Literature DB >> 30270343

Altered DNA Methylation Sites in Peripheral Blood Leukocytes from Patients with Simple Steatosis and Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis (NASH).

Jiayu Wu1, Ruinan Zhang1, Feng Shen1, Ruixu Yang1, Da Zhou1, Haixia Cao1, Guangyu Chen1, Qin Pan1, Jiangao Fan1,2,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to identify DNA methylation sites in peripheral blood leukocytes from patients with histologically confirmed nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) that included simple hepatic steatosis and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). MATERIAL AND METHODS DNA was isolated from peripheral blood leukocytes from patients with histologically diagnosed NAFLD (n=35), including simple hepatic steatosis (n=18) and NASH (n=17). Healthy controls included individuals without liver disease (n=30). DNA was hybridized, and DNA methylation was interrogated in an epigenome-wide association study (EWAS). DNA methylation levels (β-values) were correlated with serum lipid profiles, liver enzymes, and liver histology. RESULTS Circulating blood leukocytes from 35 patients with NAFLD (simple steatosis and NASH) contained 65 CpG sites, which represented 60 genes that were differentially methylated when compared with healthy controls. In the simple hepatic steatosis group (n=18), 42 methylated CpG sites were found to be associated with increased levels of serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT), and 32 methylated CpG sites were associated with increased serum lipid profiles. In the NASH group (n=17), when compared with the simple hepatic steatosis group, methylated CpG sites showed significant correlations with the presence of lobular inflammation compared with hepatic steatosis and fibrosis. Six differentially methylated CpG sites were identified in the ACSL4, CRLS1, CTP1A, SIGIRR, SSBP1 and ZNF622 genes, which were associated with histologically confirmed simple hepatic steatosis and NASH. CONCLUSIONS The study identified some key methylated CpG sites from peripheral blood leukocytes, which might be used as serum biomarkers to stratify NAFLD patients into simple hepatic steatosis and NASH.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30270343      PMCID: PMC6180948          DOI: 10.12659/MSM.909747

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Sci Monit        ISSN: 1234-1010


Background

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is defined as the pathological accumulation of fat in liver cells and tissues in the absence of hepatotoxicity due to alcohol intake or any other identified cause. NAFLD describes a spectrum of changes in the liver associated with fat accumulation that include simple hepatic steatosis, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), fibrosis, and liver cirrhosis [1]. The global prevalence of NAFLD has been estimated to be as high as 25.2%, with the Middle East and South America showing the highest prevalence, and Africa has the lowest prevalence [2]. In Asia, the prevalence of NAFLD has been reported to have recently increased to 27.4% [3]. This high prevalence of NAFLD in Asia might be due to changes in lifestyle and dietary patterns, including the increasing availability of highly calorific convenience foods. Simple hepatic steatosis is a mild form of NAFLD, which may progress to NASH in some cases. Progression to NASH has been reported in 44% of patients with simple hepatic steatosis at baseline [4]. In cases of NASH, up to 2.8% of patients may develop end-stage liver cirrhosis or hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) [5]. Therefore, because the liver changes in NASH can be progressive and irreversible, NASH has become an increasingly common reason for liver transplantation [4]. Associations between NAFLD and insulin resistance, obesity, hyperlipidemia, type 2 diabetes, and metabolic syndrome have been shown [4]. However, the pathogenesis of NAFLD and the associated phenotypes remain to be elucidated. The progression of NAFLD to cirrhosis and HCC is variable and modified by age, gender, genetic predisposition, and epigenetic factors. Despite being an invasive procedure associated with some degree of risk and dependency on adequate, relevant liver sampling, liver biopsy remains the gold standard for assessing all form of NAFLD. Optimal non-invasive detection methods for NAFLD are still being developed. However, a new approach for understanding the pathogenesis of NAFLD might be provided by identifying epigenetic modifications [6], which are known to be involved in insulin resistance (IR) and to affect lipid metabolism, and the liver cell endoplasmic reticulum and mitochondria due to oxidative stress responses [7]. DNA methylation occurs at the cytosine base within cytosine-guanine dinucleotides, which are referred to as CpG sites. During DNA methylation, DNA methyltransferase catalyzes the transfer of a methyl group to the fifth carbon atom from 5-methylcytosine within the cytosine ring, and an increased DNA methylation level of promoters that usually correlates with low or no transcription [8]. Also, the hypermethylation of the CpG islands is usually associated with gene silencing, and global hypomethylation of genomic DNA can affect genomic stability [9]. There have been few previously published studies on the potential role of DNA methylation in NAFLD. A study using a rodent model showed that diets depleted of methyl donors could promote DNA hypomethylation of important metabolism-related genes and that this hypomethylation altered hepatic fat metabolism, resulting in simple hepatic steatosis [10]. Recent research on human liver disease has begun to apply the genome-wide association studies (GWAS) [11,12], which have shown that alterations in the pattern of DNA methylation are capable of inducing gene expression changes that are reversible and can contribute to insulin resistance and changes in lipid metabolism [13]. The use of GWAS means that there is now the potential to detect epigenetic modifiers in NAFLD, which might provide molecular tools for diagnosing, assessing the severity, and predicting disease progression [14]. Recently, studies have explored the possibility of using circulating leukocytes, derived from peripheral blood samples, for the evaluation of potential biomarkers in liver disease [15]. A recent study by Nano et al., which was the most extensive study to date using circulating leukocytes, identified CpG sites and DNA methylation levels that were associated with serum enzyme levels and simple hepatic steatosis, resulting in new insights into the epigenetic mechanisms associated with NAFLD [16]. The aims of the present study were to identify DNA methylation sites in peripheral blood leukocytes in patients with histologically confirmed NAFLD, including simple hepatic steatosis and NASH. Of particular interest was the possibility that epigenetic changes in DNA methylation were associated with clinical parameters, including serum liver enzymes, and lipid profiles, as well as the histological features of NAFLD. The use of routine blood samples was combined with findings from liver biopsy histology, with the aim of determining whether circulating leukocytes could be used to identify specific methylated CpGs that could be related to liver enzyme levels, lipid profiles, or NAFLD phenotypes, to provide novel non-invasive biomarkers for NAFLD, but mainy for NASH in this study.

Material and Methods

Study participants and study design

Between March 2012 and May 2013, 35 Chinese Han patients with NAFLD between the ages of 18–70 years were recruited to the study in Shanghai, China. Also, 30 healthy controls with normal liver function tests were recruited. Individuals were excluded from the study if they reported excessive alcohol consumption (>30 g/day for men; >20 g/day for women) or had known diseases that could cause fatty liver, such as chronic hepatitis C, autoimmune hepatitis, drug-induced liver injury or Wilson’s disease, who were being given total parenteral nutrition (TPN), exhibited other end-stage diseases or malignancy, or who had diabetes mellitus. To ensure patient confidentiality, patient anonymity was included in the study protocol, and to meet the appropriate ethical requirements, all procedures were conducted in accordance with the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Evaluated clinical variables

All clinical variables were evaluated according to the normal reference standards of our institution. Venous blood samples and metabolic profiles were obtained from NAFLD patients and normal controls. The body mass index (BMI) was calculated using the weight (in kilograms) divided by the square of their height (in meters) (kg/m2). The BMI classification used was the World Health Organization (WHO) classification for adults: lean individuals (BMI <18.5 kg/m2), normal individuals (BMI 18.5–24.9 kg/m2), overweight individuals (BMI 25.0–29.9 kg/m2), and obese individuals (BMI ≥30 kg/m2). The following fasting blood biochemical tests were performed for all study participants using a conventional automated analyzer (Hitachi 7600, Tokyo, Japan): fasting blood glucose (FBG), insulin; total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TG), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), very low-density lipoprotein (VLDL). Liver function tests included alanine transaminase (ALT), aspartate transaminase (AST), γ-glutamyl-transpeptidase (GGT), total bilirubin (TBil), direct bilirubin (DBil), and uric acid (UA) levels. The homeostatic model assessment insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) index was used to assess basal glucose and insulin concentrations. HOMA-IR scores were obtained by multiplying the fasting serum insulin level (μIU/mL) by the FBG level (mmol/L), and dividing the product by 22.5. Each study participant underwent a FibroScan® 502 test (Echosens, Paris, France) with an M-probe to measure liver stiffness (kPa) and the controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) that correlated with liver fibrosis and steatosis, respectively. All 35 patients met the histological diagnostic criteria for NAFLD. All control subjects had a CAP value <240 dB/m and a liver stiffness measurement (LSM) value <7.0 kPa, to confirm that they were free from fatty liver disease.

Liver histology

Patients with NAFLD (n=35) had undergone percutaneous liver biopsy with real-time ultrasound guidance. The liver biopsy specimens were fixed and stored in neutral buffered formalin, processed and embedded in paraffin wax blocks. The tissue sections were then cut onto glass slides. Hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining and Masson’s trichrome staining for collagen and reticulin were routinely performed on all biopsies, and the results were assessed under light microscopy by experienced histopathologists, who were unaware of the patient’s clinical and imaging history. NAFLD, including simple liver steatosis and NASH, was diagnosed according to the semi-quantitative histological scoring algorithm of hepatic steatosis, hepatocyte ballooning, and lobular inflammation. A SAF score was created for each case including steatosis (S), activity (A, ballooning + lobular inflammation), and liver fibrosis (F). A score that fulfilled the criteria of S≥1A≥2Fany was used to support the diagnosis of NASH [17].

DNA extraction and bisulfite conversion

DNA extraction from peripheral blood samples was performed using a nucleic acid extraction kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany). The quality of the DNA was determined using a NanoDrop 2000c spectrophotometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., DE, USA). Bisulfite conversion of the DNA (500 ng/sample) was then performed according to the manufacturer’s protocol using the EZ DNA Methylation Kit (Zymo Research, CA, USA) and a modified thermo-cycling procedure (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA). DNA methylation status was analyzed with a microarray approach using the Illumina Human Methylation450 BeadChip platform (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA) to interrogate DNA methylation in an epigenome-wide association study (EWAS). The methylation level of each cytosine was calculated as the fluorescence intensity ratio of the methylated alleles to the unmethylated alleles, based on the Infinium type I probes and the Infinium type II probes and was expressed as a β value. The β values ranged from between 0 (unmethylated) and 1 (completely methylated) according to the combination of the Cy3 and Cy5 fluorescence intensities [18]. Illumina Genome Studio® Methylation module version 1.0 (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA) was used to calculate the β value for each CpG site. Color balance adjustment was performed to normalize the samples between the two color channels using Genome Studio Illumina software (V2010.3). GenomeStudio was used to normalize the data using different internal controls that were present on the Illumina HumanMethylation450 BeadChip platform (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA). All probes were subsequently filtered according to the following requirements: detection of P-values >0.05 in one or more samples; the presence of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) at the 10 bp 3′ end of the interrogating probe; and alignment with multiple locations on the X and Y chromosomes. The final number of valid CpG sites used for this study was 418,913. The global methylation level was compared between patients with NASH, patients with simple hepatic steatosis, and normal controls. The genomic distribution of the differentially methylated CpG sites was examined using the distribution of the CpG sites among all analyzed sites on the Illumina HumanMethylation450 BeadChip platform.

