4.4 Article

Accelerated epigenetic aging and inflammatory/immunological profile (ipAGE) in patients with chronic kidney disease

期刊

GEROSCIENCE
卷 44, 期 2, 页码 817-834

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11357-022-00540-4

关键词

Chronic kidney disease; Accelerated aging; DNA methylation; Inflammation

资金

  1. Ministry of Science and Higher Education [075-15-2021-639]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study found an accelerated aging phenotype in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), and the underlying inflammatory processes were better quantified by the inflammatory/immunological profile (ipAGE) than by epigenetic clocks.
Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is defined by a reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). This failure can be related to a phenotype of accelerated aging. In this work, we considered 76 patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and 83 healthy controls. We concomitantly evaluated for the first time two measures that can be informative of the rate of aging, i.e., whole blood DNA methylation using the Illumina Infinium EPIC array and plasma levels of a selection of inflammatory/immunological proteins using multiplex immunoassays. First of all, we demonstrated accelerated aging in terms of the most common epigenetic age estimators in CKD patients. Moreover, we developed a new clock/predictor of age based on the inflammatory/immunological profile (ipAGE) and identified the inflammatory/immunological biomarkers differentially expressed between cases and controls. IpAGE appeared to be more sensitive than epigenetic clocks in quantifying the accelerated aging phenotype of ESRD patients. Interestingly, we did not find any correlation between the age acceleration evaluated according to the epigenetic clocks and ipAGE in either the ESRD group or the control group. On the whole, our data show a consistent accelerated aging phenotype in ESRD patients, which is better appreciated by quantifying the underlying inflammatory processes (inflammaging) by ipAGE than by using epigenetic clocks.

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

4.4
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