Deep biomarkers of human aging: Application of deep neural networks to biomarker development

By E. Putin, Polina Mamoshina, Alexander M. Aliper, Mikhail Korzinkin, A. Moskalev, A. Kolosov, A. Ostrovskiy, Charles R. Cantor, J. Vijg, A. Zhavoronkov. Aging, 2016

350 citations recorded by the source corpus.

One of the major impediments in human aging research is the absence of a comprehensive and actionable set of biomarkers that may be targeted and measured to track the effectiveness of therapeutic interventions. In this study, we designed a modular ensemble of 21 deep neural networks (DNNs) of varying depth, structure and optimization to predict human chronological age using a basic blood test. To train the DNNs, we used over 60,000 samples from common blood biochemistry and cell count tests from routine health exams performed by a single laboratory and linked to chronological age and sex. The best performing DNN in the ensemble demonstrated 81.5 % epsilon-accuracy r = 0.90 with R2 = 0.80 and MAE = 6.07 years in predicting chronological age within a 10 year frame, while the entire ensemble achieved 83.5% epsilon-accuracy r = 0.91 with R2 = 0.82 and MAE = 5.55 years. The ensemble also identified the 5 most important markers for predicting human chronological age: albumin, glucose, alkaline phosphatase, urea and erythrocytes. To allow for public testing and evaluate real-life performance of the predictor, we developed an online system available at http://www.aging.ai. The ensemble approach may facilitate integration of multi-modal data linked to chronological age and sex that may lead to simple, minimally invasive, and affordable methods of tracking integrated biomarkers of aging in humans and performing cross-species feature importance analysis.

Subfields: Aging, Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0188e8d525e525b743ef89d96727a342dfaa4480

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

  1. Polina Mamoshina
  2. Daniele Ravì
  3. Lucy Ojomoko
  4. Javier Andreu-Perez
  5. Artem V. Artemov
  6. Yury Yanovich
  7. Alex Aliper
  8. Charence Wong

Citations in the corpus