Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Older biological age is associated with adverse COVID-19 outcomes: A cohort study in UK Biobank

Qingning Wang, Veryan Codd, Zahra Raisi-Estabragh, Crispin Musicha, Vasiliki Bountziouka, Stephen Kaptoge, Elias Allara, View ORCID ProfileEmanuele Di Angelantonio, Adam S. Butterworth, Angela M. Wood, John R. Thompson, Steffen E Petersen, Nicholas C. Harvey, John N. Danesh, Nilesh J. Samani, View ORCID ProfileChristopher P. Nelson
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.20.21254010
Qingning Wang
1Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
2NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Veryan Codd
1Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
2NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Zahra Raisi-Estabragh
3William Harvey Research Institute, NIHR Barts Biomedical Research Centre, Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse Square, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK
4Barts Heart Centre, St Bartholomew’s Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, EC1A 7BE, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Crispin Musicha
11Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, UK
2NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Vasiliki Bountziouka
11Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, UK
2NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Stephen Kaptoge
6National Institute for Health Research Blood and Transplant Research Unit in Donor Health and Genomics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
7British Heart Foundation Centre of Research Excellence, University of Cambridge, Cambridge,UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Elias Allara
5British Heart Foundation Cardiovascular Epidemiology Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
6National Institute for Health Research Blood and Transplant Research Unit in Donor Health and Genomics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Emanuele Di Angelantonio
5British Heart Foundation Cardiovascular Epidemiology Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
6National Institute for Health Research Blood and Transplant Research Unit in Donor Health and Genomics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
7British Heart Foundation Centre of Research Excellence, University of Cambridge, Cambridge,UK
8Health Data Research UK Cambridge, Wellcome Genome Campus and University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Emanuele Di Angelantonio
Adam S. Butterworth
5British Heart Foundation Cardiovascular Epidemiology Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
6National Institute for Health Research Blood and Transplant Research Unit in Donor Health and Genomics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
7British Heart Foundation Centre of Research Excellence, University of Cambridge, Cambridge,UK
8Health Data Research UK Cambridge, Wellcome Genome Campus and University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Angela M. Wood
5British Heart Foundation Cardiovascular Epidemiology Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
6National Institute for Health Research Blood and Transplant Research Unit in Donor Health and Genomics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
7British Heart Foundation Centre of Research Excellence, University of Cambridge, Cambridge,UK
8Health Data Research UK Cambridge, Wellcome Genome Campus and University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
9Medical Research Council Biostatistics Unit, Cambridge Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
10The Alan Turing Institute, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
John R. Thompson
11Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Steffen E Petersen
3William Harvey Research Institute, NIHR Barts Biomedical Research Centre, Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse Square, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK
4Barts Heart Centre, St Bartholomew’s Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, EC1A 7BE, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nicholas C. Harvey
12MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
13NIHR Southampton Biomedical Research Centre, University of Southampton and University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
John N. Danesh
5British Heart Foundation Cardiovascular Epidemiology Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
6National Institute for Health Research Blood and Transplant Research Unit in Donor Health and Genomics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
7British Heart Foundation Centre of Research Excellence, University of Cambridge, Cambridge,UK
8Health Data Research UK Cambridge, Wellcome Genome Campus and University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
14Department of Human Genetics, Wellcome Sanger Institute, Hinxton, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nilesh J. Samani
1Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
2NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christopher P. Nelson
1Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
2NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Christopher P. Nelson
  • For correspondence: chris.p.nelson@leicester.ac.uk
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background Older chronological age is the most powerful risk factor for adverse coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) outcomes. It is uncertain, however, whether older biological age, as assessed by leucocyte telomere length (LTL), is also associated with COVID-19 outcomes.

Methods We associated LTL values obtained from participants recruited into UK Biobank (UKB) during 2006-2010 with adverse COVID-19 outcomes recorded by 30 November 2020, defined as a composite of any of the following: hospital admission, need for critical care, respiratory support, or mortality. Using information on 131 LTL-associated genetic variants, we conducted exploratory Mendelian randomisation (MR) analyses in UKB to evaluate whether observational associations might reflect cause-and-effect relationships.

