| Literature DB >> 31811260 |
Paul M Thompson1, Gunter Schumann2, Tianye Jia2,3,4, Congying Chu2, Yun Liu5, Jenny van Dongen6, Evangelos Papastergios2, Nicola J Armstrong7, Mark E Bastin8, Tania Carrillo-Roa9, Anouk den Braber6, Mathew Harris10, Rick Jansen11, Jingyu Liu12, Michelle Luciano13, Anil P S Ori14, Roberto Roiz Santiañez15,16, Barbara Ruggeri2, Daniil Sarkisyan17, Jean Shin18, Kim Sungeun19,20, Diana Tordesillas Gutiérrez15,21, Dennis Van't Ent6, David Ames22,23, Eric Artiges24,25,26, Georgy Bakalkin17, Tobias Banaschewski27, Arun L W Bokde28, Henry Brodaty29,30, Uli Bromberg31, Rachel Brouwer32, Christian Büchel31, Erin Burke Quinlan2, Wiepke Cahn32, Greig I de Zubicaray33, Stefan Ehrlich34, Tomas J Ekström35, Herta Flor36,37, Juliane H Fröhner38, Vincent Frouin39, Hugh Garavan40, Penny Gowland41, Andreas Heinz42,43, Jacqueline Hoare44, Bernd Ittermann45, Neda Jahanshad1, Jiyang Jiang29, John B Kwok46,47, Nicholas G Martin48, Jean-Luc Martinot24,25,49, Karen A Mather29,50, Katie L McMahon51, Allan F McRae52, Frauke Nees27,36, Dimitri Papadopoulos Orfanos39, Tomáš Paus53, Luise Poustka54, Philipp G Sämann9, Peter R Schofield50,55, Michael N Smolka38, Dan J Stein44,56, Lachlan T Strike57, Jalmar Teeuw14,32, Anbupalam Thalamuthu29,50, Julian Trollor29,58, Henrik Walter42,43, Joanna M Wardlaw59,60, Wei Wen29, Robert Whelan61, Liana G Apostolova62,63,64,65, Elisabeth B Binder9, Dorret I Boomsma6, Vince Calhoun12,66, Benedicto Crespo-Facorro15, Ian J Deary13, Hilleke Hulshoff Pol32, Roel A Ophoff32,67, Zdenka Pausova18, Perminder S Sachdev29,68, Andrew Saykin69, Margaret J Wright48, Sylvane Desrivières70.
Abstract
DNA methylation, which is modulated by both genetic factors and environmental exposures, may offer a unique opportunity to discover novel biomarkers of disease-related brain phenotypes, even when measured in other tissues than brain, such as blood. A few studies of small sample sizes have revealed associations between blood DNA methylation and neuropsychopathology, however, large-scale epigenome-wide association studies (EWAS) are needed to investigate the utility of DNA methylation profiling as a peripheral marker for the brain. Here, in an analysis of eleven international cohorts, totalling 3337 individuals, we report epigenome-wide meta-analyses of blood DNA methylation with volumes of the hippocampus, thalamus and nucleus accumbens (NAcc)-three subcortical regions selected for their associations with disease and heritability and volumetric variability. Analyses of individual CpGs revealed genome-wide significant associations with hippocampal volume at two loci. No significant associations were found for analyses of thalamus and nucleus accumbens volumes. Cluster-based analyses revealed additional differentially methylated regions (DMRs) associated with hippocampal volume. DNA methylation at these loci affected expression of proximal genes involved in learning and memory, stem cell maintenance and differentiation, fatty acid metabolism and type-2 diabetes. These DNA methylation marks, their interaction with genetic variants and their impact on gene expression offer new insights into the relationship between epigenetic variation and brain structure and may provide the basis for biomarker discovery in neurodegeneration and neuropsychiatric conditions.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31811260 PMCID: PMC8550939 DOI: 10.1038/s41380-019-0605-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mol Psychiatry ISSN: 1359-4184 Impact factor: 13.437
