European Geriatric Medicine

, Volume 10, Issue 2, pp 183–188 | Cite as

Why are people with HIV considered “older adults” in their fifties?

  • Matilde Sánchez-CondeEmail author
  • Jorge Díaz-Alvarez
  • Fernando Dronda
  • Fátima Brañas


One in six new HIV diagnoses in Europe occur among people over 50 years of age. As in the general population, the aging process is not homogeneous among older adults with HIV, and some of them exhibit impaired physical function, higher frailty and more frequent geriatric syndromes. These illness reflect a higher biological age independently of their chronological age. After starting antirretroviral treatment, people living with HIV (PLWH) older than 50 exhibit a poorer immunological recovery than younger PLWH. Moreover, older adults with HIV present early onset of comorbidities and functional impairment caused by persistent and chronic activation of the immune system, which leads to immune exhaustion and accelerated immunosenescence despite optimal suppression of HIV replication. The evidence of poorer immunological response to ARV, linked with early immunosenescence in PLWH and its prematurely deleterious effect in physiological functions and its clinical consequences, are the basis to accept the cut-off of 50 years of age to define an “older adult with HIV”.


HIV Aging DNA-methylation Epigenetic 


Since the introduction of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) in 1996, the course of HIV disease has been significantly modified thanks to longer survival rates and improved quality of life [1]. Moreover, the number of new infections diagnosed among older persons is increasing; in fact, one in six new HIV diagnoses in Europe are people over 50 years of age. Such a statistic represents a total of 14% of new cases with an annual increase of 2% in this age group [2], and it is expected that in 2030 almost 40% of them will be older than 65 years of age [3]. Therefore, the proportion of older people living with HIV (PLWH) is greatly increasing, with a life expectancy approaching that of the general population in which the main causes of mortality and morbidity are related to malignancies, cardiovascular and renal diseases and metabolic complications [4, 5, 6].

In the general population, older age is generally defined at 65 years of age in relation to retirement from active working life and its associated changes in adulthood. However, this definition is arbitrary because there is no general agreement on the age at which a person becomes old. The common use of calendar age to determine the threshold of old age assumes an equivalence between chronological and biological age, but they are not synonymous because aging is not a homogeneous process. Some people reach old age independent of assistance and with most faculties intact, while others suffer from diseases and deficits that seriously impact their quality of life. People with a similar chronological age have different biological functions. These inter-individual differences make chronological age an unreliable index to use when measuring vitality, mental or physical function and longevity [7]. However, from a scientific and practical point of view, it is necessary to establish cut-offs that allow us to study population groups with similar characteristics between them and variations from others (e.g., such as older PLWH).

Similar to the general population, aging is not homogeneous among PLWH. In addition, previously published data reveals an increased biological age in HIV-infected versus non-HIV-infected individuals, even if viral replication is suppressed [8]. Moreover, PLWH is a population group with an increased prominence of age-related comorbid illnesses with respect to the non-HIV population [9]. Furthermore, these comorbidities appear early and include higher rates of functional impairment and geriatric syndromes such as frailty, which may become up to twice as prevalent in comparison to non-infected individuals who are 10 years older [10, 11, 12].

Thus, the identification of patients who are at risk for unhealthy aging has become relevant for the care of older adults with HIV.

HIV infection and the relevance of chronological age and biological age

Chronological age is defined as the number of years a person has lived. Adults of the same chronological age have different risks for age-associated diseases. Biological age, also referred to as physiological age, takes genetic heterogeneity, functional status and many lifestyle factors into consideration. Consequently, it varies among individuals and could markedly differ from chronological age. Although higher chronological age is a major risk factor for functional impairments, chronic diseases and increased morbidity, some people are “biologically young”, and they are living into older age with good health and active lifestyles [13].

An important effort has been made during recent years to properly identify the accuracy of various biomarkers of aging. Some molecular and cellular hallmarks of biological age have developed, and the crucial relation between epigenetic alterations and cellular dysfunction associated with the aging process has been demonstrated. The most important epigenetic mechanisms include DNA methylation at very specific sites in the genoma, histone modifications and noncoding RNAs [14, 15]. The epigenetic clock developed by Horvath is currently the most promising biological age predictor in blood and tissues [16].