Findings Of 6,775 participants in UKB who had tested positive for infection with SARS-CoV-2 in the community, there were 914 (13.5%) with adverse COVID-19 outcomes. The odds ratio (OR) for adverse COVID-19 outcomes was 1·17 (95% CI 1·05-1·31; P=0·004) per 1-SD shorter usual LTL, after adjustment for chronological age, sex and ethnicity. Similar ORs were observed in analyses that: adjusted for additional risk factors; disaggregated the composite outcome and reduced the scope for selection or collider bias. In MR analyses, the OR for adverse COVID-19 outcomes was directionally concordant but non-significant.

Interpretation Shorter LTL, indicative of older biological age, is associated with higher risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes, independent of several major risk factors for COVID-19 including chronological age. Further data are needed to determine whether this association reflects causality.

Funding UK Medical Research Council, Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council and British Heart Foundation.

Introduction

Older chronological age has emerged as the most powerful risk factor for severe infection, requiring hospitalisation or critical care, and mortality from coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).1,2 One potential mediator of this effect is ageing of the immune system, leading to increased levels of pro-inflammatory senescent cells and reduced proliferative capacity of immune precursor cells.3,4 Whether an individual’s biological age, which may be older or younger than their chronological age, plays an additional role in COVID-19 outcome is unclear. Telomere length (TL), a proposed marker of biological age, is a key determinant of proliferative capacity and cellular lifespan, triggering senescence once a critically short TL is reached.5 Although TL − commonly measured in leucocytes (LTL) − declines with chronological age, age accounts for only ∼3.5% of the inter-individual variation in LTL.6

A few small case-control studies, in which LTL was measured after SARS-CoV-2 infection at the time of hospital admission, have reported associations of shorter LTL with hospitalisation and severe outcomes.7−9 However, their interpretation is complicated by the possibility that LTL measurements could have been influenced by white cell turnover in response to infection. To our knowledge, no study to date has reported on associations of prior (pre-infection) LTL values and adverse COVID-19 outcomes.

Here, we examine whether LTL measured several years prior to SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with adverse COVID-19 outcomes, leveraging our recent completion of LTL measurements in 474,074 participants aged 40-69 at time of recruitment into UK Biobank (UKB)6 between 2006 and 2010.10, 11

Methods

Participants

Participants in UKB have been characterised in detail using questionnaires, physical measurements, urinary and plasma biomarker measurements, genomic assays and longitudinal linkage with multiple health record systems, including Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) and Office for National Statistics (ONS) mortality data.12 We have described the associations of inter-individual variation in LTL with multiple biomedical traits and risk of several diseases in UKB.11 Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, UKB has also linked participants with results from clinically indicated SARS-CoV-2 testing and COVID-19 outcomes. By linking participants in UKB to SARS-CoV-2 testing datasets of Public Health England (PHE),13 we identified participants who tested positive between 16 March 2020 and 30 November 2020; the latter date corresponds to the latest release of HES data to UKB. We used HES records to identify SARS-CoV-2 positive participants who were admitted to hospital due to COVID-19 (ICD-10 code ‘U07.1’) within 28 days after a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. We further extracted information on need for critical care admission and respiratory support, due to COVID-19 (ICD-10 code ‘U07.1’), via linkage to the ICNARC (Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre) database, and deaths due to COVID-19 (ICD-10 code ‘U07.1’), from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) death registry data.

The UK Biobank has ethical approval from the North West Centre for Research Ethics Committee (Application 11/NW/0382), which covers the UK. UK Biobank obtained informed consent from all participants. Full details can be found at https://www.ukbiobank.ac.uk/learn-more-about-uk-biobank/about-us/ethics. The work in this manuscript was approved by UK Biobank (Application 6077). The generation and use of the data presented in this paper was approved by the UK Biobank access committee under UK Biobank application number 6077.

LTL measurements

Full details of the LTL measurements in UKB are provided elsewhere.6 Briefly, LTL was measured using a validated PCR method that expresses LTL as a ratio (T/S ratio).6 LTL measurements were adjusted for technical variation, loge transformed and Z-standardised.6 We made paired LTL measurements at two time-points (mean interval: 5·5 years) in 1,351 participants, yielding a regression-dilution ratio of ∼0·68. Results in this study have been corrected for within-person variability of LTL values over time (abbreviated “usual LTL”), as described previously.6,11

Primary outcome

Our study’s primary outcome was a composite of COVID-19-related outcomes (ICD-10 code ‘U07.1’): hospital admission, requirement for critical care, respiratory support, or mortality. We defined cases as those participants in UKB who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and had the primary outcome. Controls were those who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 but did not have the primary outcome. To reduce the scope for collider bias14 we included only participants with positive SARS-CoV-2 tests done outside of hospital settings, since hospital admission itself may increase the likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 testing. The chronological age, sex and ethnicity adjusted odds ratio (OR) for having a SARS-CoV-2 test (n=43,574) at any location, was 1·03, (95% CI 1·01-1·05; P=1·0×10−4) per 1-SD shorter usual LTL.

