Biomarkers of aging through the life course: a recent literature update
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose of review: The development of biomarkers of aging has greatly advanced epidemiological studies of aging processes. However, much debate remains on the timing of aging onset and the causal relevance of these biomarkers. In this review, we discuss the most recent biomarkers of aging that have been applied across the life course. Recent findings: The most recently developed aging biomarkers that have been applied across the life course can be designated into three categories: epigenetic clocks, epigenetic markers of chronic inflammation, and mitochondrial DNA copy number. While these have been applied at different life stages, the development, validation, and application of these markers has been largely centered on populations of older adults. Few studies have examined trajectories of aging biomarkers across the life course. As the wealth of molecular and biochemical data increases, emerging biomarkers may be able to capture complex and system-specific aging processes. Recently developed biomarkers include novel epigenetic clocks; clocks based on ribosomal DNA, transcriptomic profiles, proteomics, metabolomics, and inflammatory markers; clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential gene mutations; and multi-omics approaches. Summary: Attention should be placed on aging at early and middle life stages to better understand trajectories of aging biomarkers across the life course. Additionally, novel biomarkers will provide greater insight into aging processes. The specific mechanisms of aging reflected by these biomarkers should be considered when interpreting results.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".