Various works based on the epigenetic clock have specifically evaluated the relationship between epigenetic age and age-related adverse outcomes beyond chronological age, known genetic factors, lifestyle or traditional risk factors [17, 18, 19]. More recently, Horvath and colleagues published a meta-analysis of 13 different cohorts that included a sample size of 13,089 individuals from three racial/ethnic groups (non-Hispanic whites, Hispanics and African Americans) to confirm the ability of the epigenetic clock to predict all-cause mortality and to evaluate the association between epigenetic age and longevity. They hypothesized that epigenetic age captures some aspect of biological age and the resulting susceptibility to disease and multiple health outcomes [20].

Regarding the HIV population, some investigators used the epigenetic clock to measure age acceleration even though the HIV infection was under control. Gross et al. [21] investigated the impact of chronic HIV infection on aging by performing a global analysis of the whole-blood DNA methylomes of 137 HIV-positive individuals under a stable antiretroviral treatment and comparing them with those of 44 matched HIV-negative individuals. These authors found that both chronic and recent HIV infections lead to an average aging advancement of 4.9 years and a 19% increase in expected mortality risk. In another study with participants from the Veterans Aging Cohort Study, Nelson et al. [22] assessed the difference in DNA methylation among antiretroviral treatment in (ART)-naïve, HIV-positive and HIV-negative individuals and found that the DNA methylation age was 11.2 years higher in HIV-positive individuals than in HIV-negative ones. Moreover, Horvath and colleagues [8] have shown that HIV infection leads to an increase in the epigenetic age of brain tissue (7.4 years) and blood (5.2 years). A recent study published by Levine et al. [23] already determined an association between an HIV infection with neurocognitive disorders (HAND) and higher biological age. The most important studies that use DNA methylation to assess a higher biological age is associated with HIV infection are shown in Table 1.
Table 1

Studies in which higher biological age assessed through DNA methylation is associated with HIV infection




Tissue in which age acceleration was measured


Age acceleration

Age (mean)

Total patients

Horvath [8]

DNA methylation data sets (cases HIV + and controls HIV−)




Brain tissue (7.4 years)

Blood (5.2 years)

Rickabaug [49]

Young (20–35)

Older (36–56)

24 HIV+

24 HIV−



13.7 years in young

14.7 years in older

Gross [21]

137 HIV+

44 HIV−



4.9 years

Levine [23]

58 HIV+



3.5 years

Leung [50]

35.8 years old

31 HIV+




Horvath [51]

10.3 years old

204 HIV+

44 HIV−




(*) In this study, the DNA methylation age was calculated for each subject at the various time points

(&) HIV+ adolescents exhibit increased levels of age acceleration with a high correlation between DNAm age and chronological age

But how can we take into account biological age and age acceleration in daily clinical practice? As far as we know, functional impairment, frailty and other geriatric syndromes can independently predict mortality and are commonly used to identify vulnerable older adults. These conditions are already described at relatively young ages in adults living with HIV even when it is virologically suppressed [11, 24]. Moreover, there are few published data from general population-based cohorts that show an association between the age acceleration measured by DNA methylation with the frailty phenotype and impaired physical function. Marioni and colleagues [25] performed cross-sectional correlations between age acceleration and cognitive ability, walking speed, lung function and grip strength concurrently measured in 1492 adults at age 70 and older. The correlations between greater age acceleration and poorer lung function performance, cognition and grip strength measures were significant. Similarly, in another study assessed by Bellizzi [26] authors found a correlation between DNA methylation levels and the frailty status in middle/advanced-aged subjects but not between DNA-methylation levels and age.

Therefore, the presence of frailty, impaired physical function and geriatric syndromes could constitute clinical markers of accelerated biological age that are easy to measure in a clinical follow-up. Implementing a more geriatric approach in the evaluation of PLWH could allow us to develop specific programs, and thereby avoid future adverse events and disability in this population.

