Literature DB >> 28225026

Blood-based omic profiling supports female susceptibility to tobacco smoke-induced cardiovascular diseases.

Aristotelis Chatziioannou1, Panagiotis Georgiadis1, Dennie G Hebels2, Irene Liampa1, Ioannis Valavanis1, Ingvar A Bergdahl3, Anders Johansson4, Domenico Palli5, Marc Chadeau-Hyam6, Alexandros P Siskos7, Hector Keun7, Maria Botsivali1, Theo M C M de Kok2, Almudena Espín Pérez2, Jos C S Kleinjans2, Paolo Vineis6, Soterios A Kyrtopoulos1.   

Abstract

We recently reported that differential gene expression and DNA methylation profiles in blood leukocytes of apparently healthy smokers predicts with remarkable efficiency diseases and conditions known to be causally associated with smoking, suggesting that blood-based omic profiling of human populations may be useful for linking environmental exposures to potential health effects. Here we report on the sex-specific effects of tobacco smoking on transcriptomic and epigenetic features derived from genome-wide profiling in white blood cells, identifying 26 expression probes and 92 CpG sites, almost all of which are affected only in female smokers. Strikingly, these features relate to numerous genes with a key role in the pathogenesis of cardiovascular disease, especially thrombin signaling, including the thrombin receptors on platelets F2R (coagulation factor II (thrombin) receptor; PAR1) and GP5 (glycoprotein 5), as well as HMOX1 (haem oxygenase 1) and BCL2L1 (BCL2-like 1) which are involved in protection against oxidative stress and apoptosis, respectively. These results are in concordance with epidemiological evidence of higher female susceptibility to tobacco-induced cardiovascular disease and underline the potential of blood-based omic profiling in hazard and risk assessment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28225026      PMCID: PMC5320491          DOI: 10.1038/srep42870

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Rep        ISSN: 2045-2322            Impact factor:   4.379


Exposure to tobacco smoke is one of the best studied examples of an exposure with proven causal association with a large number of human diseases1. Although the relevant epidemiological evidence is not completely consistent, many studies have provided evidence of differential sex susceptibility to the health effects of tobacco, especially in relation to smoking-induced cardiovascular disease (CVD; including acute myocardial infarction and coronary heart disease)234, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)156 and lung cancer789. Focusing in particular on CVD, a systematic review and meta-analysis of data from 86 prospective studies and nearly 4 million subjects came to the conclusion that female smokers have a 25% higher risk of developing coronary heart disease than males with the same exposure to tobacco smoke and after allowing for other risk factors2, a conclusion supported by the results of a recent meta-analysis of the available data3. Another recent systematic review and meta-analysis covering data from 81 cohorts and nearly 4 million subjects concluded that the risk of stroke in Western populations is 10% higher in female smokers4. Biomarker-based investigations have contributed significantly to our understanding of the disease risks associated with exposure to environmental hazards. Currently such biomarker studies are benefiting from the expanding use of genome-wide profiling (omics). We have recently reported the results of a study of the impact of tobacco smoke exposure on genome-wide gene expression and DNA methylation in white blood cells (WBCs) of apparently healthy smokers10 and identified large numbers of transcripts and DNA CpG sites whose expression and methylation, respectively, differ significantly between current and never smokers. Furthermore we used disease connectivity analysis to show that the corresponding gene profiles can identify with remarkable efficiency (specificity 94%, positive predictive value 86%) most diseases and conditions independently known to be causally associated with smoking10. In view of this finding, we decided to look for sex-related differences in these profiles which might possibly reflect differential disease susceptibility.

Results

In order to minimise statistical power problems, we focused our search for sex-related differences in the effects of tobacco smoking on the transcriptomic and epigenetic features which we previously found to differ significantly between mixed-sex groups of current and never smokers10. These features consist of 1,273 CpG sites (FDR < 0.05; associated with 725 differentially methylated genes - DMGs) and 350 transcripts (FDR < 0.10; associated with 271 differentially expressed genes - DEGs) which were derived from the comparison of genome-wide transcriptomic and epigenetic profiles of 143 current and 311 never smokers (including 134 males and 320 females) derived from 2 cohorts, the Northern Sweden Health and Disease Study and EPIC Italy (Suppl. Tables S1 and S2). The tobacco exposure data available to us (Table 1) included the number of cigarettes smoked per day and smoking duration in both cohorts, the smoking intensity measured in pack-years (only in the Italian cohort), as well as plasma cotinine levels for a fraction of the study subjects from both cohorts. Inspection of this data did not reveal statistically significant differences between the two sexes, although it did suggest possibly higher exposure intensity (pack-years) in males (Table 1). While the above parameters provide an approximate picture of smoking exposure, they do not allow an accurate quantitative estimation of the long-term exposure to tobacco smoke of the different subjects suitable for use in statistical adjustment for the purpose of sub-group comparison. For this reason, and also having in mind our previous observation of the highly skewed distribution of the expression or methylation differences between current and never smokers (effect size), we opted to base our sex comparisons not on the effect size, which is expected to be strongly dependent on exposure level and duration, but on the ranking of the various features by statistical significance (i.e. p-values in current vs never smoker comparisons) in sex-stratified analyses. Thus we compared the full set of signals separately for males and females, ranking them according to the statistical significance of their current-versus-never smoker differences in each sex and, finally, compared the rankings in the two sexes of the limited number of signals of interest. The methodology is described in detail in Methods while the workflow of the procedure is shown diagrammatically in Fig. 1. We adopted this approach on the reasonable assumption that any differences between the sexes with regard to the level or duration of exposure would in general affect the effect size for the different features in a similar manner but would be unlikely to alter their ranking within each sex group. This non-parametric approach has the added advantage that it minimizes the impact of non-normal data distribution, outliers and differences in statistical power arising from the different sizes of the male and female populations.
Table 1

Study population and sex comparison of smoking exposure-related parameters.

  MalesFemales
 N236413
 age; mean (range)51.0 (30.2–65.0)52.8(29.6–74.9)
cohortNSHDS; N171228
EPIC Italy; N65185
BMI; mean (range)26.5 (19.0–39.5)25.4(18.8–55.28)
smoking statuscurrent smokers; N43 (18.2%)100 (24.2%)
former smokers; N102 (43.2%)93 (22.5%)
never smokers; N91 (38.6%)220 (53.3%)
duration of smokingN4090
years, mean (s.d)31.8 (8.7)30.6 (18.1)
p0.49
pack-years*N1445
mean (S.D)582.9 (429.0)356.6 (266.0)
p0.06
cigarettes/daytotal N4298
≤4, N7 (16.7%)24 (24.5%)
5–15, N17 (40.5%)50 (51%)
≥25, N18 (42.9%)24 (24.4%)
p#0.2
plasma cotinineN4035
AUC; mean (s.d.)33.7 (8.7)28.1 (8.5)
p0.85

*Only EPIC Italy; #chi-squared test.

