Although our genetic code does not change throughout our lives, our genes can be turned on and off as a result of epigenetics. Epigenetics can track how the environment and even certain behaviors add or remove small chemical markers to the DNA that makes up the genome. The type and location of these markers may affect whether genes are active or silent, this is, whether the protein coded for by that gene is being produced or not. One common epigenetic marker is known as DNA methylation. DNA methylation has been linked to the levels of a range of proteins in our cells and the risk people have of developing chronic diseases.

Blood samples can be used to determine the epigenetic markers a person has on their genome and to study the abundance of many proteins. Gadd, Hillary, McCartney, Zaghlool et al. studied the relationships between DNA methylation and the abundance of 953 different proteins in blood samples from individuals in the German KORA cohort and the Scottish Lothian Birth Cohort 1936. They then used machine learning to analyze the relationship between epigenetic markers found in people’s blood and the abundance of proteins, obtaining epigenetic scores or ‘EpiScores’ for each protein. They found 109 proteins for which DNA methylation patterns explained between at least 1% and up to 58% of the variation in protein levels.

Integrating the ‘EpiScores’ with 14 years of medical records for more than 9000 individuals from the Generation Scotland study revealed 130 connections between EpiScores for proteins and a future diagnosis of common adverse health outcomes. These included diabetes, stroke, depression, various cancers, and inflammatory conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease.

Age-related chronic diseases are a growing issue worldwide and place pressure on healthcare systems. They also severely reduce quality of life for individuals over many years. This work shows how epigenetic scores based on protein levels in the blood could predict a person’s risk of several of these diseases. In the case of type 2 diabetes, the EpiScore results replicated previous research linking protein levels in the blood to future diagnosis of diabetes. Protein EpiScores could therefore allow researchers to identify people with the highest risk of disease, making it possible to intervene early and prevent these people from developing chronic conditions as they age.

Chronic morbidities place longstanding burdens on our health as we age. Stratifying an individual’s risk prior to symptom presentation is therefore critical (NHS England, 2016). Though complex morbidities are partially driven by genetic factors (Fuchsberger et al., 2016; Yao et al., 2018), epigenetic modifications have also been associated with disease (Lord and Cruchaga, 2014). DNA methylation (DNAm) encodes information on the epigenetic landscape of an individual and blood-based DNAm signatures have been found to predict all-cause mortality and disease onset, providing strong evidence to suggest that methylation is an important measure of disease risk (Hillary et al., 2020a; Lu et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2017). DNAm can regulate gene transcription (Lea et al., 2018), and epigenetic differences can be reflected in the variability of the proteome (Hillary et al., 2019; Hillary et al., 2020b; Zaghlool et al., 2020). Low-grade inflammation, which is thought to exacerbate many age-related morbidities, is particularly well captured through DNAm studies of plasma protein levels (Zaghlool et al., 2020). As proteins are the primary effectors of disease, connecting the epigenome, proteome, and time to disease onset may help to resolve predictive biological signatures.

Epigenetic predictors have utilised DNAm from the blood to estimate a person’s ‘biological age’ (Lu et al., 2019), measure their exposure to lifestyle and environmental factors (McCartney et al., 2018c; McCartney et al., 2018a; Peters et al., 2021), and predict circulating levels of inflammatory proteins (Stevenson et al., 2020; Stevenson et al., 2021). A leading epigenetic predictor of biological aging, the GrimAge epigenetic clock incorporates methylation scores for seven proteins along with smoking and chronological age, and is associated with numerous incident disease outcomes independently of smoking (Hillary et al., 2020a; Lu et al., 2019). This suggests there is predictive value gained in utilising DNAm scores relevant to protein levels as intermediaries for predictions. Methylation scores also point towards the pathways that may act on health beyond the protein biomarker that they are trained on. A portfolio of methylation scores for proteins across the circulating proteome could therefore aid in the prediction of disease and offer a different, but additive signal beyond methylation or protein data alone. Generation of an extensive range of epigenetic scores for protein levels has not been attempted to date. The capability of specific protein scores to predict a range of morbidities has also not been tested. However, DNAm scores for interleukin-6 (IL-6) and C-reactive protein (CRP) have been found to associate with a range of phenotypes independently of measured protein levels, show more stable longitudinal trajectories than repeated protein measurements, and, in some cases, outperform blood-based proteomic associations with brain morphology (Stevenson et al., 2021; Conole et al., 2021). This is likely due to DNAm representing the accumulation of more sustained effects over a longer period of time than protein measurements, which have often been shown to be variable in their levels when measured at multiple time points (Koenig et al., 2003; Liu et al., 2015; Moldoveanu et al., 2000; Shah et al., 2014). DNAm scores for proteins could therefore be used to alert clinicians to individuals with high-risk biological signatures, many years prior to disease onset.

Here, we report a comprehensive association study of blood-based DNAm with proteomics and disease (Figure 1). We trained epigenetic scores – referred to as EpiScores – for 953 plasma proteins (with sample size ranging from 706 to 944 individuals) and validated them using two independent cohorts with 778 and 162 participants. We regressed out known genetic pQTL effects from the protein levels prior to generating the EpiScores to preclude the signatures being driven by common SNP data that are invariant across the lifespan. We then examined whether the most robust predictors (n = 109 EpiScores) associated with the incidence of 12 major morbidities (Table 1), over a follow-up period of up to 14 years in the Generation Scotland cohort (n = 9537). We also tested for associations between EpiScore levels and COVID-19 disease outcomes. We regressed out the effects of age on protein levels prior to training and testing; age was also included as a covariate in disease prediction models. We controlled for common risk factors for disease and assessed the capacity of EpiScores to identify previously reported protein-disease associations.

Figure 1

Download asset Open asset

Our MethylDetectR shiny app (Hillary and Marioni, 2020) has CpG weights for the 109 EpiScores integrated such that it automates the process of score generation for any DNAm dataset and is available at: https://www.ed.ac.uk/centre-genomic-medicine/research-groups/marioni-group/methyldetectr. A video on how to use the MethylDetectR shiny app to generate EpiScores is available at: https://youtu.be/65Y2Rv-4tPU.

Here, we report a comprehensive DNAm scoring study of 953 circulating proteins. We define 109 robust EpiScores for plasma protein levels that are independent of known pQTL effects. By projecting these EpiScores into a large cohort with extant data linkage, we show that 70 EpiScores associate with the incidence of 10 leading causes of morbidity (130 EpiScore-disease associations in total), but do not associate with COVID-19 outcomes. Finally, we show that EpiScore-diabetes associations highlight previously measured protein-diabetes relationships. The bulk of EpiScore-disease associations are independent of common lifestyle and health factors, differences in immune cell composition and GrimAge acceleration. EpiScores therefore provide methylation-proteomic signatures for disease prediction and risk stratification.

The consistency between our EpiScore-diabetes associations and previously identified protein-diabetes relationships (Elhadad et al., 2020; Gudmundsdottir et al., 2020; Ngo et al., 2021) suggests that epigenetic scores identify disease-relevant biological signals. In addition to the comprehensive lookup of SOMAscan proteins with diabetes, several of the markers we identified for COPD and IHD also reflect previous associations with measured proteins (Ganz et al., 2016; Serban et al., 2021). The three studies used for the diabetes comparison represent the largest candidate protein characterisations of type 2 diabetes to date and the top markers identified included aminoacylase-1 (ACY-1), sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) and growth hormone receptor (GHR) (Elhadad et al., 2020; Gudmundsdottir et al., 2020; Ngo et al., 2021). Our EpiScores for these top markers were also associated with diabetes, in addition to EpiScores for several other protein markers reported in these studies. A growing body of evidence suggests that type 2 diabetes is mediated by genetic and epigenetic regulators (Kwak and Park, 2016) and proteins such as ACY-1 and GHR are thought to influence a range of diabetes-associated metabolic mechanisms (Kim and Park, 2017; Pérez-Pérez et al., 2012). Proteins that we identify through EpiScore associations, such as NTR domain-containing protein 2 (WFIKKN2), have also been causally implicated in type 2 diabetes onset through Mendelian randomisation analysis (Ngo et al., 2021). In the case of diabetes, EpiScores may therefore be used as disease-relevant risk biomarkers, many years prior to onset. Validation should be tested when sufficient data become available for the remaining morbidities.

With modest test set performances (e.g., SHBG r = 0.18 and ACY-1 r = 0.25), it is perhaps surprising that such strong synergy is observed between EpiScores for proteins that associated with diabetes and the trends seen with measured proteins. Nonetheless, DNAm scores for CRP and IL-6 have previously been shown to perform modestly in test sets (r ~ 0.2, equivalent to ~4% explained variance in protein level), but augment and often outperform the measured protein related to a range of phenotypes (Stevenson et al., 2020; Stevenson et al., 2021). Compared to scores utilising DNAm for the prediction of singular diseases, our EpiScores enable the granular study of individual protein predictor signatures with clinical outcomes.

