Literature DB >> 30819252

Genome-wide DNA methylation and long-term ambient air pollution exposure in Korean adults.

Mi Kyeong Lee1, Cheng-Jian Xu2,3,4, Megan U Carnes5, Cody E Nichols1, James M Ward1, Sung Ok Kwon6, Sun-Young Kim7, Woo Jin Kim8, Stephanie J London9.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Ambient air pollution is associated with numerous adverse health outcomes, but the underlying mechanisms are not well understood; epigenetic effects including altered DNA methylation could play a role. To evaluate associations of long-term air pollution exposure with DNA methylation in blood, we conducted an epigenome-wide association study in a Korean chronic obstructive pulmonary disease cohort (N = 100 including 60 cases) using Illumina's Infinium HumanMethylation450K Beadchip. Annual average concentrations of particulate matter ≤ 10 μm in diameter (PM10) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) were estimated at participants' residential addresses using exposure prediction models. We used robust linear regression to identify differentially methylated probes (DMPs) and two different approaches, DMRcate and comb-p, to identify differentially methylated regions (DMRs).
RESULTS: After multiple testing correction (false discovery rate < 0.05), there were 12 DMPs and 27 DMRs associated with PM10 and 45 DMPs and 57 DMRs related to NO2. DMP cg06992688 (OTUB2) and several DMRs were associated with both exposures. Eleven DMPs in relation to NO2 confirmed previous findings in Europeans; the remainder were novel. Methylation levels of 39 DMPs were associated with expression levels of nearby genes in a separate dataset of 3075 individuals. Enriched networks were related to outcomes associated with air pollution including cardiovascular and respiratory diseases as well as inflammatory and immune responses.
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that long-term ambient air pollution exposure impacts DNA methylation. The differential methylation signals can serve as potential air pollution biomarkers. These results may help better understand the influences of ambient air pollution on human health.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Air pollution; Epigenesis, genetic; Epigenomics; Nitrogen dioxide; Particulate matter

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30819252      PMCID: PMC6396524          DOI: 10.1186/s13148-019-0635-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Epigenetics        ISSN: 1868-7075            Impact factor:   6.551


Background

Exposure to ambient air pollution has well-documented adverse effects on health outcomes, including cardiovascular disease [1] and pulmonary function [2]. Oxidative stress and inflammation have been suggested as underlying mechanisms but specific data supporting these links are lacking. Despite mounting evidence of the negative impacts of air pollution exposure on health outcomes, the underlying mechanisms are not well understood. DNA methylation, an epigenetic modification that can influence gene expression, has widely replicated genome-wide associations with smoking [3]. While there are fewer data, there is evidence that ambient air pollution influences methylation [4-7]. Most studies of long-term air pollution exposure and methylation have been conducted in Caucasian adult populations [5-7] and evidence for replication of differentially methylated probes (DMPs) across studies or different ethnic groups is sparse. We performed an epigenome-wide association study (EWAS) to evaluate the relationship of long-term exposure to particulate matter ≤ 10 μm in diameter (PM10) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) with blood DNA methylation in adults (N = 100) participating in a Korean chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) cohort. We identified differentially methylated signals in relation to air pollution exposure both at an individual C–phosphate–G (CpG) probe level and at a regional level involving several neighboring CpG probes (CpGs). We evaluated whether methylation levels of our DMPs were associated with expression levels of nearby transcripts in a large independent dataset with matched gene expression and DNA methylation in the same individuals, Biobank-based integrative omics studies (BIOS) consortium. We also replicated findings from earlier EWASes in European populations, reporting a list of DMPs showing similar associations in our Asian population.

Methods

Study population

For DNA methylation profiling, study participants (N = 100 including 60 individuals with COPD) were sampled from a Korean COPD cohort [8]. Data and biologic specimens collected at a baseline visit (between late August and early November in 2012 and 2013) were used in this study. Blood and urine samples as well as survey questionnaires were obtained for all study participants who also underwent physical examination for anthropometric measurements. A trained nurse measured height and weight using the body composition analyzer IOI 353 (Aarna Systems., Udaipur, India). Body mass index (BMI) was calculated as weight (kg) divided by height squared (m2). Information on cigarette smoking status (never, former, and current) and pack-years of smoking was obtained via questionnaires. We calculated pack-years of smoking, for current and former smokers, by multiplying the number of years smoked by the number of cigarette packs smoked per day. Current nonsmoking status was validated using urine cotinine levels (nmol/L) measured by immunoassay (Immulite 2000 Xpi; Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, Tarrytown, NY, USA). Workflow of this study can be found in Additional file 1: Figure S1. The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Kangwon National University. We obtained informed consent from all study participants.

Air pollution exposure at residential addresses

We estimated annual average concentrations of PM10 (μg/m3) and NO2 (ppb) at each residential address obtained from the baseline survey using a national-scale exposure prediction model [9]. Using air pollution regulatory monitoring data in 2010, the prediction model estimated the annual average concentrations of the pollutants in a universal kriging framework based on geographic predictors and spatial correlation. Geographic predictors were estimated by hundreds of geographic variables that represent pollution sources including traffic, demographic characteristics, land use, physical geography, transportation facilities, emissions, vegetation, and altitude. To account for season in the prediction model, we used several inclusion criteria for monitoring sites: (1) having more than 75% (274 days) of daily data, (2) having at least one daily measurement in each of the 10 months, and (3) having no more than 45 consecutive days without daily measurements. Participants’ residential addresses at the baseline visit were geocoded using GeoCoder-Xr software (Geoservice, Seoul, South Korea).

DNA methylation profiling

DNA was extracted from blood samples collected at the baseline visit. We obtained genome-wide methylation profiles using the Infinium HumanMethylation450K BeadChip (Illumina, Inc., San Diego, CA, USA). We used a pipeline implemented in the chip analysis methylation pipeline (ChAMP) R package [10] for signal extraction and initial low-quality probe filtering, excluding probes having a detection p value > 0.01 in any sample or a bead-count < 3 in 5% or more samples. Correction for probe design bias was done using Beta Mixture Quantile dilation normalization [11]. Batch effects were corrected using Combat [12] in the sva R package [13]. To minimize false positive findings, we additionally removed non-CpG probes and probes reported to be non-specific [14, 15] or potentially influenced by nearby single-nucleotide variants [14]. We provide probe filtering steps in Additional file 2: Table S1. After excluding probes on the X and Y chromosomes, the remaining 402,508 CpGs were used for association analyses. To reduce the potential influence of extreme methylation outliers on association results, we removed methylation values more extreme than Tukey’s outer fences [16] defined as more than three times the interquartile range from the 25th and 75th percentiles of methylation values at each probe, resulting in removal of 75,549 (0.19%) values across all participants. To estimate cell-type proportions including CD8+ T lymphocytes, CD4+ T lymphocytes, natural killer cells, B cells, monocytes, and granulocytes, we applied Houseman’s algorithm [17] with the Reinius reference panel [18] using the minfi R package [19].