Figure 1

Workflow of the statistical analysis.

Suppl. Fig. S1 shows the distribution of the p-values of the rank differences in the two sexes. It can be seen that a biomodal distribution is observed, with the anticipated pattern of decreasing numbers of signals as p-values decrease being observed along with an increased number of signals with very low p-values (<0.05) increases. The latter indicates the existence, among both the transcriptomic and the epigenetic signals, of sub-groups of signals whose ranking differences between the sexes are more significant than expected. Tables 2 and 3 show the lists of expression probes and CpG sites, respectively, whose significance rankings differ significantly (p < 0.05) between the two sexes. There was no significant difference in the corresponding rankings of these signals between male and female never smokers (results not shown), indicating that the observed sex-related differences reflect the differential impact of tobacco smoke exposure.
Table 2

Expression probes and DEGs ranked by significance of sex specificity.

Expression probeGene symbolGene nameRank by p-value in sex-stratified analysis
Effect size (ratio current/never smokers) in sex-stratified analysis
MalesFemalesp rank differenceMalesFemales
A_23_P120883NMOX1heme oxygenase (decycling) 129,411312.82E-051.000.77
A_23_P87013TAGLNtransgelin29,013743.86E-051.000.80
A_24_P410453SYNE1spectrin repeat containing. nuclear envelope 128,5731205.42E-051.000.81
A_23_P23834LGR6leucine-rich repeat-containing G protein-coupled receptor 627,005261.46E-041.490.72
A_23_P136347EPS8epidermal growth factor receptor pathway substrate 826,954161.50E-040.990.75
A_24_P173754C1orf21chromosome 1 open reading frame 2124,586246.54E-040.980.78
A_23_P354387MYOFmyoferlin24,5421117.06E-040.980.79
A_23_P66881RGS9regulator of G-protein signaling 921,7361183.29E-030.960.79
A_24_P76644  20,8041215.24E-030.980.88
A_23_P86682MYOFmyoferlin19,999567.46E-030.960.78
A_23_P43679ZNF618zinc finger protein 61819,852227.86E-030.960.84
A_23_P1962RARRES3retinoic acid receptor responder (tazarotene induced) 319,7751138.49E-030.970.87
A_23_P113161C1orf21chromosome 1 open reading frame 2119,632478.80E-030.950.75
A_24_P921823TCF7L2transcription factor 7-like 2 (T-cell specific. HMG-box)18,32971.53E-020.960.77
A_23_P45831CHD1Lchromodomain helicase DNA binding protein 1-like19,1871,4281.94E-020.980.93
A_23_P48175TMEM106Ctransmembrane protein 106C18,0964102.00E-020.960.88
A_23_P39251PLIN5perilipin 522917,7252.16E-021.341.05
A_23_P200780TGFBR3transforming growth factor. beta receptor III17,259942.47E-020.940.80
A_23_P110791CSF1Rcolony stimulating factor 1 receptor16,516493.23E-020.950.80
A_32_P140475KIAA1377KIAA13777216,0143.93E-020.820.97
A_23_P213620PPP2R2Bprotein phosphatase 2. regulatory subunit B. beta16,0492564.14E-020.940.86
A_32_P75141  15,9692404.24E-020.940.85
A_23_P385105PLCD4phospholipase C. delta 415,9303544.48E-020.940.86
A_24_P88763LOXL3lysyl oxidase-like 315,9794134.50E-020.950.89
A_24_P9883DKFZp761E198DKFZp761E198 protein2715,5244.61E-021.491.05
A_23_P109171BFSP1beaded filament structural protein 1. filensin15,8924814.75E-020.930.84
Table 3

CpG sites and DMGs ranked by significance of sex specificity.