Our large-scale assessment of EpiScores provides a platform for future studies, as composite predictors for traits may be created using our EpiScore database. These should be tested in incident disease predictions when sufficient case data are available. Our results indicated that the set of 109 EpiScores are likely to be heavily enriched for inflammatory, complement system and innate immune system pathways, in addition to extracellular matrix, cell remodelling, and cell adhesion pathways. This reinforces previous work linking chronic inflammation and the epigenome (Zaghlool et al., 2020). It also suggests that EpiScores could be useful in the prediction of morbidities that are characterised by differential inflammatory states. An example of this is the EpiScore for Complement Component 5 (C5), which was associated with the onset of four morbidities (Figure 5). The EpiScore for C5 is likely to reflect the biological pathways occurring in individuals with heightened complement cascade activity and could be utilised to alert clinicians to individuals at high risk of multimorbidity. Elevated levels of C5 peptides have been associated with severe inflammatory, autoimmune, and neurodegenerative states (Ma et al., 2019; Mantovani et al., 2014; Morgan and Harris, 2015) and a range of C5-targetting therapeutic approaches are in development (Alawieh et al., 2018; Brandolini et al., 2019; Hawksworth et al., 2017; Hernandez et al., 2017; Morgan and Harris, 2015; Ort et al., 2020).

Though EpiScores such as C5 – which occupy central hubs in the disease prediction framework – may provide evidence of early methylation signatures common to the onset of multiple diseases, we did not observe associations between EpiScores and COVID-19 hospitalisation or long-COVID status. This is perhaps surprising, given that many of the morbidities that our EpiScores predicted are also known risk factors for increased risk of death due to COVID-19 (Williamson et al., 2020). Many of the proteins corresponding to EpiScores in our study were also associated with COVID-19 severity and progression in two previous studies that included a pilot sample (N = 199) from the Generation Scotland cohort at baseline as control data (Demichev et al., 2021; Messner et al., 2020). COVID-19 likely has multiple intersecting risk factors that impact severity and recovery, and the lack of associations we observe is likely to be in part due to the limited number of COVID-19 cases available in Generation Scotland. Additionally, there is a large lag time between baseline biological measurement and COVID-19 in our analyses, whereas the two studies that found protein marker associations integrated protein measurements longitudinally and from samples extracted during COVID-19 progression. With increased power available through continued data linkage, EpiScore relationships with COVID-19 outcomes may be observed in future work.

This study has several limitations. First, we demonstrate that EpiScores carry disease-relevant signals that may be clinically meaningful to delineate early disease risk when comparing relative differences within a cohort. However, projecting a new individual onto a reference set is complicated due to absolute differences in methylation quantification resulting from batch and processing effects. Second, future studies should assess paired protein and EpiScore contributions to traits, as inference from EpiScores alone, while useful for disease risk stratification, is not sufficient to determine mechanisms. This may also highlight EpiScores that outperform the measured protein equivalent in disease. Third, the epitope nature of the protein measurement in the SOMAscan panel may incur probe cross-reactivity and non-specific binding; there may also be differences in how certain proteins are measured across panels (Pietzner et al., 2020; Sun et al., 2018). Comparisons of multiple protein measurement technologies on the same samples would help to explore this in more detail. Fourth, there may be pQTLs with small effect sizes that were not regressed from the proteins prior to generating the EpiScores. Fifth, while training and testing was performed across multiple cohorts, it is likely that further development of EpiScores in larger proteomic samples with diverse ancestries will improve power to generate robust scores. Upper bounds for DNAm prediction of complex traits, such as proteins, can be estimated by variance components analyses (Hillary et al., 2020b; Trejo Banos et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2019). Finally, associations present between EpiScore measures and disease incidence may have been influenced by external factors such as prescription medications for comorbid conditions and comorbid disease prevalence.

We have shown that EpiScores for circulating protein levels predict the incidence of multiple diseases, up to 14 years prior to diagnosis. Our findings suggest that DNAm phenotyping approaches and data linkage to electronic health records in large, population-based studies have the potential to (1) capture inter-individual variability in protein levels; (2) predict incident disease risk many years prior to morbidity onset; and (3) highlight disease-relevant biological signals for further exploration. The EpiScore weights are publicly available, enabling any cohort with Illumina DNAm data to generate them and to relate them to various outcomes. Given the increasingly widespread assessment of DNAm in cohort studies (McCartney et al., 2020; Min et al., 2021), EpiScores offer an affordable and consistent (i.e., array-based) way to utilise these signatures. This information is likely to be important in risk stratification and prevention of age-related morbidities.

Datasets generated in this study are made available in Supplementary file 1; this file includes the protein EpiScore weights for the 109 EpiScores we provide for future studies to use. Our MethylDetectR shiny app (Hillary and Marioni, 2020) has CpG weights for the 109 EpiScores integrated such that it automates the process of score generation for any DNAm dataset and is available at: https://www.ed.ac.uk/centre-genomic-medicine/research-groups/marioni-group/methyldetectr. A video on how to use the MethylDetectR shiny app to generate EpiScores is available at: https://youtu.be/65Y2Rv-4tPU. All datasets used to create figures are included in Supplementary file 1 and specific locations for these are noted in figure legends. All code used in the analyses is available with open access at the following Gitlab repository: https://github.com/DanniGadd/EpiScores-for-protein-levels (copy archived at swh:1:rev:a5130fab3895a0d95f0dcc8826aa9fb5e8c0fa86). The source datasets analysed during the current study are not publicly available due to them containing information that could compromise participant consent and confidentiality. Data can be obtained from the data owners. Instructions for Lothian Birth Cohort data access can be found here: https://www.ed.ac.uk/lothian-birth-cohorts/data-access-collaboration. Dr Simon Cox must be contacted to obtain a Lothian Birth Cohort 'Data Request Form' by email: simon.cox@ed.ac.uk. Instructions for accessing Generation Scotland data can be found here: https://www.ed.ac.uk/generation-scotland/for-researchers/access; the 'GS Access Request Form' can be downloaded from this site. Completed request forms must be sent to access@generationscotland.org to be approved by the Generation Scotland access committee. Data from the KORA study can be requested from KORA-gen: https://www.helmholtz-munich.de/en/kora/for-scientists/cooperation-with-kora/index.html. Requests are submitted online and are subject to approval by the KORA board.

1. 1. Alatab S
   2. Sepanlou SG
   3. Ikuta K
   4. Vahedi H
   5. Bisignano C
   6. Safiri S
   7. Sadeghi A
   8. Nixon MR
   9. Abdoli A
   10. Abolhassani H
   11. Alipour V
   12. Almadi MAH
   13. Almasi-Hashiani A
   14. Anushiravani A
   15. Arabloo J
   16. Atique S
   17. Awasthi A
   18. Badawi A
   19. Baig AAA
   20. Naghavi M

   (2020) The global, regional, and national burden of inflammatory bowel disease in 195 countries and territories, 1990-2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017

   The Lancet. Gastroenterology & Hepatology 5:17–30.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-1253(19)30333-4

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
2. 1. Alawieh A
   2. Langley EF
   3. Tomlinson S

   (2018) Targeted complement inhibition salvages stressed neurons and inhibits neuroinflammation after stroke in mice

   Science Translational Medicine 10:eaao6459.

   https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.aao6459

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
3. 1. Amador C
   2. Huffman J
   3. Trochet H
   4. Campbell A
   5. Porteous D
   6. Wilson JF
   7. Hastie N
   8. Vitart V
   9. Hayward C
   10. Navarro P
   11. Haley CS
   12. Generation Scotland

   (2015) Recent genomic heritage in Scotland

   BMC Genomics 16:437.

   https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-015-1605-2

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
4. 1. Aryee MJ
   2. Jaffe AE
   3. Corrada-Bravo H
   4. Ladd-Acosta C
   5. Feinberg AP
   6. Hansen KD
   7. Irizarry RA

   (2014) Minfi: a flexible and comprehensive Bioconductor package for the analysis of Infinium DNA methylation microarrays

   Bioinformatics 30:1363–1369.

   https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btu049

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
5. 1. Bollepalli S
   2. Korhonen T
   3. Kaprio J
   4. Anders S
   5. Ollikainen M

   (2019) EpiSmokEr: a robust classifier to determine smoking status from DNA methylation data

