RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Comparing the genetic and environmental architecture of blood count, blood biochemistry and urine biochemistry biological ages with machine learning
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.07.05.21260032
DO 10.1101/2021.07.05.21260032
A1 Alan Le Goallec
A1 Samuel Diai
A1 Théo Vincent
A1 Chirag J. Patel
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/07/07/2021.07.05.21260032.abstract
AB While a large number of biological age predictors have been built from blood samples, a blood count-based biological age predictor is lacking, and the genetic and environmental factors associated with blood-measured accelerated aging remain elusive. In the following, we leveraged 31 blood count biomarkers measured from 489,079 blood samples, 28 blood biochemistry biomarkers measured from 245,147 blood samples, and four urine biochemistry biomarkers measured from 158,381 samples to build three distinct biological age predictors by training machine learning models to predict age. Blood biochemistry significantly outperformed blood count and urine biochemistry in terms of age prediction (RMSE: 5.92+-0.02 vs. 7.60+-0.02 years and 7.72+-0.04 years). We performed genome wide association studies [GWASs], and found accelerated blood biochemistry, blood count and urine biochemistry aging to be respectively 26.2+-0.3%, 18.1+-0.2% and 10.5±0.5% GWAS-heritable. We identified 1,081 single nucleotide polymorphisms [SNPs] associated with accelerated blood biochemistry aging, 2,636 SNPs associated with accelerated blood cells aging and 24 SNPs associated with accelerated urine biochemistry aging. Similarly, we identified biomarkers, clinical phenotypes, diseases, environmental and socioeconomic factors associated with accelerated blood biochemistry, blood cells and urine biochemistry aging.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementNIEHS R00 ES023504 NIEHS R21 ES25052. NIAID R01 AI127250 NSF 163870 MassCATS, Massachusetts Life Science Center Sanofi The funders had no role in the study design or drafting of the manuscript(s). Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The Harvard internal review board (IRB) deemed the research as non-human subjects research (IRB: IRB16-2145).All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesWe used the UK Biobank (project ID: 52887). The code can be found at https://github.com/Deep-Learning-and-Aging. The results can be interactively and extensively explored at https://www.multidimensionality-of-aging.net/. We will make the biological age phenotypes available through UK Biobank upon publication. The GWAS results can be found at https://www.dropbox.com/s/59e9ojl3wu8qie9/Multidimensionality_of_aging-GWAS_results.zip?dl=0. https://github.com/Deep-Learning-and-Aging https://www.multidimensionality-of-aging.net/ https://www.dropbox.com/s/59e9ojl3wu8qie9/Multidimensionality_of_aging-GWAS_results.zip?dl=0