BACKGROUND: Clinical and radiographic measures are gold standards for diagnosing periodontitis but offer little information regarding the pathogenesis of the disease. We hypothesized that a comparison of gene expression signatures between healthy and diseased gingival tissues would provide novel insights in the pathobiology of periodontitis and would inform the design of future studies. METHODS: Ninety systemically healthy non-smokers with moderate to advanced periodontitis (63 with chronic periodontitis and 27 with aggressive periodontitis) each contributed at least two diseased interproximal papillae (with bleeding on probing [BOP], probing depth [PD] > or =4 mm, and attachment loss [AL] > or =3 mm) and a healthy papilla, if available (no BOP, PD < or =4 mm, and AL < or =2 mm). RNA was extracted, amplified, reverse-transcribed, labeled, and hybridized with whole genome microarrays. Differential expression was assayed in 247 individual tissue samples (183 from diseased sites and 64 from healthy sites) using a standard mixed-effects linear model approach, with patient effects considered random with a normal distribution and gingival tissue status considered a two-level fixed effect. Gene ontology analysis classified the expression patterns into biologically relevant categories. RESULTS: Transcriptome analysis revealed that 12,744 probe sets were differentially expressed after adjusting for multiple comparisons (P <9.15 x 10(7)). Of those, 5,295 were upregulated and 7,449 were downregulated in disease compared to health. Gene ontology analysis identified 61 differentially expressed groups (adjusted P <0.05), including apoptosis, antimicrobial humoral response, antigen presentation, regulation of metabolic processes, signal transduction, and angiogenesis. CONCLUSION: Gingival tissue transcriptomes provide a valuable scientific tool for further hypothesis-driven studies of the pathobiology of periodontitis.
BACKGROUND: Clinical and radiographic measures are gold standards for diagnosing periodontitis but offer little information regarding the pathogenesis of the disease. We hypothesized that a comparison of gene expression signatures between healthy and diseased gingival tissues would provide novel insights in the pathobiology of periodontitis and would inform the design of future studies. METHODS: Ninety systemically healthy non-smokers with moderate to advanced periodontitis (63 with chronic periodontitis and 27 with aggressive periodontitis) each contributed at least two diseased interproximal papillae (with bleeding on probing [BOP], probing depth [PD] > or =4 mm, and attachment loss [AL] > or =3 mm) and a healthy papilla, if available (no BOP, PD < or =4 mm, and AL < or =2 mm). RNA was extracted, amplified, reverse-transcribed, labeled, and hybridized with whole genome microarrays. Differential expression was assayed in 247 individual tissue samples (183 from diseased sites and 64 from healthy sites) using a standard mixed-effects linear model approach, with patient effects considered random with a normal distribution and gingival tissue status considered a two-level fixed effect. Gene ontology analysis classified the expression patterns into biologically relevant categories. RESULTS: Transcriptome analysis revealed that 12,744 probe sets were differentially expressed after adjusting for multiple comparisons (P <9.15 x 10(7)). Of those, 5,295 were upregulated and 7,449 were downregulated in disease compared to health. Gene ontology analysis identified 61 differentially expressed groups (adjusted P <0.05), including apoptosis, antimicrobial humoral response, antigen presentation, regulation of metabolic processes, signal transduction, and angiogenesis. CONCLUSION: Gingival tissue transcriptomes provide a valuable scientific tool for further hypothesis-driven studies of the pathobiology of periodontitis.
Authors: Martin Handfield; Jeffrey J Mans; Gaolin Zheng; M Cecilia Lopez; Song Mao; Ann Progulske-Fox; Giri Narasimhan; Henry V Baker; Richard J Lamont Journal: Cell Microbiol Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 3.715
Authors: Klara Gijsbers; Gert Van Assche; Sofie Joossens; Sofie Struyf; Paul Proost; Paul Rutgeerts; Karel Geboes; Jo Van Damme Journal: Eur J Immunol Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: A Meka; V Bakthavatchalu; S Sathishkumar; M C Lopez; R K Verma; S M Wallet; I Bhattacharyya; B F Boyce; M Handfield; R J Lamont; H V Baker; J L Ebersole; L Kesavalu Journal: Mol Oral Microbiol Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 3.563
Authors: M Kebschull; R Demmer; J H Behle; A Pollreisz; J Heidemann; P B Belusko; R Celenti; P Pavlidis; P N Papapanou Journal: J Periodontal Res Date: 2008-10-07 Impact factor: 4.419
Authors: Melissa Grant; Ola Kilsgård; Sigvard Åkerman; Björn Klinge; Ryan T Demmer; Johan Malmström; Daniel Jönsson Journal: J Innate Immun Date: 2018-11-28 Impact factor: 7.349
Authors: Benjamin Krämer; Moritz Kebschull; Michael Nowak; Ryan T Demmer; Manuela Haupt; Christian Körner; Sven Perner; Søren Jepsen; Jacob Nattermann; Panos N Papapanou Journal: Infect Immun Date: 2012-12-17 Impact factor: 3.441
Authors: Panos N Papapanou; Jan H Behle; Moritz Kebschull; Romanita Celenti; Dana L Wolf; Martin Handfield; Paul Pavlidis; Ryan T Demmer Journal: BMC Microbiol Date: 2009-10-18 Impact factor: 3.605
Authors: Jeffrey J Mans; Kate von Lackum; Cassandra Dorsey; Shaun Willis; Shannon M Wallet; Henry V Baker; Richard J Lamont; Martin Handfield Journal: BMC Genomics Date: 2009-08-18 Impact factor: 3.969