   Epigenomics 11:1469–1486.

   https://doi.org/10.2217/epi-2019-0206

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
6. 1. Brandolini L
   2. Grannonico M
   3. Bianchini G
   4. Colanardi A
   5. Sebastiani P
   6. Paladini A
   7. Piroli A
   8. Allegretti M
   9. Varrassi G
   10. Di Loreto S

   (2019) The Novel C5aR Antagonist DF3016A Protects Neurons Against Ischemic Neuroinflammatory Injury

   Neurotoxicity Research 36:163–174.

   https://doi.org/10.1007/s12640-019-00026-w

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
7. 1. Conole ELS
   2. Stevenson AJ
   3. Muñoz Maniega S
   4. Harris SE
   5. Green C
   6. Valdés Hernández MDC
   7. Harris MA
   8. Bastin ME
   9. Wardlaw JM
   10. Deary IJ
   11. Miron VE
   12. Whalley HC
   13. Marioni RE
   14. Cox SR

   (2021) DNA Methylation and Protein Markers of Chronic Inflammation and Their Associations With Brain and Cognitive Aging

   Neurology 97:e2340–e2352.

   https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000012997

   • Google Scholar
8. 1. Deary IJ
   2. Gow AJ
   3. Pattie A
   4. Starr JM

   (2012) Cohort profile: the Lothian Birth Cohorts of 1921 and 1936

   International Journal of Epidemiology 41:1576–1584.

   https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyr197

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
9. 1. Demichev V
   2. Tober-Lau P
   3. Lemke O
   4. Nazarenko T
   5. Thibeault C
   6. Whitwell H
   7. Röhl A
   8. Freiwald A
   9. Szyrwiel L
   10. Ludwig D
   11. Correia-Melo C
   12. Aulakh SK
   13. Helbig ET
   14. Stubbemann P
   15. Lippert LJ
   16. Grüning N-M
   17. Blyuss O
   18. Vernardis S
   19. White M
   20. Messner CB
   21. Joannidis M
   22. Sonnweber T
   23. Klein SJ
   24. Pizzini A
   25. Wohlfarter Y
   26. Sahanic S
   27. Hilbe R
   28. Schaefer B
   29. Wagner S
   30. Mittermaier M
   31. Machleidt F
   32. Garcia C
   33. Ruwwe-Glösenkamp C
   34. Lingscheid T
   35. Bosquillon de Jarcy L
   36. Stegemann MS
   37. Pfeiffer M
   38. Jürgens L
   39. Denker S
   40. Zickler D
   41. Enghard P
   42. Zelezniak A
   43. Campbell A
   44. Hayward C
   45. Porteous DJ
   46. Marioni RE
   47. Uhrig A
   48. Müller-Redetzky H
   49. Zoller H
   50. Löffler-Ragg J
   51. Keller MA
   52. Tancevski I
   53. Timms JF
   54. Zaikin A
   55. Hippenstiel S
   56. Ramharter M
   57. Witzenrath M
   58. Suttorp N
   59. Lilley K
   60. Mülleder M
   61. Sander LE
   62. Ralser M
   63. Kurth F
   64. PA-COVID-19 Study group

   (2021) A time-resolved proteomic and prognostic map of COVID-19

   Cell Systems 12:780–794.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cels.2021.05.005

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
10. 1. Elhadad MA
    2. Jonasson C
    3. Huth C
    4. Wilson R
    5. Gieger C
    6. Matias P
    7. Grallert H
    8. Graumann J
    9. Gailus-Durner V
    10. Rathmann W
    11. von Toerne C
    12. Hauck SM
    13. Koenig W
    14. Sinner MF
    15. Oprea TI
    16. Suhre K
    17. Thorand B
    18. Hveem K
    19. Peters A
    20. Waldenberger M

    (2020) Deciphering the Plasma Proteome of Type 2 Diabetes

    Diabetes 69:2766–2778.

    https://doi.org/10.2337/db20-0296

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
11. 1. Fawns-Ritchie C
    2. Altschul DM
    3. Campbell A
    4. Huggins C
    5. Nangle C
    6. Dawson R
    7. Edwards R
    8. Flaig R
    9. Hartley L
    10. Levein C
    11. McCartney DL
    12. Bell D
    13. Douglas E
    14. Deary IJ
    15. Hayward C
    16. Marioni RE
    17. McIntosh AM
    18. Sudlow C
    19. Porteous DJ

    (2021) CovidLife: a resource to understand mental health, well-being and behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK

    Wellcome Open Research 6:176.

    https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.16987.1

    • Google Scholar
12. 1. Friedman J
    2. Hastie T
    3. Tibshirani R

    (2010) Regularization Paths for Generalized Linear Models via Coordinate Descent

    Journal of Statistical Software 33:1–22.

    https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v033.i01

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
13. 1. Fuchsberger C
    2. Flannick J
    3. Teslovich TM
    4. Mahajan A
    5. Agarwala V
    6. Gaulton KJ
    7. Ma C
    8. Fontanillas P
    9. Moutsianas L
    10. McCarthy DJ
    11. Rivas MA
    12. Perry JRB
    13. Sim X
    14. Blackwell TW
    15. Robertson NR
    16. Rayner NW
    17. Cingolani P
    18. Locke AE
    19. Tajes JF
    20. Highland HM
    21. Dupuis J
    22. Chines PS
    23. Lindgren CM
    24. Hartl C
    25. Jackson AU
    26. Chen H
    27. Huyghe JR
    28. van de Bunt M
    29. Pearson RD
    30. Kumar A
    31. Müller-Nurasyid M
    32. Grarup N
    33. Stringham HM
    34. Gamazon ER
    35. Lee J
    36. Chen Y
    37. Scott RA
    38. Below JE
    39. Chen P
    40. Huang J
    41. Go MJ
    42. Stitzel ML
    43. Pasko D
    44. Parker SCJ
    45. Varga TV
    46. Green T
    47. Beer NL
    48. Day-Williams AG
    49. Ferreira T
    50. Fingerlin T
    51. Horikoshi M
    52. Hu C
    53. Huh I
    54. Ikram MK
    55. Kim B-J
    56. Kim Y
    57. Kim YJ
    58. Kwon M-S
    59. Lee J
    60. Lee S
    61. Lin K-H
    62. Maxwell TJ
    63. Nagai Y
    64. Wang X
    65. Welch RP
    66. Yoon J
    67. Zhang W
    68. Barzilai N
    69. Voight BF
    70. Han B-G
    71. Jenkinson CP
    72. Kuulasmaa T
    73. Kuusisto J
    74. Manning A
    75. Ng MCY
    76. Palmer ND
    77. Balkau B
    78. Stančáková A
    79. Abboud HE
    80. Boeing H
    81. Giedraitis V
    82. Prabhakaran D
    83. Gottesman O
    84. Scott J
    85. Carey J
    86. Kwan P
    87. Grant G
    88. Smith JD
    89. Neale BM
    90. Purcell S
    91. Butterworth AS
    92. Howson JMM
    93. Lee HM
    94. Lu Y
    95. Kwak S-H
    96. Zhao W
    97. Danesh J
    98. Lam VKL
    99. Park KS
    100. Saleheen D
    101. So WY
    102. Tam CHT
    103. Afzal U
    104. Aguilar D
    105. Arya R
    106. Aung T
    107. Chan E
    108. Navarro C
    109. Cheng C-Y
    110. Palli D
    111. Correa A
    112. Curran JE
    113. Rybin D
    114. Farook VS
    115. Fowler SP
    116. Freedman BI
    117. Griswold M
    118. Hale DE
    119. Hicks PJ
    120. Khor C-C
    121. Kumar S
    122. Lehne B
    123. Thuillier D
    124. Lim WY
    125. Liu J
    126. van der Schouw YT
    127. Loh M
    128. Musani SK
    129. Puppala S
    130. Scott WR
    131. Yengo L
    132. Tan S-T
    133. Taylor HA
    134. Thameem F
    135. Wilson G
    136. Wong TY
    137. Njølstad PR
    138. Levy JC
    139. Mangino M
    140. Bonnycastle LL
    141. Schwarzmayr T
    142. Fadista J
    143. Surdulescu GL
    144. Herder C
    145. Groves CJ
    146. Wieland T
    147. Bork-Jensen J
    148. Brandslund I
    149. Christensen C
    150. Koistinen HA
    151. Doney ASF
    152. Kinnunen L
    153. Esko T
    154. Farmer AJ
    155. Hakaste L
    156. Hodgkiss D
    157. Kravic J
    158. Lyssenko V
    159. Hollensted M
    160. Jørgensen ME
    161. Jørgensen T
    162. Ladenvall C
    163. Justesen JM
    164. Käräjämäki A
    165. Kriebel J
    166. Rathmann W
    167. Lannfelt L
    168. Lauritzen T
    169. Narisu N
    170. Linneberg A
    171. Melander O
    172. Milani L
    173. Neville M
    174. Orho-Melander M
    175. Qi L
    176. Qi Q
    177. Roden M
    178. Rolandsson O
    179. Swift A
    180. Rosengren AH
    181. Stirrups K
    182. Wood AR
    183. Mihailov E
    184. Blancher C
    185. Carneiro MO
    186. Maguire J
    187. Poplin R
    188. Shakir K
    189. Fennell T
    190. DePristo M
    191. de Angelis MH
    192. Deloukas P
    193. Gjesing AP
    194. Jun G
    195. Nilsson P
    196. Murphy J
    197. Onofrio R
    198. Thorand B
    199. Hansen T
    200. Meisinger C
    201. Hu FB
    202. Isomaa B
    203. Karpe F
    204. Liang L
    205. Peters A
    206. Huth C
    207. O’Rahilly SP
    208. Palmer CNA
    209. Pedersen O
    210. Rauramaa R
    211. Tuomilehto J
    212. Salomaa V
    213. Watanabe RM
    214. Syvänen A-C
    215. Bergman RN
    216. Bharadwaj D
    217. Bottinger EP
    218. Cho YS
    219. Chandak GR
    220. Chan JCN
    221. Chia KS
    222. Daly MJ
    223. Ebrahim SB
    224. Langenberg C
    225. Elliott P
    226. Jablonski KA
    227. Lehman DM
    228. Jia W
    229. Ma RCW
    230. Pollin TI
    231. Sandhu M
    232. Tandon N
    233. Froguel P
    234. Barroso I
    235. Teo YY
    236. Zeggini E
    237. Loos RJF
    238. Small KS
    239. Ried JS
    240. DeFronzo RA
    241. Grallert H
    242. Glaser B
    243. Metspalu A
    244. Wareham NJ
    245. Walker M
    246. Banks E
    247. Gieger C
    248. Ingelsson E
    249. Im HK
    250. Illig T
    251. Franks PW
    252. Buck G
    253. Trakalo J
    254. Buck D
    255. Prokopenko I
    256. Mägi R
    257. Lind L
    258. Farjoun Y
    259. Owen KR
    260. Gloyn AL
    261. Strauch K
    262. Tuomi T
    263. Kooner JS
    264. Lee J-Y
    265. Park T
    266. Donnelly P
    267. Morris AD
    268. Hattersley AT
    269. Bowden DW
    270. Collins FS
    271. Atzmon G
    272. Chambers JC
    273. Spector TD
    274. Laakso M
    275. Strom TM
    276. Bell GI
    277. Blangero J
    278. Duggirala R
    279. Tai ES
    280. McVean G
    281. Hanis CL
    282. Wilson JG
    283. Seielstad M
    284. Frayling TM
    285. Meigs JB
    286. Cox NJ
    287. Sladek R
    288. Lander ES
    289. Gabriel S
    290. Burtt NP
    291. Mohlke KL
    292. Meitinger T
    293. Groop L
    294. Abecasis G
    295. Florez JC
    296. Scott LJ
    297. Morris AP
    298. Kang HM
    299. Boehnke M
    300. Altshuler D
    301. McCarthy MI

