| Literature DB >> 29077742 |
Azadeh Houshmand-Oeregaard1,2,3, Line Hjort2,3,4, Louise Kelstrup1,3, Ninna S Hansen2,3,4, Christa Broholm2, Linn Gillberg2, Tine D Clausen3,5, Elisabeth R Mathiesen1,3,6, Peter Damm1,3, Allan Vaag2,3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fetal exposure to maternal diabetes increases the risk of type 2 diabetes (T2DM), possibly mediated by epigenetic mechanisms. Low blood TXNIP DNA methylation has been associated with elevated glucose levels and risk of T2DM, and increased skeletal muscle TXNIP gene expression was reported in subjects with impaired glucose metabolism or T2DM. Subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) and skeletal muscle play a key role in the control of whole body glucose metabolism and insulin action. The extent to which TXNIP DNA methylation levels are decreased and/or gene expression levels increased in SAT or skeletal muscle of a developmentally programmed at-risk population is unknown. OBJECTIVE AND METHODS: The objective of this study was to investigate TXNIP DNA methylation and gene expression in SAT and skeletal muscle, and DNA methylation in blood, from adult offspring of women with gestational diabetes (O-GDM, n = 82) or type 1 diabetes (O-T1DM, n = 67) in pregnancy compared with offspring of women from the background population (O-BP, n = 57).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29077742 PMCID: PMC5659766 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0187038
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Study design- subjects participating and lost to follow-up.
O-BP: offspring of women from the background population; O-GDM: offspring of women with gestational diabetes; O-NoGDM: offspring of women with risk factors for gestational diabetes but normal glucose tolerance in pregnancy (not invited to participate in second round of follow-up); O-T1DM: offspring of women with type 1 diabetes in pregnancy. *O-NoGDM (n = 254) were not invited to participate in the second round of follow-up, leaving 812 eligible offspring from the original cohort (1066–254 = 812) divided into the three groups O-GDM, O-T1DM and O-BP.
Baseline clinical characteristics in adult offspring of women with gestational diabetes (O-GDM) or type 1 diabetes (O-T1DM) compared to offspring of women from the background population (O-BP).
| O-GDM | O-T1DM | O-BP | O-GDM vs. O-BP | O-T1DM vs. O-BP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 82 | 67 | 57 | |||
| 30.4(5.2) | 26.4 (4.7) | 26.8 (4.6) | 0.645 | ||
| 24.3 (5.6) | 21.7 (1.9) | 21.2 (3.5) | 0.301 | ||
| 34% (28/82) | 8% (5/64) | 12% (7/57) | 0.412 | ||
| 26% (21/82) | 25% (17/67) | 16% (9/57) | 0.166 | 0.191 | |
| 32% (22/69) | 63% (37/59) | 58% (26/45) | 0.610 | ||
| 5.2 (0.6) | NA | NA | NA | NA | |
| 7.9 (1.8) | NA | NA | NA | NA | |
| NA | 9.0 (3.0) | NA | NA | NA | |
| NA | 6.7 (1.6) | NA | NA | NA | |
| 30.2 (2.1) | 30.8 (2.4) | 30.8 (2.4) | 0.183 | 0.879 | |
| 52% (43/82) | 46% (31/67) | 46% (26/57) | 0.429 | 0.942 | |
