A NuGenia Logics publication · Free to read

Residential Context and Epigenetic Age Acceleration in Older Americans

This study investigates the relationship between residential contexts and epigenetic age acceleration (EAA) among older Black and White Americans, utilizing data from the Health and Retirement Study conducted between 2010 and 2016. EAA is a significant biomarker indicative of premature aging, measured through various epigenetic clocks including GrimAge, PhenoAge, and DunedinPoAm38.

The research involved 3,187 non-Hispanic Black and White older adult participants, with a mean age of 69, who provided venous blood samples in 2016. The authors employed multigroup structural equation modeling to analyze the direct and indirect relationships between EAA and five residential context features: racial clustering, air pollution, greenspace, household income, and perceived disorder.

Findings indicate that White respondents residing in areas with a high concentration of other White residents exhibited lower EAA in 2016 compared to their peers in less racially homogeneous neighborhoods. Notably, higher household incomes in predominantly White areas accounted for approximately 25% of this association. In contrast, the study found no significant correlations between residential contexts and EAA among Black participants, suggesting that the factors influencing EAA may differ across racial groups.

The robustness of these findings was confirmed through various control measures and sensitivity analyses, underscoring the impact of concentrated privilege in predominantly White neighborhoods as a potential contributor to health and aging disparities between Black and White populations.

What this study does not show

This study does not establish a causal relationship between residential contexts and epigenetic age acceleration, nor does it provide insights into the mechanisms underlying these observed disparities.

Evidence scorecard

  • Analytic validity: Established
  • Clinical validity: Not established
  • Clinical utility: Not established

The evidence is based on primary research involving human participants.

Sponsored
Article slot — 728×90

Evidence classes are taken from source metadata — publication type and trial registration — never from opinion. How we classify · Corrections