Identification of differentially methylated probes

To evaluate associations of air pollution exposure with DNA methylation, we used robust linear regression models to decrease the influence of outlier methylation values and heteroskedasticity on association results [20]. Annual average concentrations of a pollutant (PM10 or NO2) were used as the predictor and the methylation beta values were the response variable. A methylation beta value is a ratio of methylated CpG probe intensity to total probe intensity and ranges between 0 (unmethylated) and 1 (methylated). Covariates included were age (years), sex (male, female), cigarette smoking (never, former, current), pack-years of smoking, BMI (kg/m2), COPD status (cases, noncases), and estimated cell-type proportions. For genome-wide statistical significance, we set a threshold of Benjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate (FDR) adjusted p value < 0.05 unless otherwise noted. We also used p value < 1.2E-07 (= 0.05/402,508) as a cutoff for statistically significant associations after Bonferroni correction. We used R version 3.0.2 for preprocessing methylation data from raw data (.idat files) to methylation beta values and R version 3.4.0 for association analyses and visualization of differential methylation regions.

Identification of differentially methylated regions

In addition to association analyses at individual CpGs, we applied two different methods to identify differential DNA methylation at the regional level in relation to air pollution exposure: DMRcate [21] and comb-p [22]. As the two methods implement different algorithms to identify differentially methylated regions (DMRs), we used both methods to find significant DMRs while reducing false positives. DMRcate uses a tunable kernel smoothing process with differential methylation association signals, whereas comb-p examines regional clustering of low p values from irregularly spaced p values. We used the “dmrcate” function in the DMRcate R package with input files from the epigenome-wide association results: regression coefficients, standard deviations, and uncorrected p values. Comb-p, a stand-alone software, was used with input files containing uncorrected p values and information on chromosomal locations (chromosome and physical position). To define significant DMRs in our study, we applied the following three criteria. First, more than one CpG should reside within a DMR. Second, regional differential methylation signals can be calculated using neighboring CpGs within 1000 base pairs (bp). Third, a region must have multiple-testing corrected p value < 0.05 in both methods: Benjamini-Hochberg FDR for DMRcate and Sidak for comb-p. The use of FDR for DMRcate and Sidak for comb-p was the default setting in the two methods. As the minimum number of CpGs (N = 2) in a region and the minimum length of a distance (N = 1000 nucleotides) were the defaults in DMRcate, we used the same values for comb-p to harmonize results from the two methods. As the two methods call DMRs based on association results of neighboring probes, a significant DMR does not necessarily overlap a significant differentially methylated probe (DMP) in that region (Additional file 2: Table S2 and S3). To visualize regions of differential methylation, we used the coMET R package [23].

Biological implications of association results

Gene annotation for each CpG was done by using the manufacturer’s annotation file [24]; the UCSC RefGene names were obtained. For biological implications of our differential methylation signals in relation to each pollutant (PM10 or NO2), we explored curated variant annotations in the GeneticsLand software (OmicSoft, QIAGEN, NC, USA) and performed functional pathway analyses using the “Core Analysis” of ingenuity pathway analysis (IPA; Ingenuity Systems, QIAGEN, CA, USA) on genes annotated to DMPs with an uncorrected p value < 1E-04 (an arbitrary cutoff for suggestive association) or significant DMRs. To assess enrichment of tissue- or cell type-specific signals, we analyzed DMPs (FDR < 0.05) and probes having the minimum p value in each DMR for overlap with DNase 1 hypersensitivity sites (DHSs) using the experimentally derived functional element overlap analysis of ReGions from EWAS (eFORGE, version 1.2) [25].

Replication look-up

To replicate our DMPs with results from previous EWASes, we looked for evidence of our DMPs (FDR < 0.05) in the two published epigenome-wide studies of PM10 and/or NO2 exposure in adults [6, 7]. Also, we examined whether DMPs reported in the two studies were replicated in our study. Across the two studies, 5001 DMPs were reported (FDR < 0.05): 9 for PM10 and 4992 for NO2. Of these, 4671 were available for the look-up analysis in our data after probe filtering: 9 for PM10 and 4662 for NO2. We set the cutoff of an uncorrected p value < 0.05 for statistical significance for the look-up.

Associations of methylation levels of DMPs with gene expression levels of nearby transcripts: expression quantitative trait methylation in the BIOS data

To evaluate associations between methylation levels of DMPs and expression levels of nearby transcripts (cis-eQTMs), we regressed the methylation M value, the log2 ratio of methylated versus unmethylated probe intensities, on gene expression, adjusting for age, sex, lymphocytes percentage, monocyte percentage, and RNA flow cell number. The inflation of models was corrected using the “bacon” method [26]. We mapped the expression quantitative trait methylation (eQTMs) in a window of 250 kilobase pairs (kb) around the significant DMPs (FDR < 0.05). For this analysis, we used a total of 3075 samples for which both methylation and gene expression data were available from 4 cohorts: Leiden Longevity Study, LifeLines Study, Rotterdam Study, and Netherland Twin Study. We analyzed each cohort separately and then meta-analyzed the results using the inverse variance-weighted fixed-effects model using METAL software [27].

Results

The average age of the study participants was 73 years (standard deviation, SD = 6) and 66% were male (Table 1). There were 39 never, 30 former, and 31 current smokers. The mean annual average concentration was 45.1 μg/m3 for PM10 and 13.1 ppb for NO2. The two air pollutants were highly correlated (Spearman correlation coefficient = 0.74, p value < 2.2E-16).
Table 1

Descriptive characteristics of the study population

CharacteristicsThe Korean COPDa cohort (N = 100)
Age, years72.8 ± 6.3
Male66 (66%)
Body mass index, kg/m222.9 ± 2.9
COPD, case60 (60%)
Cigarette smoking
  Never39 (39%)
  Former30 (30%)
  Current31 (31%)
Pack-years
  Former smoker28.9 ± 19.6
  Current smoker35.7 ± 19.1
Annual average air pollution concentration at residential addresses
  PM10, μg/m345.1 ± 2.0
  NO2, ppb13.1 ± 1.4

N (%) or mean ± standard deviation reported

aChronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Descriptive characteristics of the study population N (%) or mean ± standard deviation reported aChronic obstructive pulmonary disease We observed numerous DMPs in relation to the two pollutants (FDR < 0.05): 11 for PM10 alone, 44 for NO2 alone, and 1 for both PM10 and NO2 (Tables 2 and 3). Of these 56 DMPs, some showed statistical significance after Bonferroni multiple testing correction: cg05454562 (WDR46), cg13999433 (AKNA), and cg11691844 (SYTL2) associated with PM10 exposure (Table 2); cg05171937 (STK38L), cg26583725 (8541 bp apart from IRS2), and cg06226567 (C20orf56) associated with NO2 exposure (Table 3). The DMP cg06992688 (OTUB2) was positively associated with both PM10 and NO2 (FDR < 0.05). Exposure to the two pollutants was mostly positively associated with DNA methylation: 92% (N = 11/12 CpGs) for PM10 and 71% (N = 32/45 CpGs) for NO2. In Additional file 1: Figure S2, we provide Manhattan and quantile-quantile plots for visual representation of the epigenome-wide association results (Additional file 3). No systematic inflation was observed in our results as genomic inflation factor (lambda) values were 0.83 for PM10 exposure and 1.07 for NO2 exposure.
Table 2