| 77.8 (17.4) | 78.3 (17.9) | 75.3 (16.5) | 0.398 | 0.331 | |
| 1.76 (0.10) | 1.74 (0.10) | 1.74 (0.10) | 0.481 | 0.676 | |
| 29.8% (0.1) | 31.4% (0.1) | 28.7% (0.1) | 0.428 | 0.093 | |
| 25.2 (5.1) | 26.0 (5.9) | 24.6 (3.9) | 0.493 | 0.113 | |
| 15% (12/82) | 16% (11/67) | 7% (4/57) | 0.166 | 0.110 | |
| 5.0 (0.7) | 4.9 (0.4) | 4.9 (0.3) | 0.245 | 0.381 | |
| 8.2 (1.7) | 7.8 (1.7) | 7.3 (1.6) | 0.125 | ||
| 6.0 (1.8) | 6.3 (1.7) | 5.3 (1.2) | |||
| 35.1 (3.6) | 34.5 (3.3) | 34.0 (2.8) | 0.076 | 0.415 | |
| 5.4 (0.3) | 5.3 (0.3) | 5.3 (0.3) | 0.079 | 0.569 | |
| 13% (11/82) | 13% (9/67) | 5% (3/57) | 0.116 | 0.125 | |
| 1% (1/82) | 0% (0/67) | 0% (0/57) | 0.403 | NA | |
| 7% (6/82) | 10% (7/67) | 5% (3/57) | 0.628 | 0.291 | |
| 1% (1/82) | 0%(0/67) | 0% (0/57) | 0.403 | NA | |
| 10% (8/82) | 10% (7/67) | 5% (3/57) | 0.334 | 0.291 | |
| 2% (2/82) | 1.5% (1/67) | 0% (0/57) | 0.235 | 0.354 | |
| 1% (1/82) | 1.5%(1/67) | 0% (0/57) | 0.403 | 0.354 | |
| 1.77 (1.56–2.02) | 1.95 (1.71–2.22) | 1.72 (1.47–2.02) | 0.784 | 0.222 | |
| 49 (43–55) | 54 (48–61) | 49 (42–56) | 0.953 | 0.255 | |
| 252 (210–304) | 281 (240–329) | 223 (185–268) | 0.350 | 0.056 | |
| 0.89 (0.81–0.98) | 0.84 (0.76–0.93) | 1.00 (0.76–1.31) | 0.391 | 0.233 | |
| 2.72 (2.57–2.87) | 2.64 (2.48–2.81) | 2.79 (2.60–3.00) | 0.540 | 0.233 | |
| 1.33 (1.26–1.41) | 1.44 (1.37–1.52) | 1.36 (1.26–1.48) | 0.605 | 0.241 | |
| 4.68 (4.51–4.84) | 4.70 (4.53–4.89) | 4.78 (4.56–5.02) | 0.447 | 0.592 | |
| 1.02 (0.81–1.28) | 1.17 (0.90–1.52) | 0.87 (0.66–1.14) | 0.369 | 0.124 | |
Data is mean (SD), median (25th–75th percentiles) or percentage (number), unless otherwise indicated.
All comparisons are to the O-BP control group. Analysis of differences (means or proportions) between groups performed by independent samples t-test or X2- test, respectively. P-values < 0.05 are bold. Total body fat % = (total fat mass/total body mass)x100.
*Data on smoking status was missing for 33 subjects
a. Based on 2-hour 75g OGTT and evaluated according to WHO-criteria of 2006 (ref. [30])
b. Data is presented as geometric mean and 95% confidence intervals
Abbreviations: BMI: body mass index; HDL: high density lipoprotein; HOMA-IR: homeostatic model assessment insulin resistance; Hs-CRP: high sensitivity C-reactive protein; IFG: impaired fasting glucose; IGT: impaired glucose tolerance; LDL: low density lipoprotein; NA: not applicable; OGTT: oral glucose tolerance; T1DM: type 1 diabetes; T2DM: type 2 diabetes
Fig 2TXNIP DNA methylation in A. subcutaneous adipose tissue, B. skeletal muscle and C. blood from offspring of women with gestational diabetes (O-GDM), offspring of women with type 1 diabetes (O-T1DM) in pregnancy, and offspring of women from the background population (O-BP).
Data is presented as mean +/- SD. Differences between mean of exposure and control groups calculated using independent samples t-test. All comparisons are to the O-BP control group. DNA methylation was measured at the CpG site cg19693031. * P<0.05.