Pyrosequencing

The methylation of specific cytosines with CpG dinucleotides was quantified by pyrosequencing using PyroMark Q 96 MD (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany). The acyl-CoA synthetase long-chain family member 4 (ACSL4) gene was used for validation. The sequencing primers were as follows: forward (GTGATGGATTTTG-GGGTTTT), reverse (AAAACTCCCTAACCCTCAATTAC). Sequencing primers (GTATTTAGAGGGTTAG AAGTTAT) were obtained using Pyromark Assay Design software (version 2.0) (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany). Bisulfite-treated DNA was amplified via polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using the PyroMark PCR Kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) and PyroMark CpG software (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) to present the sequencing results.

Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathway analysis

The Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathway database was used to analyze the effect of differentially methylated CpG sites and to identify signaling pathways that were significantly related to CpG sites (). The method of detection of the false discovery rate (FDR) was used to exclude false-positive results [19,20].

Statistical analysis

Normally distributed data were expressed as the mean ± standard deviation (SD) and as numbers and percentages. The non-normally distributed data were presented as the median and interquartile range (IQR). After methylation data pre-processing [21], the Illumina Methylation Analyzer (IMA) R software package was used to perform t-tests following methylation data pre-processing. The P-values were adjusted using the Benjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate (FDR) procedure for multiple comparisons, in which an FDR <5% was considered to be statistically significant. A multivariate linear regression model was used to analyze the associations between the DNA methylation levels of the identified genes and liver enzyme levels and lipid profiles as continuous variables, adjusted by gender, age and BMI. The potential associations between the histological features of NAFLD and DNA methylation levels were evaluated using Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r). The diagnostic efficiencies of the candidate differentially methylated CpG sites were calculated through receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. An area under the curve (AUC) value >0.8 was interpreted as indicating very good efficiency, and an AUC value between 0.6–0.8 was interpreted as indicating good efficiency. All statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software, version 17.0 (SPSS, IBM Inc., Chicago, IL). Statistical significance was based on P-values of <0.05. Statistically significant correlations were shown using plots generated with GraphPad Prism® software, version 6.0 C (GraphPad, La Jolla, CA, USA).

Results

Demographic, clinical, and metabolic characteristics of the study participants

The demographic, clinical, and metabolic characteristics of the participants in this study are presented in Table 1. Liver biopsies from 35 patients with NAFLD showed simple hepatic steatosis (n=18) and NASH (n=17), according to the SAF score. Among the total study participants (n=65), 30.8% were women (n=20). In addition to exhibiting changes in their serum laboratory profiles, patients with NAFLD presented increased serum levels of ALT, GGT, and UA, but showed no significant differences in FBG levels. In addition to presenting high serum levels of cytokeratin (CK)18-M30 and CK18-M65, which are direct measures of liver cell damage, apoptosis, and inflammation, high LSM values were found, but only in patients with NASH.
Table 1

Clinical characteristics of the participants.

NASH (n=17)Simple hepatic steatosis (n=18)NAFLD (n=35)Control (n=30)NAFLD vs. CL P-value
Sex (F) (N, %)12 (70.6%)15 (83.3%)8 (22.9%)12 (40.0%)0.12**
BMI >25 (N, %)12 (70.6%)14 (77.8%)26 (74.0%)4 (13.0%)<0.001**
Metabolic syndrome (N, %)7 (41.2%)6 (33.3%)22 (63.0%)0 (0.0%)<0.001**
Central obesity (N, %)13 (76.5%)13 (72.2%)26 (74.0%)9 (30.0%)0.01**
Age (y)37.76±12.7737.72±12.4837.74±12.4346.63±7.24<0.001
HT (cm)167.76±6.69169.44±5.83168.63±6.23164.32±7.220.010
WT (kg)76.88±11.1579.97±13.3878.47±12.2762.29±9.04<0.001
BMI27.29±3.427.79±3.8427.55±3.5923.02±2.63<0.001
FBG (mmol/L)5.33±1.146.22±3.685.81±2.825.29±0.390.300
TBIL (μmol/L)12.36±3.3119.86±21.916.33±16.3214.29±4.050.510
DBIL (μmol/L)7.23±10.129.64±19.588.51±15.672.98±0.830.050
GGT (u/L)78.25 (44.03–131.00)51.55 (32.50–80.70)65.35 (36.48–88.78)13.00 (11.00–17.25)0.020*
ALT (u/L)70.48±40.7875.61±64.3173.19±53.7915.6±4.42<0.001
TC (mmol/L)4.99±0.654.95±1.074.97±0.914.35±0.61<0.001
TG (mmol/L)2.37±2.132.01±0.772.17±1.50.82±0.34<0.001
HDL-C (mmol/L)1.23±0.341.19±0.281.21±0.31.43±0.25<0.001
LDL-C (mmol/L)2.8±0.663.08±0.822.97±0.762.24±0.38<0.001
UA (μmol/L)413.16±122.29362.02±110.02383.19±115.97257.83±62.14<0.001
CK18M 30 (ng/L)537.44±317.21362.03±162.21<0.001***
CK18M 65 (ng/L)1159.32±613.07829.94±421.69<0.001***
LSM (kpa)9.45 (6.08–14.40)5.70 (4.35–9.95)7.60 (5.40–12.00)4.15 (3.70–4.70)<0.001*
CAP (dB/m)328.50 (289.25–358.75)310.00 (276.00–361.50)310.00 (277.00–359.00)195.00 (174.00–228.00)<0.001*

Mann-Whitney test;

Pearson chi-square or Fisher’s exact test;

NASH vs. Simple Hepatic Steatosis P-value.

FBG – fasting blood glucose; TC – total cholesterol; TG – triglyceride; HDL-C – high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; LDL-C – low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; ALT – alanine transaminase; AST – aspartate transaminase; GGT – γ-glutamyl-transpeptidase; TBIL – total bilirubin; DBIL – direct bilirubin; UA – uric acid; CK18 – cytokeratin-18; LSM – liver stiffness measurement; CAP – controlled attenuation parameter; N – number. Normal distribution data are expressed as the means±standard deviations and as numbers and percentages. The non-normal distribution data are presented as the median and interquartile range.

The global pattern of methylated DNA CpG sites in NAFLD

Comparisons of global methylation levels in the peripheral blood leukocytes of patients with NAFLD phenotypes compared with the normal controls are shown in Figures 1 and 2. Among a total of 418,913 probes, the average DNA methylation levels were similar in the NASH, simple hepatic steatosis, and normal control groups in terms of their correlation with either the CpG site content or the gene nearest to their functional genome. Hypomethylation was observed in the region of CpG islands, its north shore and south shore area (Figure 1). Promoter areas were defined as transcription start site (TSS)1500, TSS200, the 5′ UTR and the first exon. The DNA methylation levels were lower in promoter areas in all three groups studied (simple hepatic steatosis, NASH, and control groups) (Figure 2). The circulating blood leukocytes of the 35 patients with simple hepatic steatosis (n=18) and NASH (n=17) exhibited 65 CpG sites, which represented 60 genes that were differentially methylated, compared with normal controls. In the simple hepatic steatosis group, 42 methylated CpG sites were found to be associated with increased levels of alanine transaminase (ALT), and 32 methylated CpG sites were associated with increased serum lipid profiles, including TC, HDL-C, LDL-C, and TG levels. In the NASH group, compared with the simple hepatic steatosis group, methylated CpG sites showed more significant correlations with the presence of lobular inflammation than with hepatic steatosis and fibrosis.
Figure 1

Global DNA methylation in circulating leukocytes from normal controls, patients with simple hepatic steatosis, and patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), showing CpG island regions. Global DNA methylation is calculated as the average DNA methylation (%) at all CpG sites in each annotated region, according to the Illumina HumanMethylation450 BeadChip platform, which was used to interrogate DNA methylation in an epigenome-wide association study (EWAS). Shore, flanking regions of CpG islands (0–2,000 bp). Shelf, regions flanking island shores (2,000–4,000 bp from the CpG island). N – northern; S – Southern. * Significant difference (P<0.05).

Figure 2

Global DNA methylation in circulating leukocytes from normal controls, patients with simple hepatic steatosis, and patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is shown for each gene region. Transcription start site (TSS) represents the proximal promoter, defined as 200 bp or 1,500 bp upstream of the TSS. * Significant difference (P<0.05).

The 65 NAFLD-associated CpG sites, representing 60 genes, were found to be significantly methylated in individuals with NAFLD and normal controls based on a P-value of <0.05 and a false discovery rate (FDR) of q<0.05 (Supplementary Table 1). The methylation levels (β values) in more than half of the CpG sites (41 sites, 65.1%) were within the range of 0–0.2, suggesting that hypomethylation mostly characterized the NAFLD-associated CpG sites. Figure 3 shows the top 19 CpG sites associated with NAFLD presenting the most significant increases or decreases in methylation. Cg13291296 (coding GPR125) showed the most significant methylation level, with a 36% point change. Additionally, in an analysis of the difference in DNA methylation levels between patients with simple hepatic steatosis and normal controls, 119 CpG sites were annotated to 106 genes (Supplementary Table 2). The gender of the study participant was not found to exert a statistically significant influence on methylation levels in this study.
Figure 3

CpG sites showing the most significant increase or decrease in DNA methylation (q<0.05) in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD).