Differentially methylated CpGs in blood DNA in relation to PM10 exposure (FDR < 0.05), ordered by chromosomal location

ChraGene (distance to geneb)ProbePositioncCoefdSEePf
1 NEGR1 cg07721244727492750.0040.0011.6E-07
2 ARID5A cg0472221597205147− 0.0060.0011.4E-07
3FOXL2 (− 81,364)cg217427901385817020.0050.0018.6E-07
3XXYLT1 (− 92,147)cg042522031946968660.0050.0016.7E-07
6 WDR46 cg05454562g332544470.0060.0014.3E-09
7FAM20C (− 5283)cg169988311876860.0080.0023.0E-07
8 KIF13B cg07023317289613150.0080.0021.4E-06
9 AKNA cg13999433g1171568830.0070.0013.9E-08
11 SYTL2 cg11691844g854606040.0060.0011.1E-07
14 OTUB2 cg06992688944919580.0080.0021.0E-06
16MIR5093 (11,6079)cg26964426854559110.0250.0058.3E-07
18 NPC1 cg12709880211631720.0070.0013.8E-07

aChromosome

bDistance to transcription start site of the mapped gene (base pair)

cPhysical position (base pair, National Center for Biotechnology Information human reference genome assembly Build 37.3)

dRegression coefficient from statistical model. Covariates age, sex, cigarette smoking status, pack-years of smoking, BMI, COPD status, and estimated cell-type proportions were included in the model. The coefficient can be interpreted as the difference in DNA methylation per 1 μg/m3 PM10 exposure. For example, cg07721244 showed 0.4% methylation increase per 1 μg/m3 PM10 exposure increase. Methylation values range 0–1

eStandard error of regression coefficient

fUncorrected p value

gStatistically significant after Bonferroni multiple-testing correction (1.2E-07)

Table 3

Differentially methylated CpGs in blood DNA in relation to NO2 exposure (FDR < 0.05), ordered by chromosomal location

ChraGene (distance to geneb)ProbePositioncCoefdSEePf
1MAN1C1 (− 7282)cg16396978259366770.0080.0023.9E-06
1 ERI3 cg13451048448200730.0070.0018.6E-07
1 RPL5 cg0276966893302925− 0.0030.0013.3E-07
1WARS2 (− 29,067)cg067642391195447720.0023.5E-044.3E-06
1 S100A12 cg029011361533483050.0120.0022.7E-06
2STON1 (169)cg2325666448757477− 0.0013.0E-048.9E-07
2 NDUFB3 cg048650262019365050.0120.0027.5E-07
2 PLEKHM3 cg099509202087349400.0130.0032.7E-07
2 PIKFYVE cg193511662091336320.0080.0025.5E-06
3 CTDSPL cg12386061379065860.0024.3E-045.5E-06
3DCBLD2 (122,596)cg0118856298637410− 0.0040.0012.0E-06
3 AP2M1 cg173434511838997040.0090.0023.3E-06
4 CPLX1 cg16649791816968− 0.0140.0031.0E-06
4LINC01097 (− 3902)cg25913520135240410.0023.6E-042.8E-06
4 LOC641518 cg137753161090932180.0024.0E-046.2E-07
5DAP (86217)cg2311230110765559− 0.0050.0013.8E-06
5 ZNF366 cg21770462718032190.0080.0024.7E-06
5ERAP1 (− 82,414)cg1362521395915327− 0.0024.0E-043.4E-06
5CDHR2 (− 2294)cg181941531759672180.0100.0021.3E-07
6 LTA cg1158685731540136− 0.0070.0013.5E-06
8 PMP2 cg2279648182353365− 0.0190.0046.7E-07
8 OSR2 cg09607488999636570.0070.0024.5E-06
9 RORB cg04130427771139150.0050.0013.7E-06
10 ZNF438 cg10575075312886340.0140.0032.0E-06
10 EMX2 cg024208501193021570.0024.0E-046.2E-07
11 TMEM138 cg03370752611363730.0100.0025.5E-06
11 SORL1 cg175109571214666290.0110.0025.1E-06
12 TEAD4 cg1290242630688890.0030.0013.7E-06
12 STK38L cg05171937g273967650.0100.0021.1E-08
12 DDX55 cg135591441240861930.0024.3E-043.0E-06
13 EDNRB cg2332653678491199− 0.0030.0011.7E-06
13IRS2 (−8541)cg26583725g110397643− 0.0012.3E-044.9E-08
14 ITPK1 cg05284742935521280.0090.0024.1E-06
14 OTUB2 cg06992688944919580.0130.0033.3E-06
14 PLD4 cg153528291053910180.0100.0023.0E-06
15 LOC145663 cg04025675456710280.0050.0016.3E-07
16 ZCCHC14 cg1672700687470545− 0.0100.0024.8E-06
17EFCAB5 (− 2689)cg22888787279502760.0100.0023.9E-07
17CD300A (− 12,486)cg00227781724500360.0040.0013.0E-06
19 LOC100128675 cg0664250335597415− 0.0050.0012.9E-06
19 ZNF347 cg1505010353642858− 0.0080.0023.7E-06
19ZNF542 (− 28,810)cg06109293568506580.0200.0041.9E-07
20NKX2-4 (− 3198)cg27650906213728070.0060.0013.1E-07
20 C20orf56 cg06226567g225596760.0030.0013.5E-08
21 MORC3 cg01261013376917470.0100.0024.1E-06

aChromosome

bDistance to transcription start site of the mapped gene (base pair)

cPhysical position (base pair, National Center for Biotechnology Information human reference genome assembly Build 37.3)

dRegression coefficient from statistical model. Covariates age, sex, cigarette smoking status, pack-years of smoking, BMI, COPD status and estimated cell-type proportions were included in the model. The coefficient can be interpreted as the difference in DNA methylation per 1 ppb NO2 exposure. For example, cg16396978 showed 0.8% methylation increase per 1 ppb NO2 exposure increase. Methylation values range 0–1

eStandard error of regression coefficient

fUncorrected p value

gStatistically significant after Bonferroni multiple-testing correction (1.2E-07)

