MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Epigenetic Age and the Risk of Incident Atrial Fibrillation

2021· article· en· W3203783224 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEpigenetics and DNA Methylation
Canadian institutionsThrombosis and Atherosclerosis Research InstituteMcMaster University Medical CentreMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research InstituteWestern University
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsEpigeneticsAtrial fibrillationRisk factorDiseaseSenescenceDNA methylation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The most prominent risk factor for atrial fibrillation (AF) is chronological age; however, underlying mechanisms are unexplained. Algorithms using epigenetic modifications to the human genome effectively predict chronological age. Chronological and epigenetic predicted ages may diverge in a phenomenon referred to as epigenetic age acceleration (EAA), which may reflect accelerated biological aging. We sought to evaluate for associations between epigenetic age measures and incident AF. Methods: Measures for 4 epigenetic clocks (Horvath, Hannum, DNA methylation [DNAm] PhenoAge, and DNAm GrimAge) and an epigenetic predictor of PAI-1 (plasminogen activator inhibitor-1) levels (ie, DNAm PAI-1) were determined for study participants from 3 population-based cohort studies. Cox models evaluated for associations with incident AF and results were combined via random-effects meta-analyses. Two-sample summary-level Mendelian randomization analyses evaluated for associations between genetic instruments of the EAA measures and AF. Results: Among 5600 participants (mean age, 65.5 years; female, 60.1%; Black, 50.7%), there were 905 incident AF cases during a mean follow-up of 12.9 years. Unadjusted analyses revealed all 4 epigenetic clocks and the DNAm PAI-1 predictor were associated with statistically significant higher hazards of incident AF, though the magnitudes of their point estimates were smaller relative to the associations observed for chronological age. The pooled EAA estimates for each epigenetic measure, with the exception of Horvath EAA, were associated with incident AF in models adjusted for chronological age, race, sex, and smoking variables. After multivariable adjustment for additional known AF risk factors that could also potentially function as mediators, pooled EAA measures for 2 clocks remained statistically significant. Five-year increases in EAA measures for DNAm GrimAge and DNAm PhenoAge were associated with 19% (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.19 [95% CI, 1.09–1.31]; P <0.01) and 15% (adjusted HR, 1.15 [95% CI, 1.05–1.25]; P <0.01) higher hazards of incident AF, respectively. Mendelian randomization analyses for the 5 EAA measures did not reveal statistically significant associations with AF. Conclusions: Our study identified adjusted associations between EAA measures and incident AF, suggesting that biological aging plays an important role independent of chronological age, though a potential underlying causal relationship remains unclear. These aging processes may be modifiable and not constrained by the immutable factor of time.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.454
Threshold uncertainty score0.195

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations117
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicEpigenetics and DNA MethylationFrench-language works237,207