumulation after puberty may be a molecular correlate and major underlying cause of the increasing risk of dying with increasing age. These observations fit well with the principle that the force of natural selection to evolve mechanisms that maintain robust health begins to decline once the reproductive phase of life is attained.10,11 After puberty, both metabolic rate, which correlates with DNA damage rates, and DNA repair genes’ expression levels decline with age34,8 and their rates and relative levels of decline are likely to vary between individuals, due to both heritable genetic factors and differences in environmental exposures, including diet, exercise, and other lifestyle choices. This range of influences, many modifiable by personal choice, likely produces substantial inter-individual variation in somatic mutation accumulation rates and, therefore, rates of aging. However, significant variation in healthspan and lifespan may be expected even among individuals with identical puberty timing and mutation accumulation rates, if mutations are randomly distributed across the genome, only occasionally having pathogenic consequences. While investigations of the causes of variation in the rate of aging in adult populations are likely to lead to novel therapies to postpone frailty and extend the human healthspan, further study of the effects of puberty on mutation accumulation rates may also lead to important medical breakthroughs. Rather than always rising with age, mortality rates are known to be plateaued in some contexts, e.g. in humans during prepubertal childhood33 and at age 105 or older,35 and in hydra36,37 and asexual planaria38 throughout life. These mortality plateaus may share gene expression profiles that robustly maintain the integrity of the genome (or at least prevent its further deterioration) and maintain other aspects of homeostasis as well,3 effectively putting aging on hold. The results presented here provide support for the hypothesis that mutation rates, at least in part, drive both reproductive and systemic aging. To our knowledge this is the youngest age range yet in which a molecular biomarker measured in healthy individuals has been found to predict remaining life expectancy. Mutation accumulation with age may be the origin of or a contributor to one or more of the additional recognized hallmarks of aging.3 Interventions in adults directed toward returning mutation accumulation rates to their very low prepubertal levels would be expected to have broad benefits, greatly lowering the risks for multiple aging-related diseases, and dramatically extending the human healthspan. Perhaps a relatively small number of genes that are master regulators of gene networks maintaining genome stability and homeostasis generally are down-regulated at puberty, but can be reprogrammed39 or otherwise coaxed back to their prepubertal levels of activity by a combination of lifestyle, dietary, and/or pharmacological interventions. ## Data Availability Most of the data analyzed in this manuscript are provided either within the manuscript itself, or in the manuscript posted by Sasani et al. on bioRxiv at https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/552117v2 and its accompanying links; additional data may be accessed by contacting the corresponding author (Dr. Cawthon). [https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/552117v2](https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/552117v2) ## Funding NIH R01AG038797 and R21AG054962 (to R.M.C.); University of Utah Program in Personalized Health (H.D.M.); NIH T32GM007464 (to T.A.S.); NIH R01AG022095 (to K.R.S.); NIH R01HG006693, R01HG009141, and R01GM124355 (to A.R.Q.); NIH GM118335 and GM059290 (to L.B.J.); NIH P30CA2014 (to the Utah Population Database, a.k.a. the UPDB); National Center for Research Resources Public Health Services grant M01RR00064 (to the Huntsman General Clinical Research Center at the University of Utah); and gifts from the W.M. Keck Foundation and the George S. and Delores Doré Eccles Foundation that supported the Utah Genetic Reference Project (UGRP). Sequencing of the CEPH samples was funded by the Utah Genome Project, the George S. and Dolores Doré Eccles Foundation, and the H.A. and Edna Benning Foundation. We thank the Pedigree and Population Resource of the Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah (funded in part by the Huntsman Cancer Foundation) for its role in the ongoing record collection, maintenance and support of the UPDB; and additional support for the UPDB from the University of Utah, and the University of Utah’s Program in Personalized Health and Center for Clinical and Translational Science. ## Disclosures The authors declare that they have no potential conflicts of interest relevant to this study. ## Supplementary Appendix View this table: [Table S1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2019/08/13/19004184/T5) Table S1. Effect of germline DNM rates on cancer risk. View this table: [Table S2.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2019/08/13/19004184/T6) Table S2. Effect of germline DNM rates on age at last birth as a continuous variable. ![Figure S1.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2019/08/13/19004184/F2.medium.gif) [Figure S1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2019/08/13/19004184/F2) Figure S1. Germline Autosomal *de novo* Mutation Accumulation with Increasing Parental Age. The y intercepts of the linear regression lines, about 18 years for women, and 14 years for men, provide approximate lower bounds for the ages at which the observed mutation accumulation rates were established. ## Acknowledgments We thank all of the Utah individuals who participated in the CEPH consortium and all family members who participated in the UGRP. We thank Ray White, Ph.D. (deceased), Jean-Marc Lalouel D.Sc., and Mark Leppert, Ph.D. who originally ascertained and enrolled the Utah CEPH families to build the first comprehensive human genetic linkage map; Stephen M. Prescott, M.D. for his leadership in envisioning and building the UGRP; Andreas P. Peiffer, M.D., Ph.D., UGRP Medical Director; and Melissa M. Dixon, Ph.D., UGRP Study Coordinator. We thank Lisa Baird for managing the Utah CEPH and UGRP records and DNA samples; Alison M. Fraser, MSPH for many queries of the UPDB; and Brent S. Pedersen, Ph.D. and Jeff Stevens for helpful discussions. * Received August 12, 2019. * Revision received August 12, 2019. * Accepted August 13, 2019. * © 2019, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory The copyright holder for this pre-print is the author. All rights reserved. The material may not be redistributed, re-used or adapted without the author's permission. ## References 1. 