Enrichment of gene-mapped CpG sites related to NAFLD in Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathways

Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathways were used to determine the enrichment of genes mapped to NAFLD-associated CpG sites before analyzing the association of clinical parameters with the NAFLD phenotypes (Supplementary Table 3). For the NAFLD-associated methylated CpG sites, the two top-ranked pathways involved ribosome biogenesis in eukaryotes (EF=8.56, q=0.010) and MAPK signaling (EF=2.59, q=0.011). Enriched genes related to metabolic pathways, cytokine-cytokine receptor interactions, and insulin signaling pathways were also found. Because this study identified only 65 NAFLD-associated sites, all of these CpG sites were considered in the second KEGG pathway analysis for the association between DNA methylation and simple hepatic steatosis (Supplementary Table 4). This analysis identified genes that were mainly involved in vitamin digestion and absorption through enrichment factor (EF) analysis (EF=15.84, q=0.033) and in a particular pathway in cancer (EF=2.33, q=0.034). After a search of the relevant literature, genes that were involved in the endoplasmic reticulum, insulin signaling, and adipose tissue homeostasis were identified. Although these associations showed a lower EF, they are recognized as being associated with the pathogenesis of NAFLD. These simple hepatic steatosis-associated methylated CpG sites, together with the NAFLD-associated methylated CpG sites mentioned above, were then used to explore the relationship between DNA methylation and clinical parameters.

Association between DNA methylation and liver enzyme and lipid profiles

The evaluation of the relationship between DNA methylation and clinical parameters focused on the NAFLD-associated CpG sites and the other 15 selected simple hepatic steatosis-associated CpG sites (in alphabetical order by gene name: ABCC1, ATP5G1, AXIN2, CPT1A, CRLS1, DDX20, LDHB, MAPK1, NFE2L2, PMM1, PTEN, RB1, SEH1L, SGMS1, and SLC5A6) from the KEGG pathway analysis. Simple linear regression analysis showed that most of the CpG sites were closely related to lipid profiles and ALT levels. Regarding demographic and clinical parameters, these CpG sites were strongly linked to BMI and waist circumference. Multivariate linear regression analysis adjusted for age, gender, and BMI also verified the results (significant results are listed in Supplementary Table 5). A total of 42 methylated CpG sites were found to correlate with ALT levels, and these correlations remained significant after adjustment for age, gender, and BMI. Additionally, the correlations between levels of GGT with cg03992938 (CCDC13), cg04787602 (C1orf183), and cg014451560 (ARRDC1) were statistically significant. There were 32 CpG sites associated with TG, TC, or LDL-C levels, indicating dyslipidemia. With regard to glucose metabolism in NAFLD, the CpG sites were searched, and the results showed that cg07953400 (PIGQ), cg06706068 (RPUSD1), and cg16416718 (CAMTA1) exhibited strong correlations with fasting blood glucose levels, while cg25456633, cg03992938 (CCDC13), and cg02013957 (CAGE1) were closely associated with the homeostatic model assessment insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) index.

Methylation of CpG sites associated with NAFLD and liver histology

As shown in Table 2, a total of 23 CpG sites were partially correlated with the hitological characteristics of NAFLD. Among the CpG sites associated with increased serum ALT levels, three sites were inversely correlated with hepatic steatosis: cg19634213 (PTEN) (r=−0.358, P=0.035), cg01067963 (MAPK1) (r=−0.343, P=0.044), and cg05102190 (ZYX) (r=−0.357, P=0.035). Additionally, seven CpG sites were negatively correlated with lobular inflammation: cg19634213 (PTEN) (r=−0.37, P=0.029), cg16398128 (ZNF622) (r=−0.497, P=0.002), cg22185268 (COMMD4) (r=−0.341, P=0.045), cg22721468 (SH3BP5L) (r=−0.337, P=0.048), cg15226170 (PMM1) (r=−0.369, P=0.029), cg04787602 (C1orf91) (r=−0.522, P=0.032), and cg05102190 (ZYX) (r=−0.362, P=0.033). None of the ALT-associated CpG sites were found to be correlated with liver fibrosis.
Table 2

Correlations(r) between methylation levels and histological parameters in NAFLD.

Illumina ID (n=35)SteatosisBallooningInflammationFibrosis
rprprprp
cg15653194 (LFNG)−0.1790.491−0.0880.7370.4850.049*−0.3950.117
cg00150500 (HCFC1R1)−0.3810.024*−0.3370.048*−0.3460.042*−0.1790.303
cg04787602 (C1orf91)0.2860.2650.3820.131−0.5220.032*0.3550.161
cg16398128 (ZNF622)−0.1190.495−0.0310.859−0.4970.002*−0.0540.757
cg07112456 (LRWD1)−0.5260.025*−0.4390.069−0.1320.448−0.0950.708
cg01693328 (not mapped)0.1640.3460.3790.025*0.2880.0930.210.226
cg15226170 (PMM1)−0.2220.1990.0320.854−0.3690.029*−0.0090.961
cg08013262 (INSR)0.1450.4060.3370.048*0.0470.7880.0830.635
cg10178228 (FRMD4B)−0.0850.6290.0480.785−0.20.249−0.0620.723
cg05131957 (CRLS1)−0.4450.007*−0.2640.125−0.4480.007*0.0630.721
cg19634213 (PTEN)−0.3580.035*−0.0470.787−0.3700.029*0.1320.449
cg12473838 (SSBP1)−0.7040.001*−0.5420.001*−0.5310.001*−0.2190.001*
cg01067963 (MAPK1)−0.3430.044*−0.1650.344−0.1770.308−0.0020.992
cg22185268 (COMMD4)−0.040.8180.1870.283−0.3410.045*0.0660.706
cg22721468 (SH3BP5L)−0.190.275−0.1220.484−0.3370.048*−0.0780.654
cg13463639 (SIGIRR)0.2780.1060.3210.0590.640.001*0.2300.184
cg13397649 (AFG3L2)−0.3750.138−0.5430.024*0.0930.722−0.2860.267
cg26309655 (TARS2)0.2940.2520.5580.020*−0.3990.1130.20.441
cg04160753 (C10orf91)−0.3260.2020.0780.766−0.4860.048−0.1570.549
cg05102190 (ZYX)−0.3570.035*−0.1970.256−0.3620.033*−0.0640.716
cg00574958 (CTP1A)0.1340.4410.2940.0870.4430.008*0.2320.180
cg19878987 (LDHB)−0.280.103−0.0480.784−0.4130.014*0.1160.507
cg15536552 (ACSL4)0.4820.050*0.3160.216−0.3850.1270.3390.183

p<0.05.

Among the 32 CpG sites associated with lipid profiles, 11 were correlated with the histological characteristics of NAFLD: Cg00150500 (HCFC1R1) showed the strongest association with steatosis and lobular inflammation. Cg12473838 (SSBP1) showed a strong correlation with the following NAFLD histological features: steatosis (r=−0.704, P<0.001), hepatocytes ballooning (r=−0.542, P<0.001), lobular inflammation (r=−0.531, P<0.001) and fibrosis (r=−0.219, P<0.001). Additionally, cg13463639 (SIGIRR) and cg15653194 (LFNG) both showed a strong-to-moderate correlation with lobular inflammation (r=0.64, P<0.001 and r=0.485, P=0.049, respectively). No methylated CpG sites associated with FBG levels or HOMA-IR scores were correlated with the histological features of NAFLD. Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) (Y-axis) between the liver histology parameters (X-axis) and the methylated DNA sites that were inversely or directly associated with NAFLD are plotted in Figure 4.
Figure 4

Pearson’s correlation coefficients (r) (Y-axis) between histological features (X-axis) and methylated DNA sites inversely or directly associated with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD).

Differentially methylated CpG (DMCpG) sites as potential biomarkers in NAFLD

The DNA methylation levels of the CpG sites that were correlated with the histological features of NAFLD were re-tested, which showed that the methylation levels of the ACSL4, CRLS1, CTP1A, SIGIRR, SSBP1, and ZNF622 genes were significantly different in patients with NASH compared with patients with simple hepatic steatosis. The areas under the receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves (AUROCs) for these six sites were 0.689 (95% CI, 0.556–0.821) for ACSL4, 0.742 (95% CI, 0.578–0.906) for CRLS1, 0.745 (95% CI, 0.581–0.910) for CTP1A, 0.882 (95% CI, 0.758–0.999) for SIGIRR, 0.817 (95% CI, 0.676–0.958) for SSBP1, and 0.735 (95% CI, 0.567–0.903) for ZNF622 (Figure 5). These six sites showed significant effectiveness in discriminating between patients with NASH and patients with simple hepatic steatosis. The estimated cut-off values, sensitivities, specificities, positive predictive values (PPVs), and negative predictive values (NPVs) are listed in Table 3. The effectiveness of these six sites was compared with that of serum CK18 M65 levels as a marker of inflammation and hepatocyte injury, and no significant differences were found.
Figure 5

Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves for the methylation levels of the nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH)-related differentially methylated CpG sites.

Table 3

Comparison of the performance of each test for differentiating NASH versus simple hepatic steatosis.

TestAUC (95%CI)SigCut-offSens (%)Spec (%)PPV (%)NPV (%)Z-scoreP-value
CK18M650.733 (0.546–0.921)0.027756.3573.375.078.676.5
ACSL40.689 (0.556–0.821)0.0090.12362.957.164.978.61.2580.20
CTP1A0.745 (0.581–0.909)0.0130.15170.672.270.672.20.080.93
CRLS10.742 (0.578–0.906)0.0150.07188.952.967.781.80.310.75
SIGIRR0.882 (0.758–0.999)0.0010.78770.69992.377.31.120.26
SSBP10.817 (0.676–0.958)0.0010.0461.194.191.769.60.320.75
ZNF6220.735 (0.567–0.903)0.0170.04650.094.192.361.50.080.93

AUROC – area under the receiver operating characteristic curve; Sens – sensitivity; Spec – specificity; PPV – positive predictive value; NPV – negative predictive value.

Validation of ACSL4 methylation by pyrosequencing

ACSL4 (cg15536552) was selected for validation through bisulfite pyrosequencing. The pyrosequencing results indicated that the methylation level of ACSL4 (cg15536552) was consistent with that determined by the Illumina HumanMethylation450 BeadChip platform (r=0.756, P<0.0001). According to the SAF score, ACSL4 was significantly hypomethylated in patients with NASH compared with patients with simple hepatic steatosis (P=0.004).