Identifying a cut-off to define “older adult” among PLWH

During the first years of the HIV epidemic, most people were infected at young ages and the mortality rates were devastating. Consequently, assessing “older age” in PLWH was irrelevant. We are currently in a period in which the proportion of older people living with HIV is increasing, thereby reflecting a life expectancy that is close to that of the general population, but with higher rates of age-associated comorbidities and impaired physical function [9, 11, 12, 27, 28]. As a result, it has become progressively crucial to define “older age” in this population.

For the first time in 1998, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published a review of HIV infection in people in their fifties. It identified them as a “special group” because it was uncommon to find PLWH in that age category [29]. At this moment, the cut-off of 50 years was adopted to define an “older adult with HIV” in the majority of the investigations that referred to HIV infection, although it was arbitrary and lacked any strong evidence supported by clinical studies. Since that time, there has been growing data that demonstrated a lower immunological response in PLWH older than 50 years after starting antiretroviral treatment in comparison to younger patients, despite similar virological response and adherence to treatment rates [30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35].

An important study designed to identify an age cut-off to define “older adult with HIV” was published in 2012 [36]. Blanco and colleagues included 3523 HIV-infected patients who started antiretroviral treatment (ARV) during the span of time between 2004 and 2009. The patients were recruited from a large prospective, hospital-based multicenter cohort with an aim to assess the impact of the age at ARV initiation as a predictor of the immunological and virological response, as well as survival. In this study, the patients were stratified into the following intervals according to their age when they started ARV: < 25, 25–29, 30–34, 35–39, 40–44, 45–49, 50–54, 55–59, 60–64, 65–69, and 70 years or older. The impact of age on the time to immunological response, virological response, and death from any cause was assessed using Cox proportional hazard models. The authors found a decrease in immunological response when age increased, with the patients who were older than 50 less likely to achieve a complete immunological response, even though their adherence to treatment and virological response rates were similar to those of younger patients.

Moreover, beyond the poorer immunological recovery in PLWH older than 50, the authors of this study and other parallel investigations demonstrated that being 50 or older is also one of the variables that determines the survival of patients with HIV infection, with the main mortality causes unrelated to HIV [6, 37, 38, 39]. PLWH have a higher than expected risk for a number of complications typically associated with aging (e.g., diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cancer, liver disease, and neurocognitive impairment) [5, 9, 40, 41, 42], including functional impairment, frailty, sarcopenia and geriatric syndromes that occur earlier in HIV-infected individuals than their non-infected counterparts [10, 11, 12, 43].

The early onset of comorbidities and functional impairment among PLWH is based in the evidence that, despite optimal suppression of HIV replication after starting ARV, there is persistent and chronic activation of the immune system leading to the release of inflammation mediators. This immune activation arises from the persistent gut microbial translocation, sustained chronic antigenic stimulation, low-level HIV viremia, and coinfections by persistent pathogens. Constant stimulation of the immune system activates some of the changes to the adaptive immunity that are seen in the very old and leads to immune exhaustion and accelerated immunosenescence. HIV-associated inflammation and immunosenescence are directly related to the premature onset of other end-organ diseases [44, 45, 46, 47].

The evidence of poorer immunological response to ARV, linked with early immunosenescence in PLWH and its prematurely deleterious effect in physiological functions and its clinical consequences, are the basis to currently accept the cut-off of 50 years of age to define an “older adult with HIV”.

Final considerations and conclusions

In summary, PLWH are aging and showing an early increased number of health-adverse events as a consequence of constant immune activation, greater defects in innate and adaptive immunity and secondarily premature immunosenescence. If we exclusively consider the management of HIV infection, the impact of the early-aging process might be mitigated if antirretroviral treatment is initiated early, according to a strategic timing of antiretroviral treatment (START) study in which early ART initiation was associated with a significant reduction of health-adverse events [48]. In this study, however, the older adults with HIV were underrepresented, so more data are needed regarding a prompt initiation of ARV in this age group of patients.

Similarly to the general population, the aging process is not homogeneous in adults with HIV, and some of them exhibit impaired physical function, higher frailty status and more frequent geriatric syndromes. These reflect a higher biological age independently of their chronological age. Thus, the identification of patients who are at risk of unhealthy aging is crucial to the design of an adult-care program for managing and preventing age-associated diseases in this older HIV-positive population.