Statistical analysis

Analyses involved multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for chronological age (at SARS-CoV-2 positive test), sex and ethnicity. Due to small numbers, ethnic groups other than White were combined and participants with missing ethnicity (n=14 cases and 46 controls) were excluded. To remove the correlation between LTL and chronological age, we used the residuals of LTL adjusted for chronological age at baseline within the statistical models. ORs were further adjusted for baseline smoking status and body-mass index (BMI) recorded at entry into UKB. Results are described as ORs associated with the outcome per one standard deviation (SD) shorter LTL residual, with associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) and p-values.

We conducted several secondary analyses. First, we examined associations with each component of the primary composite endpoint. Second, we analysed the primary outcome using the rest of UKB participants as controls, as testing was unlikely to be random and the restriction to SARS-CoV-2 positive controls only is potentially subject to selection bias related to factors associated with infection.15 Third, to ensure that apparently post-COVID-19 outcomes were not re-admissions or influenced by proximate medical events prior to infection, we excluded participants with any hospital admission in the previous 6 months. Fourth, to consider the impact of baseline disease prevalence on LTL, and to minimise the potential confounding by these diseases on any LTL-COVID-19 outcomes relationship, we used age- and disease-adjusted LTL residuals, based on 123 previously defined diseases.11 Finally, in an exploratory analysis, we conducted one-sample Mendelian randomisation (MR) analyses in UKB to evaluate a causal relationship between shorter LTL and adverse COVID-19 outcomes, using the inverse-variance weighted (IVW)16 and weighted median17 methods with a set of 131 independent and uncorrelated genetic variants we recently identified for LTL.11 We used MR-Egger regression to assess robustness to horizontal pleiotropy.18

Results

By 30 November 2020, 914 participants were identified with an adverse COVID-19 related outcome and 5861 participants were identified as primary controls (positive community test for COVID-19 but not hospitalised). Their characteristics are summarised in Table 1. On average, compared to controls, cases were older and more likely to be male and from a non-White background. At time of their entry into UKB, they also had a higher BMI and more likely to be current smokers. (Table 1).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 1. Characteristics of participants by case status.

LTL at entry to UKB was on average shorter in cases compared with controls (Table 1). The OR for the primary outcome was 1.17 (95% CI 1.05-1.31; P=0·004) per 1-SD shorter usual LTL, after adjustment for chronological age, sex and ethnicity (Table 2). The OR only slightly attenuated after further adjustment for smoking status and BMI (OR=1·15, 1·03-1·28), and after adjustment for the presence of any of 123 diseases recorded at baseline (OR=1·14, 1·02-1·27). As expected, older chronological age, male sex and non-White ethnicity were each associated with higher risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes independently of usual LTL (Table 2).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 2. Results of the main and secondary/sensitivity analyses.

Sub-components of our study’s primary composite outcome were not mutually exclusive, as 46 cases contributed to all four sub-components (Figure 1). Shorter usual LTL was significantly associated with higher risk of each sub-component (Table 2). ORs were broadly similar to the main findings in analyses that replaced the SARS-CoV-2-positive control group with all UKB participants as controls or that excluded any participant with a hospital admission in the six months prior to testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 (Table 2).

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
Figure 1. Venn diagram showing the distribution of the individual components of the primary outcome.

Hosp., hospitalised due to COVID-19; CC, critical care admission due to COVID-19; Resp. sup, need for respiratory support; Death, death due to COVID-19.

In MR analyses, the IVW odds ratio was 1·48 (0·79-2·77; P=0·224) per 1-SD shorter genetically-determined LTL, a non-significant result directionally concordant with the observational finding (Table 2). Results were similar using the weighted median method (Table 2) and there was no evidence of horizontal pleiotropy (MR-Egger intercept P=0·591).

