An Expert Consensus Statement on Biomarkers of Aging for Use in Intervention Studies

Biomarkers of aging serve as important outcome measures in longevity-promoting interventions. However, there is limited consensus on which specific biomarkers are most appropriate for human intervention studies. This work aimed to address this need by establishing an expert consensus on biomarkers of aging for use in intervention studies via the Delphi method. A 3-round Delphi study was conducted using an online platform. In Round 1, expert panel members provided suggestions for candidate biomarkers of aging. In Rounds 2 and 3, they voted on 500 initial statements (yes/no) relating to 20 biomarkers of aging. Panel members could abstain from voting on biomarkers outside their expertise. Consensus was reached when there was ≥70% agreement on a statement/biomarker. Of the 460 international panel members invited to participate, 116 completed Round 1, 87 completed Round 2, and 60 completed Round 3. Across the 3 rounds, 14 biomarkers met consensus that spanned physiological (eg, insulin-like growth factor 1, growth-differentiating factor-15), inflammatory (eg, high sensitivity C-reactive protein, interleukin-6), functional (eg, muscle mass, muscle strength, hand grip strength, Timed-Up-and-Go, gait speed, standing balance test, frailty index, cognitive health, blood pressure), and epigenetic (eg, DNA methylation/epigenetic clocks) domains. Expert consensus identified 14 potential biomarkers of aging which may be used as outcome measures in intervention studies. Future aging research should identify which combination of these biomarkers has the greatest utility.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Journals of Gerontology Series A
Published
2024-12-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/glae297
Citations
15
Primary Topic
Delphi Technique in Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
16.98

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

An Expert Consensus Statement on Biomarkers of Aging for Use in Intervention Studies

Novi Silvia Hardiany, Giuseppe Colloca, María Rúa-Alonso, José Lara et al.
15 citations
The Journals of Gerontology Series A
Delphi Technique in Research
16.98
article

An Expert Consensus Statement on Biomarkers of Aging for Use in Intervention Studies

Novi Silvia Hardiany, Giuseppe Colloca, María Rúa-Alonso, José Lara, Thomas Wilson, Ognian Neytchev, Ruth Teh, Michelle M. C. Tan, Radiana Dhewayani Antarianto, Joseph A. Baur, Alexey Moskalev, Andrea Britta Maier, Daniela Weber, Catherine Dotchin, Sangeetha Shyam, Elina Sillanpää, Chiara de Lucia, Daisy Wilson, Lutz Schomburg, Oliver Michael Shannon, Θεοδώρα Κάτσιλα, César Agostinis‐Sobrinho, Jedd Pratt, Stephanie W. Tobin, Dudley W. Lamming, Gillian Eaglestone, Ailsa Welch, Stuart M. Phillips, Carmen Martín-Ruiz, Giorgio Di Gessa, Giorgia Perri, Breno Satler Diniz, Elena Philippou, Ian Martins, Claire M. Owen, Waylon J. Hastings, Atul Anand, Luigi Ferrucci, Swati Jain, Tongbiao Zhao, Constantinos Demetriades, Yasumichi Arai, Mary Ní Lochlainn, Lewis Mattin, Nicholas J. W. Rattray, Reshma Aziz Merchant, Omid Khaiyat, John C. Mathers, Mark A. Espeland, David Scott, Konstantinos Prokopidis, Zaki Hassan‐Smith, Dimitris Grammatopoulos, Chloe French, Frank Madeo, Omar Cauli, Peter K. Joshi, Graham John Kemp, Carolina Vila‐Chã, Bradley Elliott, Viktor I. Korolchuk, James T. Fisher, Luigi Vorluni, Morgane Clivaz-Duc
article en
15 citations