Differentially methylated CpGs in blood DNA in relation to PM10 exposure (FDR < 0.05), ordered by chromosomal location aChromosome bDistance to transcription start site of the mapped gene (base pair) cPhysical position (base pair, National Center for Biotechnology Information human reference genome assembly Build 37.3) dRegression coefficient from statistical model. Covariates age, sex, cigarette smoking status, pack-years of smoking, BMI, COPD status, and estimated cell-type proportions were included in the model. The coefficient can be interpreted as the difference in DNA methylation per 1 μg/m3 PM10 exposure. For example, cg07721244 showed 0.4% methylation increase per 1 μg/m3 PM10 exposure increase. Methylation values range 0–1 eStandard error of regression coefficient fUncorrected p value gStatistically significant after Bonferroni multiple-testing correction (1.2E-07) Differentially methylated CpGs in blood DNA in relation to NO2 exposure (FDR < 0.05), ordered by chromosomal location aChromosome bDistance to transcription start site of the mapped gene (base pair) cPhysical position (base pair, National Center for Biotechnology Information human reference genome assembly Build 37.3) dRegression coefficient from statistical model. Covariates age, sex, cigarette smoking status, pack-years of smoking, BMI, COPD status and estimated cell-type proportions were included in the model. The coefficient can be interpreted as the difference in DNA methylation per 1 ppb NO2 exposure. For example, cg16396978 showed 0.8% methylation increase per 1 ppb NO2 exposure increase. Methylation values range 0–1 eStandard error of regression coefficient fUncorrected p value gStatistically significant after Bonferroni multiple-testing correction (1.2E-07) We found numerous DMRs in relation to air pollution exposure: 22 for PM10 alone, 52 for NO2 alone, and 5 for both PM10 and NO2 (Tables 4 and 5). The five DMRs associated with both pollutants were chr6:30297174-30297627 (TRIM39), chr6:31539539-31540750 (LTA), chr8:19459672-19460243 (CSGALNACT1), chr17:80084554-80085082 (CCDC57), and chr20:45179157-45179413 (C20orf123).
Table 4

Differentially methylated regions in blood DNA in relation to PM10 exposure (adjusted P < 0.05 both in DMRcate and in comb-p)

ChraGene (distance to geneb)DMRcatecomb-pMinimum Pg
Start (bpc)End (bp)FDRd#CpGseStart (bp)End (bp)Sidak Pf#CpGs
1 MIB2 154961515500310.0205 (4)0.0090.009
2NOL10 (−22,166)10687583106887269.4E-058 (5)10687962106883172.6E-055 (5)2.5E-04
2 SNED1 2419750352419762440.0066 (5)2419757560.0154 (4)0.005
3 IL20RB 1366766721366768460.0072 (2)0.0112.5E-04
6 TRIM27 28874479288753709.4E-057 (6)288747547.3E-044 (4)0.002
6 TRIM39 30297174302976272.3E-0811 (10)1.1E-078.4E-04
6 LTA 31539539315407501.3E-1119 (13)315404613.4E-0618 (12)4.8E-05
6 TREM1 41254471412549970.0184 (3)412544330.0125 (3)1.7E-04
7 FOXK1 475295147530021.3E-043 (3)7.2E-043.4E-04
8 CSGALNACT1 19459672194602430.0037 (4)0.0017.8E-04
8 PIWIL2 22131675221333561.2E-0415 (6)221325630.02713 (5)3.8E-05
8 KIF13B h 28961315289613562.9E-043 (2)0.0031.4E-06
9 C9orf131 35042344350423950.0032 (2)0.0055.6E-05
10 CAMK1D 12648032126483383.6E-023 (2)126485260.0114 (3)0.002
10 C10orf105 73498624734987660.0033 (2)0.0322.7E-05
10 PTPRE 1297949941297950030.0022 (2)0.0203.9E-05
15 FLJ42289 1008909071008912571.1E-045 (4)1008909630.0144 (3)8.8E-05
17 TNRC6C 76036514760375627.3E-057 (7)760370351.6E-056 (6)0.001
17 CCDC57 80084554800850821.3E-044 (4)1.3E-054.3E-05
19 PRTN3 8461178463540.0103 (3)0.0040.001
19 PRTN3 8479438480710.0054 (4)0.0030.001
19 CALR 13053719130547180.0025 (4)130544270.0144 (3)8.3E-05
19 FBXO17 39465821394667570.0028 (4)0.0046.6E-04
20 STK35 208515720853440.0032 (2)0.0021.7E-05
20 SLPI 43882990438833070.0043 (3)438835468.5E-044 (4)9.7E-04
20 C20orf123 45179157451794132.0E-046 (5)1.4E-042.2E-04
21 C21orf81 15352848153529830.0132 (2)0.0124.7E-04

Blanked cells in “Start,” “End,” and “#CpGs” for comb-p represent the same information compared to results in DMRcate

aChromosome

bMinimum distance to transcription start site of the mapped gene (base pair)

cPhysical position (base pair, National Center for Biotechnology Information human reference genome assembly Build 37.3)

dBenjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate

eNumber of probes in the region (number of probes having uncorrected p value < 0.05)

fP of Sidak multiple-testing correction

gMinimum p value among uncorrected p-values of CpGs in each region. When either start or end positions were different between DMRs from the two DMR approaches, we used results from DMRcate

hRegion including significant (FDR < 0.05) differentially methylated probes from our epigenome-wide association study

Table 5

Differentially methylated regions in blood DNA in relation to NO2 exposure (adjusted p value < 0.05 both in DMRcate and in comb-p)