Discussion

In a study of 6,775 participants with a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 (nested within the 500,000-participant UKB), we have shown that individuals with shorter LTL assessed several years prior to SARS-CoV-2 infection had higher risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes, even after adjustment for several established risk factors for COVID-19 including chronological age. This finding suggests that being “biologically” older is likely to be independently associated with COVID-19 hospitalisation and severity. The results of analysis of LTL-associated genetic variants and COVID-19 were directionally concordant with our observational findings but non-significant. Our results, therefore, encourage further investigation of the potential causal relevance of biological ageing to adverse COVID-19 outcomes.

The validity of our results is supported by several observations. First, our study confirmed well-known associations of older chronological age, male sex, and non-White ethnicity with adverse COVID-19 outcomes.2 Each of these factors was associated much more strongly with COVID-19 outcomes than was shorter LTL. Second, we found significant associations of shorter LTL with each sub-component of our study’s primary composite outcome. Third, our main findings persisted after adjustment for multiple risk factors. Fourth, our overall result was robust to sensitivity analyses designed to minimise the scope for potential biases. For example, collider bias can lead to false associations between a risk factor and an outcome,14 as highlighted by studies related to understanding of COVID-19 disease risk and severity.15 Indeed, we found evidence for potential colliders in our own analysis, observing a small but significant association between shorter LTL and higher likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 testing. Hence, we only included participants with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test outside the hospital setting, as hospitalisation itself may increase the likelihood of testing.

The biological mechanisms through which shorter LTL might increase risk of adverse outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 infection remain to be clarified. Our finding that the association was not substantially attenuated when we adjusted for the association of LTL with multiple diseases at baseline, suggest that, if this association is causal,, it is probably not simply a reflection of co-morbidity due to the impact of shorter LTL on risk of these diseases. A potential mechanism relates to the impact of telomere length dynamics on aging of the immune system19 and the potential role of senescence in severe SARS-CoV-2 infection.3,4,20 When challenged with infection, individuals with shorter LTL prior to infection would have less proliferative capacity and be more likely to accrue high levels of senescent cells more quickly than individuals with longer LTL.21 Individuals with shorter LTL may therefore potentially already harbour a higher proportion of senescent T-cells, reducing the number of functional cells that are able to respond to infection.20 Additionally, senescent cells are known to adopt a pro-inflammatory phenotype, secreting high levels of cytokines, which can further drive inflammation in COVID-19 patients.20

Our study has several limitations. UKB is not representative of the general UK population; only 6% of those invited to participate did so.22 Risk factor levels and mortality rates are lower than in the general population, although risk factor associations with mortality for a range of diseases are similar.23 Hence, further studies are warranted in other populations. Our one-sample Mendelian randomisation analysis in UKB had limited power to reliably estimate causal effects as fewer than one thousand participants had been hospitalised after a positive SARS-CoV-2 test and our genetic instrument of 131 variants, while using the most up to date information on LTL-associated variants, accounts for only ∼4% of inter-individual variation in LTL.11 While there are data from large genetic studies of COVID-1924, they could not be used in our analysis because the outcome definitions differed substantially from those we used, and because of their inclusion of within hospital testing that is potentially a collider with LTL and COVID-19 outcomes. Larger sample sizes with comparable disease phenotypes should, therefore, enable more precise evaluation of a potential causal association between shorter LTL and adverse COVID-19 outcomes.

In conclusion, in the largest study to date, we provide evidence that shorter LTL, reflecting older biological age, is associated with higher risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes, independent of several major risk factors for COVID-19.

Data Availability

Source data is accessible via application to the UK Biobank.

Data sharing

Source data is accessible via application to the UK Biobank.

Author Contributions

V.C., C.P.N., J.N.D., S.E.P., N.C.H. and N.J.S. conceived the project. All authors contributed to the sample definition and the analysis plan. Q.W., C.M. and C.P.N. performed the analyses. V.C., C.P.N., Q.W. and N.J.S. prepared the manuscript and all authors revised it. V.C., C.P.N., J.R.T., J.N.D. and N.J.S. (Principal investigator) secured funding and oversaw the project.

Competing Interests Declaration

The authors declare no competing interests.

Data shown are mean (SD) for continuous traits or n (%) for categorical traits. LTL, smoking status, BMI, sex and ethnicity are from baseline information. LTL is log-transformed and Z-standardised.

