| Literature DB >> 32189431 |
Karissa M Dieseldorff Jones1, Cynthia Vied2, Isela C Valera3, P Bryant Chase4, Michelle S Parvatiyar3, Jose R Pinto1.
Abstract
Heart disease remains the number one killer of women in the US. Nonetheless, studies in women and female animal models continue to be underrepresented in cardiac research. Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), the most commonly inherited cardiac disorder, has been tied to sarcomeric protein variants in both sexes. Among the susceptible genes, TNNC1-encoding cardiac troponin C (cTnC)-causes a substantial HCM phenotype in mice. Mice bearing an HCM-associated cTnC-A8V point mutation exhibited a significant decrease in stroke volume and left ventricular diameter and volume. Importantly, isovolumetric contraction time was significantly higher for female HCM mice. We utilized a transcriptomic approach to investigate the basis underlying the sexual dimorphism observed in the cardiac physiology of adult male and female HCM mice. RNA sequencing revealed several altered canonical pathways within the HCM mice versus WT groups including an increase in eukaryotic initiation factor 2 signaling, integrin-linked kinase signaling, actin nucleation by actin-related protein-Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome family protein complex, regulation of actin-based motility by Rho kinase, vitamin D receptor/retinoid X receptor activation, and glutathione redox reaction pathways. In contrast, valine degradation, tricarboxylic acid cycle II, methionine degradation, and inositol phosphate compound pathways were notably down-regulated in HCM mice. These down-regulated pathways may be reduced in response to altered energetics in the hypertrophied hearts and may represent conservation of energy as the heart is compensating to meet increased contractile demands. HCM male versus female mice followed similar trends of the canonical pathways altered between HCM and WT. In addition, seven of the differentially expressed genes in both WT and HCM male versus female comparisons swapped directions in fold-change between the sexes. These findings suggest a sexually-dimorphic HCM phenotype due to a sarcomeric mutation and pinpoint several key targetable pathways and genes that may provide the means to alleviate the more severe decline in female cardiac function.Entities:
Keywords: cardiac troponin; hypertrophic cardiomyopathy; sex differences; transcriptomics
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32189431 PMCID: PMC7081104 DOI: 10.14814/phy2.14396
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Physiol Rep ISSN: 2051-817X
FIGURE 1Echocardiography. (a) Representative echocardiography left ventricle images taken from the Vevo 2100 1.6.0 workstation of the motion mode. (b–f) Dot plot representations of stroke volume, diastolic diameter (diameter; d), diastolic volume (volume; d), relative wall thickness (RWT) measurements, and isovolumetric contraction time (IVCT) for HCM versus. WT of each sex. Mean for each group is depicted as a horizontal line. HCM mice are represented with circles. WT mice are represented with black triangles. Symbols for males are blue and females are pink. Statistical analysis was performed using ANOVA with the least significant difference post hoc test. Data are shown as individual points with the mean of each group represented as a solid black line. (HCM males n = 14–15; HCM females n = 7–11; WT male n = 14–15; WT female n = 13–15). *p < .05 versus WT‐male within age timepoint. † p < .05 versus WT‐Female within age timepoint. ‡ p < .05 versus HCM‐male within age timepoint
Summary of echocardiography parameters
| HCM | WT | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male ( | Female ( | Male ( | Female ( | |
| Echo parameter | ||||
| IVCT (ms) | 15.02 ± 0.88 | 21.83 ± 2.45 | 17.96 ± 1.26 | 18.30 ± 1.20 |
| IVRT (ms) | 22.52 ± 1.29 | 24.88 ± 1.04 | 20.64 ± 1.41 | 17.33 ± 0.97 |
| MV E/A | 1.57 ± 0.21 | 1.12 ± 0.18 | 1.49 ± 0.08 | 1.45 ± 0.07 |
| LVID;d (mm) | 2.78 ± 0.12 | 2.72 ± 0.08 | 3.41 ± 0.13 | 3.45 ± 0.11 |
| LVID;s (mm) | 1.62 ± 0.13 | 1.46 ± 0.10 | 2.16 ± 0.17 | 1.97 ± 0.11 |
| LVPW;d (mm) | 0.98 ± 0.09 | 1.03 ± 0.08 | 0.89 ± 0.04 | 0.87 ± 0.03 |
| LVPW;s (mm) | 1.29 ± 0.09 | 1.37 ± 0.06 | 1.24 ± 0.06 | 1.25 ± 0.05 |
| CO (mL/min) | 13.10 ± 0.99 | 10.17 ± 0.75 | 17.23 ± 1.11 | 17.91 ± 1.07 |
| Diameter;d (mm) | 2.86 ± 0.07 | 2.73 ± 0.09 | 3.44 ± 0.12 | 3.44 ± 0.10 |
| Diameter;s (mm) | 1.48 ± 0.10 | 1.48 ± 0.10 | 2.05 ± 0.18 | 2.02 ± 0.12 |
| EF (%) | 79.60 ± 2.14 | 78.73 ± 2.94 | 70.38 ± 3.14 | 74.56 ± 2.09 |
| FS (%) | 47.74 ± 2.38 | 46.72 ± 2.84 | 40.34 ± 2.95 | 43.18 ± 2.07 |
| LV mass (mg) | 102.19 ± 9.89 | 97.74 ± 6.52 | 120.05 ± 9.50 | 117.92 ± 5.76 |
| SV (µL) | 25.18 ± 1.37 | 21.87 ± 1.67 | 34.09 ± 1.81 | 35.49 ± 2.05 |
| V;d (µL) | 31.69 ± 1.98 | 28.25 ± 2.12 | 50.12 ± 3.86 | 49.73 ± 3.50 |
| V;s (µL) | 6.51 ± 0.96 | 6.38 ± 1.12 | 16.03 ± 2.41 | 14.24 ± 1.87 |
| RWT (%) | 6.96 ± 0.69 | 7.71 ± 0.72 | 5.30 ± 0.33 | 5.17 ± 0.26 |
| HR (bpm) | 521.69 ± 28.50 | 468.17 ± 13.74 | 502.80 ± 10.15 | 504.09 ± 7.62 |
Data are presented as AVG ± SEM.