The geriatric approach overcomes our standard of care because it includes medical and nonmedical evaluations highlighting functional capacity and quality of life. We propose including a routine geriatric assessment of PLWH older than 50 years to detect early the presence of geriatric syndromes and implement specific approaches to avoid future adverse events and disability in these patients.


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

MSC has received honoraria for the following: speaking at symposia organized on behalf of MSD, ViiV Healthcare and Gilead. FBB has received honoraria for the following: research grants from MSD, speaking at symposia organized on behalf of MSD and ViiV Healthcare; developing educational materials for MSD; and board membership from ViiV Healthcare. JDA has no conflict of interest. FD has no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

For this type of study formal consent is not required.


  1. 1.
    Palella FJ Jr, Delaney KM, Moorman AC, Loveless MO, Fuhrer J, Satten GA et al (1998) Declining morbidity and mortality among patients with advanced human immunodeficiency virus infection. HIV Outpatient Study Investigators. N Engl J Med 338(13):853–860CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tavoschi L, Gomes Dias J, Pharris A (2017) New HIV diagnoses among adults aged 50 years or older in 31 European countries, 2004–15: an analysis of surveillance data. lancet HIV 4(11):e514–e521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Smit M, Brinkman K, Geerlings S, Smit C, Thyagarajan K, Sighem A et al (2015) Future challenges for clinical care of an ageing population infected with HIV: a modelling study. Lancet Infect Dis 15(7):810–818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Trickey A, May MT, Vehreschild JJ, Obel N, Gill MJ, Crane HM, Boesecke C, Patterson S, Grabar S, Cazanave C, Cavassini M (2017) Survival of HIV-positive patients starting antiretroviral therapy between 1996 and 2013: a collaborative analysis of cohort studies. Lancet HIV 4(8):e349–e356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wong C, Gange SJ, Moore RD, Justice AC, Buchacz K, Abraham AG et al (2018) Multimorbidity among persons living with human immunodeficiency virus in the United States. Clin Infect Dis 66(8):1230–1238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lazar R, Kersanske L, Xia Q, Daskalakis D, Braunstein SL (2017) Hospitalization rates among people with HIV/AIDS in New York City, 2013. Clin Infect Dis 65(3):469–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Khaw KT, Wareham N, Bingham S, Welch A, Luben R, Day N (2008) Combined impact of health behaviours and mortality in men and women: the EPIC-Norfolk prospective population study. PLoS Med 5(1):e12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Horvath S, Levine AJ (2015) HIV-1 infection accelerates age according to the epigenetic clock. J Infect Dis 212(10):1563–1573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Guaraldi G, Orlando G, Zona S, Menozzi M, Carli F, Garlassi E et al (2011) Premature age-related comorbidities among HIV-infected persons compared with the general population. Clin Infect Dis 53(11):1120–1126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Desquilbet L, Margolick JB, Fried LP, Phair JP, Jamieson BD, Holloway M et al (2009) Relationship between a frailty-related phenotype and progressive deterioration of the immune system in HIV-infected men. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 50(3):299–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Branas F, Jimenez Z, Sanchez-Conde M, Dronda F, Lopez-Bernaldo De Quiros JC, Perez-Elias MJ et al (2017) Frailty and physical function in older HIV-infected adults. Age Ageing 46(3):522–526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Greene M, Justice AC, Covinsky KE (2017) Assessment of geriatric syndromes and physical function in people living with HIV. Virulence 8(5):586–598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lowsky DJ, Olshansky SJ, Bhattacharya J, Goldman DP (2014) Heterogeneity in healthy aging. J Gerontol Ser A 69(6):640–649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lopez-Otin C, Blasco MA, Partridge L, Serrano M, Kroemer G (2013) The hallmarks of aging. Cell 153(6):1194–1217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jylhava J, Pedersen NL, Hagg S (2017) Biological age predictors. EBioMedicine 21:29–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Horvath S (2013) DNA methylation age of human tissues and cell types. Genome Biol 14(10):R115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Marioni RE, Shah S, McRae AF, Chen BH, Colicino E, Harris SE et al (2015) DNA methylation age of blood