    (2016) The genetic architecture of type 2 diabetes

    Nature 536:41–47.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature18642

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
14. 1. Ganz P
    2. Heidecker B
    3. Hveem K
    4. Jonasson C
    5. Kato S
    6. Segal MR
    7. Sterling DG
    8. Williams SA

    (2016) Development and Validation of a Protein-Based Risk Score for Cardiovascular Outcomes Among Patients With Stable Coronary Heart Disease

    JAMA 315:2532–2541.

    https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.5951

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
15. 1. Gold L
    2. Ayers D
    3. Bertino J
    4. Bock C
    5. Bock A
    6. Brody EN
    7. Carter J
    8. Dalby AB
    9. Eaton BE
    10. Fitzwater T
    11. Flather D
    12. Forbes A
    13. Foreman T
    14. Fowler C
    15. Gawande B
    16. Goss M
    17. Gunn M
    18. Gupta S
    19. Halladay D
    20. Heil J
    21. Heilig J
    22. Hicke B
    23. Husar G
    24. Janjic N
    25. Jarvis T
    26. Jennings S
    27. Katilius E
    28. Keeney TR
    29. Kim N
    30. Koch TH
    31. Kraemer S
    32. Kroiss L
    33. Le N
    34. Levine D
    35. Lindsey W
    36. Lollo B
    37. Mayfield W
    38. Mehan M
    39. Mehler R
    40. Nelson SK
    41. Nelson M
    42. Nieuwlandt D
    43. Nikrad M
    44. Ochsner U
    45. Ostroff RM
    46. Otis M
    47. Parker T
    48. Pietrasiewicz S
    49. Resnicow DI
    50. Rohloff J
    51. Sanders G
    52. Sattin S
    53. Schneider D
    54. Singer B
    55. Stanton M
    56. Sterkel A
    57. Stewart A
    58. Stratford S
    59. Vaught JD
    60. Vrkljan M
    61. Walker JJ
    62. Watrobka M
    63. Waugh S
    64. Weiss A
    65. Wilcox SK
    66. Wolfson A
    67. Wolk SK
    68. Zhang C
    69. Zichi D

    (2010) Aptamer-based multiplexed proteomic technology for biomarker discovery

    PLOS ONE 5:e15004.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0015004

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
16. Website

    1. GovScot

    (2016) Scottish Government. The Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD). Accessed April 2021

    Accessed April 1, 2021.

    http://www.gov.scot/Resource/0050/00504809.pdf
17. 1. Gudmundsdottir V
    2. Zaghlool SB
    3. Emilsson V
    4. Aspelund T
    5. Ilkov M
    6. Gudmundsson EF
    7. Jonsson SM
    8. Zilhão NR
    9. Lamb JR
    10. Suhre K
    11. Jennings LL
    12. Gudnason V

    (2020) Circulating Protein Signatures and Causal Candidates for Type 2 Diabetes

    Diabetes 69:1843–1853.

    https://doi.org/10.2337/db19-1070

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
18. 1. Hawksworth OA
    2. Li XX
    3. Coulthard LG
    4. Wolvetang EJ
    5. Woodruff TM

    (2017) New concepts on the therapeutic control of complement anaphylatoxin receptors

    Molecular Immunology 89:36–43.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molimm.2017.05.015

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
19. 1. Hay SI
    2. Abajobir AA
    3. Abate KH
    4. Abbafati C
    5. Abbas KM
    6. Abd-Allah F
    7. Abdulle AM
    8. Abebo TA
    9. Abera SF
    10. Aboyans V
    11. Abu-Raddad LJ
    12. Ackerman IN
    13. Adedeji IA
    14. Adetokunboh O
    15. Afshin A
    16. Aggarwal R
    17. Agrawal S
    18. Agrawal A
    19. Kiadaliri AA
    20. Bryane CEG

    (2017) Global, regional, and national disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 333 diseases and injuries and healthy life expectancy (HALE) for 195 countries and territories, 1990-2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016

    Lancet 390:1260–1344.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32130-X

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
20. 1. Hernandez MX
    2. Jiang S
    3. Cole TA
    4. Chu SH
    5. Fonseca MI
    6. Fang MJ
    7. Hohsfield LA
    8. Torres MD
    9. Green KN
    10. Wetsel RA
    11. Mortazavi A
    12. Tenner AJ

    (2017) Prevention of C5aR1 signaling delays microglial inflammatory polarization, favors clearance pathways and suppresses cognitive loss

    Molecular Neurodegeneration 12:66.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/s13024-017-0210-z

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
21. 1. Hillary RF
    2. McCartney DL
    3. Harris SE
    4. Stevenson AJ
    5. Seeboth A
    6. Zhang Q
    7. Liewald DC
    8. Evans KL
    9. Ritchie CW
    10. Tucker-Drob EM
    11. Wray NR
    12. McRae AF
    13. Visscher PM
    14. Deary IJ
    15. Marioni RE

    (2019) Genome and epigenome wide studies of neurological protein biomarkers in the Lothian Birth Cohort 1936

    Nature Communications 10:3160.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-11177-x

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
22. 1. Hillary RF
    2. Marioni RE

    (2020) MethylDetectR: a software for methylation-based health profiling

    Wellcome Open Research 5:283.