ProbeGene symbolGene nameRank by p-value in sex-stratified analysis
Males
Females
absΔΔβ = abs(Δβfem −Δβm)
MalesFemalesp rank differenceβ* current smokersβ* never smokersΔβm#β* current smokersβ* never smokersΔβfem#
cg03378003SETD2SET domain containing 2410,6153751.73E-0884.2384.240.0084.9283.591.331.33
cg05713794GP5glycoprotein V (platelet)399,7531084.17E-0881.4281.44−0.0280.6378.462.172.19
cg13411554CACNA1Dcalcium channel. voltage-dependent. L type. alpha 1D subunit398,8282064.53E-0829.3429.250.0834.6928.226.476.39
cg19028369C3orf19chromosome 3 open reading frame 19395,6726136.06E-084.454.46−0.014.294.59−0.29−0.29
cg12611488SKISKI proto-oncogene394,498636.38E-0878.0777.990.0882.7478.364.394.31
cg00436663LOC400927 388,1541711.07E-074.894.880.014.585.04−0.45−0.47
cg17993335DNMBPdynamin binding protein387,5808861.19E-0779.1479.20−0.0680.0178.031.992.05
cg15743533FAM110Afamily with sequence similarity 110. member A369,7512344.50E-0711.4611.50−0.0410.6711.72−1.05−1.01
cg17098415  366,3431905.79E-071.831.84−0.021.932.20−0.27−0.25
cg17532753HDAC4histone deacetylase 4370,7275.6066.26E-0767.3767.240.1367.7166.061.651.52
cg25115829SUZ12PSUZ12 polycomb repressive complex 2 subunit pseudogene 1179,0956987.57E-0773.0472.230.8175.5572.972.581.77
cg13543915  360,0642479.28E-0761.8261.91−0.0962.9164.51−1.60−1.52
cg09257526IL6Rinterleukin 6 receptor359,9541.6071.03E-0620.4420.52−0.0820.0420.67−0.62−0.55
cg12689529KIRREL3kin of IRRE like 3 (Drosophila)341,1914063.63E-066.846.91−0.076.507.19−0.69−0.62
cg13379236EGFepidermal growth factor332,0442566.73E-0660.4360.240.1962.5160.671.841.65
cg06459104EPB41L3erythrocyte membrane protein band 4.1-like 3331,5863416.98E-0634.3134.76−0.4633.8238.07−4.25−3.79
cg10232140ERCC6excision repair cross-complementation group 6328,9041418.25E-061.541.500.051.781.320.460.41
cg27430293  152,7572.4278.33E-0634.1133.260.8536.9534.922.031.18
cg04985185MBTPS1membrane-bound transcription factor peptidase. site 1321,6362291.34E-0583.8383.590.2484.9082.762.141.89
cg27171474CDCA8cell division cycle associated 8329,0324042.05E-0584.8984.780.1186.2285.011.211.09
cg08202265TAC1tachykinin. precursor 1314,8852722.09E-0587.5587.230.3188.4585.153.302.99
cg08528970  311,56311.6165.23E-0513.1113.34−0.2213.8814.30−0.41−0.19
cg02003183CDC42BPBCDC42 binding protein kinase beta (DMPK-like)296,5554426.59E-058.348.140.216.335.570.760.55
cg10665960EPC2enhancer of polycomb homolog 2295,2954917.13E-054.714.660.054.574.90−0.33−0.38
cg26724967IL32interleukin 32184,6705779.65E-0559.7660.34−0.5859.9561.77−1.82−1.25
cg07411111TPD52L2tumor protein D52-like 2289,5189981.04E-0461.4661.040.4262.0759.992.081.66
cg09374353EHD1EH-domain containing 1284,1553211.36E-0420.7320.540.1918.4419.61−1.18−1.37
cg23670519  278,2126161.94E-0427.8627.270.5927.0924.352.742.15
cg05307957ARID1AAT rich interactive domain 1A (SWI-like)277,4971321.97E-042.702.78−0.082.993.38−0.39−0.31
cg20305005SCN2Asodium channel. voltage-gated. type II. alpha subunit273,0402402.54E-0458.3757.960.4258.6556.272.381.96
cg13989999BCL2L1BCL2-like 1268,2583.2903.89E-0447.5247.93−0.4148.0349.34−1.31−0.90
cg06397161SYNGR1synaptogyrin 1262,2001.7874.96E-0442.4842.79−0.3144.5646.19−1.63−1.32
cg06959021TCHPtrichoplein. keratin filament binding255,7281736.39E-0458.6858.280.4061.7159.851.861.45
cg01911191  253,2231.6097.82E-042.702.620.082.342.070.270.19
cg25446789DTNBdystrobrevin. beta150,1802578.25E-0440.2840.87−0.6040.0742.21−2.14−1.55
cg14179401  249,0659839.35E-0433.3833.60−0.2234.7535.82−1.07−0.85
cg08601457FYNFYN proto-oncogene. Src family tyrosine kinase242,2824221.27E-037.117.28−0.175.986.68−0.70−0.53
cg16702313C14orf43chromosome 14 open reading frame 43239,3781531.45E-0360.7161.00−0.2961.8563.45−1.60−1.31
cg13832372LHX6LIM homeobox 6239,2271881.46E-0310.9611.42−0.4510.3212.60−2.28−1.83
cg24242519FAM49Afamily with sequence similarity 49. member A236,3021.2181.77E-0313.4713.75−0.2813.5114.61−1.10−0.82
cg22638542SEC22CSEC22 homolog C. vesicle trafficking protein227,1633292.60E-0380.6980.380.3182.4881.371.110.80
cg01904243C14orf43chromosome 14 open reading frame 43225,0471642.84E-0313.9714.22−0.2512.6213.82−1.20−0.95
cg06338710GFI1growth factor independent 1 transcription repressor224,4612052.92E-0376.2476.90−0.6677.5079.53−2.03−1.38
cg19048950LOC100188 219,3074633.72E-0376.1775.700.4673.4271.152.281.81
cg02104700S100PS100 calcium binding protein P217,7314964.00E-032.422.49−0.072.452.67−0.22−0.15
cg15417641CACNA1Dcalcium channel. voltage-dependent. L type. alpha 1D subunit215,584774.31E-0350.1848.861.3253.3946.646.765.44
cg11222173RPTORregulatory associated protein of MTOR. complex 1216,1691.0254.38E-0362.0361.490.5461.0058.742.261.71
cg08062087C2orf66chromosome 2 open reading frame 66215,6665874.39E-0369.1568.610.5470.0968.062.031.49
cg14950321PLIN5perilipin 5215,6237634.44E-0339.8740.42−0.5541.3143.13−1.82−1.27
cg08778287IGF1Rinsulin-like growth factor 1 receptor214,3834764.62E-0333.4132.780.6431.3728.842.541.90
cg13698937C4orf46chromosome 4 open reading frame 46210,7886945.45E-0376.6475.970.6777.4775.322.151.49
cg00357551FAM196Bfamily with sequence similarity 196. member B207,5221.0166.33E-0333.0132.520.5032.3030.791.511.01
cg04359840XYLT1xylosyltransferase I206,1673466.52E-0347.2747.85−0.5847.8049.99−2.19−1.61
cg21698310PPP1R9Bprotein phosphatase 1. regulatory subunit 15A203,8478227.32E-0310.6610.89−0.239.6910.49−0.81−0.58
cg00816037FAM38Afamily with sequence similarity 38. member A197,9442819.10E-037.778.09−0.336.697.77−1.08−0.75
cg24488469  192,9153141.11E-0215.9716.30−0.3314.0615.16−1.09−0.76
cg12033822SLC35C2solute carrier family 35 (GDP-fucose transporter). member C2189,1841.5191.34E-0226.7627.15−0.4025.5626.54−0.98−0.58
cg22490254  186,0853961.45E-0215.9215.440.4815.5113.871.641.16
cg26840970ZNF19zinc finger protein 19315,2313091.54E-0269.0568.760.2971.0868.752.332.04
cg09608073CHSY3chondroitin sulfate synthase 3184,6577121.55E-029.319.50−0.197.998.47−0.48−0.29
cg19925780  179,2221341.85E-0257.3656.051.3059.5856.043.542.24
cg25223634C10orf26chromosome 10 open reading frame 26172,4843681.90E-0237.5638.21−0.6435.1437.58−2.43−1.79
cg00026474ST3GAL1ST3 beta-galactoside alpha-2.3-sialyltransferase 1178,3738421.96E-0219.1019.54−0.4419.2320.63−1.40−0.96
cg25114611FKBP5FK506 binding protein 5362,7771981.97E-0230.2730.36−0.0830.4431.81−1.37−1.28
cg01609214MIR30DmicroRNA 30d174,1694182.24E-0289.8489.030.8190.8887.383.502.69
cg21188533CACNA1Dcalcium channel. voltage-dependent. L type. alpha 1D subunit173,743612.24E-0243.7441.821.9152.1943.748.456.54
cg06627354TRPM8transient receptor potential cation channel. subfamily M. member 8173,0462852.32E-0265.9165.210.7064.4561.662.792.10
cg25722983STK40serine/threonine kinase 40290,4627402.36E-0245.2645.55−0.2946.4047.91−1.52−1.22
cg25233339ATP1B3ATPase. Na+/K+ transporting. beta 3 polypeptide250,7702122.37E-023.693.79−0.103.033.48−0.45−0.35
cg00449189  171,4187022.49E-0212.0612.39−0.3310.7511.51−0.77−0.44
cg08287903UGT8UDP glycosyltransferase 8169,8751802.58E-0248.8448.150.6951.0048.242.762.06
cg05055821  168,7623222.69E-029.909.650.269.448.670.770.52
cg05525812  171,4143.6752.76E-0216.9517.39−0.4415.7116.55−0.84−0.40
cg20530056IKBKEinhibitor of kappa light polypeptide gene enhancer in B-cells. kinase epsilon168,9531.6992.80E-0263.7564.26−0.5164.6465.97−1.33−0.82
cg01963224  166,9631022.84E-0212.8313.10−0.2811.8812.94−1.06−0.78
cg05548393SLC30A8solute carrier family 30 (zinc transporter). member 8165,9674832.98E-0277.0976.220.8778.6776.302.371.50
cg24715767PRDM2PR domain containing 2. with ZNF domain165,6523373.00E-0257.8057.130.6761.4859.192.291.62
cg05603910ANO9anoctamin 9167,6283.3043.10E-0278.5877.551.0375.7773.981.790.77
cg16660971RPTORregulatory associated protein of MTOR. complex 1163,9693233.17E-0272.0971.011.0871.0166.954.062.98
cg06361984NDE1nudE neurodevelopment protein 1159,8418093.69E-0282.8982.220.6781.1979.421.771.10
cg17873451LOC440925 157,9932313.84E-024.114.26−0.153.543.90−0.37−0.22
cg03220447NAV2neuron navigator 2159,8032.2773.87E-0212.4312.70−0.2712.4412.97−0.53−0.26
cg05756780IL6Rinterleukin 6 receptor156,6141.1474.13E-0223.3223.63−0.3122.6523.65−1.00−0.69
cg02104644SYT7synaptotagmin VII158,6774.2554.27E-0219.4720.07−0.5918.6319.87−1.24−0.64
cg08242636CBFBcore-binding factor. beta subunit155,1741.1494.33E-025.105.25−0.155.005.37−0.37−0.22
cg22006825HNRNPUL1heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoprotein U-like 1171,00917.6244.41E-0219.1319.57−0.4519.2019.75−0.55−0.10
cg07201017FLJ41350LBX1 antisense RNA 1 (head to head)159,9186.9654.48E-0216.2616.59−0.3315.8216.34−0.52−0.19
cg02571448PCBP3poly(rC) binding protein 3151,5959744.81E-0241.1241.91−0.7941.6643.59−1.93−1.14
cg24968629CELSR1cadherin. EGF LAG seven-pass G-type receptor 1177,5171924.85E-0274.9073.751.1570.5265.455.073.92
cg25474070IL3interleukin 3173,1168954.92E-0262.8663.34−0.4764.1565.74−1.59−1.12
cg19859980C1orf97chromosome 1 open reading frame 97154,0944.2254.92E-022.512.60−0.092.592.74−0.15−0.06
cg03699074FAM38Afamily with sequence similarity 38. member A150,3415684.94E-0214.2314.69−0.4612.8114.07−1.26−0.79

