Research by: Xin Zhong, Yanxia Lu, Qi Gao, Ma Shwe Zin Nyunt, Christopher P. Monterola, Joo Chuan Tong, Anis Larbi, & Tze Pin Ng
Executive Summary
It is widely recognized that biological age (BA) measures more accurately the rate of human aging in relation to functional declines than chronological age (CA), which simply measures the number of years since birth. More precisely, BA is better than CA for measuring lifespan (mortality) and healthspan (frailty). However, there is limited consensus regarding measures of BA in lifespan and healthy lifespan in Singaporeans, Asians, and non-Caucasians, in general.
In this work, we investigated how physiological markers can represent biological age, or the age your body “acts” like it is, in predicting both one’s productive life and lifespan. We used machine learning in analyzing a comprehensive data of 2844 Chinese Singaporeans in two age subgroups (55–70 and 71-94 years) in the Singapore Longitudinal Aging Study (SLAS-2) with 8-year follow-up mortality information. Biological age estimate was computed using 3 algorithms: Principal Component Analysis (PCA), Multiple Linear Regression (MLR) and Klemera and Doubal (KD) methods. Features for prediction are frailty measures, defined by the well-established clinical phenotype criteria of shrinking, weakness, slowness, tiredness and inactivity and mortality from 8 years of follow-up. Our results indicate that such physiological markers of biological aging among Chinese robustly differentiate biologically old from younger individuals with the same chronological age.
One of the highlights of this work is a demonstration of a pronounced difference between the reported biological aging markers for Asian samples as compared to its caucasian counterpart where most of the known age-related measurements are anchored.
To cite this article: Zhong, X., Lu, Y., Gao, Q., Nyunt, M. S. Z., Monterola, C. P., Tong, J. C., Larbi, A., & Ng, T. P. (2020). Estimating biological age in the Singapore longitudinal aging study. The Journals of Gerontology: Series A, 75(10), 1913–1920. https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/glz146.
To access this article: https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/glz146
About the Journal
The Journals of Gerontology, Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences was ranked first among all journals in the gerontology (aging) category for 10 years in a row (2010 -present) based on Journal Citation Reports. The journal is under Oxford Academic and https://academic.oup.com/biomedgerontology
The Journal of Gerontology: Biological Sciences publishes articles on the biological aspects of aging in areas such as translational gerontology, biomarkers of aging, biochemistry, biodemography, cellular and molecular biology, comparative and evolutionary biology, endocrinology, exercise sciences, genetics, immunology, neuroscience, nutrition, pathology, pharmacology, physiology, and the biological mechanisms of late-life diseases. Biological insights gleaned in studies from invertebrates, vertebrates, and mammalian species including humans will be considered. The journal is particularly interested in publishing research on translational gerontology including interventions designed to enhance longevity and healthspan.
SJR: 180