Acknowledgements

This research has been conducted using the UK Biobank Resource under Application Number 6077 and was funded by the UK Medical Research Council (MRC), Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council and British Heart Foundation (BHF) through MRC grant MR/M012816/1. C.P.N is funded by the BHF (SP/16/4/32697). V.C., C.M., V.B., Q.W., C.P.N. and N.J.S. are supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Leicester Cardiovascular Biomedical Research Centre (BRC-1215-20010). Cambridge University investigators are supported by the B.H.F (RG/13/13/30194; RG/18/13/33946), Health Data Research UK, NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre (BRC-1215-20014), NIHR Blood and Transplant Research Unit in Donor Health and Genomics (NIHR BTRU-2014-10024) and MRC (MR/L003120/1). J.D. holds a BHF Personal Professorship and NIHR Senior Investigator Award. A.M.W. and E.A. received support from the EU/EFPIA Innovative Medicines Initiative Joint Undertaking BigData@Heart (11607). Z.R.E. is supported by BHF Clinical Research Training Fellowship No. FS/17/81/33318. S.E.P. acknowledges support from the NIHR Barts Biomedical Research Centre.

References

  1. 1.↵
    Petrilli CM, Jones SA, Yang J, et al. Factors associated with hospital admission and critical illness among 5279 people with coronavirus disease 2019 in New York City: prospective cohort study. BMJ 2020; 369: m1966
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    Williamson EJ, Walker AJ, Bhaskaran K, et al. Factors associated with COVID-19-related death using OpenSAFELY. Nature 2020; 584: 430–436.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    De Biasi S, Meschiari M, Gibellini L, et al. Marked T cell activation, senescence, exhaustion and skewing towards TH17 in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Nature Comms. 2020; 11: 3434.
    OpenUrl
  4. 4.↵
    Akbar AN & Gilroy DW. Aging immunity may exacerbate COVID-19. Science 2020; 369: 256–257.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    Allsopp RC, Vaziri H, Patterson C, et al. Telomere length predicts replicative capacity of human fibroblasts. PNAS 1992; 89: 10114–10118.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    Codd, V., Denniff, M., Swinfield, C., et al. A major population resource of 474,074 participants in UK Biobank to investigate determinants and biomedical consequences of leukocyte telomere length. MedRxiv 2021 DOI to be added
  7. 7.↵
    Sanchez-Vazquez R, Guío-Carrión A, Zapatero-Gaviria A, Martínez P, Blasco MA. Shorter telomere lengths in patients with severe COVID-19 disease. Aging 2021; 13:1–15.
    OpenUrl
  8. 8.
    Benetos A, Lai TP, Toupance S, et al. The Nexus Between Telomere Length and Lymphocyte Count in Seniors Hospitalized With COVID-19. The Journals of Gerontology: Series A; 2021: glab026
  9. 9.↵
    Froidure A, Mahieu M, Hoton D, et al. Short telomeres increase the risk of severe COVID-19. Aging 2020; 12: 19911–19922.
    OpenUrl
  10. 10.↵
    Sudlow C, Gallacher J, Allen N, et al. UK BiobankLJ: An Open Access Resource for Identifying the Causes of a Wide Range of Complex Diseases of Middle and Old Age. PloS Med. 2015; 12: e1001779.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    Codd V, Wang Q, Allara E, et al. Polygenic basis and biomedical consequences of telomere length variation. MedRxiv 2021 DOI to be added
  12. 12.↵
    Bycroft C, Freeman C, Petkova D, et al. The UK Biobank resource with deep phenotyping and genomic data. Nature 2018; 562: 203–209.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    Armstrong J, Rudkin J, Allen N, et al. Dynamic linkage of COVID-19 test results between Public Health England’s Second Generation Surveillance System and UK Biobank. Microb Genom 2020; 6: mgen000397.
    OpenUrl
  14. 14.↵
    Cole SR, Platt RW, Schisterman EF, et al. Illustrating bias due to conditioning on a collider. Int J. Epidemiol. 2010; 39: 417–20.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  15. 15.↵
    Griffith, G.J., Morris, T.T., Tudball, M.J. et al. Collider bias undermines our understanding of COVID-19 disease risk and severity. Nature Comms. 2020; 11: 5749.
    OpenUrl
  16. 16.↵
    Burgess S, Butterworth A, Thompson S.G. Mendelian randomization analysis with multiple genetic variants using summarized data. Genet Epidemiol. 2013; 37: 658–65.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    Bowden J, Davey Smith G, Haycock PC, Burgess S. Consistent Estimation in Mendelian Randomization with Some Invalid Instruments Using a Weighted Median Estimator. Genet Epidemiol. 2016; 40: 304–14 (2016).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    Bowden J, Davey Smith G and Burgess S. Mendelian randomization with invalid instruments: effect estimation and bias detection through Egger regression. Int J Epidemiol. 2015; 44: 512–25.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    Moro-Garcia MA, Alonso Arias R, Lopez-Larrea C. Molecular mechanisms involved in the aging of the T cell immune response. Curr Genom. 2012; 13: 589–602 (2012).
    OpenUrl
  20. 20.↵
    Nehme J, Borghesan M, Mackedenski S, Bird TG, Demaria M. Cellular senescence as a potential mediator of COVID-19 severity in the elderly. Aging Cell 2020; 19: e13237.
    OpenUrl
  21. 21.↵
    Bellon M. & Nicot C. Telomere Dynamics in Immune Senescence and Exhaustion Triggered by Chronic Viral Infection. Viruses. 2017; 9: 289.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    Fry, A. et al. Comparison of sociodemographic and health-related characteristics of UK Biobank participants with those of the general population. Am J Epidemiol 2017; 186: 1026– 34.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    Batty, G.D, Gale, C.R., Kivimäki, M., Deary, I.J., Bell, S. Comparison of risk factor associations in UK Biobank against representative, general population based studies with conventional response rates: prospective cohort study and individual participant meta-analysis. BMJ 368:m131 (2020).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    The COVID-19 Host Genetics Initiative, Andrea Ganna. Mapping the human genetic architecture of COVID-19 by worldwide meta-analysis. MedRxiv 2021: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.10.21252820 (2019).
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted March 22, 2021.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Older biological age is associated with adverse COVID-19 outcomes: A cohort study in UK Biobank
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Older biological age is associated with adverse COVID-19 outcomes: A cohort study in UK Biobank
Qingning Wang, Veryan Codd, Zahra Raisi-Estabragh, Crispin Musicha, Vasiliki Bountziouka, Stephen Kaptoge, Elias Allara, Emanuele Di Angelantonio, Adam S. Butterworth, Angela M. Wood, John R. Thompson, Steffen E Petersen, Nicholas C. Harvey, John N. Danesh, Nilesh J. Samani, Christopher P. Nelson
medRxiv 2021.03.20.21254010; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.20.21254010
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Older biological age is associated with adverse COVID-19 outcomes: A cohort study in UK Biobank
Qingning Wang, Veryan Codd, Zahra Raisi-Estabragh, Crispin Musicha, Vasiliki Bountziouka, Stephen Kaptoge, Elias Allara, Emanuele Di Angelantonio, Adam S. Butterworth, Angela M. Wood, John R. Thompson, Steffen E Petersen, Nicholas C. Harvey, John N. Danesh, Nilesh J. Samani, Christopher P. Nelson
medRxiv 2021.03.20.21254010; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.20.21254010