*Methylation level (%); #Δβ = difference in % methylation of current-never smokers.

Expression profile

All 26 expression probes in Table 2 show large ranking differences between the sexes, with 23 exhibiting higher significance in females (median ranks: 111 in females and 19,775 in males), while the remaining 3 probes show higher significance in males. All probes are underexpressed in smokers with the exception of 2 which are overexpressed particularly in male smokers. Owing to population size limitations, many of the identified signals do not reach statistical significance in the sex-stratified analyses. However, for the 23 female-specific probes, the median FDR value with regard to the current-versus-never smoker comparisons is 0.40 (range 0.01–0.91) in females while all 23 have FDR > 0.80 in males (not shown), suggesting that the effects of smoking are largely limited to females. Importantly, as shown in Table 2 these significance ranking differences are accompanied by a corresponding difference in effect sizes for all the signals identified, with the median effect size (ratio of expression in current divided by never smokers) observed being 0.80 (range 0.72–0.93) and 0.96 (range 0.93–1.00) in females and males, respectively. No expression probe shows opposite effects of smoking in the two sexes.

Epigenetic profile

Turning to the epigenetic profile, the 92 CpG sites (associated with 72 genes) thus identified (Table 3) show both under- and overmethylation in smokers while their ranking differences between the sexes are also substantial, with the median rank values being 432 and 215,917 in females and males, respectively. The median FDR value of these CpG sites is 0.12 (range 0.0002–0.68) in females, while all 92 sites have FDR > 0.9 in males. In complete analogy to what is observed for the transcriptomic profile, for all CpG sites the impact of smoking (Δβ = βsmokers − βnon-smokers) is greater in females than in males, with the median absolute Δβ values being 1.55% (range 0.15–8.45%) and 0.33% (range 0.00–8.45%), in females and males, respectively. No CpG sites exhibit opposite effects of smoking in the two sexes. There was no statistically significant overabundance in the distribution of the CpG sites in relation to their locations (TSS200, TSS1500, body, 3′UTR, 5′UTR, 1st exon, intragenic) or to their occurrence in CpG islands and their regions (island, non-island S-shore, S-shelf, N-shore, N-shelf). Finally, we note that one gene, PLIN5, appears to be more overexpressed in females but more undermethylated in males, implying a possibility of differential epigenetic regulation in the two sexes.

Consistency and stability of observed sex effects

Owing to the limited population size no direct replication between the two cohorts was conducted. However, cohort-stratified analyses show that the features listed in Tables 3 and 4 tend to be among the most significant features, in terms of sex differences, also in the individual cohorts. Thus, the median rank value of the 92 CpG sites of Table 4 was 3,048 (out of a total of 410,987 sites examined; top 0.7%) in females and 195,213 in males in NSHDS, and 9,098 (top 2%) and 218,704, respectively, in EPIC Italy, thus demonstrating a clear trend of higher female sensitivity in both cohorts. A similar trend was seen with the corresponding transcriptomic signals of Table 2, with the 23 female-specific signals having median ranks of 585 (out of a total of 29,667 probes examined; top 2%) in females and 25,742 in males in NSHDS, and 1,708 (top 6%) and 12,338 in females and males, respectively, in EPIC Italy. As regards the 3 male-specific transcriptomic signals, all 3 in NSHDS and 2 out of 3 in EPIC ranked higher in males.
Table 4

Female-specific DEGs/DMGs of potential relevance to CVD. and their expression/methylation changes observed in present study or reported clinical studies (where available).