1.Holmes GE, Bernstein C, Bernstein H. Oxidative and other DNA damages as the basis of aging: a review. Mutat Res. 1992;275(3-6):305-15. Review. PubMed PMID: 1383772. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/0921-8734(92)90034-M&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=1383772&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1992JV30200020&link_type=ISI) 2. 2.Ames BN. Prevention of mutation, cancer, and other age-associated diseases by optimizing micronutrient intake. J Nucleic Acids. 2010 Sep 22;2010. pii: 725071. doi: 10.4061/2010/725071. PubMed PMID: 20936173; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2945683. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.4061/2010/725071&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20936173&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 3. 3.López-Otín C, Blasco MA, Partridge L, Serrano M, Kroemer G. The hallmarks of aging. Cell. 2013;153(6):1194–217. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2013.05.039. Review. PubMed PMID: 23746838; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3836174. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.cell.2013.05.039&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=23746838&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000319979200007&link_type=ISI) 4. 4.Hoang ML, Kinde I, Tomasetti C, et al. Genome-wide quantification of rare somatic mutations in normal human tissues using massively parallel sequencing. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016;113(35):9846–51. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1607794113. PubMed PMID: 27528664; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5024639. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoicG5hcyI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoxMToiMTEzLzM1Lzk4NDYiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czozOToiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAxOS8wOC8xMy8xOTAwNDE4NC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 5. 5.Zhang L, Dong X, Lee M, Maslov AY, Wang T, Vijg J. Single-cell whole-genome sequencing reveals the functional landscape of somatic mutations in B lymphocytes across the human lifespan. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019 Apr 16. pii: 201902510. doi: 10.107. 6. 6.Payne JF, Tangpricha V, Cleveland J, Lynn MJ, Ray R, Srivastava SK. Serum insulin-like growth factor-I in diabetic retinopathy. Mol Vis. 2011;17:2318-24. PubMed PMID: 21921983; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3171491. [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21921983&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 7. 7.Webb AE, Kundaje A, Brunet A. Characterization of the direct targets of FOXO transcription factors throughout evolution. Aging Cell. 2016;15(4):673–85. doi: 10.1111/acel.12479. PubMed PMID: 27061590; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4933671. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1111/acel.12479&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=27061590&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 8. 8.Gorbunova V, Seluanov A, Mao Z, Hine C. Changes in DNA repair during aging. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007;35(22):7466-74. Review. PubMed PMID: 17913742; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2190694. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/nar/gkm756&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=17913742&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000252125900011&link_type=ISI) 9. 9.Podlutsky A, Valcarcel-Ares MN, Yancey K, et al. The GH/IGF-1 axis in a critical period early in life determines cellular DNA repair capacity by altering transcriptional regulation of DNA repair-related genes: implications for the developmental origins of cancer. Geroscience. 2017;39(2):147–160. doi: 10.1007/s11357-017-9966-x. PubMed PMID: 28233247; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5411369. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/s11357-017-9966-x&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=28233247&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 10. 10.Kirkwood TB, Holliday R. The evolution of ageing and longevity. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1979;205(1161):531-46. PubMed PMID: 42059. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1098/rspb.1979.0083&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=42059&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 11. 11.Rose MR, Burke MK, Shahrestani P, Mueller LD. Evolution of ageing since Darwin. J Genet. 2008;87(4):363-71. PubMed PMID: 19147926. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/s12041-008-0059-6&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=19147926&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 12. 12.Navarro CL, Cau P, Lévy N. Molecular bases of progeroid syndromes. Hum Mol Genet. 2006;15 Spec No 2:R151-61. Review. PubMed PMID: 16987878. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/hmg/ddl214&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=16987878&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000241329700007&link_type=ISI) 13. 