Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41403206›Full record

ArticleEpigenomics2025

From population science to the clinic? Limits of epigenetic clocks as personal biomarkers.

Abner T Apsley, Laura Etzel, Qiaofeng Ye, Idan Shalev

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Epigenomics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Abner T ApsleyNSF Science and Technology Center for Quantitative Cell Biology, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3420-7491
Laura EtzelDepartment of Biobehavioral Health, Penn State University, University Park, PA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6958-7052
Qiaofeng YeDepartment of Biobehavioral Health, Penn State University, University Park, PA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5310-5306
Idan ShalevDepartment of Biobehavioral Health, Penn State University, University Park, PA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0773-4835

Funding

Early Life Experience and Childhood Telomere Biology: A Longitudinal Study of Developmental Context and Behavioral MediatorsR01NR019610 · NINR · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI GARRETT-PETERS, PATRICIA, SHALEV, IDAN · 2021 to 2025
$2.7M
The impact of stress and caregiver sensitivity on infant cellular aging in a population of under-resourced families: A randomized controlled trial.R01NR021020 · NINR · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Carrie Dow-Smith, MONICA L OXFORD · 2024 to 2026
$1.6M
Investigating Multiple Biological Mechanisms of Obesity in a High-Risk Pediatric Cohort with Confirmed MaltreatmentR01DK139357 · NIDDK · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY, THE · PI Idan Shalev · 2025 to 2026
$1.6M
NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK139357NINR NIH HHS R01 NR019610NINR NIH HHS R01 NR021020
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Epigenetic clocks are machine-learning algorithms which use DNA methylation patterns to predict aging-related phenotypes, such as chronological age, composite indicators of health, time-to-death, and the pace of biological aging. These clocks have been instrumental at the population level in revealing how disease risk emerges from behavioral, environmental, and psychosocial factors, and how certain anti-aging interventions may alter those trajectories. Given the success of epigenetic clocks at the population level, it is reasonable to assume they might also hold value as individual-level biomarkers. We contend, however, that fundamental technical and biological properties of these algorithms prohibit their current use at the individual level. Technical concerns include methods of clock construction, sample collection and processing, data preprocessing, and computational implementations. Biological considerations include the nature of DNA methylation and its dynamics, variation across developmental periods, tissue specificity, and sensitivity to environmental/sociodemographic contexts. We show that clocks fail to meet common standards for clinical utility compared with established biomarkers, and that applying epigenetic clocks in individual-level decision making can be uninformative and potentially harmful. Finally, we argue that even if all technical and biological hurdles can be overcome, epigenetic clocks, as we currently understand them, should not be used to make individual-level decisions.

Indexed as

BiomarkersEpigenesis, GeneticEpigenomicsAgingDNA MethylationHumansMachine LearningBiomarkersbiological agingbiomarkersDNA methylationEpigenetic clocksmachine learningtranslational science

Identifiers

PMID41403206
PMCPMC12714307

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.