GeneDirect evidence of links with CVD pathogenesisMechanistic basis of links with CVDCurrent study
Vasclular inflam-mation28Chronic artery occlussion48Myocardial infarction63Coronary heart disease64Coronary artery disease65Peripheral arterial disease66Myocardial infarction67Venous thrombo-embolism68Atherosus-ceptibility69
expr*meth#expr*expr*expr*expr*expr*expr*expr*expr*meth#
F2R (PAR1)polymorphisms in human CVD14thrombin signaling/vascular haemostasisdown    down  down  
GP5  up         
FYNtransgenic mice19 down       up 
IGF1R  up        up
EGF  up         
EPS8transgenic mice24 up         
RPTORtransgenic mice26 up         
HMOX1polymorphisms and differential expression in human CVD28; transgenic mice28anti-inflammatorydown down        
HDAC4 regulation of hypertrophy           
BCL2L1 anti-apoptotic down   up     
CACNA1Dpolymorphisms in human CVD37; transgenic mice3536calcium signalling up         
TANGLNpolymorphisms in human CVD70; transgenic mice42VSMC/endothelial cell functiondown          
SYNE1polymorphisms in human CVD37; transgenic mice3536down       down  
IL32differential expression in human CVD45; transgenic mice45pro-inflammatory down         
PLIN5transgenic mice46oxidative stress down         
HNRNPUL1polymorphisms in human CVD47unknown down         
miR-30ddifferential expression in human CVD48regulation of cardiomyocyte apoptosis71 up updown      
C14orf43differential expression in human CVD61unknown down     down   
C1orf21differential expression in human CVD59unknowndown    down     
ST3GAL1differential expression in human CVD59unknown down   up     
ZNF19differential expression in human CVD59unknown up   down     

The genes are listed in the order in which they are discussed in the main text. Col. 1 presents evidence based on human population and transgenic animal studies.

*Expression; #methylation.

The observation that almost all sex-specific features identified show higher sensitivity in females is striking. For comparison it is noted that only 116 of the 350 transcripts and 1,009 of the 1,273 CpGs differentially modified by smoking in the mixed population have lower FDR values in females. Although, as stated above, the rank-based comparison we employed is not expected to be significantly affected by group size, in view of the larger number of females in our study (320 female versus 134 male current and never smokers), we ran the same analysis as described above 10 times, in each case using all 134 male subjects and an equal number of females sampled randomly from our population while maintaining constant the proportions of subjects coming from each of the two cohorts and with the different types of smoking status (see Fig. 1, right). In each such resampling analysis, the resulting sex-specific epigenetic or transcriptomic signals included on average 50.3% (S.D. 7.3%) and 50.8% (S.D. 14.2%) of the signals shown in Tables 2 and 3, respectively, while the cumulative % overlap (average of each successive resampling round plus all preceding ones) for both lists tended towards approx. 50%, reflecting the similar loss of statistical power of the smaller subpopulations employed (Suppl. Table S3 and Suppl. Fig. S2). These observations provide confirmation that the identification of the sex-specific signals was not subject to bias by the group size of each sex class.

Discussion

A number of recent studies on smoking-induced changes in methylation profiles, which employed effect size as the response classification parameter, failed to detect any sex-specific responses1112, possibly because of residual confounding arising from insufficiently accurate adjustment for tobacco smoke exposure. By comparing in sex-stratified analyses the significance ranking of transcriptomic and epigenetic signals previously shown to differ between current and never smokers in a mixed-sex population, we identified a number of features which exhibit significantly different responses in the two sexes. Because the highly stringent nature of our non-parametric, rank-based statistical methodology inevitably attenuates sensitivity, it is possible that additional features with sex-specific behaviour may exist. On the other hand this approach has the advantage that it minimizes false positive findings and maximizes specificity. Our observation that almost all features identified show stronger responses in females implies the possibility of higher female susceptibility to diseases related to the corresponding genes. The most notable observation regarding the list of sex-specific DEGs and DMGs relates to the presence of multiple genes related to CVD, especially genes involved in thrombin signaling and vascular and endothelial cell function. Table 4 summarises the relevant evidence (discussed further below) and compares the changes observed in the present study with those reported in clinical studies, where such information is available. It can be seen that the direction of change reported in these studies is in concordance with that which we have observed in apparently healthy female smokers, supporting the relevance of these changes to disease pathogenesis.

Genes involved in thrombin signaling

Thrombin, a serine protease, has an essential role in coagulation and haemostasis mediated by platelets, while in addition it elicits important effects in endothelial and vascular smooth muscle cells (VSMC). For these reasons thrombin-mediated effects are of great importance in the pathogenesis of CVD. Most of the cellular effects of thrombin are initiated via the activation of a family of G-protein-coupled receptors called protease-activated receptors (PARs), which are transmembrane proteins expressed on different types of cells including platelets, endothelial cells and VSMC. The main thrombin receptor on platelets and blood vessel cells is PAR1, also known as coagulation factor II (thrombin) receptor (F2R). This gene plays a key role in vascular function and CVD13 and its genetic variants are known to influence platelet function1415. In our previously published analysis of the effects of smoking on transcriptomic and epigenetic profiles10 we found F2R to be differentially underexpressed in current smokers with a statistical significance of FDR = 0.15 which just fails to reach the threshold adopted in the present analysis (FDR < 0.10). Inclusion of the F2R-related expression probe together with the 350 probes with FDR < 0.10 in the sex-stratified analysis described above reveals a highly significant female specificity of the effect of smoking on this gene. Thus, in male- and female-stratified analyses, respectively, the significance rankings for current-versus-never-smoker comparisons were 29,197 and 1,283 (p = 1.08 × 10−4), the FDR values 0.98 and 0.040 and the effect sizes 1.00 and 0.88. The interaction of thrombin with PAR1 in platelets is facilitated by its initial binding to the GPIb-IX-V complex which plays a critical role in thrombosis, atherogenesis and inflammation16. This complex includes the glycoprotein GP5, which is associated with a CpG site we found to be differentially overmethylated in female smokers (Table 3). Following its activation via the cleavage of its N-terminal domain by thrombin, PAR1 initiates multiple kinase signaling pathways which lead to different effects depending on the cells concerned (Fig. 2). Such effects include hemostasis and thrombosis in the case of platelets, induction of pro-inflammatory phenotype in the case of endothelial cells, increase of vascular permeability, proliferation, migration and hypertrophy in the case of VSMCs, thus contributing to the pathogenesis of different types of CVD.
Figure 2

Schematic representation of some of the interactions involved in PAR1 signalling initiated by thrombin.

All genes shown, are preferentially modified in female smokers, PAR1 being differentially expressed and the others differentially methylated. The genes shown near the arrow participate in signalling downstream of PAR1 and the order in which they are shown does not imply a sequential interaction.