Fig. 1a Manhattan plots (left) summarizing the association results for the hippocampus, thalamus and NAcc volumes. The red and blue lines represent the genome-wide FDR significance level (corrected for three brain regions) and non-corrected FDR significance level, respectively. Quantile–quantile plots (right) of multivariate GWAS of all traits (volumes of the hippocampus, thalamus and accumbens) show that the observed P values only deviate from the expected null distribution at the most significant values, indicating no undue inflation of the results. b Forest plots show the effect (i.e. correlations between CpG methylation and hippocampus volume) at each of the contributing sites to the meta-analysis. The size of the dot is proportional to the sample size, the correlation level is shown on the x-axis, and confidence interval is represented by the line. c Pie chart of distribution of the 340 CpGs associated with hippocampus volume at P < 5 × 10−4. The chart indicates the proportion of these CpG sites that are unique to the hippocampus or that are also associated (nominally, at p < 0.05) with the two other volumetric phenotypes investigated. In general, CpGs that influence other phenotypes than hippocampus volume have higher effect on thalamus than on NAcc volume
List of DMRs identified from the the hippocampus EWAS meta-analysis results
| Chrom no. | Start | End | n_probes | z_p | z_sidak_p | Nearest gene | Distance to TSS | Other gene | Distance to TSS | Number of cohorts individually identifying the DMR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | ||||||||||
| chr7 | 149,569,715 | 149,570,184 | 12 | 4.34E−08 | 3.88E−05 | ATP6V0E2 | −107 | 1 | ||
| | ||||||||||
| chr14 | 23,623,480 | 23,623,936 | 6 | 1.24E−07 | 1.14E−04 | CEBPE | −34,883 | SLC7A8 | 29,141 | 0 |
| | ||||||||||
| chr3 | 130,745,442 | 130,745,686 | 10 | 4.63E−07 | 7.97E−04 | NEK11 | −163 | ASTE1 | 82 | 0 |
| chr2 | 161,504,772 | 161,504,906 | 3 | 2.65E−07 | 8.30E−04 | TANK | −511,969 | RBMS1 | −154,534 | 0 |
| chr7 | 130,626,376 | 130,626,560 | 3 | 3.83E−07 | 8.73E−04 | MKLN1 | −386,151 | KLF14 | −207,580 | 0 |
| chr17 | 79,053,905 | 79,054,074 | 3 | 3.80E−07 | 9.44E−04 | BAIAP2 | 45,028 | AATK | 85,827 | 0 |
| chr8 | 66,472,662 | 66,472,956 | 3 | 9.33E−07 | 1.33E−03 | CYP7B1 | −761,491 | ARMC1 | 73,633 | 0 |
| chr7 | 29,605,808 | 29,606,350 | 4 | 2.04E−06 | 1.58E−03 | WIPF3 | –268,262 | PRR15 | 2652 | 0 |
| chr17 | 80,195,101 | 80,195,403 | 3 | 1.51E−06 | 2.09E−03 | SLC16A3 | 3689 | CSNK1D | 36,355 | 0 |
| chr22 | 43,739,992 | 43,740,231 | 3 | 1.48E−06 | 2.59E–03 | SCUBE1 | −718 | 0 | ||
| chr4 | 3,365,280 | 3,365,443 | 4 | 2.12E−06 | 5.44E−03 | HGFAC | –78,252 | RGS12 | 49,488 | 0 |
| chr17 | 81,028,481 | 81,028,497 | 2 | 3.24E−07 | 8.47E–03 | B3GNTL1 | –18,803 | METRNL | −9078 | 0 |
| chr2 | 3,699,195 | 3,699,354 | 4 | 5.24E−06 | 1.37E−02 | ALLC | −6510 | COLEC11 | 49,779 | 0 |
| chr22 | 43,525,330 | 43,525,432 | 2 | 3.86E−06 | 1.58E−02 | MCAT | 14,019 | BIK | 18,627 | 0 |
| chr22 | 38,506,589 | 38,506,782 | 4 | 1.09E−05 | 2.34E−02 | BAIAP2L2 | −9 | 0 | ||
| chr2 | 236,100,688 | 236,100,752 | 3 | 4.77E−06 | 3.08E−02 | AGAP1 | −302,031 | SH3BP4 | 213,391 | 0 |
| chr7 | 155,150,681 | 155,150,794 | 2 | 9.95E−06 | 3.63E−02 | EN2 | −100,086 | INSIG1 | 61,252 | 0 |
Bold values represent 3 DMRs taken forward for further analyses because, in addition to being identified from the meta-analysis, they were also identified in at least two cohorts, when analyses were run in each cohort separately.
Fig. 2Analyses of top CpG (a) and DMRs (b) demonstrate effects of DNA methylation on gene expression in 631 subjects from the IMAGEN sample. In the DMR analyses, linear regression analyses tested relationship between methylation at the listed DMR and expression of HHEX, MTX3, PAPD4, CMYA5 and CPT1B, controlling for methylation at the other two DMRs. Results represent unstandardized coefficients ± S.E.M. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001