ChraGene (distance to geneb)DMRcatecomb-pMinimum Pg
Start (bpc)End (bp)FDRd#CpGseStart (bp)End (bp)Sidak Pf#CpGs
1 RUNX3 25291041252919050.0057 (4)252915840.0446 (3)0.001
1 RPS6KA1 26855423268559260.0064 (3)268557650.0093 (3)9.1E-04
1 TFAP2E 36038468360391732.1E-048 (7)360387013.3E-046 (6)0.002
1 ARTN 44398868443998945.6E-0410 (6)443993630.0126 (4)9.8E-04
1 S100A12 h 1533478191533483052.8E-042 (2)0.0052.7E-06
1 S100A14 1535895281535902430.0134 (2)1535897810.0473 (2)0.001
1 S100A13 1535994791536001560.0017 (6)6.6E-040.003
1 ATP8B2 1543001171543002416.9E-042 (2)0.0073.4E-05
1 LAX1 2037339712037345590.0046 (4)0.0020.002
1 C1orf35 2282911182282917050.0236 (5)0.0170.009
2 ALS2CR11 2024837042024845830.00710 (5)2024840200.0087 (5)0.006
3 AMT 49459143494605211.3E-0610 (7)494598558.3E-059 (7)1.6E-04
3 PPM1L 1604750351604753360.0025 (5)0.0030.002
3 B3GALNT1 1608222681608229110.0018 (5)1608227110.0315 (4)0.003
5 MGAT4B 1792307091792311090.0023 (2)0.0062.5E-04
5OR2V1 (− 39,287)1805118221805120700.0122 (2)0.0207.8E-04
6 DUSP22 2916872928237.6E-049 (8)2918822.2E-048 (7)0.005
6 TRIM39 30297174302976271.5E-0611 (9)2.9E-056.7E-04
6 LTA h 31539539315407501.9E-1519 (11)315404614.5E-0718 (11)3.5E-06
6 HLA-DMB 32904074329051901.2E-059 (5)329046210.0015 (3)8.7E-06
6 HLA-DPB2 33083989330854702.5E-0622 (12)330844202.3E-0421 (11)0.006
6 TRAF3IP2 1118872431118878340.0022 (2)0.0263.2E-04
6MLLT4; C6orf1241682278431682287060.0013 (3)1682283740.0042 (2)6.4E-05
7UNCX (− 5426)126618012672288.2E-044 (4)12666160.0013 (3)2.0E-04
7EVX1 (− 2589)27279101272795750.0093 (2)0.0441.8E-04
7 STEAP2 89840396898414351.9E-0513 (5)898412140.00412 (5)2.1E-04
8 CSGALNACT1 19459672194602432.3E-057 (5)6.7E-051.4E-04
8KIAA0146; CEBPD (−19)48648112486497677.6E-087 (7)486488133.9E-096 (6)7.4E-05
8 HEY1 80678770806793140.0024 (3)806789250.0262 (2)4.4E-04
8 NDRG1 1343071051343077282.3E-053 (3)1343075977.4E-042 (2)3.0E-05
10 HK1 71087924710880380.0092 (2)0.0382.0E-04
10 LRRC20 72141375721419247.0E-065 (3)721416250.0074 (3)1.2E-05
10 HTRA1 1242547731242548600.0032 (2)0.0101.1E-04
11IFITM3 (10863)3305363311795.1E-045 (3)0.0011.2E-05
11 LMO2 33913187339140889.3E-045 (4)3.2E-047.2E-04
11ME3 (− 9563)86142104861425875.1E-044 (3)0.0121.0E-04
13PDX1 (− 1903)28491326284922650.0068 (3)28491409284919750.0356 (3)0.001
13 PCDH20 61989203619900256.0E-0512 (8)619897015.3E-048 (7)6.7E-04
13DAOA (−319,060)1057918901057923460.0233 (3)0.0240.003
14DAD1 (−58,286)22974144229755210.0076 (5)229749510.0295 (4)1.2E-04
14 CTSG 25045625250461210.0133 (3)0.0080.002
14 PLD4 h 1053906021053912630.0023 (2)1053910180.0072 (2)3.0E-06
15GATM; LOC145663h45670068456717088.3E-0817 (7)45670478456713471.2E-0414 (7)6.4E-07
15 TNFAIP8L3 51387571513879210.0025 (5)0.0049.7E-04
15 FLJ42289 1008904411008912578.3E-079 (4)1008909071.0E-055 (4)3.3E-05
16TMEM8A; LOC1001343684329734343561.3E-057 (4)4334394338251.1E-045 (4)1.2E-04
16 CLDN9 306205630629750.0018 (6)30623498.0E-047 (6)0.005
17 ALOX12 689873869003566.9E-1016 (12)68998881.9E-0815 (12)0.001
17 WNK4 40932199409329830.00611 (6)409327460.0059 (6)0.011
17 IGF2BP1 47091521470922720.0066 (5)470919780.0425 (4)0.003
17 CCDC57 80084554800850820.0034 (4)0.0010.002
19 ELANE 8555368561074.5E-044 (4)6.1E-052.8E-04
19 FBXO17 39465821394672582.0E-049 (6)394667576.1E-058 (6)0.003
20 C20orf123 45179157451794130.0026 (5)0.0050.002
21 RUNX1 36259067362597970.0055 (4)362594600.0084 (4)0.003
22 PARVG 44568337445688120.0249 (5)0.0430.006
22 PRR5 45125218451260400.0025 (4)451256660.0054 (3)0.002

Blanked cells in “Start,” “End,” and “#CpGs” for comb-p represent the same information compared to results in DMRcate

aChromosome

bMinimum distance to transcription start site of the mapped gene (base pair)

cPhysical position (base pair, National Center for Biotechnology Information human reference genome assembly Build 37.3)

dBenjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate

eNumber of probes in the region (number of probes having uncorrected p value < 0.05)

fP of Sidak multiple-testing correction

gMinimum p value among uncorrected p-values of CpGs in the region. When either start or end positions were different between DMRs from the two DMR approaches, we used results from DMRcate

hRegion including significant (FDR < 0.05) differentially methylated probes from our epigenome-wide association study

Differentially methylated regions in blood DNA in relation to PM10 exposure (adjusted P < 0.05 both in DMRcate and in comb-p) Blanked cells in “Start,” “End,” and “#CpGs” for comb-p represent the same information compared to results in DMRcate aChromosome bMinimum distance to transcription start site of the mapped gene (base pair) cPhysical position (base pair, National Center for Biotechnology Information human reference genome assembly Build 37.3) dBenjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate eNumber of probes in the region (number of probes having uncorrected p value < 0.05) fP of Sidak multiple-testing correction gMinimum p value among uncorrected p-values of CpGs in each region. When either start or end positions were different between DMRs from the two DMR approaches, we used results from DMRcate hRegion including significant (FDR < 0.05) differentially methylated probes from our epigenome-wide association study Differentially methylated regions in blood DNA in relation to NO2 exposure (adjusted p value < 0.05 both in DMRcate and in comb-p) Blanked cells in “Start,” “End,” and “#CpGs” for comb-p represent the same information compared to results in DMRcate aChromosome bMinimum distance to transcription start site of the mapped gene (base pair) cPhysical position (base pair, National Center for Biotechnology Information human reference genome assembly Build 37.3) dBenjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate eNumber of probes in the region (number of probes having uncorrected p value < 0.05) fP of Sidak multiple-testing correction gMinimum p value among uncorrected p-values of CpGs in the region. When either start or end positions were different between DMRs from the two DMR approaches, we used results from DMRcate hRegion including significant (FDR < 0.05) differentially methylated probes from our epigenome-wide association study Although a DMR does not necessarily contain a DMP, one DMR related to PM10 exposure chr8:28961315-28961356 (KIF13B) contains a DMPcg07023317. Four DMRs associated with NO2 exposure contain a DMP: cg02901136 in chr1:153347819-153348305 (S100A12), cg11586857 in chr6:31539539-31540750 (LTA), cg15352829 in chr14:105390602-105391263 (PLD4), and cg04025675 in chr15:45670068-45671708 (GATM; LOC145663). From each DMR method, the top two DMRs based on multiple-testing corrected p values (FDR from DMRcate) were visualized for regional association results including annotation of regulatory genomic regions and pairwise correlation of neighboring probes (Additional file 1: Figure S3). We identified biological networks enriched in our association results based on genes to which either DMPs (FDR < 0.05) or CpGs having the minimum p value within the DMRs (FDR < 0.05 in DMRcate, Sidak adjusted p value < 0.05 in comb-p) were annotated: 138 for PM10 and 288 for NO2. The enriched networks included inflammatory and immune responses and cardiovascular, respiratory, and metabolic diseases (Additional file 2: Table S4 and S5). Cancer, hematological development, immunological and inflammatory diseases pathways overlap between PM10 and NO2 related differential methylation signals (Additional file 1: Figure S4. A). Of the genes associated with both PM10 and NO2 exposure, several contribute to the hematological, immunological, and inflammatory networks: NLRC4, RPTOR, CUX1, S100A12, LTA, and HLA-DMB (Additional file 1: Figure S4. B). Using eFORGE [25], we found some enriched tissue- or cell type-specific histone marks (H3K27me3, H3K36me3, H3K4me3, H3K9me3, and H3K4me1) among the 132 probes associated with air pollution (PM10 or NO2) exposure based on either FDR < 0.05 from the DMP analyses or the minimum p value in the DMRs: 11 DMPs for PM10 exposure alone, 44 DMPs for NO2 exposure alone, 1 DMP for both PM10 and NO2 exposure, 19 probes showing the minimum p value in PM10 exposure related DMRs, 49 probes showing the minimum p value in NO2 exposure related DMRs, and 8 probes showing the minimum p value in DMRs associated with both PM10 and NO2 exposure. Enrichment of H3K4me1 in blood was observed for differential methylation related to PM10 exposure (Additional file 1: Figure S5). With respect to differential methylation related to NO2 exposure, several histone marks were enriched: H3K4me1, H3K27me3, H3K4me3, and H3K9me3 in blood; H3K4me1 and H3K27me3 in embryonic stem (ES) cell; and H3K4me1 in lung (Additional file 1: Figure S6). Several DMPs (FDR < 0.05) in our study were reported to be associated with air pollution exposure in previous genome-wide DNA methylation studies. Of the 27 DMPs associated with NO2 (FDR < 0.05) in our study, 11 were reported to be related to NO2 exposure with the same direction of effects (Table 6) in the LifeLines cohort [7]. The 12 DMPs related to PM10 (FDR < 0.05) in our study were novel, meaning not reported to be associated with this pollutant in either of the two earlier studies [6, 7]. Notably, of the 4662 probes reported to be associated with NO2 exposure in the 2 studies and also available in our data, 26% (N = 1231) showed associations in our study of at least nominal significance (uncorrected p value < 0.05) with the same direction of effects (Additional file 2: Table S6).
Table 6