Signaling by the activated PAR1 receptor is controlled by, among other factors, Src kinases17, including FYN (FYN proto-oncogene, Src family tyrosine kinase) which is associated with a CpG site differentially undermethylated in female smokers. Following initiation of GPIb-IX-V/PAR1 signalling, FYN phosphorylates PKCδ (protein kinase Cδ) which subsequently negatively modulates platelet activation18. The importance of FYN for haemostasis-related disease is underlined by the report that FYN-deficient mice show an altered haemostatic response19. Another gene which influences platelet function is IGF1R (insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor), which is associated with a CpG site differentially overmethylated in female smokers. The IFG1R protein is expressed at high levels on the plasma membrane of platelets while its ligand, IGF1, is a growth factor found in the α granules in platelets. Stimulation of platelets with IGF1 results in rapid phosphorylation of IGF1R and potentiation of PAR1-induced platelet aggregation20. As already mentioned, thrombin-mediated PAR (including PAR1) signaling also operates in VSMC and endothelial cells, thereby playing an important role in diverse cellular activities related to inflammation, CVD, tumor growth and other conditions. In this context the genes discussed above (with the exception of GP5 which is expressed only in platelets) can be anticipated to affect by analogous mechanisms the pathogenesis of such diseases. Moreover, a number of additional genes of relevance to thrombin signaling in VSMC and endothelial cells is included in the list of genes found to be differentially modified in female smokers. One of these genes is EGF (epidermal growth factor), differentially overmethylated in female smokers, a potent mitogenic factor in many cell types acting through its receptor EGFR. Activation of EGFR promotes thrombin-induced proliferation of VSMC21, while its inhibition attenuates thrombin-stimulated signalling along the PI3K-Akt-mTOR-S6K1 axis, leading to effects on cell proliferation and motility22. Importantly, EGFR signalling is coordinated by EPS8 (epidermal growth factor receptor pathway substrate 8)23, which is underexpressed in female smokers. In support of a probable role of EPS8 in vascular disease is the report that EPS8-null mice show increased vascular permeability24. Finally, RPTOR (regulatory associated protein of MTOR, complex 1), overmethylated at 2 CpG sites in female smokers, negatively regulates mTOR kinase25 which, as mentioned above, is involved in thrombin signaling in VSMC. It is noted that mice with an RPTOR deletion targeted on the myocardium have been reported to develop dilated cardiomyopathy26.

Other genes related to CVD pathogenesis

The list of genes exhibiting sex-specific response to tobacco smoking includes a number of additional members for which there is significant clinical or mechanistic evidence, including evidence from transgenic animal studies, that they are linked with CVD pathogenesis. The gene with the largest expression change in female smokers is HMOX1 (haem oxygenase 1), well known for its antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties as well as for its protective role against CVD272829. HMOX1 is also known to protect against smoking-induced COPD30, a disease for which there is strong evidence of differentially higher susceptibility in female smokers156. Another gene of interest is HDAC4 (histone deacetylase 4), differentially overmethylated in female smokers, which plays a global role in the epigenetic control of gene expression by modifying histones as well as non-histone proteins31 and plays an important role in regulating hypertrophic responses32. Finally of particular note is the female-specific demethylation of the well known anti-apoptotic gene BCL2L1 (BCL2-like 1), which plays a key role in the regulation of platelet activation and apoptosis33. Among the consequences of platelet apoptosis is the production of microparticles, which are recognised to play an important role in inflammation, CVD, coagulation and angiogenesis34. The largest sex-related difference in the impact of smoking (absΔΔβ, last column in Table 4) is observed at 3 CpG sites associated with CACNA1D (calcium channel, voltage-dependent, L type, alpha 1D subunit). This gene encodes for the cav1.3 subunit of a voltage-gated, L-type calcium channel and human and animal studies strongly support its association with various pathological conditions, including cardiovascular and neurological disorders35363738. On a side note, it is of interest that cav1.3 physically interacts with the receptor of GABAB, with activation of the latter leading to an increase in the L-type calcium channel currents39. Given the key role of this receptor in the mechanism of addiction, it is possible that any sex-related variation in CACNA1D expression may be reflected in corresponding differences in susceptibility to nicotine addiction. In support of this idea, several lines of evidence indicate that females have a higher susceptibility to nicotine dependence, including faster progression to dependence, shorter and less frequent abstinence periods, greater difficulty to quit, and poorer response to smoking cessation treatments384041. Other genes listed in Table 4, for which there is evidence of varying strength of links with different types of CVD, include TAGLN (transgelin42), SYNE1 (spectrin repeat containing, nuclear envelope 1)4344, IL32 (interleukin 32)45, PLIN5 (perilipin 5)46, HNRNPUL1 (Heterogeneous Nuclear Ribonucleoprotein U-Like 1)47 and miR-30d48. Finally, Table 4 shows a number of genes (C14orf43, C1orf21, ST3GAL1 and ZNF19) which do not have any function related to CVD pathogenesis, however they have been reported to be differentially expressed in patients with different types of CVD.

Molecular basis of sex-specific effects of tobacco smoke exposure

The previous discussion shows that numerous genes among those found to be differentially altered in female smokers interact closely in the context of thrombin signaling in platelets and vascular/endothelial cells. While the molecular basis for such differential female susceptibility to tobacco smoke is not currently understood, there is strong evidence that thrombin signaling and hemostasis are subject to hormonal influences and it is possible that such influences may also modify the responses to tobacco smoking. Megakaryocytes and platelets express the estrogen and androgen receptors, and the coagulation cascade is known to be influenced by variations in the levels of female sex steroids495051, while it has been suggested that females have greater baseline platelet reactivity which may be attenuated by estrogens5152. Furthermore, it has been reported that platelets from women are more responsive than those of men to thrombin agonists51, and that females with atherosclerosis show higher PAR1-mediated platelet activation53. Sex hormones contribute to the modulation of additional genes related to CVD and may therefore also modify the impact of smoking. For example, the expression of HMOX1 under conditions of oxidative stress is modulated by estrogen receptor alpha54, while estrogen receptor beta modulates the expression of HDAC4 under the influence of hypertrophic factors in rat cardiomyocytes55. Summarising the preceding discussion, a large number of genes which are known or suspected to play a role in the mechanism of CVD, and to modulate corresponding disease risks, have their expression or methylation in WBCs modified by smoking significantly more in females than in males. It is not known whether similar changes occur in other tissues of smokers. However we have recently reported that tobacco smoking causes similar changes in expression and CpG methylation in the Ah receptor repressor gene in WBCs and lung cells10. We have also shown that the genes which are differentially expressed or methylated in WBCs of smokers are closely related to many smoking-induced diseases regardless of their target tissue, implying that changes observed in blood cells may reflect more global effects. This conclusion is further supported by the concordance of the results presented in the present study with the conclusions of epidemiological studies which consistently point to a higher female susceptibility to tobacco-induced CVD. Furthermore, we also report analogous, although more limited, findings supporting higher female susceptibility to tobacco-induced COPD and nicotine addiction. Although our evaluation of the disease-relevance of the sex-specific DEGs and DMGs presented above did not include cancer, many of the signaling pathways discussed are also highly relevant to carcinogenesis56. It is noted that the current evidence regarding sex susceptibility to tobacco-related cancer is mixed78957. In conclusion, the results presented here underline the utility of blood-based omics profiling for identifying health hazards associated with environmental exposures and suggest a potential for use of such data in identification of susceptible sub-groups.

