What this is
- This research investigates the relationship between blood DNA methylation measures of biological aging and cancer risk.
- It utilizes data from the Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study, analyzing various cancer types.
- The study focuses on three methylation-based biomarkers and their associations with cancer risk.
Essence
- Blood DNA methylation measures of biological aging are associated with increased cancer risk, particularly for lung cancer. The study finds stronger associations compared to earlier aging measures.
Key takeaways
- Higher levels of biological aging measures correlate with increased risk of several cancers. For lung cancer, the per standard deviation increase was 1.82, indicating a strong association.
- Associations appeared linear and were consistent across multiple cancer types, including colorectal, kidney, and mature B-cell neoplasms. The overall cancer risk was 1.13 for one measure.
- The study suggests that these methylation-based measures may enhance cancer risk prediction, especially within five years of blood draw, indicating their potential utility in clinical settings.
Caveats
- The findings require replication in other studies before clinical application. The research is based on a specific cohort, which may limit generalizability.
- While the study shows strong associations, it does not establish causation between biological aging measures and cancer risk.
Definitions
- Rate Ratio (RR): A measure of the association between exposure and an outcome, indicating the likelihood of the outcome occurring in the exposed group compared to the unexposed.
AI simplified
Methods
Study Sample and Blood Collection
We used data collected from participants in the MCCS, a prospective study of 41 513 adult volunteers (24 469 women) aged between 27 and 76 years (99.3% aged 40-69 years) when recruited between 1990 and 1994 (). DNA samples were collected from peripheral blood drawn at the time of recruitment (1990-1994) or at the wave 2 follow-up visit (2003-2007). The DNA source was dried blood spots, peripheral blood mononuclear cells, or buffy coats for 70%, 28%, and 2% of participants, respectively (, available online). 16 Supplementary Methods
Study participants provided informed consent in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and the study was approved by Cancer Council Victoria’s Human Research Ethics Committee.
Cancer Case-Control Studies Nested in the MCCS
A series of case-control studies nested within the MCCS of colorectal (N = 835 pairs), gastric (N = 170), kidney (N = 143), lung (N = 332), prostate (N = 869), and urothelial cancers (N = 428) and mature B-cell neoplasms (N = 439) were conducted (). Cancer diagnoses were identified by linkage with the Victorian Cancer Registry and the Australian Cancer Database (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare). For each nested case-control study, controls were individually matched to incident cases (diagnosed after blood sample collection) on age using incidence density sampling (ie, they had to be free of the cancer of interest up to the age at diagnosis of the corresponding case), sex, country of birth (Australia or New Zealand, southern Europe, northern Europe), blood DNA source (dried blood spots, peripheral blood mononuclear cells, or buffy coat), and collection period (baseline or wave 2, the latter applicable to 151 case-control pairs of the urothelial cancer study). Controls were also matched to cases on year of birth, except for the colorectal cancer study, where controls were matched on year of baseline attendance. For the lung cancer study, controls were also matched on smoking history (never; former, quitting <10 years; former, quitting ≥10 years; current, smoking <15 cigarettes per day; current smoking ≥15 cigarettes per day) at the time of blood collection. For each study, matched cases and controls were placed next to each other, but allocated randomly, on the same slide. 17-20
