Longevity & AgingResearch PaperOpen Access

New Pace of Aging Tool Predicts Healthspan Better Than Chronological Age

Researchers developed a biomarker-based method to measure aging speed that outperforms chronological age in predicting disease, disability, and death.

Tuesday, March 31, 2026 0 views
Published in Nat Aging0 supporting3 total citations
Split-screen showing two 65-year-olds: one climbing stairs energetically with vibrant biomarker readings, another struggling with mobility aids and declining health metrics displayed as glowing data points around their bodies.

Summary

Scientists created a new "Pace of Aging" measurement using nine biomarkers from blood tests, physical exams, and functional assessments in 19,045 older adults from the US and UK. This tool tracks how fast someone's body is aging biologically, independent of their chronological age. People with faster biological aging showed significantly higher risks of chronic disease, disability, cognitive decline, and death over 8-15 years of follow-up. The method revealed stark differences between population subgroups and could help policymakers design better interventions for healthy aging.

Detailed Summary

As populations worldwide age rapidly, policymakers urgently need better tools to understand and promote healthy longevity. Current metrics like lifespan and healthspan only capture completed outcomes, failing to distinguish between health problems from early life versus ongoing aging processes that could respond to interventions.

Researchers developed an adapted "Pace of Aging" method using data from 13,358 US Health and Retirement Study participants and 5,687 English Longitudinal Study of Aging participants, all aged 50+. The method combines nine biomarkers: three blood markers (C-reactive protein, cystatin-C, hemoglobin A1c), three physical measurements (blood pressure, waist circumference, lung function), and three functional tests (grip strength, balance, walking speed). By tracking changes in these markers over 4-8 years, researchers calculated each person's biological aging rate.

The results were striking. Pace of Aging values averaged 1.49 years of biological change per calendar year, with substantial individual variation. People aging faster biologically faced dramatically higher risks across all health outcomes: 85% higher mortality risk, 42% higher chronic disease incidence, 32% higher disability risk, and 28% higher cognitive impairment risk per standard deviation increase in aging pace. These associations remained strong even after accounting for chronological age, suggesting the method captures aging processes beyond simple time passage.

The tool revealed significant health disparities. Men aged faster than women, and substantial differences emerged across socioeconomic and demographic groups, providing quantitative evidence of unequal aging trajectories that could inform targeted interventions.

This breakthrough offers policymakers a sensitive metric for evaluating healthy aging programs before waiting decades for mortality outcomes. Unlike traditional measures, Pace of Aging can detect intervention effects on ongoing biological processes in midlife and older adults, potentially revolutionizing how we design and assess longevity interventions.

Key Findings

  • Pace of Aging predicted 85% higher mortality risk per standard deviation increase
  • Method revealed stark aging rate differences between demographic subgroups
  • Tool outperformed chronological age in predicting disease, disability, and cognitive decline
  • Biological aging rates varied substantially even among same-age individuals
  • Method successfully replicated across US and UK populations

Methodology

Longitudinal cohort study tracking nine biomarkers (blood tests, physical measurements, functional assessments) over 4-8 years in 19,045 adults aged 50+ from US Health and Retirement Study and English Longitudinal Study of Aging. Used mixed-effects regression to model individual aging trajectories.

Study Limitations

Study limited to participants who survived long enough to provide multiple biomarker measurements, potentially underestimating aging rates. Analysis samples were slightly healthier and better educated than general population. Some biomarkers may be influenced by medical treatments, though researchers selected markers less affected by routine interventions.

Enjoyed this summary?

Get the latest longevity research delivered to your inbox every week.