Potential reversal of biological age in women following an 8-week methylation-supportive diet and lifestyle program: a case series

Abstract

Here we report on a case series of six women who completed a methylation-supportive diet and lifestyle program designed to impact DNA methylation and measures of biological aging. The intervention consisted of an 8-week program that included diet, sleep, exercise and relaxation guidance, supplemental probiotics and phytonutrients and nutritional coaching. DNA methylation and biological age analysis (Horvath DNAmAge clock (2013), normalized using the SeSAMe pipeline [a]) was conducted on blood samples at baseline and at the end of the 8-week period. Five of the six participants exhibited a biological age reduction of between 1.22 and 11.01 years from their baseline biological age. There was a statistically significant (p=.039) difference in the participants' mean biological age before (55.83 years) and after (51.23 years) the 8-week diet and lifestyle intervention, with an average decrease of 4.60 years. The average chronological age at the start of the program was 57.9 years and all but one participant had a biological age younger than their chronological age at the start of the program, suggesting that biological age changes were unrelated to disease improvement and instead might be attributed to underlying aging mechanisms.

Micronutrient regulation of the DNA methylome

“…These same DNA methylation signatures are also being used to investigate the impact of lifestyle factors such as diet and nutritional status on disease risk and aging (Quach et al, 2017;Lu et al, 2019;Fitzgerald et al, 2021) that may reveal potential therapeutic interventions to slow aging phenotypes and agerelated diseases, including cancer. Plant-based, Mediterranean, and methylation-supportive diets can rejuvenate DNA methylation aging signatures, decreasing chronological age predictions by 1-10 years in as little as 8 weeks of intervention (Gensous et al, 2020;Dwaraka et al, 2023;Fitzgerald et al, 2023).…”

Biological age is superior to chronological age in predicting hospital mortality of the critically ill

“…Second, our results showed that the difference between PhenoAge and chronological age after indexed to the local context had a relatively linear ‘dose-related’ relationship to hospital mortality that did not reach a plateau until up to a 20-year gap. Emerging studies have demonstrated that phenotypical age is more like a dynamic clock [ 5 ]; this would also mean that phenotypical age is like a quantitative assessment of physiological reserve, and there is an opportunity for interventions to ‘dial back’ the phenotypical age of critically ill patients, like non-critically ill patients [ 22 , 23 ]. A recent study also showed that Clonal Hematopoiesis of Indeterminate Potential (CHIP) had a direct correlation with biological age, including the PhenoAge [ 3 ], providing strong biological rationale to support the prognostic significance of PhenoAge.…”

Biomarkers of Aging and Relevant Evaluation Techniques: A Comprehensive Review

“…Recently, epigenetic clocks have been used in the randomized clinical trials to validate the effects of an interventions [ 47 ]. A series of subsequent clinical studies further emphasized the importance of studying potential changes in DNAm levels during aging [ 48 , 49 ]. In general, epigenetic age prediction is easier and more effective.…”