TXNIP DNA methylation and gene expression in subcutaneous adipose tissue, skeletal muscle and blood from offspring of women with gestational diabetes (O-GDM) or type 1 diabetes (O-T1DM) compared to offspring of women from the background population (O-BP) in univariate and multivariate analyses.
| O-GDM | O-T1D | O-BP | O-GDM vs. O-BP p-value | O-T1DM vs. O-BP p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
O-GDM N = 53; O-T1DM N = 49; O-BP N = 35 | 39.73 (4.48) | 37.76 (4.29) | 37.66 (4.18) | 0.909 | |
O-GDM N = 62; O-T1DM N = 62; O-BP N = 41 | 65.14 (4.42) | 63.91 (4.39) | 63.56 (4.59) | 0.084 | 0.697 |
O-GDM N = 82; O-T1DM N = 65; O-BP N = 57 | 64.75 (6.66) | 64.27 (6.84) | 66.25 (8.07) | 0.232 | 0.144 |
O-GDM N = 58; O-T1DM N = 59; O-BP N = 42 | 1.29 (0.56) | 1.53 (0.76) | 1.91 (1.25) | 0.058 | |
O-GDM N = 76; O-T1DM N = 63; O-BP N = 42 | 1.09 (0.47) | 1.09 (0.48) | 1.06 (0.45) | 0.800 | 0.786 |
Data is mean (SD). All comparisons are to the O-BP control group. Analysis of differences (means or proportions) between groups was performed by independent samples t-test.
p-values < 0.05 are bold
TXNIP expression is calculated relative to the HPRT reference gene.
a Data was log transformed prior to t-test.
Model 1: adjusted for maternal pre-pregnancy BMI, age at delivery, smoking status, family history of diabetes, and offspring gender and age at follow-up
Model 2: model 1 with additional adjustment for offspring HOMA-IR, Hba1c, and total body fat percent.
Fig 3TXNIP gene expression in A. subcutaneous adipose tissue and B. skeletal muscle from offspring of women with gestational diabetes (O-GDM), offspring of women with type 1 diabetes (O-T1DM) in pregnancy, and offspring of women from the background population (O-BP).
Data is presented as geometric mean with 95% confidence intervals. Differences between mean of exposure and control groups calculated using independent samples t-test. All comparisons are to the O-BP control group. Gene expression levels are shown relative to the HPRT reference gene. **P<0.01.
Correlations between TXNIP DNA methylation and gene expression and offspring markers of metabolic disease.
| METHYLATION | GENE EXPRESSION | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.048 (0.576) | 0.026 (0.791) | ||||
| 0.004 (0.964) | -0.128 (0.104) | ||||
| 0.048 (0.576) | 0.090 (0.265) | 0.061 (0.420) | |||
| 0.026 (0.791) | 0.004 (0.964) | 0.090 (0.265) | -0.092 (0.265) | ||
| -0.128 (0.104) | 0.061 (0.420) | -0.092 (0.265) | |||
| -0.104 (0.228) | 0.049 (0.516) | ||||
| -0.108 (0.177) | 0.011 (0.882) | -0.151 (0.065) | |||
| 0.093 (0.279) | 0.005 (0.946) | -0.103 (0.144) | 0.044 (0.554) | ||
| -0.040 (0.661) | -0.111 (0.181) | ||||
| -0.021 (0.814) | -0.080 (0.334) | ||||
| -0.105 (0.244) | -0.081 (0.322) | -0.064 (0.385) | |||
| -0.063 (0.426) | 0.010 (0.882) | ||||
Correlations are presented as Pearsons rank coefficient R (p-value) unless otherwise indicated. P-values <0.05 are bold.
aSpearman’s rank coefficient.
SAT: subcutaneous adipose tissue
HOMA-IR: homeostatic model assessment insulin resistance
TXNIP DNA methylation and gene expression in subjects with normal glucose tolerance compared to subjects with prediabetes.
| Abnormal OGTT (IFG, IGT, or T2DM) | Normal OGTT | Difference between subjects with normal and abnormal OGTT (p-value) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 36.73 (2.81) | 38.70 (4.53) | ||
| 62.48 (3.91) | 64.50 (4.51) | 0.070 | |
| 65.88 (5.67) | 64.91 (7.32) | 0.540 | |
| 1.52 (0.78) | 1.55 (0.91) | 0.962 | |
| 1.26 (0.46) | 1.06 (0.47) |
Data is mean (SD). Analysis of differences between groups was performed by independent samples t-test.
p-values < 0.05 are bold
N refers to number of subjects with abnormal OGTT vs. subjects with normal OGTT for each analysis
a Data was log transformed prior to t-test.
Abbreviations: IFG, impaired fasting glucose; IGT, impaired glucose tolerance; T2DM, type 2 diabetes mellitus.