Look-up analysis of CpGs associated with NO2 exposure in the Korean COPD Cohort (FDR < 0.05) in a previous publication from the LifeLines Cohort from the Netherlands

ChraGene (distance to geneb)ProbeThe Korean COPD studyThe LifeLines cohort study [7]
Coefc (per 1 ppb NO2) ± SEd P e Coef (per 10 μg/m3 NO2) ± SE P
1MAN1C1 (− 7282)cg163969780.008 ± 0.0023.9E-060.013 ± 0.0045.4E-04
1 S100A12 cg029011360.012 ± 0.0022.7E-060.027 ± 0.0063.1E-05
2 PLEKHM3 cg099509200.013 ± 0.0032.7E-070.024 ± 0.0073.4E-04
3 AP2M1 cg173434510.009 ± 0.0023.3E-060.020 ± 0.0051.4E-05
5 ZNF366 cg217704620.008 ± 0.0024.7E-060.015 ± 0.0044.1E-05
10 ZNF438 cg105750750.014 ± 0.0032.0E-060.026 ± 0.0072.7E-04
11 TMEM138 cg033707520.010 ± 0.0025.5E-060.028 ± 0.0082.4E-04
11 SORL1 cg175109570.011 ± 0.0025.1E-060.023 ± 0.0074.7E-04
12 STK38L cg051719370.010 ± 0.0021.1E-080.036 ± 0.0094.0E-05
14 OTUB2 cg069926880.013 ± 0.0033.3E-060.026 ± 0.0071.4E-04
21 MORC3 cg012610130.010 ± 0.0024.1E-060.023 ± 0.0063.3E-04

aChromosome

bDistance to transcription start site of the mapped gene (base pair)

cRegression coefficient from statistical model

dStandard error of regression coefficient

eStatistical significance from statistical model

Look-up analysis of CpGs associated with NO2 exposure in the Korean COPD Cohort (FDR < 0.05) in a previous publication from the LifeLines Cohort from the Netherlands aChromosome bDistance to transcription start site of the mapped gene (base pair) cRegression coefficient from statistical model dStandard error of regression coefficient eStatistical significance from statistical model From the analyses linking DNA methylation and gene expression in the BIOS data, we observed correlations of methylation levels of DMPs with gene expression levels of nearby (spanning a 250 bp window) transcripts (uncorrected p value < 0.05). Notably, of the 56 DMPs (FDR < 0.05), 70% (N = 39) were significantly related to gene expression of nearby transcripts (Additional file 2: Table S7).

Discussion

To our knowledge, this is the first study of genome-wide DNA methylation in relation to long-term ambient air pollution exposure, both PM10 and NO2, in an Asian population. We identified many differentially methylated signals—both individual probes and regions—related to long-term air pollution exposure in blood. We also replicated, in our Asian population, findings from earlier studies in European populations. Of our genome-wide significant findings, some provide the first replication of an earlier report from a European population [7] while others are novel. Notably, methylation levels of many DMPs were associated with gene expression levels of nearby transcripts, providing a link between ambient air pollution exposure-related differential methylation and gene expression. Some of our DMPs annotated to genetic loci reported in published genome-wide association studies of various health outcomes that have been related to air pollution exposure. Differential methylation of cg11586857 related to both pollutants annotated to LTA in which an earlier study identified rs1799964 (p value = 3.3E-07) to be associated with blood lipid levels [28]. Cg06992688 associated with exposure to both air pollutants resides in OTUB2, a nearby gene of three genetic variants related to lung function with p values around 1.0E-04 [29]. In addition, cg05284742 related to NO2 exposure is located in ITPK1; this gene contains rs2295394 (p value = 2.3E-16) associated with myocardial infarction in Asian populations [30]. Knowledge-based pathway analyses and enrichment analyses of epigenetic elements using publicly available data provided biological implication of our study findings. Enrichment of networks, such as inflammatory and immune responses and cardiovascular, pulmonary and metabolic diseases, in our results supports previous findings of air pollution exposure and the identified disease associations. Several enriched histone marks in relevant tissue and cell types (embryonic stem cell, blood and lung) suggest additional biological relevance of our differential methylation signals. We found five studies examining associations of DNA methylation, measured using Illumina’s Infinium 450K array, with ambient air pollution exposure in either children or adults [5–7, 31, 32]. Of the five, one reported DMPs associated with short-term exposure to particulate matter < 2.5 μm (PM2.5) [31]. Chi and colleagues [5] measured DNA methylation using the 450K array but they analyzed only a subset of probes for associations with PM2.5 and oxides of nitrogen (NOx). Gruzieva and colleagues [32] found differential methylation in children in relation to prenatal NO2 exposure. The remaining two analyzed long-term exposure to pollutants including both PM10 and NO2 for associations with genome-wide DNA methylation in adults [6, 7]. Notably, differential methylation signals in our study provide the first replication of findings from the two studies in European adults [6, 7], suggesting similar relationships between ambient air pollution exposure and DNA methylation between European and Asian populations. In this study, we adjusted for COPD status because it may confound associations between air pollution exposure and methylation. We also explored possible effect measure modification by the disease status in a sensitivity analysis. Of the 45 CpGs related to NO2, three (cg16649791, cg13559144, and cg23326536), showed an interaction term that was nominally significant (Additional file 2: Table S8); none of the 12 PM10-related CpGs showed statistically significant interaction. Our study has limitations and strengths. Limitations include the lack of a replication population. However, we were able to compare our findings against published lists of DMPs at genome-wide significance from two earlier studies in European populations [6, 7]. With respect to the exposure assessment, we used exposure values at residential addresses estimated from a national-scale prediction model rather than an area-specific model which could not be developed because of the limited number of monitoring sites (< 10) in the areas where our study participants resided. However, in previous US studies, estimates of PM2.5 for specific areas using national models showed association results comparable to those from area-specific models [33, 34]. Third, we used annual average concentrations estimated for 2010 and participant addresses at baseline visits in 2012 without incorporating participants’ previous exposure to air pollution. The year 2010 was used in the model because of the increased number of available monitoring sites and temporally aligned geographic data. As spatial distribution of air pollution should be relatively consistent over years in our study area with stable environments, the impact of using temporally limited exposure and address information on our methylation analysis could be small. Lastly, we have a relatively small sample size compared to earlier genome-wide methylation studies of air pollution exposure. The study has a number of important strengths. Participants reported residing in the same residential areas for 50 years (SD = 21) on average. This high level of residential stability improved our ability to estimate associations with long-term air pollution exposure. Further, we have included both PM10 and NO2 exposure so that we can examine whether there are common or unique differential methylation signals related to the two pollutants. In addition, we followed up our DMPs by examining relationships with gene expression and found that a majority were related to gene expression, suggesting functional importance of the associations. Further, we conducted pathway analyses and enrichment analyses of tissue- and cell-type specific histone marks to better understand the biological implication of the differentially methylated signals that we observed. Last, we identified DMRs by combining association signals at neighboring CpGs using two different methods in addition to identifying DMPs.

Conclusions

We identified differential DNA methylation signals in blood associated with long-term ambient air pollution exposure and linked differential methylation to differential gene expression. Replication of many of our results from an Asian population, in a European population, suggests similar influences of air pollution exposure across ancestry. Our CpGs and regions showing differential methylation are potential biomarkers for long-term ambient air pollution exposure. These findings may better inform mechanisms linking air pollution exposure to adverse health outcomes. Figure S1. Workflow of the epigenome-wide association study of long-term ambient air pollution exposure. Figure S2. Manhattan and quantile-quantile plots. Figure S3. Regional visualization of the association of air pollution exposure (PM10 and NO2) with blood DNA methylation. Figure S4. Visualization of pathway analysis results. Figure S5. Tissue- and cell-type specific enrichment pattern in CpGs significantly associated (FDR < 0.05) with PM10 exposure. Figure S6. Tissue- and cell-type specific enrichment pattern in CpGs significantly associated (FDR < 0.05) with NO2 exposure (DOCX 6165 kb) Table S1. CpG probe filtering criteria in the 450 K array. Table S2. CpGs included in the top five differentially methylated regions in relation to PM10 from each analysis: DMRcate and comb-p (ordered by software and chromosomal location). Table S3. CpGs included in the top five differentially methylated regions in relation to NO2 from each analysis: DMRcate and comb-p (ordered by software and chromosomal location). Table S4. Enriched networks in genes related to PM10 exposure. Table S5. Enriched networks in genes related to NO2 exposure. Table S6. Look-up analysis of CpGs associated with NO2 exposure (FDR < 0.05 in earlier epigenome-wide association studies) in the Korean COPD cohort, sorted by uncorrected P in the Korean COPD Cohort. Table S7. Associations between methylation levels at air pollution associated CpGs (FDR < 0.05) and the expression levels of nearby genes: cis-eQTMs. Table S8. Differential methylation of an interaction between NO2 exposure and COPD status (XLSX 115 kb) Table S9. Differential methylation in relation to PM10 exposure. Table S10. Differential methylation in relation to NO2 exposure (XLSX 46770 kb)
  30 in total

1.  The sva package for removing batch effects and other unwanted variation in high-throughput experiments.

Authors:  Jeffrey T Leek; W Evan Johnson; Hilary S Parker; Andrew E Jaffe; John D Storey
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2012-01-17       Impact factor: 6.937

2.  ChAMP: 450k Chip Analysis Methylation Pipeline.

Authors:  Tiffany J Morris; Lee M Butcher; Andrew Feber; Andrew E Teschendorff; Ankur R Chakravarthy; Tomasz K Wojdacz; Stephan Beck
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2013-12-12       Impact factor: 6.937

3.  Air Pollution and Cardiovascular Disease: A Review.

Authors:  Vivek Patel; Neha Kantipudi; Graham Jones; Adrian Upton; Markad V Kamath
Journal:  Crit Rev Biomed Eng       Date:  2016

4.  De novo identification of differentially methylated regions in the human genome.

Authors:  Timothy J Peters; Michael J Buckley; Aaron L Statham; Ruth Pidsley; Katherine Samaras; Reginald V Lord; Susan J Clark; Peter L Molloy
Journal:  Epigenetics Chromatin       Date:  2015-01-27       Impact factor: 4.954

5.  Controlling bias and inflation in epigenome- and transcriptome-wide association studies using the empirical null distribution.

Authors:  Maarten van Iterson; Erik W van Zwet; Bastiaan T Heijmans
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2017-01-27       Impact factor: 13.583

6.  DNA methylation and exposure to ambient air pollution in two prospective cohorts.

Authors:  Michelle Plusquin; Florence Guida; Silvia Polidoro; Roel Vermeulen; Ole Raaschou-Nielsen; Gianluca Campanella; Gerard Hoek; Soterios A Kyrtopoulos; Panagiotis Georgiadis; Alessio Naccarati; Carlotta Sacerdote; Vittorio Krogh; H Bas Bueno-de-Mesquita; W M Monique Verschuren; Sergi Sayols-Baixeras; Tommaso Panni; Annette Peters; Dennie G A J Hebels; Jos Kleinjans; Paolo Vineis; Marc Chadeau-Hyam
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2017-08-24       Impact factor: 9.621

7.  DNA methylation arrays as surrogate measures of cell mixture distribution.

Authors:  Eugene Andres Houseman; William P Accomando; Devin C Koestler; Brock C Christensen; Carmen J Marsit; Heather H Nelson; John K Wiencke; Karl T Kelsey
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2012-05-08       Impact factor: 3.169