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS)
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (214)
  • Allergy and Immunology (495)
  • Anesthesia (106)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (1091)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (194)
  • Dermatology (141)
  • Emergency Medicine (274)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (497)
  • Epidemiology (9747)
  • Forensic Medicine (5)
  • Gastroenterology (480)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (2299)
  • Geriatric Medicine (221)
  • Health Economics (461)
  • Health Informatics (1548)
  • Health Policy (729)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (600)
  • Hematology (236)
  • HIV/AIDS (500)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (11623)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (615)
  • Medical Education (236)
  • Medical Ethics (67)
  • Nephrology (256)
  • Neurology (2137)
  • Nursing (133)
  • Nutrition (332)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (424)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (516)
  • Oncology (1171)
  • Ophthalmology (363)
  • Orthopedics (128)
  • Otolaryngology (220)
  • Pain Medicine (145)
  • Palliative Medicine (50)
  • Pathology (308)
  • Pediatrics (693)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (298)
  • Primary Care Research (265)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (2168)
  • Public and Global Health (4640)
  • Radiology and Imaging (775)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (451)
  • Respiratory Medicine (622)
  • Rheumatology (273)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (224)
  • Sports Medicine (208)
  • Surgery (250)
  • Toxicology (42)
  • Transplantation (120)
  • Urology (94)