    https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.16458.2

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
23. 1. Hillary RF
    2. Stevenson AJ
    3. McCartney DL
    4. Campbell A
    5. Walker RM
    6. Howard DM
    7. Ritchie CW
    8. Horvath S
    9. Hayward C
    10. McIntosh AM
    11. Porteous DJ
    12. Deary IJ
    13. Evans KL
    14. Marioni RE

    (2020a) Epigenetic measures of ageing predict the prevalence and incidence of leading causes of death and disease burden

    Clinical Epigenetics 12:115.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/s13148-020-00905-6

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
24. 1. Hillary RF
    2. Trejo-Banos D
    3. Kousathanas A
    4. McCartney DL
    5. Harris SE
    6. Stevenson AJ
    7. Patxot M
    8. Ojavee SE
    9. Zhang Q
    10. Liewald DC
    11. Ritchie CW
    12. Evans KL
    13. Tucker-Drob EM
    14. Wray NR
    15. McRae AF
    16. Visscher PM
    17. Deary IJ
    18. Robinson MR
    19. Marioni RE

    (2020b) Multi-method genome- and epigenome-wide studies of inflammatory protein levels in healthy older adults

    Genome Medicine 12:60.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/s13073-020-00754-1

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
25. 1. Houseman EA
    2. Accomando WP
    3. Koestler DC
    4. Christensen BC
    5. Marsit CJ
    6. Nelson HH
    7. Wiencke JK
    8. Kelsey KT

    (2012) DNA methylation arrays as surrogate measures of cell mixture distribution

    BMC Bioinformatics 13:86.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-13-86

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
26. 1. James SL
    2. Abate D
    3. Abate KH
    4. Abay SM
    5. Abbafati C
    6. Abbasi N
    7. Abbastabar H
    8. Abd-Allah F
    9. Abdela J
    10. Abdelalim A
    11. Abdollahpour I
    12. Abdulkader RS
    13. Abebe Z
    14. Abera SF
    15. Abil OZ
    16. Abraha HN
    17. Abu-Raddad LJ
    18. Abu-Rmeileh NME
    19. Accrombessi MMK
    20. Murray CJL

    (2018) Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 354 diseases and injuries for 195 countries and territories, 1990-2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017

    Lancet 392:1789–1858.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32279-7

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
27. 1. Jensen LJ
    2. Kuhn M
    3. Stark M
    4. Chaffron S
    5. Creevey C
    6. Muller J
    7. Doerks T
    8. Julien P
    9. Roth A
    10. Simonovic M
    11. Bork P
    12. von Mering C

    (2009) STRING 8--a global view on proteins and their functional interactions in 630 organisms

    Nucleic Acids Research 37:D412–D416.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkn760

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
28. 1. Kassam Z
    2. Belga S
    3. Roifman I
    4. Hirota S
    5. Jijon H
    6. Kaplan GG
    7. Ghosh S
    8. Beck PL

    (2014) Inflammatory bowel disease cause-specific mortality: a primer for clinicians

    Inflammatory Bowel Diseases 20:2483–2492.

    https://doi.org/10.1097/MIB.0000000000000173

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
29. Software

    1. Kassambara A

    (2019) ggcorrplot: Visualization of a Correlation Matrix using “ggplot2, version 0.1.3

    R Package.

    https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/ggcorrplot/ggcorrplot.pdf
30. 1. Kim SH
    2. Park MJ

    (2017) Effects of growth hormone on glucose metabolism and insulin resistance in human

    Annals of Pediatric Endocrinology & Metabolism 22:145–152.

    https://doi.org/10.6065/apem.2017.22.3.145

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
31. 1. Koenig W
    2. Sund M
    3. Fröhlich M
    4. Löwel H
    5. Hutchinson WL
    6. Pepys MB

    (2003) Refinement of the association of serum C-reactive protein concentration and coronary heart disease risk by correction for within-subject variation over time: the MONICA Augsburg studies, 1984 and 1987

    American Journal of Epidemiology 158:357–364.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwg135

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
32. Software

    1. Kolde R

    (2019) Pheatmap: Pretty Heatmaps, version 1.0.12

    R Package.

    https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/pheatmap/index.html
33. 1. Kwak SH
    2. Park KS

    (2016) Recent progress in genetic and epigenetic research on type 2 diabetes

    Experimental & Molecular Medicine 48:e220.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/emm.2016.7

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
34. 1. Lea AJ
    2. Vockley CM
    3. Johnston RA
    4. Del Carpio CA
    5. Barreiro LB
    6. Reddy TE
    7. Tung J

    (2018) Genome-wide quantification of the effects of DNA methylation on human gene regulation

    eLife 7:e37513.

    https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.37513

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
35. 1. Liu Y
    2. Buil A
    3. Collins BC
    4. Gillet LCJ
    5. Blum LC
    6. Cheng LY
    7. Vitek O
    8. Mouritsen J
    9. Lachance G
    10. Spector TD
    11. Dermitzakis ET
    12. Aebersold R

    (2015) Quantitative variability of 342 plasma proteins in a human twin population

    Molecular Systems Biology 11:786.

    https://doi.org/10.15252/msb.20145728

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
36. 1. Lord J
    2. Cruchaga C

    (2014) The epigenetic landscape of Alzheimer’s disease

    Nature Neuroscience 17:1138–1140.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3792

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
37. 1. Lu AT
    2. Quach A
    3. Wilson JG
    4. Reiner AP
    5. Aviv A
    6. Raj K
    7. Hou L
    8. Baccarelli AA
    9. Li Y
    10. Stewart JD
    11. Whitsel EA
    12. Assimes TL
    13. Ferrucci L
    14. Horvath S

    (2019) DNA methylation GrimAge strongly predicts lifespan and healthspan

    Aging 11:303–327.

    https://doi.org/10.18632/aging.101684

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
38. 1. Ma Y
    2. Liu Y
    3. Zhang Z
    4. Yang GY

    (2019) Significance of Complement System in Ischemic Stroke: A Comprehensive Review

    Aging and Disease 10:429–462.

    https://doi.org/10.14336/AD.2019.0119

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
39. 1. Mantovani S
    2. Gordon R
    3. Macmaw JK
    4. Pfluger CMM
    5. Henderson RD
    6. Noakes PG
    7. McCombe PA
    8. Woodruff TM

    (2014) Elevation of the terminal complement activation products C5a and C5b-9 in ALS patient blood

    Journal of Neuroimmunology 276:213–218.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroim.2014.09.005

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
40. 1. McCartney DL
    2. Stevenson AJ
    3. Hillary RF
    4. Walker RM
    5. Bermingham ML
    6. Morris SW
    7. Clarke TK
    8. Campbell A
    9. Murray AD
    10. Whalley HC
    11. Porteous DJ
    12. Visscher PM
    13. McIntosh AM
    14. Evans KL
    15. Deary IJ
    16. Marioni RE

    (2018a) Epigenetic signatures of starting and stopping smoking

    EBioMedicine 37:214–220.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2018.10.051

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
41. 1. McCartney DL
    2. Stevenson AJ
    3. Walker RM
    4. Gibson J
    5. Morris SW
    6. Campbell A
    7. Murray AD
    8. Whalley HC
    9. Porteous DJ
    10. McIntosh AM
    11. Evans KL
    12. Deary IJ
    13. Marioni RE

    (2018b) Investigating the relationship between DNA methylation age acceleration and risk factors for Alzheimer’s disease

    Alzheimer’s & Dementia 10:429–437.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dadm.2018.05.006

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
42. 1. McCartney DL
    2. Hillary RF
    3. Stevenson AJ
    4. Ritchie SJ
    5. Walker RM
    6. Zhang Q
    7. Morris SW
    8. Bermingham ML
    9. Campbell A
    10. Murray AD
    11. Whalley HC
    12. Gale CR
    13. Porteous DJ
    14. Haley CS
    15. McRae AF
    16. Wray NR
    17. Visscher PM
    18. McIntosh AM
    19. Evans KL
    20. Deary IJ
    21. Marioni RE

    (2018c) Epigenetic prediction of complex traits and death

    Genome Biology 19:136.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-018-1514-1

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
43. Preprint

    1. McCartney DL
    2. Min JL
    3. Richmond RC
    4. Lu AT
    5. Sobczyk MK
    6. Davies G
    7. Broer L
    8. Guo X
    9. Jeong A
    10. Jung J
    11. Kasela S
    12. Katrinli S
    13. Kuo PL
    14. Matias-Garcia PR
    15. Mishra PP
    16. Nygaard M
    17. Palviainen T
    18. Patki A
    19. Raffield LM
    20. Marioni RE

    (2020) Genome-Wide Association Studies Identify 137 Loci for DNA Methylation Biomarkers of Ageing

    bioRxiv.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.29.133702

    • Google Scholar
44. 1. Messner CB
    2. Demichev V
    3. Wendisch D
    4. Michalick L
    5. White M
    6. Freiwald A
    7. Textoris-Taube K
    8. Vernardis SI
    9. Egger AS
    10. Kreidl M
    11. Ludwig D
    12. Kilian C
    13. Agostini F
    14. Zelezniak A
    15. Thibeault C
    16. Pfeiffer M
    17. Hippenstiel S
    18. Hocke A
    19. von Kalle C
    20. Campbell A
    21. Hayward C
    22. Porteous DJ
    23. Marioni RE
    24. Langenberg C
    25. Lilley KS
    26. Kuebler WM
    27. Mülleder M
    28. Drosten C
    29. Suttorp N
    30. Witzenrath M
    31. Kurth F
    32. Sander LE
    33. Ralser M

    (2020) Ultra-High-Throughput Clinical Proteomics Reveals Classifiers of COVID-19 Infection

    Cell Systems 11:11–24.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cels.2020.05.012

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
45. 1. Min JL
    2. Hemani G
    3. Hannon E
    4. Dekkers KF
    5. Castillo-Fernandez J
    6. Luijk R
    7. Carnero-Montoro E
    8. Lawson DJ
    9. Burrows K
    10. Suderman M
    11. Bretherick AD
    12. Richardson TG
    13. Klughammer J
    14. Iotchkova V
    15. Sharp G
    16. Al Khleifat A
    17. Shatunov A
    18. Iacoangeli A
    19. McArdle WL
    20. Ho KM
    21. Kumar A
    22. Söderhäll C
    23. Soriano-Tárraga C
    24. Giralt-Steinhauer E
    25. Kazmi N
    26. Mason D
    27. McRae AF
    28. Corcoran DL
    29. Sugden K
    30. Kasela S
    31. Cardona A
    32. Day FR
    33. Cugliari G
    34. Viberti C
    35. Guarrera S
    36. Lerro M
    37. Gupta R
    38. Bollepalli S
    39. Mandaviya P
    40. Zeng Y
    41. Clarke TK
    42. Walker RM
    43. Schmoll V
    44. Czamara D
    45. Ruiz-Arenas C
    46. Rezwan FI
    47. Marioni RE
    48. Lin T
    49. Awaloff Y
    50. Germain M
    51. Aïssi D
    52. Zwamborn R
    53. van Eijk K
    54. Dekker A
    55. van Dongen J
    56. Hottenga JJ
    57. Willemsen G
    58. Xu CJ
    59. Barturen G
    60. Català-Moll F
    61. Kerick M
    62. Wang C
    63. Melton P
    64. Elliott HR
    65. Shin J
    66. Bernard M
    67. Yet I
    68. Smart M
    69. Gorrie-Stone T
    70. Shaw C
    71. Al Chalabi A
    72. Ring SM
    73. Pershagen G
    74. Melén E
    75. Jiménez-Conde J
    76. Roquer J
    77. Lawlor DA
    78. Wright J
    79. Martin NG
    80. Montgomery GW
    81. Moffitt TE
    82. Poulton R
    83. Esko T
    84. Milani L
    85. Metspalu A
    86. Perry JRB
    87. Ong KK
    88. Wareham NJ
    89. Matullo G
    90. Sacerdote C
    91. Panico S
    92. Caspi A
    93. Arseneault L
    94. Gagnon F
    95. Ollikainen M
    96. Kaprio J
    97. Felix JF
    98. Rivadeneira F
    99. Tiemeier H
    100. van IJzendoorn MH
    101. Uitterlinden AG
    102. Jaddoe VWV
    103. Haley C
    104. McIntosh AM
    105. Evans KL
    106. Murray A
    107. Räikkönen K
    108. Lahti J
    109. Nohr EA
    110. Sørensen TIA
    111. Hansen T
    112. Morgen CS
    113. Binder EB
    114. Lucae S
    115. Gonzalez JR
    116. Bustamante M
    117. Sunyer J
    118. Holloway JW
    119. Karmaus W
    120. Zhang H
    121. Deary IJ
    122. Wray NR
    123. Starr JM
    124. Beekman M
    125. van Heemst D
    126. Slagboom PE
    127. Morange PE
    128. Trégouët DA
    129. Veldink JH
    130. Davies GE
    131. de Geus EJC
    132. Boomsma DI
    133. Vonk JM
    134. Brunekreef B
    135. Koppelman GH
    136. Alarcón-Riquelme ME
    137. Huang RC
    138. Pennell CE
    139. van Meurs J
    140. Ikram MA
    141. Hughes AD
    142. Tillin T
    143. Chaturvedi N
    144. Pausova Z
    145. Paus T
    146. Spector TD
    147. Kumari M
    148. Schalkwyk LC
    149. Visscher PM
    150. Davey Smith G
    151. Bock C
    152. Gaunt TR
    153. Bell JT
    154. Heijmans BT
    155. Mill J
    156. Relton CL
    157. BIOS Consortium

    (2021) Genomic and phenotypic insights from an atlas of genetic effects on DNA methylation

    Nature Genetics 53:1311–1321.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-021-00923-x

    • Google Scholar
46. 1. Moldoveanu AI
    2. Shephard RJ
    3. Shek PN

    (2000) Exercise elevates plasma levels but not gene expression of IL-1beta, IL-6, and TNF-alpha in blood mononuclear cells

    Journal of Applied Physiology 89:1499–1504.

    https://doi.org/10.1152/jappl.2000.89.4.1499

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
47. 1. Morgan BP
    2. Harris CL

    (2015) Complement, a target for therapy in inflammatory and degenerative diseases

    Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 14:857–877.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nrd4657

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
48. Website

    1. MRC-IEU

    (2021) The MRC-IEU catalog of epigenome-wide association studies

    Accessed April 1, 2021.

    http://www.ewascatalog.org
49. 1. Navrady LB
    2. Wolters MK
    3. MacIntyre DJ
    4. Clarke T-K
    5. Campbell AI
    6. Murray AD
    7. Evans KL
    8. Seckl J
    9. Haley C
    10. Milburn K
    11. Wardlaw JM
    12. Porteous DJ
    13. Deary IJ
    14. McIntosh AM

    (2018) Cohort Profile: Stratifying Resilience and Depression Longitudinally (STRADL): a questionnaire follow-up of Generation Scotland: Scottish Family Health Study (GS:SFHS)

    International Journal of Epidemiology 47:13–14g.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyx115

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
50. 1. Ngo D
    2. Benson MD
    3. Long JZ
    4. Chen Z-Z
    5. Wang R
    6. Nath AK
    7. Keyes MJ
    8. Shen D
    9. Sinha S
    10. Kuhn E
    11. Morningstar JE
    12. Shi X
    13. Peterson BD
    14. Chan C
    15. Katz DH
    16. Tahir UA
    17. Farrell LA
    18. Melander O
    19. Mosley JD
    20. Carr SA
    21. Vasan RS
    22. Larson MG
    23. Smith JG
    24. Wang TJ
    25. Yang Q
    26. Gerszten RE

    (2021) Proteomic profiling reveals biomarkers and pathways in type 2 diabetes risk

    JCI Insight 6:e144392.

    https://doi.org/10.1172/jci.insight.144392

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
51. Website

    1. NHS England

    (2016) mproving Outcomes Through Personalised Medicine

    Accessed April 1, 2021.

    https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/improving-outcomes-personalised-medicine.pdf
52. 1. Ort M
    2. Dingemanse J
    3. van den Anker J
    4. Kaufmann P

    (2020) Treatment of Rare Inflammatory Kidney Diseases: Drugs Targeting the Terminal Complement Pathway

    Frontiers in Immunology 11:599417.

    https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.599417

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
53. Software

    1. Pedersen TL

    (2021) ggraph: An Implementation of Grammar of Graphics for Graphs and Networks, version 2.0.5

    R Package Version.

    https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ggraph
54. 1. Pérez-Pérez R
    2. García-Santos E
    3. Ortega-Delgado FJ
    4. López JA
    5. Camafeita E
    6. Ricart W
    7. Fernández-Real JM
    8. Peral B

    (2012) Attenuated metabolism is a hallmark of obesity as revealed by comparative proteomic analysis of human omental adipose tissue

    Journal of Proteomics 75:783–795.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jprot.2011.09.016

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
55. 1. Peters A
    2. Nawrot TS
    3. Baccarelli AA

    (2021) Hallmarks of environmental insults

    Cell 184:1455–1468.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2021.01.043

