31
$\begingroup$

Several companies are commercializing tests for telomere length such as this one here. I understand the basic mechanism for why telomeres shorten during DNA replication, but how good is the evidence that telomere length is a reliable indicator of healthspan/lifespan?

$\endgroup$
20
$\begingroup$

I disagree with Ctina. So many factors go into determining loss rate, activity of telomerase, gene conversion or unequal exchange at chromosome ends, etc to ever say that length is a function of age. There is far more variation between individuals and between cells within an individual than aging ever shows. Here is one study:

Das B, Saini D, Seshadri M. Telomere length in human adults and high level natural background radiation. PLoS One. 2009 Dec 23;4(12):e8440.

however I've seen similar studies published elsewhere. Telomere length as diagnostic for age is very poor at best. Here's an article that gives a formula, but acknowledges the R2 is 0.04, which is useless: http://preview.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18378481

$\endgroup$
4
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ There's no math equation processing at the moment but you can use the html <sup> tag if you wish for things such as R-squared =) $\endgroup$
    – Rory M
    Dec 29 '11 at 23:33
  • $\begingroup$ Please note that I did never say that it is reliable. So I don't understand in what you disagree exactly. I also referred that are many factors that alter the size of the temolere, as you did. Just because I did not stated "It is not reliable" I also did not say "It is reliable". That was my mistake to not make this point clear. But it is true that it gives a rough idea of lifespan (I said rough, not accurate!) $\endgroup$
    – Ctina
    Dec 30 '11 at 10:04
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I disagree that "It would be reliable if we don't take into account the environment, and if we are comparing two genetically identical persons." There is far too much stochastic change (and non-telomerase-based repair such as interchromosomal exchange at telomeres). Two cells from the same individual are not concordant, so your statement cannot be right. To say that it is "not 100% reliable" suggests it's still pretty good (but not perfect). It's less-than-4%, so I disagree that it can be used for "a rough idea." $\endgroup$
    – KAM
    Dec 30 '11 at 11:21
  • $\begingroup$ Ok, what you said is true. agreed. vote up $\endgroup$
    – Ctina
    Dec 30 '11 at 12:01
3
$\begingroup$

A number of studies have compared replicative capacity of cells with lifespan. Since Replicative capacity of cells is linked to telomere-length, these studies may provide indirect evidence for the association between telomere length and lifespan. One interesting study in particular compared animal life spans and in vitro replicative capacity of skin fibroblasts in groupings of small, middle, large, and very large breeds of dogs of specific ages (Li et al, 1996). It was found that the life spans were inversely correlated to the frame sizes of the breeds. It was shown that all the small breeds studied have a longer life span than that of the large breeds. The replicative capacity of fibroblasts from the large dogs (Great Dane and Irish Wolfhound) was significantly decreased compared with that of the small dogs. The reasoning behind these observations may again be due to varying degrees of cell turnover between the species. Large dogs consist of more cells than small dogs and as a result more cell turnover was initially required in their development compared to small dogs. This increase in cell turnover would subsequently lead to a decrease in replicative potential (due to telomere shortening) and an increase in the rate of senescent cell formation.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ It's always helpful to link to papers you reference :-) $\endgroup$
    – Rory M
    Jun 27 '12 at 10:04

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.