A recent study led by researchers from the Universities of Jyväskylä, Tampere, and Helsinki, along with the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare (THL) and Karolinska Institutet in Sweden, has found that biological age may be a stronger indicator of heart disease risk than conventional methods.
The study, published in the journal Age and Ageing, suggests that understanding how old your body actually is—not just your age in years—could give doctors a clearer picture of your heart health.
Biological aging is the gradual decline of cells and tissues in the body over time. This process starts early in adulthood and affects various bodily functions, increasing the risk of diseases and even death.
Unlike chronological age, which simply counts the years you’ve lived, biological age reflects how well—or poorly—your body is functioning.
This age can vary widely among individuals and is influenced by genetics, lifestyle choices, and environmental factors.
To measure biological age, the researchers used two main indicators: the frailty index and telomere length. The frailty index assesses health by measuring the accumulation of health problems across different systems in the body.
It reflects how fragile or resilient someone is to illness and overall physical decline.
The second indicator, telomere length, measures the protective caps at the ends of chromosomes that shorten with each cell division. Shorter telomeres are linked to aging and age-related diseases.
In contrast, traditional methods for predicting heart disease risk, such as the SCORE2, SCORE2-OP, and Framingham risk scores, primarily rely on chronological age, gender, and health-related factors like cholesterol levels, blood pressure, and smoking habits. These methods do not account for how fast a person’s body is actually aging biologically.
The study looked at over 14,000 people from Finland and Sweden who did not have a history of cardiovascular disease. Researchers found that the frailty index was a strong predictor of heart disease risk for people both under and over the age of 70.
In fact, it alone could predict the likelihood of developing heart disease within the next ten years with surprising accuracy. This finding was consistent across three large groups of participants, demonstrating that biological age could provide valuable insight beyond what traditional methods offer.
Interestingly, the results for telomere length were less clear. While shorter telomeres are generally associated with aging and health risks, the study found that they were not as strongly linked to heart disease risk as the frailty index was.
This suggests that measuring frailty—how the body is holding up across multiple systems—might be a more practical and reliable way to assess biological aging when it comes to heart health.
According to Anna Tirkkonen, a Postdoctoral Researcher from the University of Jyväskylä, the study’s findings highlight the importance of considering biological age in heart disease assessments. She explained that the frailty index, in particular, was effective at reflecting a person’s risk of developing heart disease, even among those who were relatively young.
Laura Kananen, a Senior Research Fellow from Tampere University and the Karolinska Institutet, added that the frailty index is not only predictive but also easy to measure. In many cases, it can be assessed through a simple questionnaire, making it accessible and practical for regular health check-ups.
The researchers believe that incorporating biological age into traditional risk assessments could significantly improve predictions for heart disease. Current models focus heavily on age and health history, but they may miss critical details about how well a person’s body is coping with the aging process.
For instance, two people of the same chronological age might have vastly different biological ages, with one person being far more at risk of heart problems due to hidden health issues.
This study is one of the first to use the frailty index alongside the SCORE2 and SCORE2-OP risk scores, making it a groundbreaking step towards improving heart disease prediction. Tirkkonen noted that only one previous study had attempted to combine the frailty index with the Framingham risk score, and the new findings are consistent with those earlier results.
Moving forward, the research team believes that biological age measurements could become a valuable part of heart disease screening. By capturing a broader view of a person’s health beyond just their age and medical history, doctors could better identify those at higher risk and take steps to prevent heart disease earlier.
Kananen emphasized that this approach is not only effective but also practical, as it can be done through routine health assessments without the need for complex testing.
The study’s findings suggest that understanding biological age could be key to tackling heart disease more effectively. As researchers continue to explore this field, it could lead to improved screening methods and better outcomes for people at risk of heart-related conditions.
If you care about heart disease, please read studies that herbal supplements could harm your heart rhythm, and how eating eggs can help reduce heart disease risk.
For more health information, please see recent studies that apple juice could benefit your heart health, and results showing yogurt may help lower the death risks in heart disease.
The research findings can be found in Age and Ageing.
Copyright © 2025 Knowridge Science Report. All rights reserved.
