| Literature DB >> 27350042 |
Koen F Dekkers1, Maarten van Iterson1, Roderick C Slieker1, Matthijs H Moed1, Marc Jan Bonder2, Michiel van Galen3, Hailiang Mei4, Daria V Zhernakova2, Leonard H van den Berg5, Joris Deelen1, Jenny van Dongen6, Diana van Heemst7, Albert Hofman8, Jouke J Hottenga6, Carla J H van der Kallen9, Casper G Schalkwijk9, Coen D A Stehouwer9, Ettje F Tigchelaar2, André G Uitterlinden10, Gonneke Willemsen6, Alexandra Zhernakova2, Lude Franke2, Peter A C 't Hoen3, Rick Jansen11, Joyce van Meurs10, Dorret I Boomsma6, Cornelia M van Duijn8, Marleen M J van Greevenbroek9, Jan H Veldink5, Cisca Wijmenga2, Erik W van Zwet12, P Eline Slagboom1, J Wouter Jukema13, Bastiaan T Heijmans14.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cells can be primed by external stimuli to obtain a long-term epigenetic memory. We hypothesize that long-term exposure to elevated blood lipids can prime circulating immune cells through changes in DNA methylation, a process that may contribute to the development of atherosclerosis. To interrogate the causal relationship between triglyceride, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol levels and genome-wide DNA methylation while excluding confounding and pleiotropy, we perform a stepwise Mendelian randomization analysis in whole blood of 3296 individuals.Entities:
Keywords: DNA methylation; Gene expression; Lipids; Mendelian randomization
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27350042 PMCID: PMC4922056 DOI: 10.1186/s13059-016-1000-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genome Biol ISSN: 1474-7596 Impact factor: 13.583
Characteristics of the six cohorts in the BIOS Consortium
| CODAM | LL | LLS | NTR | PAN | RS | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of individuals | 164 | 748 | 785 | 692 | 184 | 723 |
| RNA-Seqa | 159 | 616 | 650 | 619 | ||
| Gender (% male) | 50 | 42 | 48 | 32 | 60 | 42 |
| Age (years) [SD] | 65.6 [6.8] | 45.6 [13.3] | 58.4 [7.5] | 34 [12.1] | 62.4 [9.4] | 67.6 [6.0] |
| TG (mmol/L) [SD] | 1.6 [0.8] | 1.2 [0.9] | 1.9 [1.2] | 1.3 [0.7] | 1.9 [1.1] | 1.5 [0.9] |
| LDL-C (mmol/L) [SD] | 3.6 [1.0] | 3.0 [0.9] | 3.4 [1.0] | 2.8 [0.8] | 3.4 [0.9] | 3.3 [0.9] |
| HDL-C (mmol/L) [SD] | 1.3 [0.3] | 1.5 [0.4] | 1.4 [0.4] | 1.4 [0.9] | 1.4 [0.4] | 1.5 [0.4] |
| Monocytes (%) [SD] | 7.9 [1.6] | 8.5 [2.2] | 5.5 [1.5] | 7.7 [2.0] | 6.8 [1.1] | 7.1 [2.1] |
| Lymphocytes (%) [SD] | 51.2 [14.0] | 34.5 [7.4] | 29.2 [6.9] | 35.1 [7.8] | 31.8 [7.1] | 36.3 [7.9] |
| Neutrophils (%) [SD] | 40.7 [6.9] | 53.3 [8.0] | 59.8 [7.7] | 52.6 [7.7] | 55.3 [7.0] | 48.3 [7.1] |
aThe number of individuals for which RNA-Seq data were available
CODAM Cohort on Diabetes and Atherosclerosis Maastricht, LL LifeLines, LLS Leiden Longevity Study, NTR Netherlands Twin Register, PAN Prospective ALS Study Netherlands, RS Rotterdam Study, SD standard deviation
Fig. 1Illustration of the stepwise Mendelian randomization approach. a In a conventional EWAS, associations observed are potentially confounded (C) and the direction of the association between lipids (L) and DNA methylation (M) cannot be inferred. b Using Mendelian randomization, polygenic scores (P) are used to obtain an unconfounded proxy for lipid levels and, since M cannot influence P, an effect of L on M can be inferred. c An additional analysis is required to exclude a direct effect of P on M (i.e., cis-methylation quantitative trait loci (QTL) effect of polygenic score SNPs) not mediated through L. d Reverse causation, i.e., an effect of M on L, is excluded by evaluating the association of local genetic variation (S) affecting M (cis-methylation QTL) on lipid levels. e Pleiotropic effects are excluded using a multivariate model that incorporates all lipids and their polygenic scores
