Why the study?
The genetic underpinning of the difference between AI-predicted ECG age and chronological age (delta age) is unknown, but crucial for understanding underlying individual risk.
What is the genetic underpinning of the difference between AI-predicted ECG age and chronological age (delta age)?
What is the genetic underpinning of the difference between AI-predicted ECG age and chronological age (delta age)?
The genetic basis of AI-derived cardiovascular aging is predominantly determined by cardiovascular-specific genes rather than general aging mechanisms.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
ECG delta age shares genetic overlap with cardiac traits; leaves open whether it improves risk prediction beyond known variants.
Abstract Artificial intelligence (AI)-based approaches can now use electrocardiograms (ECGs) to provide expert-level performance in detecting heart abnormalities and diagnosing disease. Additionally, patient age predicted from ECGs by AI models has shown great potential as a biomarker for cardiovascular age as recent work has found differences from chronological age ("delta age") to be associated with mortality and co-morbidities. However, the genetic underpinning of delta age is unknown, but crucial for understanding underlying individual risk. By performing a genome-wide association study using UK Biobank data (n=34,432), we identified eight loci associated with delta age (p ≤ 5 × 10−8 ), including genes linked to cardiovascular disease (CVD) (e.g. SCN5A) and (heart) muscle development (e.g. TTN). Our results indicate that the genetic basis of cardiovascular ageing is predominantly determined by genes directly involved with the cardiovascular system rather than those connected to more general mechanisms of ageing. Our insights inform the epidemiology of CVD, with implications for preventative and precision medicine.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Libiseller-Egger et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: