Systems Age: A single blood methylation test to quantify aging heterogeneity across 11 physiological systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individuals, organs, tissues, and cells age in diverse ways throughout the lifespan. Epigenetic clocks attempt to quantify differential aging between individuals, but they typically summarize aging as a single measure, ignoring within-person heterogeneity. Our aim was to develop novel systems-based methylation clocks that, when assessed in blood, capture aging in distinct physiological systems. We combined supervised and unsupervised machine learning methods to link DNA methylation, system-specific clinical chemistry and functional measures, and mortality risk. This yielded a panel of 11 system-specific scores- Heart, Lung, Kidney, Liver, Brain, Immune, Inflammatory, Blood, Musculoskeletal, Hormone, and Metabolic. Each system score predicted a wide variety of outcomes, aging phenotypes, and conditions specific to the respective system. We also combined the system scores into a composite Systems Age clock that is predictive of aging across physiological systems in an unbiased manner. Finally, we showed that the system scores clustered individuals into unique aging subtypes that had different patterns of age-related disease and decline. Overall, our biological systems based epigenetic framework captures aging in multiple physiological systems using a single blood draw and assay and may inform the development of more personalized clinical approaches for improving age-related quality of life.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".