PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Chia-Ling Kuo
AU  - Luke C. Pilling
AU  - Zuyun Liu
AU  - Janice L. Atkins
AU  - Morgan E. Levine
TI  - Genetic associations for two biological age measures point to distinct aging phenotypes
AID  - 10.1101/2020.07.10.20150797
DP  - 2020 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2020.07.10.20150797
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/07/12/2020.07.10.20150797.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/07/12/2020.07.10.20150797.full
AB  - Biological age measures outperform chronological age in predicting various aging outcomes, yet little is known regarding genetic predisposition. We performed genome-wide association scans of two age-adjusted biological age measures (PhenoAgeAcceleration and BioAgeAcceleration), estimated from clinical biochemistry markers1,2 in European-descent participants from UK Biobank. The strongest signals were found in the APOE gene, tagged by the two major protein-coding SNPs, PhenoAgeAccel—rs429358 (APOE e4 determinant) (p=1.50×10−72); BioAgeAccel—rs7412 (APOE e2 determinant) (p=3.16×10−60). Interestingly, we observed inverse APOE e2 and e4 associations and unique pathway enrichments when comparing the two biological age measures. Genes associated with BioAgeAccel were enriched in lipid related pathways, while genes associated with PhenoAgeAccel showed enrichment for immune system, cell function, and carbohydrate homeostasis pathways, suggesting the two measures capture different aging domains. Our study reaffirms that aging patterns are heterogenous across individuals, and the manner in which a person ages may be partly attributed to genetic predisposition.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementCLK and MEL are supported in part by a R00 grant (R00AG052604) funded by the National Institute on Aging, National Institute Health, USA. CLK and LCP are supported in part by a R21 grant (R21AG060018) funded by the National Institute on Aging, National Institute Health, USA. LCP is supported by the University of Exeter Medical School, and in part by the University of Connecticut School of Medicine. JLA is supported by UK Medical Research Council award (MR/S009892/1).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:Project is not human subject research and IRB involvement is not required.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.YesThis research was conducted using the UK Biobank resource, under the application 14631. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.12620291.v1 https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.12620366.v1