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
56. 1. Petersen AK
    2. Zeilinger S
    3. Kastenmüller G
    4. Römisch-Margl W
    5. Brugger M
    6. Peters A
    7. Meisinger C
    8. Strauch K
    9. Hengstenberg C
    10. Pagel P
    11. Huber F
    12. Mohney RP
    13. Grallert H
    14. Illig T
    15. Adamski J
    16. Waldenberger M
    17. Gieger C
    18. Suhre K

    (2014) Epigenetics meets metabolomics: an epigenome-wide association study with blood serum metabolic traits

    Human Molecular Genetics 23:534–545.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddt430

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
57. 1. Pietzner M
    2. Wheeler E
    3. Carrasco-Zanini J
    4. Raffler J
    5. Kerrison ND
    6. Oerton E
    7. Auyeung VPW
    8. Luan J
    9. Finan C
    10. Casas JP
    11. Ostroff R
    12. Williams SA
    13. Kastenmüller G
    14. Ralser M
    15. Gamazon ER
    16. Wareham NJ
    17. Hingorani AD
    18. Langenberg C

    (2020) Genetic architecture of host proteins involved in SARS-CoV-2 infection

    Nature Communications 11:6397.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-19996-z

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
58. Software

    1. R Development Core Team

    (2020) R: A language and environment for statistical computing

    R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.

    https://www.R-project.org
59. Software

    1. Revelle W

    (2020) Procedures for Personality and Psychological Research, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA, version 2.0.9

    Psych.

    https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych
60. 1. Saffari A
    2. Silver MJ
    3. Zavattari P
    4. Moi L
    5. Columbano A
    6. Meaburn EL
    7. Dudbridge F

    (2018) Estimation of a significance threshold for epigenome-wide association studies

    Genetic Epidemiology 42:20–33.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/gepi.22086

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
61. 1. Safiri S
    2. Kolahi AA
    3. Hoy D
    4. Smith E
    5. Bettampadi D
    6. Mansournia MA
    7. Almasi-Hashiani A
    8. Ashrafi-Asgarabad A
    9. Moradi-Lakeh M
    10. Qorbani M
    11. Collins G
    12. Woolf AD
    13. March L
    14. Cross M

    (2019) Global, regional and national burden of rheumatoid arthritis 1990-2017: a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease study 2017

    Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 78:1463–1471.

    https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2019-215920

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
62. 1. Seeboth A
    2. McCartney DL
    3. Wang Y
    4. Hillary RF
    5. Stevenson AJ
    6. Walker RM
    7. Campbell A
    8. Evans KL
    9. McIntosh AM
    10. Hägg S
    11. Deary IJ
    12. Marioni RE

    (2020) DNA methylation outlier burden, health, and ageing in Generation Scotland and the Lothian Birth Cohorts of 1921 and 1936

    Clinical Epigenetics 12:49.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/s13148-020-00838-0

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
63. 1. Serban KA
    2. Pratte KA
    3. Bowler RP

    (2021) Protein Biomarkers for COPD Outcomes

    Chest 159:2244–2253.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2021.01.004

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
64. 1. Shah S
    2. McRae AF
    3. Marioni RE
    4. Harris SE
    5. Gibson J
    6. Henders AK
    7. Redmond P
    8. Cox SR
    9. Pattie A
    10. Corley J
    11. Murphy L
    12. Martin NG
    13. Montgomery GW
    14. Starr JM
    15. Wray NR
    16. Deary IJ
    17. Visscher PM

    (2014) Genetic and environmental exposures constrain epigenetic drift over the human life course

    Genome Research 24:1725–1733.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.176933.114

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
65. 1. Smith BH
    2. Campbell A
    3. Linksted P
    4. Fitzpatrick B
    5. Jackson C
    6. Kerr SM
    7. Deary IJ
    8. MacIntyre DJ
    9. Campbell H
    10. McGilchrist M
    11. Hocking LJ
    12. Wisely L
    13. Ford I
    14. Lindsay RS
    15. Morton R
    16. Palmer CNA
    17. Dominiczak AF
    18. Porteous DJ
    19. Morris AD

    (2013) Cohort profile: Generation scotland: Scottish family health study (GS: SFHS)

    The Study, Its Participants and Their Potential for Genetic Research on Health and Illness. International Journal of Epidemiology 42:689–700.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dys084

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
66. 1. Stevenson AJ
    2. McCartney DL
    3. Hillary RF
    4. Campbell A
    5. Morris SW
    6. Bermingham ML
    7. Walker RM
    8. Evans KL
    9. Boutin TS
    10. Hayward C
    11. McRae AF
    12. McColl BW
    13. Spires-Jones TL
    14. McIntosh AM
    15. Deary IJ
    16. Marioni RE

    (2020) Characterisation of an inflammation-related epigenetic score and its association with cognitive ability

    Clinical Epigenetics 12:113.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/s13148-020-00903-8

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
67. 1. Stevenson AJ
    2. Gadd DA
    3. Hillary RF
    4. McCartney DL
    5. Campbell A
    6. Walker RM
    7. Evans KL
    8. Harris SE
    9. Spires-Jones TL
    10. McRae AF
    11. Visscher PM
    12. McIntosh AM
    13. Deary IJ
    14. Marioni RE

    (2021) Creating and Validating a DNA Methylation-Based Proxy for Interleukin-6

    The Journals of Gerontology. Series A, Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences 76:2284–2292.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/glab046

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
68. 1. Suhre K
    2. Arnold M
    3. Bhagwat AM
    4. Cotton RJ
    5. Engelke R
    6. Raffler J
    7. Sarwath H
    8. Thareja G
    9. Wahl A
    10. DeLisle RK
    11. Gold L
    12. Pezer M
    13. Lauc G
    14. El-Din Selim MA
    15. Mook-Kanamori DO
    16. Al-Dous EK
    17. Mohamoud YA
    18. Malek J
    19. Strauch K
    20. Grallert H
    21. Peters A
    22. Kastenmüller G
    23. Gieger C
    24. Graumann J

    (2017) Connecting genetic risk to disease end points through the human blood plasma proteome

    Nature Communications 8:14357.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14357

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
69. 1. Sun BB
    2. Maranville JC
    3. Peters JE
    4. Stacey D
    5. Staley JR
    6. Blackshaw J
    7. Burgess S
    8. Jiang T
    9. Paige E
    10. Surendran P
    11. Oliver-Williams C
    12. Kamat MA
    13. Prins BP
    14. Wilcox SK
    15. Zimmerman ES
    16. Chi A
    17. Bansal N
    18. Spain SL
    19. Wood AM
    20. Morrell NW
    21. Bradley JR
    22. Janjic N
    23. Roberts DJ
    24. Ouwehand WH
    25. Todd JA
    26. Soranzo N
    27. Suhre K
    28. Paul DS
    29. Fox CS
    30. Plenge RM
    31. Danesh J
    32. Runz H
    33. Butterworth AS

    (2018) Genomic atlas of the human plasma proteome

    Nature 558:73–79.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0175-2

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
70. 1. Taylor AM
    2. Pattie A
    3. Deary IJ

    (2018) Cohort Profile Update: The Lothian Birth Cohorts of 1921 and 1936

    International Journal of Epidemiology 47:1042–1042r.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyy022

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
71. Software

    1. Therneau TM

    (2020a) A Package for Survival Analysis in R, version 3.2-7

    R Package Version.

    https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=survival
72. Software

    1. Therneau TM

    (2020b) coxme: Mixed Effects Cox Models, version 2.2-16

    R Package.

    https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=coxme
73. 1. Trejo Banos D
    2. McCartney DL
    3. Patxot M
    4. Anchieri L
    5. Battram T
    6. Christiansen C
    7. Costeira R
    8. Walker RM
    9. Morris SW
    10. Campbell A
    11. Zhang Q
    12. Porteous DJ
    13. McRae AF
    14. Wray NR
    15. Visscher PM
    16. Haley CS
    17. Evans KL
    18. Deary IJ
    19. McIntosh AM
    20. Hemani G
    21. Bell JT
    22. Marioni RE
    23. Robinson MR

    (2020) Bayesian reassessment of the epigenetic architecture of complex traits

    Nature Communications 11:2865.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-16520-1

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
74. 1. Watanabe K
    2. Taskesen E
    3. van Bochoven A
    4. Posthuma D

    (2017) Functional mapping and annotation of genetic associations with FUMA

    Nature Communications 8:1–11.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-01261-5

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
75. 1. Williamson EJ
    2. Walker AJ
    3. Bhaskaran K
    4. Bacon S
    5. Bates C
    6. Morton CE
    7. Curtis HJ
    8. Mehrkar A
    9. Evans D
    10. Inglesby P
    11. Cockburn J
    12. McDonald HI
    13. MacKenna B
    14. Tomlinson L
    15. Douglas IJ
    16. Rentsch CT
    17. Mathur R
    18. Wong AYS
    19. Grieve R
    20. Harrison D
    21. Forbes H
    22. Schultze A
    23. Croker R
    24. Parry J
    25. Hester F
    26. Harper S
    27. Perera R
    28. Evans SJW
    29. Smeeth L
    30. Goldacre B

    (2020) Factors associated with COVID-19-related death using OpenSAFELY

    Nature 584:430–436.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2521-4

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
76. Book

    1. World Health Organization

    (2018)

    Global Health Estimates 2016: Deaths by Cause, Age, Sex, by Country and by Region

    WHO.