Discussion

Epigenetic processes are now recognized to play a role in the progression of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). The characterization of how these epigenetic processes result in changes associated with liver injury provides new insights related to disease diagnostics and management. DNA methylation refers to the addition of a methyl group at a CpG site, which can influence the function of DNA by activating or suppressing gene expression [22]. CpG methylation is regarded as a ‘molecular clock’ during the progression of liver phenotypes from normal liver histology to simple hepatic steatosis to inflammation and fibrosis [23]. In the present study, the application of differentially methylated CpG sites to assess NAFLD phenotypes using microarrays allowed the analysis of a large fraction of the DNA methylome and the identification of genes correlated with changes in DNA methylation in peripheral blood leukocytes. This differential methylation may directly influence normal epigenetic regulation and cause pathological changes. The main purpose of the present study was to identify differentially methylated CpG sites in peripheral blood leukocytes to determine epigenetic biomarkers that might exhibit a strong correlation with the clinical parameters and histological features of NAFLD. First, we analyzed more than 410,000 CpG sites to demonstrate that nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) was associated with differential DNA methylation in comparison with normal livers and simple hepatic steatosis. The adoption of a statistical significance of q<0.05 enabled the identification of methylated sites that were significantly associated with NAFLD and simple hepatic steatosis. The identified NAFLD-associated CpG sites were mostly hypomethylated, a phenomenon supported by previous work by Murphy et al., who showed that the livers of individuals with advanced NAFLD exhibited more hypomethylation than those of individuals with mild NAFLD [13]. In this study, the top NAFLD-associated CpG sites, including KCNQ3, FUT11, DUSP16, CAMTA1, and GTSE1, appeared to present a close connection with NAFLD and a higher risk of developing HCC. Genes contributing to insulin resistance (EHMT2, INSR, TARS2, and BRSK2) and lipid metabolism (RXRB) were enriched. Additionally, at simple hepatic steatosis-associated CpG sites, some adipogenic and lipid metabolism genes were also enriched in adipocytokine and insulin signaling pathways (CPT1A, PTEN, LDHB, SGMS1, PMM1, ATP5G1, CRLS1, and PIGQ). These observations provide evidence that, as a condition associated with metabolic disorders, NAFLD is influenced by integrated epigenetic modifications, even at an early stage. This finding might form the basis for future identification of DNA methylation biomarkers and their use to estimate future disease risk [24]. Increased serum levels of liver enzymes such as alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate transaminase (AST), and γ-glutamyl-transpeptidase (GGT) are markers of liver injury [25]. GGT affects the pro-oxidant roles played by molecular species originating during the catabolism of glutathione and promotes lipid peroxidation. Previous studies have shown a genetic effect on liver enzyme levels [26]. In this study, the majority of the NAFLD-methylated CpG sites were associated with increased ALT levels, a connection that retained its significance even after adjustments for age, gender and body mass index (BMI). The analysis focused on the correlation of these CpG sites with the histological features of NAFLD. The differential methylation of CpG sites within ZNF622, PTEN, COMMD4, SH3BP4L, PMM1, C1orf91, and ZYX was associated with lobular inflammation. Some of these genes encode key enzymes that catalyze the initial steps of lipid, acetyl-CoA, and glucose metabolism and are members of insulin-like signaling pathways. Methylation differences in ZYX and PTEN were also correlated with steatosis, although no CpG sites associated with AST were identified. The identification of methylation sites associated with liver enzymes and hepatic steatosis has recently been reviewed by Nano et al., who conducted an epigenome-wide association study and identified eight probes associated with serum GGT levels and one probe associated with serum ALT levels [16]. As in the present study, they identified no probe associated with serum AST levels. Future large-scale studies may produce different results from the present study. Individuals with simple hepatic steatosis seldom progress to clinically significant liver disease and are considered to exhibit mild NAFLD. However, in patients with NASH, hepatic steatosis may trigger a fibrogenic repair process that can lead to cirrhosis or hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Murphy et al. found relevant differences in methylation that distinguished between patients with advanced fibrosis from those with mild fibrosis [13]. Although the present study employed the same technique for measuring DNA methylation, the approach taken for analyzing the differences between liver phenotypes was dissimilar. Also, our results supported the existence cross-talk between epigenetic features and liver enzymes at the identified CpG sites. Collectively, these observations may reflect the influential role of hepatic inflammation in simple hepatic steatosis at the epigenetic level, which contributes to progression toward NASH [27]. The second main aim of this study focused on the CpG sites correlated with lipid profiles. Dysfunctional lipid metabolism causes hepatic fat accumulation. Increased serum free fatty acids (FFA) cause increased triglyceride (TG) and very low-density lipoprotein (VLDL) levels in hepatocytes and trigger lipid peroxidation. These effects are closely related to the progression of NAFLD [28]. Also, circulating cytokine and adipokine levels as well as the associated mitochondrial dysfunction, lipotoxicity, endoplasmic reticulum damage and oxidative stress are involved in hepatic steatosis [29]. The most common pattern of dyslipidemia in NAFLD is characterized by hypertriglyceridemia, high levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), and low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C). In patients with NASH, there is a significant increase in the levels of oxidized LDL-C. In this study, a total of 31 CpG sites associated with LDL-C were selected after a multivariate analysis adjusted for gender, age, and BMI. Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) was used to verify the correlations between the CpG sites and NAFLD histological features. Ten of the identified CpG sites (CTP1A, LFNG, ZNF622, HCFC1R1, CH3BP5L, COMMD4, SIGIRR, LDHB, SSBP1, and C1ofr91) were moderately correlated with lobular inflammation. Previously published studies have shown that high serum levels of oxidized LDL can be considered a risk factor for NASH, as oxidized LDL-C interacts with immune cells and contributes to the inflammatory process, upregulates adhesion molecules, and induces inflammation by increasing reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation and apoptotic cell death, which are involved in the progression of NASH [30]. In this study, DNA methylation was measured in peripheral blood leukocytes, and the results were consistent with the serum lipid profile data. According to Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) analysis, a close association was found between lobular inflammation and NAFLD-associated methylated CpG sites relevant to altered LDL-C levels, which might indicate that alterations in methylation levels also exert a direct or indirect influence on liver lobular inflammation that results in the onset of NASH. The final part of this study highlighted six methylated CpG sites that differentiated NASH from simple hepatic steatosis (ACLS4, CPT1A, CRLS1, SSBP1, SIGIRR, and ZNF622). Cytokeratin (CK)18-M65 was selected as a reference standard, as it is one of the most commonly employed serum biomarkers for diagnosing NASH. A previously published meta-analysis showed that the area under the receiver-operating characteristic (AUROC) curve for CK18-M65 for the diagnosis of NASH was 0.71–0.93 (sensitivity 66%, specificity 82%) [31]. The present study showed that SSBP1 and SIGIRR presented good efficiency for discriminating between NASH and simple hepatic steatosis, with AUCs of 0.817 and 0.882, respectively. Expression of the SSBP1 gene has been reported to be associated with the development of obesity and has been found to increase lipid accumulation in the liver. The cholesterol content of cells has been reported to be significantly increased following SSBP1 knockdown, indicating that SSBP1 could inhibit cellular cholesterol synthesis and accumulation [32]. SIGIRR (also known as TIR8) is a negative regulator of Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4), which is upregulated in NAFLD and mediates NASH before the onset of liver fibrosis. The expression of the SIGIRR gene has also been shown to represent an important checkpoint in anti-cancer activity in natural killer (NK) cells [33]. Arachidonic acid preferred long-chain acyl-CoA synthetase (ACSL4) is a key enzyme involved in fatty acid metabolism in a variety of tissues and in hepatic steatosis, even after adjustment for BMI. Upregulation of the ACSL4 gene accelerates lipogenesis, whereas downregulation of ACSL4 prevents the accumulation of cellular cholesterol [34]. Previous study also reported leukocytic hypomethylated ACSL4 an index for borderline/definitive NASH, with odds ratio (OR) at 11.44 and 95% confidence interval (CI) from 1.04 to 125.37 (P=0.046) [35]. In that study, the NAFLD Activity Score (NAS) scoring system has been used for the stratification of clinical phenotypes of NAFLD. However, inflammation facilitates fibrosis, while the prognosis of steatosis is still controversial. NAS scoring system is no longer recommended for the diagnosis of NASH because of its low prognostic value [36]. In our study, we used SAF score instead, a system that complements the histopathological evaluation by dissociating hepatic steatosis from inflammation. This system helps to avoid some special cases from being excluded, as in some advanced cases, the liver may display ballooning and lobular inflammation with rare fat vacuoles, and provides a more accurate evaluation of NAFLD with better reproducibility [37]. In our study, ACSL4 retains an effective diagnosis value with AUROC at 0.742 (0.578–0.906) for the stratification of NASH in NAFLD. CPT1A is a protein-encoding gene that plays an important role in the mitochondrial transport of carnitine, which results in a decrease in fatty acid beta-oxidation, and DNA methylation of the CpG sites of the CPT1A gene has been reported to be associated with increased lipid levels and metabolic syndrome [38]. The CRLS1 gene encodes cardiolipin, which is a phospholipid located in the inner mitochondrial membrane. The mitochondrial membrane is particularly susceptible to attack by ROS, resulting in damage to mitochondrial proteins, lipids and mitochondrial DNA, which can cause hepatocyte injury in NAFLD. Additionally, loss of cardiolipin leads to the generation of excessive levels of reactive oxygen species (ROS) that promote lipid peroxides and may cause oxidation of cardiolipin, catalyzed by cytochrome-c, resulting in apoptosis [39,40]. The ZNF622 gene (also known as ZPR9) encodes a multiprotein that is involved in the apoptosis signal-regulating kinase 1 (ASK1) and transforming growth factor (TGF)-β signaling pathway, and downregulation of ASK1 and TGF-β signaling activity can result in reduced intracellular lipid deposition. Finally, this study identified a group of genes with a transcriptional status that was significantly correlated with DNA methylation levels, and this relationship differed between the NAFLD phenotypes. The findings of this study further showed that the methylated CpG sites detected in peripheral blood leukocytes were strongly associated with liver enzyme levels and lipid profiles, which are relevant to the outcomes of liver injury, impaired lipid metabolism, and the histological features of NAFLD. The findings of this study may have implications for the diagnosis of NAFLD, particularly for the diagnosis and evaluation of the severity of NASH, with differentially methylated CpG sites functioning as diagnostic or prognostic biomarkers. Epigenetic modifications might serve as malleable targets for future interventions that aim to detect or reverse advanced NAFLD. The main challenge of this study was to assess the cause of NAFLD, as there was no evidence to explain why methylation facilitates lobular inflammation or why lobular inflammation in the progression of NASH alters methylation levels. All of these research questions require additional study. A further limitation of the study was that DNA methylation was measured in peripheral blood leukocytes, rather than in liver tissue, which may not be relevant to findings in the liver. Additionally, this study did not include gene expression analysis, and RNA samples were not available. As a result, differential DNA methylation was not studied directly from the analysis of the samples exhibiting the histological features of the NAFLD phenotypes. The whole-blood samples used in this study provided leukocytes for analysis, which were employed for quantifying DNA methylation levels, and allowed correlations with liver enzymes levels and lipid profiles to be assessed. Therefore, some CpG sites important to NAFLD might not have been detected in this study.