Materials and Methods

The present report is based on data from the Envirogenomarkers project (www.envirogenomarkers.net). Envirogenomarkers is a prospective case-control study nested within the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition study (EPIC-ITALY) and the Northern Sweden Health and Disease Study (NSHDS)5859, in which subjects asymptomatic at the time of enrolment provided a blood sample and information on dietary habits, lifestyle, health history etc. The EnviroGenomarkers project and its associated studies and experimental protocols were approved by the Regional Ethical Review Board of the Umea Division of Medical Research, for the Swedish cohort, and the Florence Health Unit Local Ethical Committee, for the Italian cohort, and all participants gave written informed consent. All methods were carried out in accordance with the approved guidelines. Owing to the Envirogenomarkers project’s design, some of the participating subjects had been selected on the basis of the fact that they went on to develop breast cancer or B-cell lymphoma 2–16 years after recruitment, however for the purposes of the present study they were all treated as apparently healthy. We have previously shown that inclusion of such subjects did not significantly affect the list of smoking-modified transcriptomic and epigenetic features10. Anthropometric measurements and lifestyle parameters had been collected through questionnaires at recruitment (1993–1998 for EPIC-ITALY; 1990–2006 for NSHDS). Information on smoking was obtained through questionnaires and included data on duration, number of cigarettes smoked per day and (only in Italy) pack-years. In addition, for a fraction of the subjects data on plasma cotinine concentration were also available. Details of the subjects involved in the present study are shown in Table 1. Sample collection, storage and processing procedures have been described elsewhere5859. Based on the conclusions of a previously published pilot study60, subjects were included in the study only if the processing of their blood samples and placement of their buffy coats in cold storage had been completed within 2 hours of collection so as to minimize effects on the transcriptomic profile. RNA and DNA extraction from buffy coats, genome-wide analysis of gene expression (Agilent 4 × 44 K human whole genome microarray platform) and CpG methylation (Illumina Infinium HumanMethylation450 platform) and the corresponding data quality assessment and preprocessing, were conducted as described previously60. Cotinine levels (AUC) in plasma were measured by reverse-phase chromatography on an Acquity UPLC system (Waters Corporation, Milford, MA, USA) with a Acquity HSS T3 C18 10 mm × 2.1 mm, 1.8 μm, column (Waters) and a binary gradient elution comprising of water 0.1% formic acid and acetonitrile 0.1% formic acid for 19 min. Online analysis of the eluent was performed using a quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometer (QTOF-Ultima-MS; Waters) in the positive ion mode. Data were processed using Databridge and XCMS software (Waters). We confirmed the identity of cotinine with authentic standard and accurate mass. Data analysis and the derivation of lists of expression probes and CpG sites which differed significantly between current and never smokers has been described in detail previously10. Briefly, linear mixed models were ran, using M values for DNA methylation or log2 intensities of mRNA expression as dependent variables, plus date of isolation, labeling, and hybridization for RNA expression, or date of analysis for methylation, as random variables. All analyses additionally adjusted for sex, age, BMI and cohort. Owing to the design of the EnviroGenomarkers project, future disease (breast cancer, B-cell lymphoma) and case-control status were also included as fixed variables. In the case of DNA methylation data, the models were also adjusted for blood cell composition estimated with a published algorithm61. Multiple testing was accounted for with high stringency by using Bonferroni or FDR Benjamini-Hochberg correction. This procedure led to the identification of lists, recently published10, of 1,273 CpG sites (FDR < 0.05) and 350 transcripts (FDR < 0.10) which differ significantly in current relative to never smokers (Suppl. Tables 1 and 2). We looked for sex-related differences among the above mentioned expression and DNA methylation features by employing rank-based, non-parametric, statistical testing methodology based on the evaluation of the differences in the significance ranks of the probes in the two classes (Fig. 2). Towards this end we first conducted current-versus-never smoker comparisons, using the same statistical models as previously, for all transcriptomic and epigenetic features (29,667 expression probes and 410,987 methylation probes, respectively) separately in males and females, ranking all features by the corresponding significance (p-value). Subsequently we extracted from these lists the rank values of the features which we had previously found to be significant in the mixed population (350 expression probes significant at FDR < 0.10 and 1,273 CpGs significant at Bonferoni-corrected p < 0.05) and calculated their differences between the two sexes. We thus derived a distribution of differences which conforms to the normality assumption (steep unimodal) and was used as basis in order search for differences that violate the null hypothesis that only non-sex-related differences are observed, i.e. signal rankings in sex-stratified analyses are equal. The statistic was calculated from the corresponding complementary cumulative distribution function (Survival Function)62 which describes the probability that a variate takes a value greater than a particular number, taking as a significance threshold the value of p < 0.05. The workflow of this analysis is described diagrammatically in Fig. 1. The tool for the implementation of the statistical evaluation of sex-specific rank differences described above is publically available, under the name RIPOSTE (“Rank DrIven POpulation STatistical Evaluation”), on the Galaxy platform at http://mebioinfo.ekt.gr/galaxy, where instructions for its use are also given. In order to check for any bias introduced by the difference in male and female population sizes on the selection of sex-specific signals, we implemented a permutation probabilistic approach (also illustrated in Fig. 1, right) by randomly resampling 10 times the full population so as to extract subpopulations even with respect to sex and smoking status, subsequently applying to all subpopulations thus selected the same analytical workflow as described above. In each subpopulation we used all available male subjects (134) and an equal number of females selected randomly while maintaining unaltered the proportions of females from the different cohorts and with different smoking status. For each resampling we counted the number of significant (p < 0.05 for rank difference) signals that came from among those obtained with the full male and female populations (shown in Tables 2 and 3).

Additional Information

How to cite this article: Chatziioannou, A. et al. Blood-based omic profiling supports female susceptibility to tobacco smoke-induced cardiovascular diseases. Sci. Rep. 7, 42870; doi: 10.1038/srep42870 (2017). Publisher's note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
  69 in total

1.  Functional role of L-type Cav1.3 Ca2+ channels in cardiac pacemaker activity.

Authors:  Matteo E Mangoni; Brigitte Couette; Emmanuel Bourinet; Josef Platzer; Daniel Reimer; Jörg Striessnig; Joël Nargeot
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2003-04-16       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 2.  Gender susceptibility for cigarette smoking-attributable lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yunxian Yu; Hui Liu; Shuangshuang Zheng; Zheyuan Ding; Zexin Chen; Wen Jin; Lijuan Wang; Zhaopin Wang; Ying Fei; Shanchun Zhang; Kejing Ying; Ruifeng Zhang
Journal:  Lung Cancer       Date:  2014-07-15       Impact factor: 5.705

Review 3.  Effects of hormones on platelet aggregation.

