Author
Listed:
- Giorgia Perri
- Chloe French
- César Agostinis-Sobrinho
- Atul Anand
- Radiana Dhewayani Antarianto
- Yasumichi Arai
- Joseph A Baur
- Omar Cauli
- Morgane Clivaz-Duc
- Giuseppe Colloca
- Constantinos Demetriades
- Chiara de Lucia
- Giorgio Di Gessa
- Breno S Diniz
- Catherine L Dotchin
- Gillian Eaglestone
- Bradley T Elliott
- Mark A Espeland
- Luigi Ferrucci
- James Fisher
- Dimitris K Grammatopoulos
- Novi S Hardiany
- Zaki Hassan-Smith
- Waylon J Hastings
- Swati Jain
- Peter K Joshi
- Theodora Katsila
- Graham J Kemp
- Omid A Khaiyat
- Dudley W Lamming
- Jose Lara Gallegos
- Frank Madeo
- Andrea B Maier
- Carmen Martin-Ruiz
- Ian J Martins
- John C Mathers
- Lewis R Mattin
- Reshma A Merchant
- Alexey Moskalev
- Ognian Neytchev
- Mary Ni Lochlainn
- Claire M Owen
- Stuart M Phillips
- Jedd Pratt
- Konstantinos Prokopidis
- Nicholas J W Rattray
- María Rúa-Alonso
- Lutz Schomburg
- David Scott
- Sangeetha Shyam
- Elina Sillanpää
- Michelle M C Tan
- Ruth Teh
- Stephanie W Tobin
- Carolina J Vila-Chã
- Luigi Vorluni
- Daniela Weber
- Ailsa Welch
- Daisy Wilson
- Thomas Wilson
- Tongbiao Zhao
- Elena Philippou
- Viktor I Korolchuk
- Oliver M Shannon
- Gustavo Duque
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.
Suggested Citation
Giorgia Perri & Chloe French & César Agostinis-Sobrinho & Atul Anand & Radiana Dhewayani Antarianto & Yasumichi Arai & Joseph A Baur & Omar Cauli & Morgane Clivaz-Duc & Giuseppe Colloca & Constantinos, 2025.
"An Expert Consensus Statement on Biomarkers of Aging for Use in Intervention Studies,"
The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 80(5), pages 3758-3775.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:geronb:v:80:y:2025:i:5:p:3758-3775.
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:80:y:2025:i:5:p:3758-3775.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/psychsocgerontology .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.