13.van Noord-Zaadstra BM, Looman CW, Alsbach H, Habbema JD, te Velde ER, Karbaat J. Delaying childbearing: effect of age on fecundity and outcome of pregnancy. BMJ. 1991;302(6789):1361-5. PubMed PMID: 2059713; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1670055. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiYm1qIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjEzOiIzMDIvNjc4OS8xMzYxIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6Mzk6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMTkvMDgvMTMvMTkwMDQxODQuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 14. 14.Snowdon DA, Kane RL, Beeson WL, et al. Is early natural menopause a biologic marker of health and aging? Am J Public Health. 1989;79(6):709-14. PubMed PMID: 2729468; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1349628. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.2105/AJPH.79.6.709&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=2729468&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1989U759900011&link_type=ISI) 15. 15.Smith KR, Gagnon A, Cawthon RM, Mineau GP, Mazan R, Desjardins B. Familial aggregation of survival and late female reproduction. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2009;64(7):740–4. doi: 10.1093/gerona/glp055. PubMed PMID: 19414513; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2691800. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/gerona/glp055&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=19414513&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 16. 16.Saini N, Gordenin DA. Somatic mutation load and spectra: A record of DNA damage and repair in healthy human cells. Environ Mol Mutagen. 2018;59(8):672–686. doi: 10.1002/em.22215. Review. PubMed PMID: 30152078; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6188803. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/em.22215&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=30152078&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 17. 17.Acuna-Hidalgo R, Veltman JA, Hoischen A. New insights into the generation and role of de novo mutations in health and disease. Genome Biol. 2016;17(1):241. Review. PubMed PMID: 27894357; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5125044. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1186/s13059-016-1110-1&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=27894357&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 18. 18.Jónsson H, Sulem P, Kehr B, et al. Parental influence on human germline de novo mutations in 1,548 trios from Iceland. Nature. 2017;549(7673):519–522. doi: 10.1038/nature24018. PubMed PMID: 28959963. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/nature24018&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=28959963&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 19. 19.White R, Leppert M, Bishop DT, et al. Construction of linkage maps with DNA markers for human chromosomes. Nature. 1985;313(5998):101-5. PubMed PMID: 2981412. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/313101a0&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=2981412&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 20. 20.Dausset J, Cann H, Cohen D, Lathrop M, Lalouel JM, White R. Centre d’etude du polymorphisme humain (CEPH): collaborative genetic mapping of the human genome. Genomics. 1990;6(3):575-7. PubMed PMID: 2184120. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/0888-7543(90)90491-C&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=2184120&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1990CQ97700023&link_type=ISI) 21. 21.Therneau T, Grambsch P. Modeling Survival Data: Extending the Cox Model. Springer-Verlag, 2000. 22. 22.Nieschlag E, Nieschlag S, Behre HM. Lifespan and testosterone. Nature. 1993;366(6452):215. PubMed PMID: 8232579. [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=8232579&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 23. 23.Milholland B, Dong X, Zhang L, Hao X, Suh Y, Vijg J. Differences between germline and somatic mutation rates in humans and mice. Nat Commun. 2017;8:15183. doi: 10.1038/ncomms15183. PubMed PMID: 28485371; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5436103. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/ncomms15183&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=28485371&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 24. 24.Dou Y, Gold HD, Luquette LJ, Park PJ. Detecting Somatic Mutations in Normal Cells. Trends Genet. 2018;34(7):545–557. doi: 10.1016/j.tig.2018.04.003. Review. PubMed PMID: 29731376; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6029698. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.tig.2018.04.003&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=29731376&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 25. 25.Day FR, Elks CE, Murray A, Ong KK, Perry JR. Puberty timing associated with diabetes, cardiovascular disease and also diverse health outcomes in men and women: the UK Biobank study. Sci Rep. 2015;5:11208. doi: 10.1038/srep11208. PubMed PMID: 26084728; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4471670. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/srep11208&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=26084728&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 26. 26.Mostafavi H, Berisa T, Day FR, Perry JRB, Przeworski M, Pickrell JK. Identifying genetic variants that affect viability in large cohorts. PLoS Biol. 2017;15(9):e2002458. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.2002458. eCollection 2017 Sep. PubMed PMID: 28873088; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5584811. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1371/journal.pbio.2002458&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=28873088&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 27. 27.Charalampopoulos D, McLoughlin A, Elks CE, Ong KK. Age at menarche and risks of all-cause and cardiovascular death: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Epidemiol. 