The rise of early-onset cancer may be linked to changes in biological aging.
The rise of early-onset cancer has become one of the most puzzling trends in modern oncology. A new study investigated whether changes in biological aging may help explain why some cancers are appearing more frequently in younger adults.
Enjoying this research? Get deeper insights like this delivered every other week.
Every other week our Premium Members receive deep dives like this alongside Rhonda's commentary and 8+ other hand-picked papers.
The researchers analyzed health data from 148,317 adults in the UK Biobank. Using a blood-based measure called PhenoAge, they estimated each participant's biological age from a set of routine blood markers and compared it with their actual age. The difference was converted into a standardized score. Higher scores indicated that a person's biological age was older than expected for their age, while lower scores indicated a younger-than-expected biological age. The researchers then examined whether higher scores were associated with solid cancers diagnosed before age 55. To determine whether the same association could be observed in a separate population, they repeated the analysis in 8,935 adults from the US All of Us Research Program.
- More recent generations were more likely to appear biologically older than their actual age. In the UK cohort, participants born between 1965 and 1974 had age-gap scores about 23% higher than those born between 1950 and 1954.
- People with the highest biological age-gap scores had a 15% higher rate of solid cancers before age 55 than those with the lowest scores.**
- Higher biological age-gap scores were associated with a 57% higher rate of lung cancer. Rates of gastrointestinal and uterine cancers were also 17% and 31% higher, respectively , although that finding was statistically less certain.
- A similar pattern appeared in the US cohort. Higher biological age-gap scores were associated with a 22% higher rate of early-onset solid cancers.
- Two alternative aging clocks did not clearly reproduce the overall cancer association, reducing confidence in a broader link between biological aging and early-onset cancer and suggesting the finding may be stronger for PhenoAge than for other aging measures.
Rather than pointing to a single cause or risk factor, biological-age measures may capture the cumulative effects of many influences that shape the body's internal environment over time, including metabolic health, inflammation, sleep, chronic stress, environmental exposures, diet, obesity, physical activity, and social conditions. Together, these factors can affect how tissues function, how the immune system responds, and how the body repairs damage as people age. As a result, biological-age measures could help connect generational changes in lifestyle and environmental factors to the rising incidence of early-onset cancer.
Because this was an observational study, it cannot determine whether biological aging contributes to cancer development or simply reflects other factors linked to cancer risk. Biological-age tests therefore should not be viewed as tools for predicting who will develop cancer. If confirmed in future studies, biological-age measures could help refine prevention and screening strategies by identifying biological changes associated with cancer risk earlier in life. In episode #112, I discuss with Dr. Steve Horvath how epigenetic clocks measure biological age and which proven interventions actually slow or reverse aging.