DNA Extraction and Bisulfite Conversion, and DNA Methylation Data Processing
Methods relating to DNA extraction and bisulfite conversion and to DNA methylation data processing have been described previously () and are detailed in the(available online). 21 Supplementary Material
Methylation-Based Measures of Biological Aging
,, methylation-predicted telomere length, and their respective age-adjusted measures (the residual from the regression of biological age on chronological age) were obtained using Horvath’s online calculator at(,,). PhenoAge GrimAge https://dnamage.genetics.ucla.edu/new↗ 7 11 12
Statistical Analysis
Pearson correlations of the 3 aging measures with each other and with age were calculated for participants selected as controls. We used conditional logistic regression to calculate odds ratios, which are estimates of the rate ratios (RRs) when incidence density sampling matching is used (), for the associations between age-adjusted biological aging measures, per standard deviation (SD), and the risk of cancer. In Model 1, no covariates were included. In Model 2, we adjusted for smoking status (current, former, or never), smoking pack-years, age at starting smoking (never smoked, aged 16 years or younger, aged 17-21 years, older than 21 years), years since quitting smoking (never smoked, >10 years without smoking, between 5 and 10 years without smoking, <5 years without smoking), body mass index (in kg/m), height (in meters), alcohol intake in the past week (in grams per day), physical activity (categorized score based on time spent doing vigorous or less vigorous activities) (), dietary quality (Alternative Healthy Eating Index 2010) (), socioeconomic status (deciles of the relative socioeconomic disadvantage of area of residence index) (), education (ordinal variable ranging from 1, primary school only, to 8, tertiary or higher university degree) (). In Model 3, we added to Model 2 the white blood cell proportions estimated using the Houseman algorithm (). These models were used to analyze each cancer type separately, and all 7 cancers combined; for the combined analysis, where an individual was diagnosed with several cancers, we included the first diagnosis only (respecting the incidence density sampling procedure) so that participants did not contribute twice to the pooled estimate. Analyses were additionally stratified (Model 1) by time between blood draw and diagnosis of the case (≤5 years, 5-10 years, and >10 years), and effect modification was examined using likelihood ratio tests of the interaction between each measure and the time-to-diagnosis variable, used as either categorical () or continuous (). Potential nonlinearity in the associations between methylation-based measures and cancer risk was assessed using penalized regression splines, specifically P-splines, which are based on cubic B-splines and a large number of equidistant knots (), with 3 degrees of freedom. This type of spline was chosen because results are numerically stable, not sensitive to the location and number of knots (). These were represented graphically, and nonlinearity was assessed by comparing the P-spline and linear models using a likelihood ratio test. Case-control pairs with any missing values for the confounders (Model 2) measured at baseline were excluded, and missing values at follow-up (urothelial cancers) were replaced by baseline values; 3% of the initial sample was excluded because of missing values. We also excluded 6 case-control pairs (0.2%) for which a participant had an outlying value (>5 or ≤ −5) for any of the 3 age-adjusted methylation-based measures (, available online). The same models were used to calculate associations: expressed for a 5-year increase forand(, available online); expressed per a 1 SD increase for the first-generation measures (, available online). 22 23 24 25 Table 1 26 27 28 Supplementary Figure 1 Supplementary Table 4 Supplementary Table 5 2 P P PhenoAge GrimAge heterogeneity linearity