Authors:  Antonio López Farré; Javier Modrego; José J Zamorano-León
Journal:  Horm Mol Biol Clin Investig       Date:  2014-04

4.  GABA(B) receptor-mediated ERK1/2 phosphorylation via a direct interaction with Ca(V)1.3 channels.

Authors:  Bo-Hye Im; Hyewhon Rhim
Journal:  Neurosci Lett       Date:  2012-02-14       Impact factor: 3.046

5.  Cardiovascular disease and diabetes in the Northern Sweden Health and Disease Study Cohort - evaluation of risk factors and their interactions.

Authors:  Göran Hallmans; Asa Agren; Gerd Johansson; Anders Johansson; Birgitta Stegmayr; Jan-Håkan Jansson; Bernt Lindahl; Olle Rolandsson; Stefan Söderberg; Mats Nilsson; Ingegerd Johansson; Lars Weinehall
Journal:  Scand J Public Health Suppl       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 3.021

6.  Physical and functional interaction between protein kinase C delta and Fyn tyrosine kinase in human platelets.

Authors:  David Crosby; Alastair W Poole
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2003-04-29       Impact factor: 5.157

7.  Epigenome-wide association study in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC-Turin) identifies novel genetic loci associated with smoking.

Authors:  Natalie S Shenker; Silvia Polidoro; Karin van Veldhoven; Carlotta Sacerdote; Fulvio Ricceri; Mark A Birrell; Maria G Belvisi; Robert Brown; Paolo Vineis; James M Flanagan
Journal:  Hum Mol Genet       Date:  2012-11-21       Impact factor: 6.150

8.  Estrogen regulates histone deacetylases to prevent cardiac hypertrophy.

Authors:  Ali Pedram; Mahnaz Razandi; Ramesh Narayanan; James T Dalton; Timothy A McKinsey; Ellis R Levin
Journal:  Mol Biol Cell       Date:  2013-10-23       Impact factor: 4.138

9.  Circulating MicroRNAs Characterizing Patients with Insufficient Coronary Collateral Artery Function.

Authors:  Nazanin Hakimzadeh; A Yaël Nossent; Anja M van der Laan; Stephan H Schirmer; Maurice W J de Ronde; Sara-Joan Pinto-Sietsma; Niels van Royen; Paul H A Quax; Imo E Hoefer; Jan J Piek
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-09-02       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Heavy smoking and lung cancer: are women at higher risk? Result of the ICARE study.

Authors:  A Papadopoulos; F Guida; K Leffondré; S Cénée; D Cyr; A Schmaus; L Radoï; S Paget-Bailly; M Carton; G Menvielle; A-S Woronoff; B Tretarre; D Luce; I Stücker
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2014-01-14       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  7 in total

1.  Transcriptional differences between smokers and non-smokers and variance by obesity as a risk factor for human sensitivity to environmental exposures.

Authors:  Maria Nikodemova; Jeremiah Yee; Patrick R Carney; Christopher A Bradfield; Kristen Mc Malecki
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2018-02-16       Impact factor: 9.621

2.  Pre-diagnostic blood immune markers, incidence and progression of B-cell lymphoma and multiple myeloma: Univariate and functionally informed multivariate analyses.

Authors:  Roel Vermeulen; Fatemeh Saberi Hosnijeh; Barbara Bodinier; Lützen Portengen; Benoît Liquet; Javiera Garrido-Manriquez; Henk Lokhorst; Ingvar A Bergdahl; Soterios A Kyrtopoulos; Ann-Sofie Johansson; Panagiotis Georgiadis; Beatrice Melin; Domenico Palli; Vittorio Krogh; Salvatore Panico; Carlotta Sacerdote; Rosario Tumino; Paolo Vineis; Raphaële Castagné; Marc Chadeau-Hyam; Maria Botsivali; Aristotelis Chatziioannou; Ioannis Valavanis; Jos C S Kleinjans; Theo M C M de Kok; Hector C Keun; Toby J Athersuch; Rachel Kelly; Per Lenner; Goran Hallmans; Euripides G Stephanou; Antonis Myridakis; Manolis Kogevinas; Lucia Fazzo; Marco De Santis; Pietro Comba; Benedetta Bendinelli; Hannu Kiviranta; Panu Rantakokko; Riikka Airaksinen; Paivi Ruokojarvi; Mark Gilthorpe; Sarah Fleming; Thomas Fleming; Yu-Kang Tu; Thomas Lundh; Kuo-Liong Chien; Wei J Chen; Wen-Chung Lee; Chuhsing Kate Hsiao; Po-Hsiu Kuo; Hung Hung; Shu-Fen Liao
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2018-04-26       Impact factor: 7.396

3.  Epigenome-wide change and variation in DNA methylation in childhood: trajectories from birth to late adolescence.

Authors:  Rosa H Mulder; Alexander Neumann; Charlotte A M Cecil; Esther Walton; Lotte C Houtepen; Andrew J Simpkin; Jolien Rijlaarsdam; Bastiaan T Heijmans; Tom R Gaunt; Janine F Felix; Vincent W V Jaddoe; Marian J Bakermans-Kranenburg; Henning Tiemeier; Caroline L Relton; Marinus H van IJzendoorn; Matthew Suderman
Journal:  Hum Mol Genet       Date:  2021-03-25       Impact factor: 6.150

Review 4.  Air pollution-induced epigenetic changes: disease development and a possible link with hypersensitivity pneumonitis.

Authors:  Suranjana Mukherjee; Sanjukta Dasgupta; Pradyumna K Mishra; Koel Chaudhury
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2021-09-08       Impact factor: 4.223

Review 5.  Cigarette smoke-induced alterations in blood: A review of research on DNA methylation and gene expression.

Authors:  Constanza P Silva; Helen M Kamens
Journal:  Exp Clin Psychopharmacol       Date:  2020-07-13       Impact factor: 3.157

Review 6.  Cell-type deconvolution from DNA methylation: a review of recent applications.

Authors:  Alexander J Titus; Rachel M Gallimore; Lucas A Salas; Brock C Christensen
Journal:  Hum Mol Genet       Date:  2017-10-01       Impact factor: 6.150

7.  Creating and Validating a DNA Methylation-Based Proxy for Interleukin-6.

Authors:  Anna J Stevenson; Danni A Gadd; Robert F Hillary; Daniel L McCartney; Archie Campbell; Rosie M Walker; Kathryn L Evans; Sarah E Harris; Tara L Spires-Jones; Allan F McRae; Peter M Visscher; Andrew M McIntosh; Ian J Deary; Riccardo E Marioni
Journal:  J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci       Date:  2021-11-15       Impact factor: 6.053

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.