| Title |
A framework for selection of blood-based biomarkers for geroscience-guided clinical trials: report from the TAME Biomarkers Workgroup
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
GeroScience, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11357-018-0042-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jamie N. Justice, Luigi Ferrucci, Anne B. Newman, Vanita R. Aroda, Judy L. Bahnson, Jasmin Divers, Mark A. Espeland, Santica Marcovina, Michael N. Pollak, Stephen B. Kritchevsky, Nir Barzilai, George A. Kuchel |
| Abstract |
Recent advances indicate that biological aging is a potentially modifiable driver of late-life function and chronic disease and have led to the development of geroscience-guided therapeutic trials such as TAME (Targeting Aging with MEtformin). TAME is a proposed randomized clinical trial using metformin to affect molecular aging pathways to slow the incidence of age-related multi-morbidity and functional decline. In trials focusing on clinical end-points (e.g., disease diagnosis or death), biomarkers help show that the intervention is affecting the underlying aging biology before sufficient clinical events have accumulated to test the study hypothesis. Since there is no standard set of biomarkers of aging for clinical trials, an expert panel was convened and comprehensive literature reviews conducted to identify 258 initial candidate biomarkers of aging and age-related disease. Next selection criteria were derived and applied to refine this set emphasizing: (1) measurement reliability and feasibility; (2) relevance to aging; (3) robust and consistent ability to predict all-cause mortality, clinical and functional outcomes; and (4) responsiveness to intervention. Application of these selection criteria to the current literature resulted in a short list of blood-based biomarkers proposed for TAME: IL-6, TNFα-receptor I or II, CRP, GDF15, insulin, IGF1, cystatin C, NT-proBNP, and hemoglobin A1c. The present report provides a conceptual framework for the selection of blood-based biomarkers for use in geroscience-guided clinical trials. This work also revealed the scarcity of well-vetted biomarkers for human studies that reflect underlying biologic aging hallmarks, and the need to leverage proposed trials for future biomarker discovery and validation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 11% |
| United States | 3 | 11% |
| China | 1 | 4% |
| Chile | 1 | 4% |
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 4% |
| Singapore | 1 | 4% |
| Italy | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 15 | 56% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 18 | 67% |
| Scientists | 6 | 22% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 7% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 219 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 219 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 41 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 30 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 23 | 11% |
| Other | 15 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 4% |
| Other | 37 | 17% |
| Unknown | 64 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 41 | 19% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 23 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 22 | 10% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 10 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 4% |
| Other | 30 | 14% |
| Unknown | 84 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,414,038
of 24,620,470 outputs
Outputs from GeroScience
#159
of 1,473 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,886
of 339,369 outputs
Outputs of similar age from GeroScience
#2
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,620,470 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,473 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 339,369 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.