A recent scholarly investigation has shed light on the potential impact of cancerous conditions on the precision of forensic age determination techniques, particularly those relying on DNA methylation patterns. This inquiry, detailed in the 17th volume of Aging (Aging-US) on July 17, 2025, focused on understanding whether malignancies could compromise the reliability of age predictions derived from biological samples.

The study, spearheaded by Charlotte Sutter, Daniel Helbling, Cordula Haas, and Jacqueline Neubauer from the Zurich Institute of Forensic Medicine at the University of Zurich, alongside Onkozentrum Zurich, delved into the intricacies of how cancer might affect forensic tools designed to estimate an individual's age from blood samples. DNA methylation, a naturally occurring biochemical modification of DNA, is known to vary predictably with age, forming the bedrock of such forensic age prediction methods. However, concerns have persisted regarding how various health conditions, including cancer, might disrupt these age-related methylation patterns, thereby introducing inaccuracies into forensic analyses.

The research team employed the VISAGE enhanced age estimation tool, a widely recognized DNA methylation-based method, to analyze blood samples from 100 individuals diagnosed with cancer and 102 healthy controls. Their findings indicated that while age predictions for the healthy control group consistently maintained a high degree of accuracy with minimal average deviations, the situation varied among cancer patients.

Significantly, patients battling solid tumors, such as breast and lung cancers, exhibited only a marginal decrease in prediction accuracy. In stark contrast, individuals afflicted with blood cancers, notably chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML), occasionally presented with substantial errors, with age overestimations reaching up to five decades in some instances. Despite these notable exceptions, the overall conclusion of the study affirmed that cancer generally does not profoundly compromise the accuracy of this forensic instrument. The majority of cancer patients, even those undergoing active treatment, displayed DNA methylation profiles that closely resembled those of healthy individuals. No consistent discrepancies were identified based on the specific type of cancer, its stage, or the treatment administered, except for isolated cases involving highly aggressive forms of the disease.

These compelling results lend strong support to the continued application of existing forensic age estimation methodologies. While it is acknowledged that aggressive cancers might, on rare occasions, influence prediction precision, such occurrences are infrequent. The researchers advocate for the recognition of these specific conditions as a potential contributing factor in instances of unusually large estimation errors, but they do not suggest any sweeping revisions to current standard practices. This valuable research significantly contributes to our understanding of how various health statuses, including cancer, interact with DNA-based age assessment. It bolsters confidence in the robustness and dependability of forensic age prediction tools, even when utilized in investigations involving individuals with a documented history of cancer.