predicts all-cause mortality in later life. Genome Biol 16:25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Christiansen L, Lenart A, Tan Q, Vaupel JW, Aviv A, McGue M et al (2016) DNA methylation age is associated with mortality in a longitudinal Danish twin study. Aging Cell 15(1):149–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Perna L, Zhang Y, Mons U, Holleczek B, Saum KU, Brenner H (2016) Epigenetic age acceleration predicts cancer, cardiovascular, and all-cause mortality in a German case cohort. Clin Epigenetics 8:64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chen BH, Marioni RE, Colicino E, Peters MJ, Ward-Caviness CK, Tsai PC et al (2016) DNA methylation-based measures of biological age: meta-analysis predicting time to death. Aging 8(9):1844–1865CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gross AM, Jaeger PA, Kreisberg JF, Licon K, Jepsen KL, Khosroheidari M et al (2016) Methylome-wide analysis of chronic HIV infection reveals five-year increase in biological age and epigenetic targeting of HLA. Mol Cell 62(2):157–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nelson KN, Hui Q, Rimland D, Xu K, Freiberg MS, Justice AC et al (2017) Identification of HIV infection-related DNA methylation sites and advanced epigenetic aging in HIV-positive, treatment-naive US veterans. AIDS 31(4):571–575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Levine AJ, Quach A, Moore DJ, Achim CL, Soontornniyomkij V, Masliah E et al (2016) Accelerated epigenetic aging in brain is associated with pre-mortem HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders. J Neurovirol 22(3):366–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Greene M, Covinsky KE, Valcour V, Miao Y, Madamba J, Lampiris H et al (2015) Geriatric syndromes in older HIV-infected adults. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 69(2):161–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Marioni RE, Shah S, McRae AF, Ritchie SJ, Muniz-Terrera G, Harris SE et al (2015) The epigenetic clock is correlated with physical and cognitive fitness in the Lothian Birth Cohort 1936. Int J Epidemiol 44(4):1388–1396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bellizzi D, D’Aquila P, Montesanto A, Corsonello A, Mari V, Mazzei B et al (2012) Global DNA methylation in old subjects is correlated with frailty. Age 34(1):169–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Schrack JA, Althoff KN, Jacobson LP, Erlandson KM, Jamieson BD, Koletar SL et al (2015) Accelerated longitudinal gait speed decline in HIV-infected older men. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 70(4):370–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Brothers TD, Kirkland S, Guaraldi G, Falutz J, Theou O, Johnston BL et al (2014) Frailty in people aging with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. J Infect Dis 210(8):1170–1179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (1998) AIDS among persons aged greater than or equal to 50 years – United States, 1991–1996. MMWR 47:21–27Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Manfredi R, Chiodo F (2000) A case-control study of virological and immunological effects of highly active antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected patients with advanced age. AIDS 14(10):1475–1477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Knobel H, Guelar A, Valldecillo G, Carmona A, Gonzalez A, Lopez-Colomes JL et al (2001) Response to highly active antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected patients aged 60 years or older after 24 months follow-up. AIDS 15(12):1591–1593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Viard JP, Mocroft A, Chiesi A, Kirk O, Roge B, Panos G et al (2001) Influence of age on CD4 cell recovery in human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients receiving highly active antiretroviral therapy: evidence from the EuroSIDA study. J Infect Dis 183(8):1290–1294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Grabar S, Kousignian I, Sobel A, Le Bras P, Gasnault J, Enel P et al (2004) Immunologic and clinical responses to highly active antiretroviral therapy over 50 years of age. Results from the French Hospital Database on HIV. AIDS 18(15):2029–2038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Yamashita TE, Phair JP, Munoz A, Margolick JB, Detels R, O’Brien SJ et al (2001) Immunologic and virologic response to highly active antiretroviral therapy in the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study. AIDS 15(6):735–746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Branas F, Berenguer J, Sanchez-Conde M, Lopez-Bernaldo de Quiros JC, Miralles P, Cosin J et al (2008) The eldest of older adults living with HIV: response and adherence to highly active antiretroviral therapy. Am J Med 121(9):820–824CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Blanco JR, Jarrin I, Vallejo M, Berenguer J, Solera C, Rubio R et al (2012) Definition of advanced age in HIV infection: looking for an age cut-off. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses 28(9):1000–1006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Gomez de la Camara A, Rubio Herrera MA, Gutierrez Fuentes JA, Gomez Gerique JA, del Campo J, Jurado Valenzuela C et al (2008) [1991–2004 follow-up of a Spanish general population cohort. Mortality and raising risk factors in the DRECE III Study (Diet and Risk of Cardiovascular Diseases in Spain)]. Revista espanola de salud publica. 82(4):415–423. Seguimiento de 1991 a 2004 de la mortalidad y los factores de riesgo emergentes en una cohorte de poblacion general espanola. Estudio Drece III (Dieta y Riesgo de Enfermedades Cardiovasculares en Espana)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Smith C, Sabin CA, Lundgren JD, Thiebaut R, Weber R, Law M et al (2010) Factors associated with specific causes of death amongst HIV-positive individuals in the D: A: D Study. AIDS 24(10):1537–1548Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Dawood H, Hassan-Moosa R, Zuma NY, Naidoo K (2018) Mortality and treatment response amongst HIV-infected patients 50 years and older accessing antiretroviral services in South Africa. BMC Infect Dis 18(1):168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Bunting E, Rajkumar C, Fisher M (2014) The human immunodeficiency virus and ageing. Age Ageing 43(3):308–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Butt AA, Chang CC, Kuller L, Goetz MB, Leaf D, Rimland D et al (2011) Risk of heart failure with human immunodeficiency virus in the absence of prior diagnosis of coronary heart disease. Arch Intern Med 171(8):737–743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Schouten J, Wit FW, Stolte IG, Kootstra NA, van der Valk M, Geerlings SE et al (2014) Cross-sectional comparison of the prevalence of age-associated comorbidities and their risk factors between HIV-infected and uninfected individuals: the AGEhIV cohort study. Clin Infect Dis 59(12):1787–1797CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Buehring B, Kirchner E, Sun Z, Calabrese L (2012) The frequency of low muscle mass and its overlap with low bone mineral density and lipodystrophy in individuals with HIV—a pilot study using DXA total body composition analysis. J Clin Densitom 15(2):224–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Desai S, Landay A (2010) Early immune senescence in HIV disease. Curr HIV/AIDS Rep 7(1):4–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Deeks SG (2011) HIV infection, inflammation, immunosenescence, and aging. Annu Rev Med 62:141–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Rodriguez-Penney AT, Iudicello JE, Riggs PK, Doyle K, Ellis RJ, Letendre SL et al (2013) Co-morbidities in persons infected with HIV: increased burden with older age and negative effects on health-related quality of life. AIDS Patient Care STDs 27(1):5–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Lagathu C, Cossarizza A, Bereziat V, Nasi M, Capeau J, Pinti M (2017) Basic science and pathogenesis of ageing with HIV: potential mechanisms and biomarkers. AIDS 31(Suppl 2):S105–S119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Lundgren JD, Babiker AG, Gordin F, Emery S, Grund B, Sharma S et al (2015) Initiation of antiretroviral therapy in early asymptomatic HIV infection. N Engl J Med 373(9):795–807CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Rickabaugh TM, Baxter RM, Sehl M, Sinsheimer JS, Hultin PM, Hultin LE et al (2015) Acceleration of age-associated methylation patterns in HIV-1-infected adults. PloS ONE 10(3):e0119201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Leung JM, Fishbane N, Jones M, Morin A, Xu S, Liu JC et al (2017) Longitudinal study of surrogate aging measures during human immunodeficiency virus seroconversion. Aging 9(3):687–705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Horvath S, Stein DJ, Phillips N, Heany SJ, Kobor MS, Lin DTS et al (2018) Perinatally acquired HIV infection accelerates epigenetic aging in South African adolescents. AIDS 32(11):1465–1474CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Geriatric Medicine Society 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Infectious Diseases Department, Hospital Universitario Ramón y CajalMadridSpain
  2. 2.Instituto de Investigación del Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal (IRYCIS)MadridSpain
  3. 3.Hospital Universitario Infanta LeonorMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations