Impact of paternal education on epigenetic ageing in adolescence and mid-adulthood: a multi-cohort study in the USA and Mexico.

BACKGROUND: Both parental and neighbourhood socio-economic status (SES) are linked to poorer health independently of personal SES measures, but the biological mechanisms are unclear. Our objective was to examine these influences via epigenetic age acceleration (EAA)-the discrepancy between chronological and epigenetic ages. METHODS: We examined three USA-based [Coronary Artery Risk Disease in Adults (CARDIA) study, Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study (FFCWS) and Programming Research in Obesity, Growth, Environment and Social Stressors (PROGRESS)] and one Mexico-based (Project Viva) cohort. DNA methylation was measured using Illumina arrays, personal/parental SES by questionnaire and neighbourhood disadvantage from geocoded address. In CARDIA, we examined the most strongly associated personal, parental and neighbourhood SES measures with EAA (Hannum's method) at study years 15 and 20 separately and combined using a generalized estimating equation (GEE) and compared with other EAA measures (Horvath's EAA, PhenoAge and GrimAge calculators, and DunedinPoAm). RESULTS: EAA was associated with paternal education in CARDIA [GEEs: ßsome college = -1.01 years (-1.91, -0.11) and ß

Collaborative Cohort of Cohorts for COVID-19 Research (C4R) Study: Study Design.

The Collaborative Cohort of Cohorts for COVID-19 Research (C4R) is a national prospective study of adults at risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) comprising 14 established United States (US) prospective cohort studies. For decades, C4R cohorts have collected extensive data on clinical and subclinical diseases and their risk factors, including behavior, cognition, biomarkers, and social determinants of health. C4R will link this pre-COVID phenotyping to information on SARS-CoV-2 infection and acute and post-acute COVID-related illness. C4R is largely population-based, has an age range of 18-108 years, and broadly reflects the racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and geographic diversity of the US. C4R is ascertaining severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and COVID-19 illness using standardized questionnaires, ascertainment of COVID-related hospitalizations and deaths, and a SARS-CoV-2 serosurvey via dried blood spots. Master protocols leverage existing robust retention rates for telephone and in-person examinations, and high-quality events surveillance. Extensive pre-pandemic data minimize referral, survival, and recall bias. Data are being harmonized with research-quality phenotyping unmatched by clinical and survey-based studies; these will be pooled and shared widely to expedite collaboration and scientific findings. This unique resource will allow evaluation of risk and resilience factors for COVID-19 severity and outcomes, including post-acute sequelae, and assessment of the social and behavioral impact of the pandemic on long-term trajectories of health and aging.

Comparison of Medicare claims versus physician adjudication for identifying stroke outcomes in the Women's Health Initiative.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Many studies use medical record review for ascertaining outcomes. One large, longitudinal study, the Women's Health Initiative (WHI), ascertains strokes using participant self-report and subsequent physician review of medical records. This is resource-intensive. Herein, we assess whether Medicare data can reliably assess stroke events in the WHI. METHODS: Subjects were WHI participants with fee-for-service Medicare. Four stroke definitions were created for Medicare data using discharge diagnoses in hospitalization claims: definition 1, stroke codes in any position; definition 2, primary position stroke codes; and definitions 3 and 4, hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke codes, respectively. WHI data were randomly split into training (50%) and test sets. A concordance matrix was used to examine the agreement between WHI and Medicare stroke diagnosis. A WHI stroke and a Medicare stroke were considered a match if they occurred within ±7 days of each other. Refined analyses excluded Medicare events when medical records were unavailable for comparison. RESULTS: Training data consisted of 24 428 randomly selected participants. There were 577 WHI strokes and 557 Medicare strokes using definition 1. Of these, 478 were a match. With regard to algorithm performance, specificity was 99.7%, negative predictive value was 99.7%, sensitivity was 82.8%, positive predictive value was 85.8%, and κ=0.84. Performance was similar for test data. Whereas specificity and negative predictive value exceeded 99%, sensitivity ranged from 75% to 88% and positive predictive value ranged from 80% to 90% across stroke definitions. CONCLUSIONS: Medicare data seem useful for population-based stroke research; however, performance characteristics depend on the definition selected.