An unbiased comparison of 14 epigenetic clocks in relation to 174 incident disease outcomes

Christos Mavrommatis, Daniel W. Belsky, Kejun Ying, Mahdi Moqri, Archie Campbell, Anne Richmond, Vadim N. Gladyshev, Tamir Chandra, Daniel L. McCartney, Riccardo E. Marioni

Nature Communications12/16/2025·DOI·Read paper

Abstract

Abstract Epigenetic Clocks have been trained to predict chronological age, healthspan and lifespan. Such clocks are often analysed in relation to disease outcomes – typically using small datasets and a limited number of clocks. Here, we present a large-scale ( n = 18,859), unbiased comparison of 14 widely used clocks as predictors of 174 incident disease outcomes and all-cause mortality over 10-years of follow up. Second- and third-generation clocks significantly outperform first-generation clocks, which have limited applications in disease settings. Of the 176 Bonferroni significant (P < 0.05/174) associations from fully-adjusted Cox regression models controlling for lifestyle and socioeconomic measures, there are 27 diseases (including primary lung cancer and diabetes) where the hazard ratio for the clock exceeds the clock’s association with all-cause mortality. Furthermore, for 32 of the 176 findings, adding the clock to a null classification model with traditional risk factors significantly increases the classification accuracy by >1%. However, there is minimal evidence for interactions between the clocks and sex or smoking (ever/never) status. Second- and third-generation epigenetic clocks show promise for disease risk prediction, particularly in relation to respiratory and liver-based conditions.

Make this part of your paper trail

Save this paper to a shelf, write a review, and keep your own notes.

Community Reviews

No reviews yet. Be the first to review this paper!