Conclusions

The findings of this clinical study showed that DNA methylation sites in peripheral blood leukocytes correlated with changes in serum liver enzyme levels and lipid profiles and with histologically confirmed forms of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) that included simple steatosis and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) when compared with healthy controls. The study identified six differentially methylated CpG sites in genes including ACSL4, CPT1A, SSBP1, CRLS1, ZNF622, and SIGIRR in NAFLD patients. In the simple hepatic steatosis group, 42 methylated CpG sites were found to be associated with the increased serum levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT), and 32 methylated CpG sites were associated with the altered lipid profiles in the blood. In the NASH group, altered methylation of CpG sites showed a more close correlation with the presence of hepatic lobular inflammation, seen histologically on liver biopsy. These results suggest that changes in methylated CpG sites can be detected in peripheral blood leukocytes in patients with NAFLD, and these blood-based biomarkers may have potential value for clinical research and diagnosis of NASH. Individual CpG sites associated with NAFLD (q<0.05) in circulating leukocytes. (N=64). Individual CpG sites associated with simple hepatic steatosis (q<0.05) in circulating leukocytes. (N=119). Significantly enriched KEGG pathways of genes with altered DNA methylation level in NAFLD. Significantly enriched KEGG pathways of genes with altered DNA methylation level in simple hepatic steatosis. Significance of associations between biological parameters and selected methylated CpG sites. 1# – Uni-variate p; 2# – Multi-variate; p* p<0.05, adjusted by sex, age and BMI.
Supplementary Table 1

Individual CpG sites associated with NAFLD (q<0.05) in circulating leukocytes. (N=64).

Probe IDp NAFLDq NAFLDNAFLD mean βCL mean βDifference (% points)Gene symbolUCSC RefGene AcessionRelation to gene regionRelation to CpG island
cg001505005.05E-080.0035260.0406110.0264090.014201229HCFC1R1; THOC6NM_017885; NM_001002018; NM_001002017; NM_001142350; NM_024339Body; TSS1500Island
cg016933283.78E-060.0377360.7349330.6899030.045030407S_Shelf
cg020139572.80E-070.0082170.0698280.108342−0.03851329CAGE1; RIOK1NM_205864; NM_031480; NM_001170693; NM_001170692TSS1500; BodyS_Shore
cg035116387.43E-060.049440.2075240.1924780.015045277FBXL15NM_024326; NM_0243261st Exon; 5′UTRIsland
cg036152402.36E-060.0298780.2349030.2172140.01768861Island
cg037530662.57E-060.0298780.0427780.0337190.009058818PGPEP1NM_017712TSS200N_Shore
cg039560534.68E-060.0406840.0948070.0695680.025238064Island
cg039929387.18E-060.049440.2018340.18780.014034138CCDC13NM_144719; NM_1447191st Exon; 5′UTRIsland
cg041607535.99E-060.0464880.2752130.2554420.019770564C10orf91NM_173541TSS1500
cg043965503.68E-121.54E-060.0379640.0255830.012380549KCNQ3NM_004519TSS1500Island
cg047876022.61E-070.0082170.1613060.1442320.017073828C1orf183NM_198926; NM_019099Body; TSS1500Island
cg049816965.54E-070.0128980.5599230.4919680.067954905ABCC1NM_019862; NM_019898; NM_019899; NM_004996; NM_019900BodyS_Shore
cg051021907.38E-060.049440.2922540.2615360.030718122ZYXNM_003461; NM_001010972TSS200Island
cg067060686.62E-060.048660.4503190.3992540.051064413RPUSD1NM_0581923′UTRN_Shore
cg070677446.97E-060.049440.9205630.902320.018243335BRSK2NM_003957Body
cg071124566.04E-070.0133110.9319720.9124290.019543021LRWD1NM_152892BodyS_Shelf
cg079534001.74E-060.026960.0542260.0452650.008961501PIGQNM_004204; NM_148920TSS1500; TSS1500N_Shore
cg079562641.06E-070.0063740.0601920.0426440.017547367GPATCH3NM_0220781st ExonIsland
cg080132622.14E-060.0289150.0511250.0401340.010991397INSRNM_000208; NM_001079817BodyIsland
cg093670466.48E-060.0484570.0780460.0579730.020073316ANGEL1NM_015305TSS200Island
cg098266923.66E-070.0095810.6957340.717446−0.0217123Island
cg100771446.43E-060.0484570.1510840.1366080.014476221Island
cg101782282.57E-060.0298780.163830.111160.052670088FRMD4BNM_015123TSS200S_Shore
cg105765162.94E-070.0082170.0464870.0341380.01234886RECQL5; SAP30BPNM_001003716; NM_013260; NM_001003715; NM_013260; NM_004259TSS200; 1st Exon; 5′UTIsland
cg122895099.38E-070.0194260.126320.1162980.010022888TUBE1NM_016262; NM_001033564Body; TSS200Island
cg123629803.73E-060.0377360.8906480.915371−0.02472296Island
cg132912961.94E-060.0281510.9282930.5678110.360481701GPR125NM_145290Body
cg133733619.74E-070.0194260.9720630.9580360.014027139MYH16NR_002147Body
cg133976492.39E-060.0298780.1843310.1710450.013286234AFG3L2NM_0067961st ExonIsland
cg134636391.14E-070.0476850.7951960.7449520.050244062SIGIRRNM_001135053; NM_021805TSS1500S_Shore
cg139207684.76E-060.0406840.1806920.160380.02031251PRDM12NM_0216193′UTRIsland
cg142147451.61E-060.0258920.0300790.023960.006119444CRELD1NM_001077415; NM_001031717; NM_015513; NM_015513; NM_001077415; NM_0010317171st Exon; 5′UTRIsland
cg142473182.91E-060.0321370.068590.0512550.017334521S_Shore
cg144515604.08E-060.0381850.1633690.1300140.033355016ARRDC1NM_152285TSS1500N_Shore
cg153178374.86E-060.04070.0820770.0658880.016188353GTPBP4NM_012341TSS1500Island
cg156531941.99E-090.0002710.0770770.0516330.025443482LFNGNM_001166355; NM_002304; NM_001040168; NM_001040167Body; TSS200Island
cg161055941.46E-060.0250020.2227880.2068810.015907317MEF2CNM_001131005; NM_0023975′UTR; TSS1500Island
cg162610915.26E-060.0424030.8712210.7681760.103045403C17orf101; HEXDCNM_175902; NM_173620; NM_024648Body; TSS1500N_Shore
cg163572871.96E-070.0075270.0334640.0222860.011177644SEH1LNM_001013437; NM_031216TSS1500N_Shore
cg163981281.66E-070.0075270.0389630.0255030.01345955ZNF622NM_033414; NM_0334145′UTR; 1st ExonIsland
cg164167184.04E-060.0381850.1683790.1555380.012840944CAMTA1NM_015215TSS1500Island
cg164872801.11E-060.0202890.1636180.1463360.017282797MYBL2NM_002466TSS1500Island
cg171624751.08E-060.0202890.1361010.1203080.015793168C6orf150NM_138441TSS200Island
cg171765175.44E-060.0429660.0551920.0431870.012004537SNX4NM_003794; NM_0037945′UTR; 1st ExonIsland
cg185705533.67E-060.0377360.1440110.1289480.015063351PRR15NM_175887TSS200N_Shore
cg188486881.42E-080.0011920.1439810.325489−0.18150742LIFRNM_001127671; NM_002310TSS1500; 5′UTRIsland
cg191376621.98E-070.0075270.0456240.0324930.013131109NOP56NM_006392; NR_031699; NR_027700; NR_003078Body; TSS200Island
cg191893101.49E-060.0250020.2014870.186070.015416665RPS10NM_0010145′UTRIsland
cg217861142.28E-070.0079460.5162190.4607620.055456681EHMT2NM_006709; NM_025256TSS1500N_Shore
cg221852683.99E-070.0098310.0269940.0200760.006918145COMMD4NM_017828TSS200Island
cg224023982.50E-060.0298780.9391150.9236890.015425828FGRNM_001042747; NM_005248; NM_001042729TSS1500; 5′UTR
cg225982333.16E-060.0339970.0691280.0564460.012681401POLRMTNM_005035TSS200Island
cg227214681.96E-060.0281510.0602140.044240.01597372SH3BP5LNM_030645TSS1500Island
cg227464211.52E-070.0075270.874340.8526610.021678989
cg232244052.59E-090.0002710.0649450.0450180.019927219DUSP16NM_030640; NM_0306401st Exon; 5′UTRIsland
cg241990502.65E-060.0299710.0103760.0063590.004017477GTSE1NM_016426; NR_024009TSS200Island
cg242396907.36E-060.049440.1962410.1816110.014630372FSCN1NM_003088BodyS_Shore
cg246897544.95E-060.04070.0295380.0201960.009341864C19orf62NM_001033549; NM_001033549; NM_014173; NM_0141735′UTR; 1st Exon
cg252957261.84E-090.0002710.1815570.1628270.018730389FUT11NM_173540TSS200Island
cg254566334.20E-060.0382240.8970030.8781850.018817636
cg258188134.10E-060.0381850.0644290.0500920.014336947MERTKNM_006343BodyIsland
cg261050572.02E-060.0281510.1608830.1267870.034095982PAN2NM_014871; NM_001166279; NM_001127460; NM_014871; NM_0011662791st Exon; 5′UTR; TSS200Island
cg263096554.66E-060.0406840.168280.1482230.02005632TARS2NM_025150TSS200
cg124738384.88E-060.0287950.0405010.0312020.009299747SSBP1NM_003143; NR_015392TSS200; BodyIsland
cg267869806.79E-060.0490420.2205940.1831550.037438788RARBNM_016152; NM_016152; NM_000965; NM_0009655′UTR; 1st Exon
Supplementary Table 2

Individual CpG sites associated with simple hepatic steatosis (q<0.05) in circulating leukocytes. (N=119).

Probe IDp Simple hepatic steatosisq Simple hepatic steatosisSimple hepatic steatosis mean βCL mean βDifference (% points)Gene symbolUCSC RefGene acessionRelation to gene regionRelation to CpG island
cg001505000.000000.000050.043540.026410.01713HCFC1R1; THOC6NM_017885; NM_001002018; NM_001002017; NM_001142350; NM_024339Body; TSS1500Island
cg005749580.000000.026250.137770.19441−0.05664CPT1A; CPT1ANM_001876; NM_0010318475′UTRN_Shore
cg006392860.000010.037940.117830.093290.02454ATOX1NM_004045BodyIsland
cg009320070.000000.026250.073280.048030.02525SERINC1; PKIBNM_020755; NM_181794; NM_0207551st Exon; TSS200; 5′UTRIsland
cg010679630.000010.029680.064600.049190.01541MAPK1NM_138957; NM_002745TSS1500Island
cg012166070.000010.048880.137310.111670.02564ZNHIT1; PLOD3NM_006349; NM_001084; NM_001084TSS1500; 1st Exon; 5′UTRIsland
cg015252440.000000.008300.222030.171440.05059CBX7NM_175709TSS200N_Shore
cg018011010.000000.021760.311910.274600.03730AMZ1NM_1334635′UTRN_Shore
cg024328880.000010.034100.926220.93604−0.00982SMARCA4NM_001128845; NM_001128844; NM_001128848; NM_001128846; NM_003072; NM_001128849; NM_0011288471st Exon; BodyN_Shelf
cg025819630.000000.009770.097230.069080.02816C10orf75NR_026762TSS200Island
cg030272410.000000.017120.354250.42982−0.07557KCNG1NM_0022373′UTRIsland
cg030693830.000010.048060.228460.200880.02758RDH14NM_0209051st ExonIsland
cg030749840.000010.042620.220300.190830.02947RPS6KA4NM_003942; NM_001006944TSS200Island
cg035116380.000000.026980.210130.192480.01765FBXL15NM_024326; NM_0243261st Exon; 5′UTRIsland
cg039560530.000000.004680.100870.069570.03130Island
cg039929380.000000.020850.203990.187800.01619CCDC13NM_144719; NM_1447191st Exon; 5′UTRIsland
cg043965500.000000.000000.039990.025580.01440KCNQ3NM_004519TSS1500Island
cg045514400.000000.023750.069750.052040.01771KATNAL1NM_001014380; NM_032116TSS200; 5′UTRIsland
cg046727690.000000.017120.103580.083400.02017HARSNM_002109; NM_012208; NM_0021095′UTR; TSS200; 1stExonIsland
cg046996680.000000.026540.787650.83452−0.04687N_Shore
cg047817640.000000.017040.861440.88530−0.02387WDR51BNM_172240Body
cg047876020.000000.020850.163000.144230.01876C1orf183; C1orf183NM_198926; NM_019099Body; TSS1500Island
cg048513520.000010.041560.324020.307660.01637Island
cg049816960.000000.017120.559260.491970.06730ABCC1NM_019862; NM_019898; NM_019899; NM_004996; NM_019900BodyS_Shore
cg050207750.000010.031450.118040.094110.02393SNPHNM_014723TSS200Island
cg051021900.000000.017120.300750.261540.03922ZYXNM_003461; NM_001010972TSS200Island
cg051319570.000000.026250.088170.067550.02062CRLS1; CRLS1NM_019095; NM_019095; NM_0011274581st Exon; 5′UTR; TSS1500Island
cg052095270.000010.030180.202130.151720.05042SLC5A6NR_028323; NM_080592; NM_021095; NM_016085; NM_001170795TSS1500; Body; 5′UTRS_Shore
cg053771610.000010.048880.116390.094040.02235Island
cg056297210.000000.026540.293310.244570.04875PSMB8NM_004159; NM_148919; NM_0041595′UTR; TSS1500; 1st ExonS_Shore
cg059771090.000000.020850.091990.068380.02361SGMS1NM_1471565′UTRIsland
cg062764290.000010.041560.211570.171320.04025SLC39A7; RXRBNM_006979; NM_021976; NM_001077516TSS1500; BodyN_Shore
cg070676590.000010.031870.034020.024410.00961SLC7A5NM_0034861st ExonIsland
cg071124560.000010.035360.932870.912430.02044LRWD1NM_152892BodyS_Shelf
cg079534000.000010.029680.055080.045260.00982PIGQNM_004204; NM_148920TSS1500N_Shore
cg079562640.000000.002280.062670.042640.02003GPATCH3NM_0220781st ExonIsland
cg081809340.000000.026250.057680.045680.01200STRAPNM_007178TSS200Island
cg082768890.000000.023750.037780.028140.00964LOC100133985NR_024444BodyIsland
cg087307280.000010.041560.105240.079190.02606Island
cg090900480.000010.030180.212300.181390.03091VPS26B; NCAPD3NM_052875; NM_015261TSS1500; BodyIsland
cg092670870.000010.041560.676240.641830.03441
cg093670460.000010.042620.079820.057970.02184ANGEL1NM_015305TSS200Island
cg094574690.000000.016980.062480.046710.01577YBX2NM_015982BodyIsland
cg098266920.000000.023750.694720.71745−0.02273Island
cg100591710.000010.031870.075020.058290.01674GPR89BNM_016334; NM_0163345′UTR; 1st ExonIsland
cg101782280.000000.008200.170820.111160.05966FRMD4BNM_015123TSS200S_Shore
cg103696880.000010.030180.156840.139060.01778ZFP36NM_003407BodyIsland
cg103810710.000000.017120.154370.20650−0.05213TLE3NM_020908; NM_001105192; NM_005078TSS1500Island
cg105765160.000000.000190.050030.034140.01589RECQL5; SAP30BPNM_001003716; NM_013260; NM_001003715; NM_013260; NM_004259TSS200; 1st Exon; 5′UTRIsland
cg109656690.000010.029310.808700.82408−0.01538AXIN2NM_004655BodyIsland
cg113193620.000010.042510.086660.068280.01838ARL6IP5NM_006407; NM_0064071st Exon; 5′UTRIsland
cg115420630.000000.026250.055130.038840.01629NFE2L2NM_006164; NM_006164; NM_001145413; NM_0011454125′UTR; 1st Exon; TSS1500Island
cg118664220.000000.026540.063370.051600.01177Island
cg122895090.000010.044420.126570.116300.01027TUBE1; C6orf225NM_016262; NM_001033564Body; TSS200Island
cg123629800.000000.003070.887300.91537−0.02807Island
cg124076660.000000.029010.123780.102500.02128RIC8BNM_018157TSS1500Island
cg128101890.000010.039200.043870.036960.00691BCAP29NR_027830; NM_018844; NM_018844; NM_001008405Body; 1st Exon; 5′UTR; TSS1500Island
cg128507930.000000.023210.159790.143100.01669DENND5ANM_015213TSS200Island
cg131100340.000010.031870.072930.061480.01145ANKRD34A; POLR3GLNM_001039888; NM_032305TSS1500; 5′UTRIsland
cg131996150.000010.030180.237550.211150.02640KRTCAP2; TRIM46NM_173852; NM_025058TSS1500; BodyN_Shore
cg133988640.000000.024330.110610.085980.02463SEC22ANM_012430TSS200N_Shore
cg134857560.000000.026980.093700.082240.01146RB1NM_000321TSS200Island
cg140225300.000000.026980.073710.053850.01986SASS6; CCDC76NM_194292; NM_019083TSS200Island
cg142147450.000000.016980.031140.023960.00718CRELD1NM_001077415; NM_001031717; NM_015513; NM_015513; NM_001077415; NM_0010317171st Exon; 5′UTRIsland
cg142473180.000010.030180.069910.051260.01865S_Shore
cg150439260.000000.026980.280890.264300.01659STIM2NM_001169117; NM_020860; NM_001169118BodyIsland
cg152261700.000000.028790.374910.316590.05832PMM1NM_002676TSS1500S_Shore
cg153242560.000000.026250.056170.040620.01555QTRTD1; KIAA1407NM_024638; NM_020817TSS1500; 1st ExonIsland
cg153244480.000000.026250.100200.080010.02019ZNF643NM_023070TSS200Island
cg155365520.075840.047960.205830.34740−0.01416ACSL4NM_022977; NM_0044585′UTR; 5′UTRN_Shore
cg155720860.000000.016980.061200.048060.01314C1orf203NR_027645; NR_024126; NR_024124; NR_027646; NR_024125TSS1500Island
cg156531940.000000.003940.076600.051630.02496LFNGNM_001166355; NM_002304; NM_001040168; NM_001040167Body; TSS200Island
cg160077110.000000.017120.111040.084140.02689RHOBTB2NM_001160036; NM_001160037; NM_015178Body; 5′UTRS_Shore
cg163061480.000010.033590.012340.006080.00626YBX1NM_004559TSS1500Island
cg163572870.000000.002280.035880.022290.01360SEH1L; SEH1LNM_001013437; NM_031216TSS1500N_Shore
cg163981280.000000.000000.043600.025500.01810ZNF622NM_033414; NM_0334145′UTR; 1st ExonIsland
cg164167180.000000.028790.169980.155540.01445CAMTA1NM_015215TSS1500Island
cg167430700.000000.017210.042220.026400.01582MYST3NM_001099413; NM_001099412; NM_0067665′UTRIsland
cg168035220.000000.014410.037050.026030.01102RASGRP1NM_001128602; NM_005739TSS1500Island
cg170742130.000010.029010.209860.158610.05125TGFBR3NM_003243; NM_0032431st Exon; 5′UTRIsland
cg171624750.000000.023750.138170.120310.01786C6orf150NM_138441TSS200Island
cg171682420.000000.015990.092730.082380.01035OTUD7BNM_020205TSS200Island
cg171765170.000010.040390.056530.043190.01334SNX4NM_003794; NM_0037945′UTR; 1st ExonIsland
cg174277810.000010.042270.089430.070590.01884DDX20; C1orf183NM_007204; NM_198926TSS200; BodyIsland
cg186767900.000010.030180.279300.34935−0.07005
cg188486880.000010.029680.142960.32549−0.18253LIFRNM_001127671; NM_002310TSS1500; 5′UTRIsland
cg190508510.000000.026900.039730.028760.01097ARSBNM_000046; NM_198709Body; BodyIsland
cg191376620.000000.014410.047050.032490.01455NOP56NM_006392; NR_031699; NR_027700; NR_003078Body; TSS200; TSS1500Island
cg193621960.000000.026250.706500.76251−0.05601STMN1NM_005563; NM_203399; NM_203401; NM_001145454TSS1500Island
cg195201150.000000.001600.120950.104880.01607CAPZBNM_004930BodyIsland
cg196342130.000000.017120.057160.040740.01643PTEN; KILLINNM_000314; NM_001126049TSS1500; 1st ExonIsland
cg196930310.000010.031870.807560.85146−0.04390TXNIPNM_0064723′UTR
cg198789870.000000.022800.103620.080200.02342LDHBNM_002300TSS1500S_Shore
cg206567510.000000.026250.513570.472610.04096NAT8LNM_1785571stExonIsland
cg210127290.000010.037630.082080.065270.01681NINNM_182946; NM_020921; NM_1829445′UTRIsland
cg213738060.000010.041560.835460.86386−0.02840BAHCC1NM_001080519BodyN_Shore
cg217861140.000010.031870.513570.460760.05281EHMT2NM_006709; NM_025256TSS1500N_Shore
cg221852680.000000.002170.028710.020080.00864COMMD4NM_017828TSS200Island
cg227214680.000000.002280.064940.044240.02070SH3BP5LNM_030645TSS1500Island
cg227464210.000000.017120.876450.852660.02379
cg229024780.000010.041560.100270.085250.01502LOC100130987NR_024469TSS200Island
cg232244050.000000.000110.067830.045020.02281DUSP16NM_030640; NM_0306401st Exon; 5′UTRIsland
cg233481580.000000.017120.093420.061740.03168FUZNM_025129TSS200S_Shore
cg235121650.000000.020850.028860.020410.00845MTMR4NM_004687; NM_0046871st Exon; 5′UTRIsland
cg241082860.000010.031450.252850.211780.04107TFDP1NR_026580; NM_007111TSS1500
cg246897540.000000.024330.030450.020200.01026C19orf62NM_001033549; NM_001033549; NM_014173; NM_0141735′UTR; 1st Exon
cg247284790.000010.031870.192580.175460.01712ZNF252; C8orf77NR_023392; NR_026974TSS1500; BodyIsland
cg250539070.000010.029680.063770.051980.01179ZNF721; PIGGNM_133474; NM_017733; NM_001127178; NM_1334745′UTR; TSS200; 1st ExonIsland
cg252957260.000000.011010.181620.162830.01879FUT11NM_173540TSS200Island
cg256785320.000000.026250.051380.038890.01249RBBP8NM_203291; NM_203292; NM_002894TSS1500; TSS200Island
cg258188130.000000.020140.066710.050090.01661MERTKNM_006343BodyIsland
cg258561200.000010.046800.111570.082440.02914ATP5G1NM_005175; NM_005175; NM_0010020271st Exon; 5′UTRS_Shore
cg259890570.000010.029420.038130.026600.01154AIPNM_003977TSS200Island
cg263096550.000010.041560.171360.148220.02314TARS2NM_025150TSS200
cg264621360.000010.036470.084110.066280.01783ATXN7L3NM_001098833; NM_020218TSS1500Island
cg267913840.000010.041560.251910.216220.03569SYCE1LNM_001129979BodyIsland
cg268247050.000010.048880.081420.064020.01740MUL1NM_024544TSS200Island
cg271646120.000000.026540.013420.008130.00529
cg276126950.000000.026250.188520.156150.03238SUZ12PNR_024187BodyS_Shore
Supplementary Table 3

Significantly enriched KEGG pathways of genes with altered DNA methylation level in NAFLD.

Pathway IDDescriptionp Valueq ValueGenesEnrich factor
hsa03008Ribosome biogenesis in eukaryotes0.0040.010GTPBP4GTP binding protein48.56
NOP56Ribonucleo protein
hsa04010MAPK signaling pathway0.0010.011DUSP16Dual specificity phosphatase 162.59
MEF2CMyocyte enhancer factor 2C
Supplementary Table 4

Significantly enriched KEGG pathways of genes with altered DNA methylation level in simple hepatic steatosis.

Pathway IDDescriptionp Valueq ValueGenesEnrich factor
hsa04977Vitamin digestion and absorption0.00070.033SLC5A6Solute carrier family 5 member 615.84
ABCC1ATP binding cassette sub familyC member1
hsa03013RNAtransport0.01000.040DDX20DEAD-box helicase 202.50
SEH1LSEH1 like nucleoporin
hsa05200Pathways in cancer0.00700.034PTENPhosphatase and tensin homolog2.33
AXIN2Axin 2
MAPK1Mitogen-activated protein kinase 1
RB1RB transcriptional corepressor 1
Supplementary Table 5

Significance of associations between biological parameters and selected methylated CpG sites.

Illumina IDGene symbolGLUHOMAINTGTCHDLLDLGGTALTAST
1#2#1#2#1#2#1#2#1#2#1#2#1#2#1#2#1#2#
cg00150500HCFC1R10.4920.7360.2900.4330.0200.5450.0080.027*0.5050.5160.0000.005*0.1070.1320.0060.0570.7920.668
cg00574958CTP1A0.3330.4350.4330.7680.0010.001*0.0170.3080.0670.5750.0000.001*0.1250.4170.0340.4780.3400.657
cg01067963MAPK10.3210.6850.5200.9630.0390.7950.2160.6320.0700.3160.0180.2590.3650.2010.0060.035*0.6030.454
cg016933280.8990.8750.4080.6650.2470.8160.1260.1700.1730.4410.0870.1650.1620.1740.0020.009*0.1110.185
cg01801101AMZ10.9710.9490.3920.8380.0060.2110.2400.2800.2870.8440.0160.0780.9830.9320.0000.002*0.8180.488
cg02013957CAGE10.8600.7880.0100.010*0.0490.3710.2130.9510.0510.6560.1500.4130.1330.1220.0010.024*0.4980.082
cg03511638FBXL150.1580.2820.1360.2580.1290.9300.5850.9850.3730.9080.0730.4460.1130.1410.0100.0700.5880.818
cg036152400.1470.7570.2860.3550.1010.2060.0360.1420.8160.2370.0120.012*0.1790.4000.0000.033*0.0610.373
cg03992938CCDC130.1070.2960.0670.032*0.8440.1390.0350.4490.4040.2400.0010.006*0.0160.021*0.0120.011*0.1870.882
cg04160753C10orf910.1620.3160.9360.8800.0140.1050.0300.1610.4660.7980.0140.1080.2950.3610.1040.3450.9040.986
cg04787602C1orf1830.1530.3040.3280.3960.0440.2710.0580.9140.0460.2590.0010.039*0.0330.035*0.0010.010*0.1810.207
cg04981696ABCC10.2600.3180.4200.7840.0460.0900.0550.7780.4700.6450.0020.033*0.6570.7360.0000.004*0.7770.547
cg05102190ZYX0.1160.1220.9720.8800.0390.0840.0560.3600.3010.9260.0250.0770.3380.3650.0050.030*0.8120.717
cg05131957CRLS10.0910.1990.4890.8760.0320.2740.0680.3120.5850.8920.0060.047*0.9950.7800.0180.0690.4830.196
cg05209527SLC5A60.1430.5190.2540.4070.1410.9190.0400.1090.5630.9080.0050.5060.9230.3530.0000.006*0.4780.317
cg06706068RPUSD10.0340.020*0.4770.9700.5330.0520.0320.2680.0900.7480.0230.049*0.2330.2430.0030.043*0.8510.586
cg07067744BRSK20.7820.9740.4540.7600.0930.1040.0380.9630.3890.7820.0030.030*0.3600.4350.0120.1080.6940.757
cg07112456LRWD10.1670.2610.3700.5310.2300.1990.0710.6600.4700.6640.0330.1780.0820.0970.0310.2080.4750.480
cg07953400PIGQ0.0010.004*0.6250.4520.2330.005*0.0000.8230.9160.7700.0000.001*0.2500.3430.0130.041*0.9390.439
cg07956264GPATCH30.7020.6930.0260.0680.0000.028*0.0290.002*0.1120.4930.0090.023*0.1580.1640.0000.002*0.2820.232
cg08013262INSR0.5820.6780.4820.6950.0310.046*0.0230.2420.8500.5690.0130.0610.8470.9520.0010.005*0.8590.992
cg09367046ANGEL10.2750.3560.5570.7930.1090.3510.1900.8110.2030.6240.0220.1180.1750.2050.0000.002*0.1980.188
cg100771440.7220.5440.4670.2830.0060.2030.0290.0840.6450.7360.0070.1380.9500.7110.0020.004*0.7760.621
cg10178228FRMD4B0.5660.7050.4820.6030.4470.9370.6680.1960.0050.0550.0780.3570.2400.2700.0000.005*0.8380.776
cg12289509TUBE10.4020.5030.4790.6700.2360.029*0.0190.9210.6760.6830.0010.002*0.4430.4890.0000.001*0.6240.833
cg12473838SSBP10.0040.1670.5000.7110.4190.9280.0000.1920.0000.6640.0010.030*0.1220.1400.7550.1990.4530.765
cg13291296GPR1250.6520.8020.6970.9670.0340.1010.0640.2560.0630.2110.0100.028*0.2420.2530.0120.0570.7520.820
cg13397649AFG3L20.0900.2270.6780.7490.0030.8090.3050.0790.1330.3850.0380.2950.8980.9480.0170.0820.3010.156
cg13463639SIGIRR0.0820.5510.6180.9850.3760.7090.0020.3480.0280.3630.0090.020*0.3750.2750.9800.7300.2980.431
cg13920768PRDM120.2780.4310.5390.6350.0040.1010.0350.0650.8550.2210.0160.0950.2780.3470.0070.040*0.7790.710
cg14214745CRELD10.7640.6270.1410.2460.0010.4190.2070.024*0.0220.1960.0480.2180.8830.7130.0410.2670.3140.359
cg142473180.4050.3090.2060.3610.0520.009*0.0170.1460.4560.7180.0040.004*0.2240.2150.0110.031*0.6480.821
cg14451560ARRDC10.1320.1290.2820.4800.0750.1910.1170.4520.0440.1820.0220.0760.0400.047*0.0140.0780.7960.810
cg15226170PMM10.8940.7800.4220.6250.0240.3540.1360.3520.5110.9110.0120.0950.3020.2030.0010.009*0.5350.537
cg15317837GTPBP40.9200.9420.1940.5500.0050.6820.5070.2820.0120.2440.1660.4600.6500.7080.0160.2540.1270.472
cg15536552ACSL40.0010.4390.0010.045*0.0010.1890.0500.4780.6700.6670.0010.0850.1190.6640.0010.043*0.0710.431
cg15653194LFNG0.1670.0520.1900.8430.0000.001*0.0060.010*0.1240.3200.0010.001*0.8400.9550.0160.4530.0010.111
cg16105594MEF2C0.2280.4810.7010.8320.0420.2340.0670.4370.0200.0640.0020.022*0.4110.5000.0260.1240.0860.213
cg16261091HEXDC0.7220.6200.0730.1460.0050.3150.2420.1100.0930.4650.0440.1180.0970.0950.0040.036*0.5610.614
cg16357287SEH1L0.5740.7450.0920.1380.0810.1830.1100.4460.1260.3610.0080.025*0.7730.7090.0000.003*0.6440.386
cg16398128ZNF6220.4100.7170.3390.3520.0030.022*0.0050.0580.3650.7660.0000.001*0.9760.8590.0000.001*0.8090.764
cg16416718CAMTA10.0010.004*0.7390.7720.2000.010*0.0010.7780.3870.5580.0000.001*0.0530.0690.0310.0790.9840.313
cg16487280MYBL20.0820.0700.7080.7440.1830.1120.0640.4880.9890.0670.0060.027*0.6710.4970.0810.6240.0040.060
cg17162475C6orf1500.3170.3280.2010.4650.0520.5070.3410.8740.0520.6180.0320.1650.5620.6350.0000.008*0.6110.313
cg17176517SNX40.3490.6390.4060.4460.2550.1820.0420.8210.2910.5930.0050.0620.5630.7130.0060.030*0.7150.484
cg18570553PRR150.0420.0980.4440.3100.0280.043*0.0080.3870.6400.7120.0010.009*0.0630.0840.0050.035*0.5270.705
cg18848688LIFR0.8850.9250.1250.2420.0030.0640.0510.1020.0230.1750.0050.012*0.2240.2210.0020.022*0.6510.826
cg19189310RPS100.3980.5640.4530.7110.0620.1500.0520.9530.2050.9640.0090.0860.2000.2390.0050.0750.2920.224
cg19634213PTEN0.1940.4970.4940.9320.9000.3530.1020.2130.4830.6510.0100.0920.2970.3560.0010.002*0.2360.447
cg19878987LDHB0.3210.5320.3280.5740.0860.1360.0340.6910.4770.9320.0080.0870.1760.2400.0010.003*0.1970.218
cg21786114EHMT20.3440.3740.9530.3670.0230.0730.0600.8410.3630.4840.0040.029*0.6000.6540.0010.018*0.8090.483
cg22185268COMMD40.9430.7440.5480.6180.0070.1800.0580.1080.2990.8420.0010.019*0.3290.4310.0010.008*0.4670.844
cg227464210.7980.7790.0300.1050.1300.2370.2050.6330.0110.2410.0210.0540.3020.2890.0020.038*0.1630.527
cg23224405DUSP160.8730.5940.0990.0620.0240.2560.0530.3510.0990.1940.0020.0540.1470.1990.0000.001*0.1970.435
cg24199050GTSE10.0640.1750.9490.8620.0120.006*0.0010.1290.7190.9840.0000.001*0.7540.9880.0040.013*0.7170.190
cg24689754C19orf620.3570.4660.2730.3410.1470.6070.3660.5760.1020.1830.0070.045*0.7310.5930.0010.005*0.3680.104
cg25295726FUT110.6850.9060.1750.3140.0560.2310.0940.7480.0300.1840.0070.0500.1120.1300.0030.040*0.6990.746
cg254566330.6130.9380.0030.003*0.0800.5810.2350.6490.2960.6880.0850.3770.6260.7420.0010.012*0.8930.758
cg25818813MERTK0.1310.2530.9680.9260.0870.037*0.0150.2640.8480.5450.0000.002*0.4780.5500.0000.001*0.1790.513
cg26105057PAN20.8430.9720.3050.8310.0290.1220.1610.4010.1070.6560.0580.0820.1550.1370.0000.002*0.5220.167
cg26309655TARS20.1030.2990.8200.6670.0650.1720.0320.3010.6710.6700.0060.0770.3910.5140.0040.008*0.7570.542
g22721468SH3BP5L0.0970.2250.6160.6490.2320.1060.0280.8160.6180.7870.0000.009*0.4650.5690.0010.008*0.6430.882