Abbreviation: IVCT, isovolumetric contraction time; IVRT, isovolumetric relaxation time; MV E/A, mitral valve early‐peak‐flow to atrial‐peak‐flow velocity ratio; LVID;d/s, diastolic/systolic left ventricular internal diameter; LVPW;d/s, diastolic/systolic left ventricular posterior wall thickness; CO, cardiac output; Diameter;d/s, diastolic/systolic diameter; EF, ejection fraction; FS, fractional shortening; LV Mass, left ventricular mass; SV, stroke volume; V;d/s, diastolic/systolic diameter; RWT, relative wall thickness; and HR, heart rate. RWT was calculated as follows: ([(2 × LVPW;d)/(10xDia;d)]×100). ANOVA with least significant difference post hoc test.
p < .05 versus WT‐male within age timepoint.
p < .05 versus WT‐female within age timepoint.
p < .05 versus HCM‐male within age timepoint.
FIGURE 2Cardiac morphology and size. (a) Representative cardiac images with Masson Trichrome staining. (b) Dot plot representation of heart weight for each mouse (above). Dot plot representation of heart weight normalized to tibia length (HW/TL) ratios for each mouse (below). The mean for each group is depicted as a horizontal line. HCM mice are represented with circles and WT mice are represented with triangles. Symbols for males are blue and females are pink. HCM males n = 8, HCM females n = 7, WT males n = 6, and WT females n = 7. There was no statistical significance among the groups. Statistical analysis was performed using ANOVA with the least significant difference post hoc test
FIGURE 3Principal component analysis. Normalized and variance stabilized transcript expression data from the top 500 most variant transcripts in the dataset were used to generate this PCA plot. Each axis displays the percent variance by each principal component. Females are represented in pink, males are represented in blue, HCM mice are represented as circles, and WT mice are represented as triangles
FIGURE 4Sex‐specific patterns in transcriptome regulation. The hierarchical clustering and heat map of the normalized expression values of 25 most upregulated (top section) and 25 most downregulated (bottom section) genes. Upregulated expression in the HCM mouse compared to WT is represented as green and downregulated expression as purple. Mouse IDs with a noted HCM.M are HCM males; HCM.F, HCM females; WT.M, WT males; and WT.F, WT females
FIGURE 5IPA differential expression analysis. The most significantly altered canonical pathways for the HCM versus WT comparison are represented in the bar graph. Positive z‐scores (upregulation) are represented in purple and negative z‐scores (downregulation) are shown in green. These results were filtered to only display the pathways that exhibited a greater than ± 2 z‐score of significance
FIGURE 6Sex differences at transcriptomic level. (a) Venn diagram representing genes that were differentially expressed in both WT and HCM male versus. female comparisons. (b) Venn diagram further dividing differentially expressed genes that were up‐ or down‐regulated in both the WT and HCM male versus female comparisons. (c) Representative bar graph exhibiting genes with opposing expression values due to HCM. The bars represent the fold change of the differentially expressed genes that were sex biased. Females are represented in pink and males in blue
FIGURE 7Upregulated genes in HCM female versus male comparisons. (a) GO Enrichment Treemaps for upregulated genes in the HCM females compared to HCM males. Boxes represent biological processes enriched with differentially expressed genes. Boxed numbers contain the following terms: 1. ribosome biogenesis; 2. ribonucleoprotein complex subunit organization; 3. ribosomal small subunit assembly; 4. hydrogen ion transmembrane transport. (b) GO Enrichment Treemaps for upregulated genes in the HCM females compared to HCM males. Boxes represent cellular components enriched with differentially expressed genes. Boxed numbers contain the following terms: 1. mitochondrial respiratory chain; 2. mitochondrial protein complex; 3. spliceosomal tri‐snRNP complex; 4. U12‐type spliceosomal complex; 5. membrane protein complex; 6. small nuclear ribonucleoprotein complex; 7. spliceosomal complex; 8. endoplasmic reticulum lumen; 9. endoplasmic reticulum chaperone complex; 10. Polysome; 11. cytochrome complex; 12. myosin filament; 13. NADH dehydrogenase complex; 14. methylosome; 15. aggresome; 16. dendrite membrane. (c) GO Enrichment Treemaps for upregulated genes in the HCM females compared to HCM males. Boxes represent molecular function enriched with differentially expressed genes. Boxed numbers contain the following terms: 1. hydrogen ion transmembrane transporter activity; 2. ubiquinol‐cytochrome‐c reductase activity; 3. glycosaminoglycan binding; 4. oxidoreductase activity, acting on diphenols and related substances as donors. Area of the boxes represent the degree of enrichment for each process as determined by FDR‐adjusted p‐value