Muscle epigenetic clock in ICU survivors at 5 years and long-term muscle strength
Five years after ICU discharge, former critically ill patients showed higher muscle epigenetic age than matched healthy controls, but this measure was not associated with their poor long-term muscle strength. [1]
Automatic summary · not editorially reviewed
The key findings
Former ICU patients at 5-year follow-up showed significantly higher muscle epigenetic age, epigenetic-minus-chronological-age difference and epigenetic age acceleration than controls matched for age and sex. [1]
In adjusted models, higher muscle epigenetic age measures did not substantially contribute to differentially expressed muscle RNAs in former patients versus controls. [1]
The muscle epigenetic clock measures were not associated with poor long-term muscle strength, and the authors call for other muscle-specific biological predictors. [1]
The source at a glance
- Study type / format
- Abstract of a matched observational comparison with multivariable models
- Population / context
- Former ICU patients at 5-year follow-up (N = 118; 97 matched) and healthy controls (N = 160; 97 matched), aged 18–89 years.
- Summary based on
- Study abstract
- Original publication
- July 1, 2026
ICU survivors versus matched controls at 5 years
The study compared skeletal muscle DNA-methylation data from former ICU patients at 5-year follow-up (N = 118) with healthy controls (N = 160), aged 18–89 years, using the MEATv2 muscle-specific epigenetic clock. For the main comparison, 97 former patients were propensity score-matched to 97 controls for age and sex. Former patients showed significantly higher muscle epigenetic age, epigenetic minus chronological age, and epigenetic age acceleration than matched controls.
Supporting source [1]
No link to altered RNA or weak muscle strength
In adjusted multivariable models, higher muscle epigenetic age, the epigenetic-minus-chronological-age difference, or epigenetic age acceleration did not substantially contribute to differentially expressed muscle RNAs in former patients compared with controls. These measures were also not associated with the poor long-term muscle strength. The authors conclude that the muscle-specific epigenetic clock did not capture the molecular changes linked to long-term muscle weakness.
Supporting source [1]
Abstract-only scope and need for other predictors
This explainer is based only on the abstract; the full text was not reviewed. The abstract reports a matched comparison of muscle DNA-methylation data and adjusted models, but does not give effect sizes, matching details beyond age and sex, or the full model structure. The authors state that other muscle-specific biological predictors of age-related physical impairment are needed. The registration is ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00512122.
Supporting source [1]
How to interpret this
Abstract only; the full text was not reviewed. Effect sizes, matching details beyond age and sex, and full model structure are not reported in the abstract. Associations are not causes.
Based on the study abstract; the full paper, tables and supplementary data were not reviewed.
Source & supporting passages
Uzun Ayar C, Derese I, Van den Berghe G, Vanhorebeek I. · europepmc.org · July 1, 2026