1# – Uni-variate p; 2# – Multi-variate; p* p<0.05, adjusted by sex, age and BMI.

  40 in total

Review 1.  The diagnosis and management of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: Practice guidance from the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.

Authors:  Naga Chalasani; Zobair Younossi; Joel E Lavine; Michael Charlton; Kenneth Cusi; Mary Rinella; Stephen A Harrison; Elizabeth M Brunt; Arun J Sanyal
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  2017-09-29       Impact factor: 17.425

Review 2.  New trends on obesity and NAFLD in Asia.

Authors:  Jian-Gao Fan; Seung-Up Kim; Vincent Wai-Sun Wong
Journal:  J Hepatol       Date:  2017-06-19       Impact factor: 25.083

Review 3.  Redox homeostasis and epigenetics in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD).

Authors:  Christine Podrini; Michela Borghesan; Azzura Greco; Valerio Pazienza; Gianluigi Mazzoccoli; Manlio Vinciguerra
Journal:  Curr Pharm Des       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 3.116

4.  Involvement of cholesterol in hepatitis B virus X protein-induced abnormal lipid metabolism of hepatoma cells via up-regulating miR-205-targeted ACSL4.

Authors:  Ming Cui; Zelin Xiao; Baodi Sun; Yue Wang; Minying Zheng; Lihong Ye; Xiaodong Zhang
Journal:  Biochem Biophys Res Commun       Date:  2014-02-24       Impact factor: 3.575

5.  Genome-scale analysis of in vivo spatiotemporal promoter activity in Caenorhabditis elegans.

Authors:  Denis Dupuy; Nicolas Bertin; César A Hidalgo; Kavitha Venkatesan; Domena Tu; David Lee; Jennifer Rosenberg; Nenad Svrzikapa; Aurélie Blanc; Alain Carnec; Anne-Ruxandra Carvunis; Rock Pulak; Jane Shingles; John Reece-Hoyes; Rebecca Hunt-Newbury; Ryan Viveiros; William A Mohler; Murat Tasan; Frederick P Roth; Christian Le Peuch; Ian A Hope; Robert Johnsen; Donald G Moerman; Albert-László Barabási; David Baillie; Marc Vidal
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2007-05-07       Impact factor: 54.908

6.  Differential DNA methylation of genes involved in fibrosis progression in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and alcoholic liver disease.

Authors:  Müjdat Zeybel; Timothy Hardy; Stuart M Robinson; Christopher Fox; Quentin M Anstee; Thomas Ness; Steven Masson; John C Mathers; Jeremy French; Steve White; Jelena Mann
Journal:  Clin Epigenetics       Date:  2015-03-14       Impact factor: 6.551

7.  Non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) levels in children with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD).

Authors:  Naim Alkhouri; Katharien Eng; Rocio Lopez; Valerio Nobili
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2014-08-05

8.  Association between bilirubin and risk of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease based on a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Jianbo Tian; Rong Zhong; Cheng Liu; Yuhan Tang; Jing Gong; Jiang Chang; Jiao Lou; Juntao Ke; Jiaoyuan Li; Yi Zhang; Yang Yang; Ying Zhu; Yajie Gong; Yanyan Xu; Peiyi Liu; Xiao Yu; Lin Xiao; Min Du; Ling Yang; Jing Yuan; Youjie Wang; Weihong Chen; Sheng Wei; Yuan Liang; Xiaomin Zhang; Meian He; Tangchun Wu; Ping Yao; Xiaoping Miao
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-08-03       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  An integrated encyclopedia of DNA elements in the human genome.

Authors: 
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2012-09-06       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 10.  DNA methylation biomarkers: cancer and beyond.

Authors:  Thomas Mikeska; Jeffrey M Craig
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2014-09-16       Impact factor: 4.096

View more
  8 in total

1.  Methylome-wide association study of central adiposity implicates genes involved in immune and endocrine systems.

Authors:  Anne E Justice; Geetha Chittoor; Rahul Gondalia; Phillip E Melton; Elise Lim; Megan L Grove; Eric A Whitsel; Ching-Ti Liu; L Adrienne Cupples; Lindsay Fernandez-Rhodes; Weihua Guan; Jan Bressler; Myriam Fornage; Eric Boerwinkle; Yun Li; Ellen Demerath; Nancy Heard-Costa; Dan Levy; James D Stewart; Andrea Baccarelli; Lifang Hou; Karen Conneely; Trevor A Mori; Lawrence J Beilin; Rae-Chi Huang; Penny Gordon-Larsen; Annie Green Howard; Kari E North
Journal:  Epigenomics       Date:  2020-09-09       Impact factor: 4.778

2.  Analysis of Risk Factors for Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Elderly Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction and Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD).

Authors:  Wei Xia; Ning Yang; Yuming Li
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2020-06-01

Review 3.  Epigenetic Markers and Microbiota/Metabolite-Induced Epigenetic Modifications in the Pathogenesis of Obesity, Metabolic Syndrome, Type 2 Diabetes, and Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.

Authors:  Daniela Stols-Gonçalves; Luca Schiliró Tristão; Peter Henneman; Max Nieuwdorp
Journal:  Curr Diab Rep       Date:  2019-05-01       Impact factor: 4.810

4.  Dysregulated H3K27 Acetylation Is Implicated in Fatty Liver Hemorrhagic Syndrome in Chickens.

Authors:  Yaling Zhu; Qingjie Zeng; Fang Li; Haoshu Fang; Zhimin Zhou; Tao Jiang; Chao Yin; Qing Wei; Yujie Wang; Jiming Ruan; Jianzhen Huang
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2021-01-11       Impact factor: 4.599

Review 5.  An Update in Epigenetics in Metabolic-Associated Fatty Liver Disease.

Authors:  J Samael Rodríguez-Sanabria; Rebeca Escutia-Gutiérrez; Rebeca Rosas-Campos; Juan S Armendáriz-Borunda; Ana Sandoval-Rodríguez
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-01-11

6.  Potential Blood DNA Methylation Biomarker Genes for Diagnosis of Liver Fibrosis in Patients With Biopsy-Proven Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.

Authors:  Qing-Feng Sun; Liang-Jie Tang; Ming-Jie Wang; Pei-Wu Zhu; Yang-Yang Li; Hong-Lei Ma; Ou-Yang Huang; Liang Hong; Gang Li; Christopher D Byrne; Giovanni Targher; Wen-Yue Liu; Yan Lu; Ji-Guang Ding; Ming-Hua Zheng
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-03-31

Review 7.  Genetic and epigenetic factors determining NAFLD risk.

Authors:  Wenke Jonas; Annette Schürmann
Journal:  Mol Metab       Date:  2020-11-05       Impact factor: 7.422

8.  Differential DNA methylation and changing cell-type proportions as fibrotic stage progresses in NAFLD.

Authors:  Nicholas D Johnson; Xiumei Wu; Karen N Conneely; Johanna K DiStefano; Christopher D Still; Xin Chu; Anthony T Petrick; Glenn S Gerhard
Journal:  Clin Epigenetics       Date:  2021-08-05       Impact factor: 6.551

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.