In secondary analyses, we assessed the association between biological aging measures and risk of the following cancer subtypes, as defined in previous publications: colon and rectal cancer; multiple myeloma, follicular lymphoma, low-grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma (including chronic lymphocytic leukemia), and high-grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma (); aggressive and nonaggressive prostate cancer (); and invasive and superficial urothelial cancers (). 20 18 19
As per the Journal guidelines, avalue of less than .05 was considered statistically significant, andvalues of less than .001 were written as “<.001.” All statistical tests were 2-sided. All analyses were undertaken using R version 3.6.1. P P
| Variable of interest | Controls | Cases |
|---|---|---|
| Cancer type, No. | ||
| Colorectal cancer | 813 | 813 |
| Gastric cancer | 165 | 165 |
| Kidney cancer | 139 | 139 |
| Lung cancer | 327 | 327 |
| Mature B-cell neoplasms | 423 | 423 |
| Prostate cancer | 846 | 846 |
| Urothelial cancers | 404 | 404 |
| Matching variables | ||
| Age at blood draw, median (IQR), y | 61 (54-66) | 61 (54-66) |
| Sex, No. (%) | ||
| Male | 2159 (69.3) | 2159 (69.3) |
| Female | 958 (30.7) | 958 (30.7) |
| Country of birth, No. (%) | ||
| Australia/New Zealand | 2,079 (66.7) | 2,094 (67.2) |
| Northern Europe | 211 (6.8) | 205 (6.6) |
| Southern Europe | 827 (26.5) | 818 (26.2) |
| Blood sample type, No. (%) | ||
| Dried blood spots | 2142 (68.7) | 2142 (68.7) |
| Peripheral blood mononuclear cells | 794 (25.5) | 794 (25.5) |
| Buffy coats | 181 (5.8) | 181 (5.8) |
| Potential confounders | ||
| Smoking, No. (%) | ||
| Current | 458 (14.7) | 485 (15.8) |
| Former | 1230 (39.5) | 1294 (41.5) |
| Never | 1429 (45.8) | 1338 (42.9) |
| Pack-years, median (IQR) | 2.4 (0-27.2) | 4.5 (0-31.1) |
| Age at starting, No. (%) | ||
| Never smoked | 1429 (45.8) | 1338 (42.9) |
| ≤16 y | 639 (20.5) | 672 (21.6) |
| 17-21 y | 749 (24.0) | 834 (26.8) |
| ≥22 y | 300 (9.6) | 273 (8.8) |
| Time since quitting, No. (%) | ||
| Never smoked | 1429 (45.8) | 1338 (42.9) |
| <5 y | 622 (20.0) | 675 (21.7) |
| 5-10 y | 862 (27.7) | 885 (28.4) |
| >10 y | 204 (6.5) | 219 (7.0) |
| Body mass index, median (IQR), kg/m2 | 27 (24-29) | 27 (25-30) |
| Height, median (IQR), m | 168 (161-174) | 169 (162-175) |
| Alcohol consumption, median (IQR), g/d | 4 (0-19) | 5 (0-19.3) |
| Diet quality: AHEI-2010, median (IQR) | 63 (56-71) | 63 (56-71) |
| Physical activity score, median (IQR) | 2 (1-4) | 2 (1-4) |
| Education score, median (IQR) | 4 (4-6) | 4 (4-6) |
| Socioeconomic status: SEIFA-10, median (IQR) | 5 (3-8) | 6 (3-9) |
| Cancer type | Cases, No. | PhenoAge | GrimAge | Telomere length | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | RR (95% CI) | P | RR (95% CI) | P | RR (95% CI) | P | ||
| Colorectal cancer | 813 | Model 1 2 | 1.22 (1.10 to 1.36) | <.001 | 1.20 (1.07 to 1.34) | 0.001 | 0.98 (0.88 to 1.09) | 0.68 |
| Model 2 3 | 1.22 (1.09 to 1.36) | <.001 | 1.19 (1.03 to 1.36) | 0.02 | 0.99 (0.89 to 1.10) | 0.9 | ||
| Model 3 4 | 1.18 (1.05 to 1.32) | 0.01 | 1.12 (0.96 to 1.30) | 0.15 | 1.02 (0.90 to 1.14) | 0.78 | ||
| Gastric cancer | 165 | Model 1 | 0.95 (0.77 to 1.18) | 0.65 | 1.03 (0.83 to 1.27) | 0.8 | 1.17 (0.92 to 1.48) | 0.19 |
| Model 2 | 0.96 (0.76 to 1.22) | 0.74 | 1.05 (0.78 to 1.41) | 0.74 | 1.25 (0.96 to 1.63) | 0.1 | ||
| Model 3 | 0.88 (0.67 to 1.15) | 0.34 | 0.95 (0.68 to 1.33) | 0.75 | 1.19 (0.86 to 1.64) | 0.29 | ||
| Kidney cancer | 139 | Model 1 | 1.25 (0.96 to 1.63) | 0.09 | 1.27 (0.98 to 1.65) | 0.07 | 1.07 (0.80 to 1.43) | 0.65 |
| Model 2 | 1.28 (0.94 to 1.76) | 0.12 | 1.32 (0.91 to 1.91) | 0.15 | 1.11 (0.78 to 1.57) | 0.57 | ||
| Model 3 | 1.25 (0.88 to 1.77) | 0.21 | 1.28 (0.84 to 1.95) | 0.25 | 1.19 (0.79 to 1.79) | 0.4 | ||
| Lung cancer | 327 | Model 1 | 1.23 (1.06 to 1.44) | 0.007 | 1.81 (1.45 to 2.26) | <.001 | 0.90 (0.76 to 1.06) | 0.19 |
| Model 2 | 1.23 (1.05 to 1.45) | 0.01 | 1.82 (1.44 to 2.30) | <.001 | 0.88 (0.74 to 1.04) | 0.13 | ||
| Model 3 | 1.25 (1.05 to 1.49) | 0.01 | 2.03 (1.56 to 2.64) | <.001 | 0.88 (0.73 to 1.06) | 0.19 | ||
| Mature B-cell neoplasms | 423 | Model 1 | 1.24 (1.07 to 1.43) | 0.003 | 0.95 (0.81 to 1.11) | 0.49 | 0.92 (0.81 to 1.05) | 0.24 |
| Model 2 | 1.27 (1.09 to 1.47) | 0.002 | 0.96 (0.78 to 1.17) | 0.66 | 0.91 (0.79 to 1.05) | 0.2 | ||
| Model 3 | 1.23 (1.04 to 1.45) | 0.02 | 1.03 (0.82 to 1.28) | 0.81 | 0.95 (0.81 to 1.13) | 0.57 | ||
| Prostate cancer | 846 | Model 1 | 0.98 (0.88 to 1.08) | 0.68 | 0.88 (0.79 to 0.98) | 0.02 | 1.06 (0.95 to 1.18) | 0.28 |
| Model 2 | 0.99 (0.89 to 1.10) | 0.85 | 0.88 (0.76 to 1.01) | 0.07 | 1.05 (0.94 to 1.17) | 0.43 | ||
| Model 3 | 1.00 (0.89 to 1.11) | 0.96 | 0.84 (0.72 to 0.98) | 0.02 | 1.06 (0.94 to 1.20) | 0.35 | ||
| Urothelial cancers | 404 | Model 1 | 1.21 (1.05 to 1.40) | 0.01 | 1.39 (1.19 to 1.61) | <.001 | 0.90 (0.77 to 1.04) | 0.14 |
| Model 2 | 1.17 (1.00 to 1.36) | 0.05 | 1.22 (1.00 to 1.48) | 0.05 | 0.95 (0.81 to 1.10) | 0.48 | ||
| Model 3 | 1.16 (0.99 to 1.37) | 0.07 | 1.22 (0.98 to 1.52) | 0.08 | 0.92 (0.78 to 1.09) | 0.33 | ||
| All types | 2994 5 | Model 1 | 1.14 (1.08 to 1.20) | <.001 | 1.13 (1.06 to 1.19) | <.001 | 0.98 (0.93 to 1.03) | 0.46 |
| Model 2 | 1.13 (1.07 to 1.19) | <.001 | 1.12 (1.05 to 1.20) | 0.001 | 0.98 (0.93 to 1.04) | 0.58 | ||
| Model 3 | 1.11 (1.05 to 1.18) | <.001 | 1.11 (1.03 to 1.20) | 0.01 | 1.00 (0.94 to 1.06) | 1 | ||
Results
The correlation with chronological age was 0.70, 0.80, and −0.55 for,, and methylation-predicted telomere length, respectively (, available online). For the age-adjusted measures, the correlation betweenandwas 0.34, and their correlations with methylation-predicted telomere length were −0.25 and −0.29, respectively. The correlations of the 3 measures with the 5 first-generation measures of epigenetic aging (all age adjusted) were in the same range (, available online). PhenoAge GrimAge PhenoAge GrimAge Supplementary Table 1 Supplementary Table 2
Hereafter, the age-adjusted measures are referred to as,, and telomere length. Their associations with cancer risk are presented in. In models without adjustment other than that provided by the matching variables, increasingwas associated with increased risk of several types of cancer, including colorectal cancer (per 1-SD RR = 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.10 to 1.36), kidney cancer (RR = 1.25, 95% CI = 0.96 to 1.63), lung cancer (RR = 1.23, 95% CI = 1.06 to 1.44), mature B-cell neoplasms (RR = 1.24, 95% CI = 1.07 to 1.43), urothelial cancer (RR = 1.21, 95% CI = 1.05 to 1.40), and cancer overall (RR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.08 to 1.20). These rate ratios were virtually the same after adjustment for a comprehensive set of cancer risk factors (cancer overall, RR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.07 to 1.19).biological aging showed similar associations tofor risk of colorectal, kidney cancer, and cancer overall. The association with risk of lung cancer was much stronger (per 1-SD RR = 1.81, 95% CI = 1.45 to 2.26). A possible inverse association with risk of prostate cancer was also observed (RR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.79 to 0.98). These associations were virtually the same in comprehensively adjusted models (lung cancer RR = 1.82, 95% CI = 1.44 to 2.30) except for urothelial cancer, for which estimates showed substantial attenuation while remaining quite strong (RR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.00 to 1.48). The RR also remained similar after additional adjustment for estimated white blood cell proportions for cancer overall (RR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.05 to 1.18), being somewhat smaller for colorectal cancer risk (: RR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.05 to 1.32;: RR = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.96 to 1.30) but larger for lung cancer risk (: RR = 2.03, 95% CI = 1.56 to 2.64) (). We found no association between methylation-predicted telomere length and risk of any type of cancer or cancer overall (all> .1). PhenoAge GrimAge PhenoAge GrimAge PhenoAge PhenoAge GrimAge GrimAge P Table 2 Table 2
The same results expressed per a 5-year increase forandand expressed per a 1 SD increase for the first-generation measures are shown in(available online), respectively. PhenoAge GrimAge Supplementary Tables 4 and 5
In analyses stratified by time since blood draw (), associations were somewhat larger within 5 years of blood draw for several cancer types for: colorectal cancer (RR = 1.48, 95% CI = 1.16 to 1.89,= .07), lung cancer (RR = 1.51, 95% CI = 1.05 to 2.18,= .18), and mature B-cell neoplasms (RR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.90,= .14), and this pattern was even clearer in the overall cancer analysis (RR = 1.29, 95% CI = 1.15 to 1.44; RR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.23; and RR = 1.09, 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.17 for ≤5, 5-10 years, and >10 years, respectively,= .004). A similar trend, albeit weaker, was observed for(RR = 1.19, 95% CI = 1.06 to 1.33; RR = 1.15, 95% CI = 1.04 to 1.28; RR = 1.08, 95% CI = 1.00 to 1.17, respectively,= .11). As shown in, most associations with cancer risk appeared relatively linear. Some evidence of nonlinearity was observed forand lung cancer risk (= .001), with a sharp increase at lower values and a plateau after the 75th percentile. A similar shape of association, while less marked, was also observed forand overall cancer risk (= .05). Table 3 Figure 1 PhenoAge P P P P GrimAge P GrimAge P GrimAge P linearity linearity linearity linearity linearity
Associations were generally consistent across cancer subtypes (, available online). Evidence of heterogeneity was observed for the association ofwith B-cell lymphoma subtypes (= .05, being stronger for low-grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma: RR = 1.90, 95% CI = 1.37 to 2.62). Weak evidence of heterogeneity was observed forand colorectal cancer risk (= .16; colon: RR = 1.16, 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.32; rectum: RR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.12 to 1.69). The inverse association observed betweenand prostate cancer risk was only apparent for nonaggressive disease (RR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.64 to 0.97,= 0.16). No association was found between methylation-predicted telomere length and risk of cancer subtypes. Supplementary Table 3 PhenoAge P PhenoAge P GrimAge P heterogeneity
Assessment of linearity. Relative cancer rates for age-adjusted,, and predicted telomere length for 7 cancer types and overall in the Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study. Model 1 was used (no other adjustment than that provided by the matching variables).-axis: methylation-based measures of aging. All measures were expressed as Z scores (mean = 0, SD = 1), so that approximately 95% of the values are between –2 and 2.-axis: Relative cancer rate, using as a reference (y = 1) the median value of the methylation-based measure distribution.values (P-lin) are from a likelihood ratio test comparing-spline and linear models. PhenoAge GrimAge x y P P
| PhenoAge | GrimAge | Telomere length | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cancer type | No. cases | Time since blood draw | RR95% CI 6 | P het 7 | P lin 7 | RR95% CI 6 | P het 7 | P lin 7 | RR95% CI 6 | P het 7 | P lin 7 |
| Colorectal cancer | 813 | ≤5 y | 1.48 (1.16 to 1.89) | 1.20 (0.94 to 1.52) | 0.95 (0.75 to 1.20) | ||||||
| 5-10 y | 1.23 (1.02 to 1.50) | 0.13 | 0.07 | 1.24 (1.03 to 1.50) | 0.89 | 0.32 | 1.05 (0.87 to 1.26) | 0.68 | 0.79 | ||
| >10 y | 1.11 (0.95 to 1.30) | 1.17 (0.99 to 1.38) | 0.95 (0.81 to 1.10) | ||||||||
| Gastric cancer | 165 | ≤ 5 y | 0.72 (0.42 to 1.26) | 0.99 (0.54 to 1.84) | 0.98 (0.57 to 1.71) | ||||||
| 5-10 y | 1.06 (0.71 to 1.59) | 0.52 | 0.48 | 0.93 (0.61 to 1.42) | 0.85 | 0.49 | 1.14 (0.73 to 1.77) | 0.74 | 0.6 | ||
| >10 y | 0.97 (0.73 to 1.30) | 1.08 (0.82 to 1.41) | 1.26 (0.91 to 1.74) | ||||||||
| Kidney cancer | 139 | ≤5 y | 1.29 (0.61 to 2.70) | 0.81 (0.46 to 1.42) | 1.68 (0.82 to 3.45) | ||||||
| 5-10 y | 1.33 (0.72 to 2.48) | 0.97 | 0.67 | 1.91 (1.06 to 3.44) | 0.09 | 0.26 | 1.01 (0.54 to 1.91) | 0.36 | 0.13 | ||
| >10 y | 1.22 (0.89 to 1.67) | 1.29 (0.89 to 1.87) | 0.95 (0.66 to 1.38) | ||||||||
| Lung cancer | 327 | ≤5 y | 1.51 (1.05 to 2.18) | 2.15 (1.28 to 3.61) | 0.76 (0.51 to 1.14) | ||||||
| 5-10 y | 1.13 (0.85 to 1.50) | 0.44 | 0.18 | 1.46 (1.00 to 2.12) | 0.4 | 0.92 | 0.97 (0.71 to 1.31) | 0.64 | 0.51 | ||
| >10 y | 1.20 (0.97 to 1.49) | 1.94 (1.40 to 2.69) | 0.91 (0.73 to 1.13) | ||||||||
| Mature B-cell neoplasms | 423 | ≤5 y | 1.38 (1.01 to 1.90) | 0.85 (0.58 to 1.25) | 0.94 (0.72 to 1.22) | ||||||
| 5-10 y | 1.21 (0.93 to 1.57) | 0.73 | 0.14 | 1.22 (0.87 to 1.71) | 0.22 | 0.3 | 1.03 (0.78 to 1.35) | 0.64 | 0.3 | ||
| >10 y | 1.20 (0.98 to 1.46) | 0.88 (0.71 to 1.09) | 0.88 (0.73 to 1.05) | ||||||||
| Prostate cancer | 846 | ≤5 y | 1.23 (0.96 to 1.57) | 0.90 (0.71 to 1.13) | 1.03 (0.82 to 1.30) | ||||||
| 5-10 y | 0.93 (0.77 to 1.13) | 0.13 | 0.13 | 0.94 (0.74 to 1.18) | 0.78 | 0.95 | 1.09 (0.88 to 1.34) | 0.95 | 0.95 | ||
| >10 y | 0.93 (0.81 to 1.07) | 0.85 (0.73 to 0.99) | 1.06 (0.91 to 1.23) | ||||||||
| Urothelial cancers | 404 | ≤5 y | 1.17 (0.94 to 1.47) | 1.70 (1.31 to 2.22) | 0.90 (0.72 to 1.13) | ||||||
| 5-10 y | 1.16 (0.89 to 1.51) | 0.76 | 0.93 | 1.07 (0.84 to 1.38) | 0.04 | 0.52 | 1.04 (0.80 to 1.36) | 0.22 | 0.47 | ||
| >10 y | 1.32 (0.99 to 1.75) | 1.48 (1.10 to 2.00) | 0.74 (0.54 to 1.00) | ||||||||
| All types | 2994 | ≤5 y | 1.29 (1.15 to 1.44) | 1.19 (1.06 to 1.33) | 0.95 (0.85 to 1.06) | ||||||
| 5-10 y | 1.12 (1.01 to 1.23) | 0.05 | 0.004 | 1.15 (1.04 to 1.28) | 0.36 | 0.11 | 1.05 (0.95 to 1.16) | 0.31 | 0.7 | ||
| >10 y | 1.09 (1.01 to 1.17) | 1.08 (1.00 to 1.17) | 0.96 (0.89 to 1.03) | ||||||||
Discussion
In this prospective study, including 3117 incident cancer cases, we observed relatively strong associations ofandwith risk of several cancer types; these appeared to be greater than in our study of first-generation epigenetic aging measures for risk of colorectal, lung, and urothelial cancer (, available online) (). For, a very strong association was observed with risk of lung cancer independently of several questionnaire-collected variables relating to smoking. An association stronger than forwas also observed with risk of urothelial cancer. A possible inverse association was observed betweenand (nonaggressive) prostate cancer. No association was observed between methylation-predicted telomere length and any cancer type or subtype. PhenoAge GrimAge GrimAge PhenoAge GrimAge Supplementary Table 5 10
andintegrate methylation measures at CpG sites associated with age, mortality, key disease risk factors, and biomarkers, which are also involved in the aetiology of cancer. Thatis enriched for smoking-associated methylation measures likely explains the very strong association observed with lung cancer risk; of note, however, case-control pairs were matched on smoking history in the lung cancer study, and the estimates were robust to further adjustment for questionnaire-collected variables. In the case of urothelial cancer, for which smoking is a strong risk factor, the association was partially attenuated after adjustment for smoking status, which was not a matching variable in that study. However, for bothand, there was overall little attenuation of risk estimates after adjustment for a comprehensive set of sociodemographic and lifestyle cancer risk factors, which may indicate that these measures capture information beyond self-reported questionnaires and on many adverse environmental and lifestyle factors that affect the methylome over the life course. To our knowledge, no data exist on the association ofandwith risk of cancers other than pancreatic cancer () and breast cancer; in the latter case, the Sister Study revealed a reasonably strong association with() (invasive disease; hazard ratio per 5-year increase: 1.13, which is of similar magnitude to our findings for colorectal, kidney, lung, mature B-cell, and urothelial cancers) (, available online) but not with(). Further adjustment for estimated white blood cell proportions slightly attenuated associations with cancer risk overall, although a larger association was observed forand lung cancer, similar to observations made forand risk of breast () and pancreatic cancer (). PhenoAge GrimAge GrimAge PhenoAge GrimAge PhenoAge GrimAge PhenoAge GrimAge GrimAge PhenoAge 29 30 Supplementary Table 4 31 30 29
Although our sample size was quite large, our findings should be replicated by other studies before these methylation-based measures can be used for cancer risk prediction. In the case of lung cancer, our rate ratio estimate of 1.8 per SD foris considerably larger than current estimates obtained for polygenic risk scores (). For other cancers, our estimates are lower than for polygenic risk scores for colorectal, gastric, B-cell lymphoma, and prostate cancer and similar or greater for kidney and urothelial cancer (). Combining polygenic and methylation aging scores may therefore be required to summarize risk associated with genetic factors and lifestyle or environmental exposures accumulated over the lifetime. Our findings also suggest thatandmay be more valuable biomarkers than the first-generation aging clocks (,) and generally show a linear association with risk. That we observed stronger associations within 5 years of blood draw for, and to a lesser extent for, suggests that these aging measures may have more utility for assessment of short-term risk, but corroborating data are required to confirm this. In our previous report on the first-generation measures (), we found at best weak evidence of effect modification by time since blood draw. Consistent with this, it was observed that Horvath epigenetic aging was largely determined before adulthood (), and this might not hold true forandsince these predictors were developed to predict a composite phenotype (age and clinical markers). Finally, although these methylation-based predictors show some degree of correlation with age in other tissues (), they were developed and validated in blood so at this stage should be considered as biomarkers of future cancer risk and extrapolation to cancer or normal-adjacent tissue made with caution (), because DNA methylation usually shows substantial variation across tissues (). GrimAge PhenoAge GrimAge PhenoAge GrimAge PhenoAge GrimAge 32-35 32-35 10 30 10 36 11 37 38
We also used DNA methylation measures at a set of 140 CpGs to estimate telomere length. The correlation of this predictor with measured telomere length in independent data has been shown to be moderate (= approximately 0.40), but its correlation with age appeared stronger than was the case for measured telomere length (= approximately −0.75 vs −0.35), which is consistent with our findings (correlation with age= −0.56). Our findings of no association between telomere length and cancer risk are consistent with those reported in a Danish prospective study of 3142 cancer cases of any type (). In a Mendelian randomization study and meta-analysis by Haycock et al., which included a larger number of cancer cases and types, genetically predicted telomere length was strongly positively associated with risks of lung and bladder cancers, which is inconsistent with our findings. Our results were nevertheless consistent with Mendelian randomization estimates for other cancer types and with estimates from prospective studies for all cancer types, all showing null or weak associations with cancer risk (,). r r r 14 13 14
We conclude that biological aging, as defined by the methylation-based measuresand, is associated with risk of several cancer types, including colorectal, lung, kidney and urothelial, and mature B-cell neoplasms, independent of key demographic, lifestyle, and socioeconomic variables. These measures, derived using a limited number of methylation sites across the genome, have the potential to improve cancer risk prediction, particularly in contexts where relevant cancer biomarkers have not been extensively measured. PhenoAge GrimAge
Funding
This work was supported by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) grants 1164455. MCCS cohort recruitment was funded by VicHealth and Cancer Council Victoria. The MCCS was further supported by Australian NHMRC grants 209057, 251553, and 504711 and by infrastructure provided by Cancer Council Victoria. The nested case-control methylation studies were supported by the NHMRC grants 1011618, 1026892, 1027505, 1050198, 1043616, and 1074383. S.L. is a Victorian Cancer Agency Early Career Research Fellow (ECRF19020). M.C.S. is an NHMRC Senior Research Fellow (1061177). This work also received funding from Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Notes
The funders had no role in the design of the study; the collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data; the writing of the manuscript; and the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Role of the funder:
: None declared. Disclosures
Conceptualization: all authors; data collection and curation: JKB, EMW and JEJ; formal analysis and visualization: PAD; methodology: all authors; funding and resources: DS, EM, NWD, DDB, AMH, DRE, GGG, MCS, and RLM, writing—original draft: PAD; writing—review & editing: all authors. Author contributions:
Cases were ascertained through the Victorian Cancer Registry (VCR) and the Australian Cancer Database (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare). Acknowledgements:
Data Availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.