2014;180(1):29–40. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwu113. Review. PubMed PMID: 24920784; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4070937. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/aje/kwu113&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24920784&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 28. 28.Chen X, Liu Y, Sun X, et al. Age at menarche and risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis. Menopause. 2018 Dec 17. doi: 10.1097/GME.0000000000001289. PubMed PMID: 30562317. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1097/GME.0000000000001289&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=30562317&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 29. 29.Mishra GD, Pandeya N, Dobson AJ, et al. Early menarche, nulliparity and the risk for premature and early natural menopause. Hum Reprod. 2017;32(3):679–686. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dew350. PubMed PMID: 28119483; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5850221. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/humrep/dew350&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=28119483&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 30. 30.Day FR, Thompson DJ, Helgason H, et al. Genomic analyses identify hundreds of variants associated with age at menarche and support a role for puberty timing in cancer risk. Nat Genet. 2017;49(6):834–841. doi: 10.1038/ng.3841. PubMed PMID: 28436984; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5841952. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/ng.3841&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=28436984&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 31. 31.Milholland B, Auton A, Suh Y, Vijg J. Age-related somatic mutations in the cancer genome. Oncotarget. 2015;6(28):24627–35. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.5685. PubMed PMID: 26384365; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4694783. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.18632/oncotarget.5685&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=26384365&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 32. 32.Podolskiy DI, Lobanov AV, Kryukov GV, Gladyshev VN. Analysis of cancer genomes reveals basic features of human aging and its role in cancer development. Nat Commun. 2016; 7:12157. doi: 10.1038/ncomms12157. PubMed PMID: 27515585; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4990632. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/ncomms12157&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=27515585&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 33. 33.Carnes BA, Holden LR, Olshansky SJ, Witten MT, Siegel JS. Mortality partitions and their relevance to research on senescence. Biogerontology. 2006;7(4):183-98. Review. PubMed PMID: 16732401. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/s10522-006-9020-3&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=16732401&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000239814000001&link_type=ISI) 34. 34.Ruggiero C, Metter EJ, Melenovsky V, et al. High basal metabolic rate is a risk factor for mortality: the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2008;63(7):698-706. PubMed PMID: 18693224; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4984846. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/gerona/63.7.698&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=18693224&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000258389300007&link_type=ISI) 35. 35.Barbi E, Lagona F, Marsili M, Vaupel JW, Wachter KW. The plateau of human mortality: Demography of longevity pioneers. Science. 2018;360(6396):1459–1461. doi: 10.1126/science.aat3119. PubMed PMID: 29954979. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6Mzoic2NpIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjEzOiIzNjAvNjM5Ni8xNDU5IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6Mzk6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMTkvMDgvMTMvMTkwMDQxODQuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 36. 36.Boehm AM, Khalturin K, Erxleben FA, et al. FoxO is a critical regulator of stem cell maintenance in immortal Hydra: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: Vol. 109, pp. 19697-19702, 2012. Ann Neurosci. 2013;20(1):17. doi: 10.5214/ans.0972.7531.200107. PubMed PMID: 25206004; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4117090. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.5214/ans.0972.7531.200107&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=25206004&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 37. 37.Tomczyk S, Fischer K, Austad S, Galliot B. Hydra, a powerful model for aging studies. Invertebr Reprod Dev. 2015 Jan 30;59(Sup1):11-16. PubMed PMID: 26120246; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4463768. [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=26120246&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 38. 38.Petralia RS, Mattson MP, Yao PJ. Aging and longevity in the simplest animals and the quest for immortality. Ageing Res Rev. 2014;16:66–82. doi: 10.1016/j.arr.2014.05.003. Review. PubMed PMID: 24910306; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4133289. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.arr.2014.05.003&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24910306&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom) 39. 39.Ocampo A, Reddy P, Martinez-Redondo P, et al. In Vivo Amelioration of Age-Associated Hallmarks by Partial Reprogramming. Cell. 2016;167(7):1719-1733.e12. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2016.11.052. PubMed PMID: 27984723; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5679279. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.cell.2016.11.052&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=27984723&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F08%2F13%2F19004184.atom)