Associations between log TG, LDL-C, and HDL-C levels and DNA methylation
| Chromosome | Position | Mean DNAm (%) | Estimate (%/SD)a |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TG | cg14476101 | 1 | 120,255,993 | 63 | −0.8 (−1.0, −0.6) | 2.6 × 10−8 |
| cg19693031 | 1 | 145,441,553 | 73 | −0.6 (−0.8, −0.5) | 5.2 × 10−9 | |
| cg06690548 | 4 | 139,162,809 | 85 | −0.6 (−0.7, −0.5) | 5.7 × 10−12 | |
| cg05575921 | 5 | 373,379 | 79 | −0.9 (−1.3, −0.6) | 4.3 × 10−3 | |
| cg14817490 | 5 | 392,921 | 32 | −0.5 (−0.6, −0.3) | 3.3 × 10−2 | |
| cg06560379 | 6 | 44,231,306 | 12 | −0.2 (−0.2, −0.1) | 4.0 × 10−2 | |
| cg19589396 | 8 | 103,937,375 | 69 | −0.4 (−0.5, −0.2) | 7.6 × 10−3 | |
| cg07504977 | 10 | 102,131,013 | 41 | 0.5 (0.3, 0.6) | 2.4 × 10−4 | |
| cg11376147 | 11 | 57,261,199 | 21 | −0.2 (−0.3, −0.1) | 7.3 × 10−3 | |
| cg00574958 | 11 | 68,607,623 | 12 | −0.4 (−0.5, −0.3) | 2.4 × 10−23 | |
| cg17058475 | 11 | 68,607,738 | 14 | −0.4 (−0.5, −0.3) | 7.9 × 10−7 | |
| cg12556569 | 11 | 116,664,040 | 26 | 2.4 (1.5, 3.4) | 1.4 × 10−2 | |
| cg15863539 | 17 | 17,716,951 | 79 | 0.2 (0.1, 0.3) | 1.3 × 10−3 | |
| cg20544516 | 17 | 17,717,184 | 73 | 0.3 (0.2, 0.4) | 1.1 × 10−3 | |
| cg11024682 | 17 | 17,730,095 | 46 | 0.5 (0.3, 0.6) | 3.8 × 10−11 | |
| cg08857797 | 17 | 40,927,700 | 57 | 0.4 (0.3, 0.6) | 7.3 × 10−3 | |
| cg03636183 | 19 | 17,000,586 | 68 | −0.6 (−0.8, −0.3) | 1.3 × 10−2 | |
| cg02711608 | 19 | 47,287,965 | 24 | −0.3 (−0.4, −0.2) | 3.9 × 10−2 | |
| cg27243685 | 21 | 43,642,367 | 83 | 0.4 (0.4, 0.5) | 8.4 × 10−20 | |
| cg01881899 | 21 | 43,652,705 | 13 | 0.3 (0.2, 0.3) | 1.7 × 10−4 | |
| cg06500161 | 21 | 43,656,588 | 60 | 0.7 (0.6, 0.8) | 1.5 × 10−29 | |
| LDL-C | cg27168858 | 1 | 55,351,660 | 78 | 0.4 (0.3, 0.6) | 5.3 × 10−3 |
| cg00908766 | 1 | 109,817,497 | 59 | 1.0 (0.6, 1.3) | 2.3 × 10−2 | |
| cg05119988 | 4 | 166,251,190 | 59 | 0.5 (0.3, 0.6) | 1.4 × 10−4 | |
| HDL-C | cg17901584 | 1 | 55,353,707 | 53 | 0.7 (0.5, 0.9) | 1.2 × 10−4 |
| cg26313301 | 19 | 11,219,616 | 87 | −0.2 (−0.3, −0.1) | 3.6 × 10−2 | |
| cg27243685 | 21 | 43,642,367 | 83 | −0.4 (−0.5, −0.3) | 1.2 × 10−9 | |
| cg06500161 | 21 | 43,656,588 | 60 | −0.7 (−0.8, −0.5) | 1.3 × 10−13 |
aEstimate is the percentage change in DNA methylation per standard deviation change in lipid levels
DNAm DNA methylation
Estimated effect of TG, LDL-C, and HDL-C levels on DNA methylation using a multivariable MR analysis to exclude pleiotropic effects
| Chromosome | Position | Mean DNAm (%) | Estimate (%/SD)a |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TG | cg00574958 | 11 | 68,607,623 | 12 | −0.7 (−1.2, −0.3) | 1.5 × 10−3 |
| cg17058475 | 11 | 68,607,738 | 14 | −1.0 (−1.6, −0.3) | 2.5 × 10−3 | |
| cg11024682 | 17 | 17,730,095 | 26 | 1.0 (0.3, 1.7) | 5.4 × 10−3 | |
| LDL-C | cg27168858 | 1 | 55,351,660 | 78 | 1.4 (0.5, 2.3) | 3.1 × 10−3 |
| HDL-C | cg27243685 | 21 | 43,642,367 | 83 | −0.7 (−1.1, −0.3) | 2.2 × 10−3 |
| cg06500161 | 21 | 43,656,588 | 60 | −1.1 (−1.8, −0.5) | 3.5 × 10−4 |
a Estimate is the percentage change in DNA methylation per standard deviation change in lipid levels
DNAm DNA methylation
Estimated effect of TG, LDL-C, and HDL-C levels on DNA methylation using an approach based on Egger regression to exclude pleiotropic effects, including P values for an estimate of net pleiotropic effects of the PS SNPs