8.  Meta-analyses of genome-wide association studies identify multiple loci associated with pulmonary function.

Authors:  Dana B Hancock; Mark Eijgelsheim; Jemma B Wilk; Sina A Gharib; Laura R Loehr; Kristin D Marciante; Nora Franceschini; Yannick M T A van Durme; Ting-Hsu Chen; R Graham Barr; Matthew B Schabath; David J Couper; Guy G Brusselle; Bruce M Psaty; Cornelia M van Duijn; Jerome I Rotter; André G Uitterlinden; Albert Hofman; Naresh M Punjabi; Fernando Rivadeneira; Alanna C Morrison; Paul L Enright; Kari E North; Susan R Heckbert; Thomas Lumley; Bruno H C Stricker; George T O'Connor; Stephanie J London
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2009-12-13       Impact factor: 41.307

9.  Genome-wide signatures of differential DNA methylation in pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

Authors:  Jessica Nordlund; Christofer L Bäcklin; Per Wahlberg; Stephan Busche; Eva C Berglund; Maija-Leena Eloranta; Trond Flaegstad; Erik Forestier; Britt-Marie Frost; Arja Harila-Saari; Mats Heyman; Olafur G Jónsson; Rolf Larsson; Josefine Palle; Lars Rönnblom; Kjeld Schmiegelow; Daniel Sinnett; Stefan Söderhäll; Tomi Pastinen; Mats G Gustafsson; Gudmar Lönnerholm; Ann-Christine Syvänen
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2013-09-24       Impact factor: 13.583

10.  Adult lung function and long-term air pollution exposure. ESCAPE: a multicentre cohort study and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Martin Adam; Tamara Schikowski; Anne Elie Carsin; Yutong Cai; Benedicte Jacquemin; Margaux Sanchez; Andrea Vierkötter; Alessandro Marcon; Dirk Keidel; Dorothee Sugiri; Zaina Al Kanani; Rachel Nadif; Valérie Siroux; Rebecca Hardy; Diana Kuh; Thierry Rochat; Pierre-Olivier Bridevaux; Marloes Eeftens; Ming-Yi Tsai; Simona Villani; Harish Chandra Phuleria; Matthias Birk; Josef Cyrys; Marta Cirach; Audrey de Nazelle; Mark J Nieuwenhuijsen; Bertil Forsberg; Kees de Hoogh; Christophe Declerq; Roberto Bono; Pavilio Piccioni; Ulrich Quass; Joachim Heinrich; Deborah Jarvis; Isabelle Pin; Rob Beelen; Gerard Hoek; Bert Brunekreef; Christian Schindler; Jordi Sunyer; Ursula Krämer; Francine Kauffmann; Anna L Hansell; Nino Künzli; Nicole Probst-Hensch
Journal:  Eur Respir J       Date:  2014-09-05       Impact factor: 16.671

View more
  19 in total

1.  Ambient air pollution and daily hospital admissions for respiratory system-related diseases in a heavy polluted city in Northeast China.

Authors:  Qing Chang; Hehua Zhang; Yuhong Zhao
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2020-01-13       Impact factor: 4.223

2.  Respiratory Health Effects of Exposure to Ambient Particulate Matter and Bioaerosols.

Authors:  Savannah M Mack; Amy K Madl; Kent E Pinkerton
Journal:  Compr Physiol       Date:  2019-12-18       Impact factor: 9.090

3.  Gaseous air pollutants and DNA methylation in a methylome-wide association study of an ethnically and environmentally diverse population of U.S. adults.

Authors:  Katelyn M Holliday; Rahul Gondalia; Antoine Baldassari; Anne E Justice; James D Stewart; Duanping Liao; Jeff D Yanosky; Kristina M Jordahl; Parveen Bhatti; Themistocles L Assimes; James S Pankow; Weihua Guan; Myriam Fornage; Jan Bressler; Kari E North; Karen N Conneely; Yun Li; Lifang Hou; Pantel S Vokonas; Cavin K Ward-Caviness; Rory Wilson; Kathrin Wolf; Melanie Waldenberger; Josef Cyrys; Annette Peters; H Marike Boezen; Judith M Vonk; Sergi Sayols-Baixeras; Mikyeong Lee; Andrea A Baccarelli; Eric A Whitsel
Journal:  Environ Res       Date:  2022-04-30       Impact factor: 8.431

4.  Epigenome-wide analysis of long-term air pollution exposure and DNA methylation in monocytes: results from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis.

Authors:  Gloria C Chi; Yongmei Liu; James W MacDonald; Lindsay M Reynolds; Daniel A Enquobahrie; Annette L Fitzpatrick; Kathleen F Kerr; Matthew J Budoff; Su-In Lee; David Siscovick; Joel D Kaufman
Journal:  Epigenetics       Date:  2021-04-05       Impact factor: 4.528

5.  The Migratory Properties and Numbers of T Regulatory Cell Subsets in Circulation Are Differentially Influenced by Season and Are Associated With Vitamin D Status.

Authors:  Abigail A Lamikanra; Hoi Pat Tsang; Shaza Elsiddig; Michael Spencer; Elinor Curnow; Robert Danby; David J Roberts
Journal:  Front Immunol       Date:  2020-05-19       Impact factor: 7.561

Review 6.  The etiologic origins for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Authors:  Xinwei Huang; Xi Mu; Li Deng; Aili Fu; Endong Pu; Tao Tang; Xiangyang Kong
Journal:  Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis       Date:  2019-05-27

Review 7.  Particulate matter exposure shapes DNA methylation through the lifespan.

Authors:  L Ferrari; M Carugno; V Bollati
Journal:  Clin Epigenetics       Date:  2019-08-30       Impact factor: 6.551

Review 8.  Cumulative Lifetime Burden of Cardiovascular Disease From Early Exposure to Air Pollution.

Authors:  Juyong Brian Kim; Mary Prunicki; Francois Haddad; Christopher Dant; Vanitha Sampath; Rushali Patel; Eric Smith; Cezmi Akdis; John Balmes; Michael P Snyder; Joseph C Wu; Kari C Nadeau
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2020-03-15       Impact factor: 5.501

9.  Air pollution, particulate matter composition and methylation-based biologic age.

Authors:  Alexandra J White; Jacob K Kresovich; Joshua P Keller; Zongli Xu; Joel D Kaufman; Clarice R Weinberg; Jack A Taylor; Dale P Sandler
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2019-08-03       Impact factor: 9.621

10.  Genome-Wide DNA Methylation in Peripheral Blood and Long-Term Exposure to Source-Specific Transportation Noise and Air Pollution: The SAPALDIA Study.

Authors:  Ikenna C Eze; Ayoung Jeong; Emmanuel Schaffner; Faisal I Rezwan; Akram Ghantous; Maria Foraster; Danielle Vienneau; Florian Kronenberg; Zdenko Herceg; Paolo Vineis; Mark Brink; Jean-Marc Wunderli; Christian Schindler; Christian Cajochen; Martin Röösli; John W Holloway; Medea Imboden; Nicole Probst-Hensch
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2020-06-01       Impact factor: 9.031

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.