Exploring Biomarker Correlations in the Aging Process

Research Article

Austin Aging Res. 2025; 4(1): 1008.

Exploring Biomarker Correlations in the Aging Process

Naik NN and Suresh P*

Acasta Health Pvt Ltd, India

*Corresponding author: Poosala Suresh, Acasta Health Pvt Ltd, VCR Park, Plot No. 9&12 Layout vide TP No. 9/74, Survey No. 119, Krishna Nagar, Maharani Peta, Visakhapatnam, AP 530002, India Tel: +919100851758; Email: suresh@acastahealth.com

Received: February 20, 2025; Accepted: March 12, 2025; Published: March 17, 2025

Abstract

Aging has traditionally been perceived as an inevitable decline, marked by the coexistence of wisdom and frailty. However, emerging research reveals that aging is not merely an unavoidable process but a condition with identifiable and modifiable characteristics. While debates on a single underlying cause of aging remain unresolved, consensus has been reached on 12 biological hallmarks of aging, each representing a measurable facet of the aging process that informs targeted interventions. This systematic review focuses on the interplay between key genomic and proteomic biomarkers associated with these hallmarks of aging. By analysing biomarker correlations and their implications, the review offers critical insights into mechanisms influencing biological age, health span, and longevity. A comprehensive methodology was employed to identify trends, gaps, and opportunities in biomarker studies. These findings underscore the importance of multi-omics integration in unravelling the complexities of aging. By bridging genomic, proteomic, metabolomic, and functional biomarkers, this approach provides a comprehensive understanding of the aging process. It establishes a foundation for innovative interventions to promote healthy aging, extend health span, and enhance overall quality of life.

Keywords: Aging biomarkers; Proteomics; Genomics; Systems biology; Multi-omics integration; Healthspan; Longevity

Introduction

In recent decades, there has been a steady increase in the average lifespan, given advancements in healthcare and medicine. Thus, the world population is witnessing a shift towards an older population. In biological or physiological terms, aging can be defined as the declining functional capacity of the human body over time, caused by the accumulation of various molecular and cellular damage and increasing loss of cellular and tissue homeostasis [1]. On the other hand, chronological age (CA) is the number of years since an individual has been alive. The chronological age and biological age of an individual might not be the same, as the rate of aging might differ among individuals depending on various internal and external factors. For example, if an individual is healthy and fit, their biological age may well be lower than or same as their chronological age. However, if an individual is sedentary, chronically ill, or in poor physical condition, their biological age may be higher than their chronological age, indicating possible future risk of certain age-related complications.

Moreover, because the aging process is usually slow and gradual, determining biological age and aging rate presents opportunities and options for successful and healthy aging with appropriate guided lifestyle changes [2]. Biological age (BA) conveys the physiological status of your body, which is affected by diet, exercise, lifestyle, comorbidities or predisposition for comorbidities, external environmental stressors, and the natural aging process. It is an indicator of overall health and wellness and of that of various organs. In addition, BA indicates the physiological aging rate of an individual compared to that expected for the corresponding chronological age, thus leading to an altered risk of experiencing age-related complications [1]. BA also acts as a guide to making personalized lifestyle changes to improve overall health and prevent or delay aging-related indications. Biological age (BA) is important for clinical monitoring, community surveillance, and evaluating interventions to delay or prevent agingrelated disorders and disabilities. Clinical and cellular biomarkers can be measured and integrated in years using mathematical models to display an individual’s BA [3]. This disparity between chronological and biological age underscores the importance of understanding the mechanisms behind aging and developing strategies for successful aging.

In recent decades, different aging biomarkers have been studied and explored in population studies to estimate biological age, both of organs and the overall body. The biological age-determining methods/ models based on such studies are often called “age-predictive methods” or commonly referred to as “aging clocks” [1]. A comprehensive review Jylhävä et.al summarized current state-of-the-art findings considering various types of biological age predictors. Jylhävä et.al stated that the existing biological age predictors provide additional evidence on individual aging independent of their chronological age and predict health outcomes such as physical function, cognition, morbidity, and mortality. It is imperative to have a validated set of markers to predict biological age that provides insight into health span rather than only focusing on mortality and lifespan, thus moving the focus towards successful and healthy aging. Ideally, the marker combinations could include a set of physiologic, genomic, and proteomic markers [4].

In line with the same, a varied set of markers predicting biological age is more relevant and accurate since aging is a complex process occurring at all levels of an individual. Biomarkers derived from various hallmarks of aging or ‘mechanistic underpinnings of aging’ present the possibility of measuring the aging processes before clinically recognizable symptoms are visible [5].

Human aging is a complex phenomenon and exploring the intricacies of aging requires a multidisciplinary approach combining biology, genetics, cellular physiology among other fields. Researchers have extensively studied some of the molecular mechanism underlying aging, such as telomere shortening, DNA damage, and oxidative stress and their contribution to the decline in cellular function and the development of age-related diseases [6, 7, 8]. The study of aging, given the complexity of the subject, involves understanding the interplay between genetic factors, environmental influences, and lifestyle choices. Scientific advancements have highlighted potential interventions to support healthy aging, including caloric restriction and pharmaceutical approaches targeting cellular pathways [ 9, 10]. By employing a scientific approach, researchers strive to uncover the mechanisms of human aging, laying the groundwork for strategies to improve well-being and extend health span in an aging population.

This review examines biological aging, a process influenced by genetics, lifestyle, and environmental stressors. Comprehensive assessments of biological age increasingly utilize aging clocks, which integrate data from multiple biomarkers to provide a holistic understanding of the aging process. By synthesizing evidence on key genomic and proteomic biomarkers, this review highlights their interrelationships and relevance in advancing aging research. It also delves into the hallmarks of aging, exploring how each biomarker discussed is intricately connected to these hallmarks. By focusing on a select few genomic and proteomic markers, the review underscores the critical role of biomarkers in unravelling the complexities of aging and provides valuable insights into their applications for aging research and targeted interventions.

Methodology

We conducted a comprehensive search across major scientific databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Articles were identified using keywords such as “aging biomarkers,” “biological age,” “genomic biomarkers,” “proteomic biomarkers,” and “multi-omics in aging,” with Boolean operators and truncation applied to refine the search results. The inclusion criteria focused on articles and reviews discussing the roles of genomic and proteomic biomarkers in aging, as well as studies providing insights into biomarker correlations. Literature unrelated to aging biomarkers and non-English publications were excluded.

The findings from the selected studies were narratively organized, with data categorized by biomarker types and analysed for common themes and correlations. This approach highlighted key trends, significant insights, and gaps in the current literature, laying the groundwork for identifying future research directions in aging biomarker studies. A shortlist of genomic and proteomic biomarkers was created based on their association with the hallmarks of aging.

Hallmarks of Aging

Experts have long debated a single underlying cause for aging; instead, they have reached a consensus on multiple biological “hallmarks of aging.” Today, we recognize 12 hallmarks of aging (Figure 1), each representing a measurable aspect of the process that can guide targeted interventions and support healthier, more resilient aging. These hallmarks are interconnected among each other [11]. Initially nine molecular, cellular, and systemic hallmarks of aging: DNA instability, telomere attrition, epigenetic alterations, loss of proteostasis, deregulated nutrient-sensing, mitochondrial dysfunction, cellular senescence, stem cell exhaustion, and altered intercellular communication, were suggested in 2013 [12]. A decade later, three additional hallmarks of aging: disabled macro autophagy, chronic inflammation, and dysbiosis were added, and some reorganizations were introduced to the existing nine hallmarks of aging [11].