    • Google Scholar
77. 1. Yao C
    2. Chen G
    3. Song C
    4. Keefe J
    5. Mendelson M
    6. Huan T
    7. Sun BB
    8. Laser A
    9. Maranville JC
    10. Wu H
    11. Ho JE
    12. Courchesne P
    13. Lyass A
    14. Larson MG
    15. Gieger C
    16. Graumann J
    17. Johnson AD
    18. Danesh J
    19. Runz H
    20. Hwang S-J
    21. Liu C
    22. Butterworth AS
    23. Suhre K
    24. Levy D

    (2018) Author Correction: Genome-wide mapping of plasma protein QTLs identifies putatively causal genes and pathways for cardiovascular disease

    Nature Communications 9:3853.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-06231-z

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
78. 1. Zaghlool SB
    2. Kühnel B
    3. Elhadad MA
    4. Kader S
    5. Halama A
    6. Thareja G
    7. Engelke R
    8. Sarwath H
    9. Al-Dous EK
    10. Mohamoud YA
    11. Meitinger T
    12. Wilson R
    13. Strauch K
    14. Peters A
    15. Mook-Kanamori DO
    16. Graumann J
    17. Malek JA
    18. Gieger C
    19. Waldenberger M
    20. Suhre K

    (2020) Epigenetics meets proteomics in an epigenome-wide association study with circulating blood plasma protein traits

    Nature Communications 11:15.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-13831-w

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
79. 1. Zhang Y
    2. Wilson R
    3. Heiss J
    4. Breitling LP
    5. Saum KU
    6. Schöttker B
    7. Holleczek B
    8. Waldenberger M
    9. Peters A
    10. Brenner H

    (2017) DNA methylation signatures in peripheral blood strongly predict all-cause mortality

    Nature Communications 8:14617.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14617

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
80. 1. Zhang Q
    2. Marioni RE
    3. Robinson MR
    4. Higham J
    5. Sproul D
    6. Wray NR
    7. Deary IJ
    8. McRae AF
    9. Visscher PM

    (2018) Genotype effects contribute to variation in longitudinal methylome patterns in older people

    Genome Medicine 10:75.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/s13073-018-0585-7

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
81. 1. Zhang F
    2. Chen W
    3. Zhu Z
    4. Zhang Q
    5. Nabais MF
    6. Qi T
    7. Deary IJ
    8. Wray NR
    9. Visscher PM
    10. McRae AF
    11. Yang J

    (2019) OSCA: a tool for omic-data-based complex trait analysis

    Genome Biology 20:107.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-019-1718-z

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar

Author details

1. Danni A Gadd

   Centre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

   Contribution

   Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Software, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review and editing

   Contributed equally with

   Robert F Hillary, Daniel L McCartney and Shaza B Zaghlool

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6398-5407

2. Robert F Hillary

   Centre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

   Contribution

   Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Visualization

   Contributed equally with

   Danni A Gadd, Daniel L McCartney and Shaza B Zaghlool

   Competing interests

   has received consultant fees from Illumina

3. Daniel L McCartney

   Centre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

   Contribution

   Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Validation

   Contributed equally with

   Danni A Gadd, Robert F Hillary and Shaza B Zaghlool

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

4. Shaza B Zaghlool

   1. Department of Physiology and Biophysics, Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar, Education City, Doha, Qatar
   2. Computer Engineering Department, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, United States

   Contribution

   Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Validation

   Contributed equally with

   Danni A Gadd, Robert F Hillary and Daniel L McCartney

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

5. Anna J Stevenson

   Centre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

   Contribution

   Investigation, Methodology

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

6. Yipeng Cheng

   Centre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

   Contribution

   Data curation, Formal analysis

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

7. Chloe Fawns-Ritchie

   1. Centre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
   2. Department of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

   Contribution

   Data curation, Formal analysis

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

8. Cliff Nangle

   Centre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

   Contribution

   Data curation, Investigation

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5432-1158

9. Archie Campbell

   Centre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

   Contribution

   Data curation, Investigation

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

10. Robin Flaig

    Centre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

    Contribution

    Data curation, Investigation

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

11. Sarah E Harris

    1. Department of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    2. Lothian Birth Cohorts, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

    Contribution

    Data curation, Investigation

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

    "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4941-5106

12. Rosie M Walker

    Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, Chancellor’s Building, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

    Contribution

    Data curation, Investigation

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

13. Liu Shi

    Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom

    Contribution

    Data curation, Investigation

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

14. Elliot M Tucker-Drob

    1. Department of Psychology, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, United States
    2. Population Research Center, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, United States

    Contribution

    Data curation, Investigation

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

15. Christian Gieger

    1. Research Unit Molecular Epidemiology, Helmholtz Zentrum München, German Research Center for Environmental Health, Neuherberg, Germany
    2. Institute of Epidemiology, Helmholtz Zentrum München, German Research Center for Environmental Health, Neuherberg, Germany
    3. German Center for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK), partner site Munich Heart Alliance, Munich, Germany
    4. German Center for Diabetes Research (DZD), Neuherberg, Germany

    Contribution

    Data curation, Investigation

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

16. Annette Peters

    1. Institute of Epidemiology, Helmholtz Zentrum München, German Research Center for Environmental Health, Neuherberg, Germany
    2. German Center for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK), partner site Munich Heart Alliance, Munich, Germany
    3. German Center for Diabetes Research (DZD), Neuherberg, Germany

    Contribution

    Data curation, Investigation

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

17. Melanie Waldenberger

    1. Research Unit Molecular Epidemiology, Helmholtz Zentrum München, German Research Center for Environmental Health, Neuherberg, Germany
    2. Institute of Epidemiology, Helmholtz Zentrum München, German Research Center for Environmental Health, Neuherberg, Germany
    3. German Center for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK), partner site Munich Heart Alliance, Munich, Germany

    Contribution

    Data curation, Investigation

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

18. Johannes Graumann

    1. Scientific Service Group Biomolecular Mass Spectrometry, Max Planck Institute for Heart and Lung Research, W.G. Kerckhoff Institute, Bad Nauheim, Germany
    2. German Centre for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK), Partner Site Rhine-Main, Max Planck Institute of Heart and Lung Research, Bad Nauheim, Germany

    Contribution

    Data curation, Investigation

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

19. Allan F McRae

    Institute for Molecular Bioscience, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia

    Contribution

    Data curation, Investigation

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

20. Ian J Deary

    1. Department of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    2. Lothian Birth Cohorts, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

    Contribution

    Data curation, Investigation

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

21. David J Porteous

    Centre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

    Contribution

    Data curation, Investigation

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

22. Caroline Hayward

    1. Centre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    2. Medical Research Council Human Genetics Unit, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

    Contribution

    Data curation, Investigation

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

23. Peter M Visscher

    Institute for Molecular Bioscience, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia

    Contribution

    Data curation, Investigation

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

24. Simon R Cox

    1. Department of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    2. Lothian Birth Cohorts, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

    Contribution

    Data curation, Investigation

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

25. Kathryn L Evans

    Centre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

    Contribution

    Data curation, Investigation

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

26. Andrew M McIntosh

    1. Centre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
    2. Division of Psychiatry, University of Edinburgh, Royal Edinburgh Hospital, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

    Contribution

    Data curation, Investigation

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

27. Karsten Suhre

    Department of Physiology and Biophysics, Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar, Education City, Doha, Qatar

    Contribution

    Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Methodology

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

    "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9638-3912

28. Riccardo E Marioni

    Centre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

    Contribution

    Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Writing – original draft, Writing – review and editing

    For correspondence

    Riccardo.Marioni@ed.ac.uk

    Competing interests

    has received speaker fees from Illumina and is an advisor to the Epigenetic Clock Development Foundation

    "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4430-4260

• 5,005

  Page views

• 651

  Downloads

• 25

  Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: PubMed Central, Crossref, Scopus.