ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2024
Leveraging DNA methylation to create Epigenetic Biomarker Proxies that inform clinical care: A new framework for Precision Medicine.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dietary pattern modifies associations between dietary factors and pace of epigenetic aging.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Epigenetic clocks and DNA methylation biomarkers of brain health and disease.Nature reviews. Neurology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The lack of accurate, cost-effective, and clinically relevant biomarkers remains a major barrier to incorporating omic data into clinical practice. Previous studies have shown that DNA methylation algorithms have utility as surrogate measures for selected proteins and metabolites. We expand upon this work by creating DNAm surrogates, termed epigenetic biomarker proxies (EBPs), across clinical laboratories, the metabolome, and the proteome. After screening >2,500 biomarkers, we trained and tested 1,694 EBP models and assessed their incident relationship with 12 chronic diseases and mortality, followed up to 15 years. We observe broad clinical relevance: 1) there are 1,292 and 4,863 FDR significant incident and prevalent associations, respectively; 2) most of these associations are replicated when looking at the lab-based counterpart, and > 62% of the shared associations have higher odds and hazard ratios to disease outcomes than their respective observed measurements; 3) EBPs of current clinical biochemistries detect deviations from normal with high sensitivity and specificity. Longitudinal EBPs also demonstrate significant changes corresponding to the changes observed in lab-based counterparts. Using two cohorts and > 30,000 individuals, we found that EBPs validate across healthy and sick populations. While further study is needed, these findings highlight the potential of implementing EBPs in a simple, low-cost, high-yield framework that benefits clinical medicine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.