| Chr | Position | Mean DNAm (%) | Estimate (%/SD)a |
| Pleiotropy | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TG | cg00574958 | 11 | 68,607,623 | 12 | −1.1 (-1.4, -0.7) | 5.7 × 10−9 | 0.37 |
| cg17058475 | 11 | 68,607,738 | 14 | −1.3 (-1.8, -0.8) | 2.3 × 10−7 | 0.82 | |
| cg11024682 | 17 | 17,730,095 | 26 | 0.9 (0.3, 1.5) | 1.9 × 10−3 | 0.50 | |
| cg27243685 | 21 | 43,642,367 | 83 | 0.7 (0.3, 1.1) | 6.4 × 10−4 | 0.18 | |
| cg06500161 | 21 | 43,656,588 | 60 | 1.4 (0.8, 2.0) | 2.9 × 10−6 | 0.75 | |
| LDL-C | cg27168858 | 1 | 55,351,660 | 78 | 0.7 (0.1, 1.3) | 3.1 × 10−2 | 0.36 |
| HDL-C | cg27243685 | 21 | 43,642,367 | 83 | 0.3 (-0.9, 1.5) | 0.62 | 0.79 |
| cg06500161 | 21 | 43,656,588 | 60 | −0.1 (-1.8, 1.7) | 0.93 | 0.15 |
a Estimate is the percentage change in DNA methylation per standard deviation change in lipid levels
DNAm DNA methylation
Overview of the stepwise Mendelian randomization approach
| b | c | d | e | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TG | cg14476101 | ✗ | |||
| cg19693031 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ | |
| cg07504977 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ | |
| cg11376147 | ✗ | ||||
| cg00574958 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
| cg17058475 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
| cg12556569 | ✓ | ✗ | |||
| cg15863539 | ✗ | ||||
| cg20544516 | ✗ | ||||
| cg11024682 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
| cg08857797 | ✗ | ||||
| cg03636183 | ✗ | ||||
| cg02711608 | ✗ | ||||
| cg27243685 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓1 | |
| cg01881899 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ | |
| cg06500161 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓1 | |
| cg06690548 | ✗ | ||||
| cg05575921 | ✗ | ||||
| cg14817490 | ✗ | ||||
| cg06560379 | ✗ | ||||
| cg19589396 | ✗ | ||||
| LDL-C | cg27168858 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| cg00908766 | ✓ | ✗ | |||
| cg05119988 | ✗ | ||||
| HDL-C | cg17901584 | ✗ | |||
| cg26313301 | ✗ | ||||
| cg27243685 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓2 | |
| cg06500161 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓2 |
Starting from associations between lipid levels and DNA methylation, a causal and unconfounded effect of lipid levels on DNA methylation was estimated (b), a direct effect of genetic variants on DNA methylation was excluded (c), reverse causation was excluded (d) and pleiotropy was excluded (e)
A tick indicates a CpG passed step; a cross indicates a CpG failed step
1Egger regression only
2Multivariable MR only
DNA methylation of MR-identified CpGs was associated with gene expression of genes involved in lipid metabolism
| Chr | Position | Mean DNAm (%) | Gene | Estimate (logCPM/β)a |
| Chromatin state | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TG | cg00574958 | 11 | 68,607,623 | 12 |
| −3.3 (−4.1,−2.5) | 1.5 × 10−14 | Flanking active TSS |
| cg17058475 | 11 | 68,607,738 | 14 |
| −1.7 (−2.3,−1.1) | 1.8 × 10−8 | Enhancer | |
| cg11024682 | 17 | 17,730,095 | 26 |
| −2.4 (−2.8,−2.0) | 5.2 × 10−33 | Enhancer | |
| LDL-C | cg27168858 | 1 | 55,351,660 | 78 |
| −4.1 (−4.9,−3.3) | 2.4 × 10−25 | Flanking active TSS |
| HDL-C | cg27243685 | 21 | 43,642,367 | 83 |
| −4.5 (−5.4,−3.6) | 4.0 × 10−24 | Flanking active TSS |
| cg06500161 | 21 | 43,656,588 | 60 |
| −5.1 (−5.7,−4.5) | 1.2 × 10−56 | Weak transcription |
CpGs are located in regions of active gene regulation
a Estimate is the log counts per million change in gene expression per β (0–1) change in DNA methylation
DNAm DNA methylation