4.7 Article

Decelerated epigenetic aging associated with mood stabilizers in the blood of patients with bipolar disorder

期刊

TRANSLATIONAL PSYCHIATRY
卷 10, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41398-020-0813-y

关键词

-

资金

  1. JSPS KAKENHI [26461718, 17H04249, 15K19727, 18K15483]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [17H04249, 18K15483, 15K19727, 26461718] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

There is high mortality among patients with bipolar disorder (BD). Studies have reported accelerated biological aging in patients with BD. Recently, Horvath and Hannum et al. independently developed DNA methylation (DNAm) profiles as epigenetic clocks, which are the most accurate biological age estimate. This led to the development of two accomplished measures of epigenetic age acceleration (EAA) using blood samples, namely, intrinsic and extrinsic EAA (IEAA and EEAA, respectively). IEAA, which is based on Horvath's clock, is independent of blood cell counts and indicates cell-intrinsic aging. On the other hand, EEAA, which is based on Hannum's clock, is associated with age-dependent changes in blood cell counts and indicates immune system aging. Further, Lu et al. developed the GrimAge clock, which can strongly predict the mortality risk, and DNAm-based telomere length (DNAmTL). We used a DNAm dataset from whole blood samples obtained from 30 patients with BD and 30 healthy controls. We investigated Horvath EAA, IEAA, Hannum EAA, EEAA, Grim EAA, DNAmTL, and DNAm-based blood cell composition. Compared with controls, there was a decrease in Horvath EAA and IEAA in patients with BD. Further, there was a significant decrease in Horvath EAA and IEAA in patients with BD taking medication combinations of mood stabilizers (including lithium carbonate, sodium valproate, and carbamazepine) than in those taking no medication/monotherapy. This study provides novel evidence indicating decelerated epigenetic aging associated with mood stabilizers in patients with BD.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据