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
{"title":"关于用于干预研究的衰老生物标志物的专家共识声明","authors":"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","doi":"10.1093/gerona/glae297","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Biomarkers of ageing 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 ageing for use in intervention studies via the Delphi method. A three-round Delphi study was conducted using an online platform. In Round 1, expert panel members provided suggestions for candidate biomarkers of ageing. In Rounds 2 and 3, they voted on 500 initial statements (yes/no) relating to 20 biomarkers of ageing. 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 (e.g., insulin-like growth factor 1, growth-differentiating factor-15), inflammatory (e.g., high sensitivity c-reactive protein, interleukin-6), functional (e.g., muscle mass, muscle strength, hand grip strength, Timed-Up-and-Go, gait speed, standing balance test, frailty index, cognitive health, blood pressure), and epigenetic (e.g., DNA methylation/epigenetic clocks) domains. Expert consensus identified 14 potential biomarkers of ageing which may be used as outcome measures in intervention studies. Future ageing research should identify which combination of these biomarkers has the greatest utility.","PeriodicalId":22892,"journal":{"name":"The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An expert consensus statement on biomarkers of ageing for use in intervention studies\",\"authors\":\"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\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/gerona/glae297\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Biomarkers of ageing 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 ageing for use in intervention studies via the Delphi method. A three-round Delphi study was conducted using an online platform. In Round 1, expert panel members provided suggestions for candidate biomarkers of ageing. In Rounds 2 and 3, they voted on 500 initial statements (yes/no) relating to 20 biomarkers of ageing. 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 (e.g., insulin-like growth factor 1, growth-differentiating factor-15), inflammatory (e.g., high sensitivity c-reactive protein, interleukin-6), functional (e.g., muscle mass, muscle strength, hand grip strength, Timed-Up-and-Go, gait speed, standing balance test, frailty index, cognitive health, blood pressure), and epigenetic (e.g., DNA methylation/epigenetic clocks) domains. Expert consensus identified 14 potential biomarkers of ageing which may be used as outcome measures in intervention studies. Future ageing research should identify which combination of these biomarkers has the greatest utility.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22892,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/glae297\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/glae297","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
老化生物标志物是促进长寿干预措施的重要结果测量指标。然而,对于哪些特定的生物标志物最适合人类干预研究,目前还没有达成共识。这项工作旨在通过德尔菲法就干预研究中使用的老龄化生物标志物达成专家共识,从而满足这一需求。利用在线平台进行了三轮德尔菲研究。在第一轮中,专家小组成员就候选老龄化生物标志物提出了建议。在第二轮和第三轮中,他们就与 20 个老龄化生物标志物有关的 500 个初步陈述(是/否)进行投票。专家组成员可对其专业领域以外的生物标志物投弃权票。当对某项声明/生物标志物的同意率≥70% 时,即达成共识。在受邀参与的 460 名国际专家组成员中,116 人完成了第一轮投票,87 人完成了第二轮投票,60 人完成了第三轮投票。在这三轮讨论中,有 14 个生物标志物达成了共识,这些生物标志物涉及生理(如胰岛素样生长因子 1、生长异常因子-15)、炎症(如高敏 c 反应蛋白、白细胞介素-6)、功能(如肌肉质量、肌肉力量、手部握力)等方面、功能(如肌肉质量、肌肉力量、手握力、定时起跑、步态速度、站立平衡测试、虚弱指数、认知健康、血压)和表观遗传(如 DNA 甲基化/表观遗传时钟)领域。专家共识确定了 14 种潜在的老龄化生物标志物,可作为干预研究的结果测量指标。未来的老龄化研究应确定这些生物标志物的哪种组合最有用。
An expert consensus statement on biomarkers of ageing for use in intervention studies
Biomarkers of ageing 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 ageing for use in intervention studies via the Delphi method. A three-round Delphi study was conducted using an online platform. In Round 1, expert panel members provided suggestions for candidate biomarkers of ageing. In Rounds 2 and 3, they voted on 500 initial statements (yes/no) relating to 20 biomarkers of ageing. 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 (e.g., insulin-like growth factor 1, growth-differentiating factor-15), inflammatory (e.g., high sensitivity c-reactive protein, interleukin-6), functional (e.g., muscle mass, muscle strength, hand grip strength, Timed-Up-and-Go, gait speed, standing balance test, frailty index, cognitive health, blood pressure), and epigenetic (e.g., DNA methylation/epigenetic clocks) domains. Expert consensus identified 14 potential biomarkers of ageing which may be used as outcome measures in intervention studies. Future ageing research should identify which combination of these biomarkers has the greatest utility.