Analysis shows biological ages associate with higher risks of chronic diseases, indicating organ age's significance in health assessments.
The biological age of organs may better quantify risk for health deterioration compared with chronological age. We investigated organ-specific aging patterns in a community-based cohort and assessed the associations with adverse health outcomes. Biological ages of 11 organs were estimated for 11,757 participants of the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study (55.6% women, mean age, 57.1 years) using a circulating protein-based model. Older organ ages were significantly associated with related adverse outcomes, even after accounting for chronological age; for example, older arteries and hearts were associated with an increased risk for coronary heart disease (CHD; hazard ratio [HR] per 5-year-higher age gap, 1.22; 95% CI [1.13-1.31] and 1.16 [1.07-1.26], respectively, and older lungs with lung cancer (HR 1.12 [1.09-1.16]). Hierarchical agglomerative clustering based on organ ages revealed 3 patient phenotypes: those with older organs, normal/slightly older organs, and younger organs. The patients with older organs were at higher risk for cancer (HR 1.19; 95% CI [1.08-1.31]), death (HR 1.75 [1.64-1.86]), end-stage kidney disease (HR 6.12 [4.65-8.06]), CHD (HR 1.21 [1.06-1.38]), heart failure (HR 1.92 [1.73-2.13]), infection (HR 1.56 [1.44-1.68]), and stroke (HR 1.36 [1.16-1.61]). Proteomic organ aging signatures demonstrated significant associations with multiple adverse health outcomes and may be useful for health risk identification.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liu et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: