Common methods of biological age estimation.
Common methods of biological age estimation.
复制标题
DOI：
10.2147/cia.s134921
复制
发表时间：
2017
影响因子：
3.6
通讯作者：
Chen X
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Jia L;Zhang W;Chen X
目前，还没有单一的指标可以作为评价老化过程的黄金指标。生物年龄（BA）是将几种重要的生物标志物与数学模型相结合的一种年龄估计方法，已被提出用于代替实足年龄（CA）。常用的BA估计方法包括多元线性回归（MLR）、主成分分析（PCA）、Hochschild方法和Klemera and Doubal方法（KDM）。这四种方法的根本区别在于CA的作用和衰老生物标志物的选择标准。在MLR和PCA中，CA被作为选择标准和独立指标。Hochschild方法和KDM有相似的概念，使CA成为一个自变量。以往的研究要么简单地用一种方法构建BA模型，要么将四种方法放在一起进行比较。然而，综述尚未系统地说明和比较这四种方法。由于BA模型是一种潜在的用于临床的衰老估计方法，可用于预测疾病的发病和预后，提高老年人的生活质量，实现老年化的成功。在此，我们总结了前人的BA研究，说明了基本的统计步骤，并深入讨论了四种常用的BA估计方法的比较。
At present, no single indicator could be used as a golden index to estimate aging process. The biological age (BA), which combines several important biomarkers with mathematical modeling, has been proposed for >50 years as an aging estimation method to replace chronological age (CA). The common methods used for BA estimation include the multiple linear regression (MLR), the principal component analysis (PCA), the Hochschild’s method, and the Klemera and Doubal’s method (KDM). The fundamental differences in these four methods are the roles of CA and the selection criteria of aging biomarkers. In MLR and PCA, CA is treated as the selection criterion and an independent index. The Hochschild’s method and KDM share a similar concept, making CA an independent variable. Previous studies have either simply constructed the BA model by one or compared the four methods together. However, reviews have yet to illustrate and compare the four methods systematically. Since the BA model is a potential estimation of aging for clinical use, such as predicting onset and prognosis of diseases, improving the elderly’s living qualities, and realizing successful aging, here we summarize previous BA studies, illustrate the basic statistical steps, and thoroughly discuss the comparisons among the four common BA estimation methods.