Abstract

Biomarkers of aging serve as important outcome measures in longevity-promoting interventions. However, there is limited consensus on which specific biomarkers are most appropriate for human intervention studies. This work aimed to address this need by establishing an expert consensus on biomarkers of aging for use in intervention studies via the Delphi method. A 3-round Delphi study was conducted using an online platform. In Round 1, expert panel members provided suggestions for candidate biomarkers of aging. In Rounds 2 and 3, they voted on 500 initial statements (yes/no) relating to 20 biomarkers of aging. Panel members could abstain from voting on biomarkers outside their expertise. Consensus was reached when there was ≥70% agreement on a statement/biomarker. Of the 460 international panel members invited to participate, 116 completed Round 1, 87 completed Round 2, and 60 completed Round 3. Across the 3 rounds, 14 biomarkers met consensus that spanned physiological (eg, insulin-like growth factor 1, growth-differentiating factor-15), inflammatory (eg, high sensitivity C-reactive protein, interleukin-6), functional (eg, muscle mass, muscle strength, hand grip strength, Timed-Up-and-Go, gait speed, standing balance test, frailty index, cognitive health, blood pressure), and epigenetic (eg, DNA methylation/epigenetic clocks) domains. Expert consensus identified 14 potential biomarkers of aging which may be used as outcome measures in intervention studies. Future aging research should identify which combination of these biomarkers has the greatest utility.

The Journals of Gerontology Series AVol. 80(5)
Universidade da Coruña (ES), Sprint (United States) (US), University of East Anglia (GB), Manchester Metropolitan University (GB), Edith Cowan University (AU), National Institutes of Health (US), University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Citrix (Switzerland) (CH), American Public Health Association (US), University of Wisconsin–Madison (US), University of Connecticut (US), University of Liverpool (GB), Deakin University (AU), University of Auckland (NZ), University of Graz (AT), Aberystwyth University (GB), Universitat de València (ES), National University of Singapore (SG), University of Nicosia (CY), University of Cologne (DE), University of Strathclyde (GB), King's College London (GB), Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN), Keio University (JP), Manchester Academic Health Science Centre (GB), Stavanger University Hospital (NO), Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ES), Texas College (US), University Hospital Coventry (GB), Agostino Gemelli University Polyclinic (IT), University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust (GB), University of Manchester (GB), University of Indonesia (ID), Northumbria University (GB), Klaipėda University (LT), University of Warwick (GB), Humanity & Health (CN), Institut de Recerca Biomèdica Catalunya Sud (ES), Institute of Experimental Endocrinology of the Slovak Academy of Sciences (SK), Nawi Graz (AT), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red (ES), Monash Health (AU), National Hellenic Research Foundation (GR), Integrative Medicine Institute (US), Primary Health Care (QA), Nutrition Sciences (Belgium) (BE), National Institute on Aging (US), Centre for Global Health Research (CA), Cologne Excellence Cluster on Cellular Stress Responses in Aging Associated Diseases (DE), Central Finland Health Care District (FI), National University Health System (SG), Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IT), Max Planck Institute for Biology of Ageing (DE), Hôpital du Valais (CH), German Institute of Human Nutrition (DE), Health & Life (Taiwan) (TW), Oldham Council (GB), Institute of Zoology (CN), Liverpool Hope University (GB), University College London (GB), Wake Forest University (US), University of Greenwich (GB), Universitat Rovira i Virgili (ES), Monash University (AU), Trent University (CA), UConn Health (US), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE), University of Glasgow (GB), N. I. Lobachevsky State University of Nizhny Novgorod (RU), University of Pennsylvania (US), University of Birmingham (GB), Newcastle University (GB), Texas A&M University (US), University of Jyväskylä (FI), University of Westminster (GB), McMaster University (CA), University of Edinburgh (GB)
Alzheimer's Association, Abbott Laboratories, Amgen, Pfizer, UK Research and Innovation, Cytokinetics, Bayer HealthCare, National Institutes of Health, Directorate for Biological Sciences, Medical Research Council, Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Delphi Technique in Research
16.98
DOIOpen Access PDFOpenAlex
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.