Cardiac and systemic biological age models compared for prevalent cardiovascular disease
In 1,830 participants, cardiac and systemic biological age models captured partly complementary aging signals; both were associated with prevalent cardiovascular disease in cross-sectional analyses, and a combined multimodal model predicted chronological age best. [1]
Automatic summary · not editorially reviewed
The key findings
The study enrolled 1,830 participants (77.81% male; mean age 55.87 ± 11.07 years) who underwent blood chemistry testing and echocardiography. [1]
The multimodal model achieved the best age-prediction performance (mean absolute error 4.29 years; R = 0.70), while cardiac and systemic biological ages showed only partial overlap (R = 0.25). [1]
Cardiac biological age acceleration showed a numerically larger association with prevalent cardiovascular disease than systemic acceleration (odds ratio 1.36, 95% CI 1.23–1.52 vs. 1.31, 1.20–1.43). [1]
The source at a glance
- Study type / format
- Cross-sectional study using supervised machine learning models (abstract)
- Population / context
- 1,830 participants undergoing blood chemistry testing and echocardiography; 937 apparently healthy participants for model development; 810 CVD cases and 1,020 CVD-negative participants for CVD analyses.
- Summary based on
- Study abstract
- Original publication
- August 25, 2026
Biological age models in 1,830 participants
The study enrolled 1,830 people (77.81% male; mean age 55.87 ± 11.07 years) who underwent blood chemistry testing and echocardiography. Cardiac, systemic and multimodal biological age models were trained with supervised machine learning and 20-fold cross-validation to predict chronological age. Inputs were 15 echocardiographic indices, 73 blood-based indices, or their combination. Biological age acceleration was derived using age-bias correction functions fitted in an apparently healthy reference cohort and standardized before analysis. Models were developed in 937 apparently healthy participants.
Supporting source [1]
Age prediction accuracy and leading contributors
Cardiac biological age showed moderate accuracy (mean absolute error 6.08 years; R = 0.34), with late diastolic transmitral flow velocity (A1) and septal early diastolic mitral annular velocity (septal e') as the leading contributors. Systemic biological age performed better (mean absolute error 4.60 years; R = 0.65), led by estimated glomerular filtration rate and creatinine. The multimodal model had the best age-prediction performance (mean absolute error 4.29 years; R = 0.70). Cardiac and systemic biological ages showed only partial overlap (R = 0.25).
Supporting source [1]
Cross-sectional CVD associations and subtype limits
Associations between biological age acceleration and prevalent cardiovascular disease (ICD-10 I00–I99) were assessed with multivariable logistic regression, comparing 810 cases with 1,020 CVD-negative participants. Cardiac acceleration showed a numerically larger association than systemic acceleration (odds ratio 1.36, 95% confidence interval 1.23–1.52 vs. 1.31, 1.20–1.43). The multimodal model was also associated with prevalent CVD (odds ratio 1.40, 95% confidence interval 1.28–1.53). Subtype-specific associations were broadly directionally consistent; significance was reached for hypertension, while estimates for smaller subtypes remained imprecise. These are cross-sectional associations, not evidence of causation.
Supporting source [1]
How to interpret this
Abstract only; the full text was not reviewed. The cardiovascular disease analyses were cross-sectional, so associations do not establish causation. Subtype estimates beyond hypertension were imprecise, and the sample was predominantly male.
Based on the study abstract; the full paper, tables and supplementary data were not reviewed.
Source & supporting passages
Wang Y, Zhu H, Liu X, Yuan C, Liu J, Wang X, Duan Y. · europepmc.org · August 25, 2026