| Literature DB >> 33931109 |
Charles E Breeze1,2,3, Anna Batorsky4, Mi Kyeong Lee5, Mindy D Szeto6, Xiaoguang Xu7, Daniel L McCartney8, Rong Jiang9, Amit Patki10, Holly J Kramer11,12, James M Eales7, Laura Raffield13, Leslie Lange6, Ethan Lange6, Peter Durda14, Yongmei Liu15, Russ P Tracy14,16, David Van Den Berg17, Kathryn L Evans8, William E Kraus15,18, Svati Shah15,18, Hermant K Tiwari10, Lifang Hou19,20, Eric A Whitsel21,22, Xiao Jiang7, Fadi J Charchar23,24,25, Andrea A Baccarelli26, Stephen S Rich27, Andrew P Morris28, Marguerite R Irvin29, Donna K Arnett30, Elizabeth R Hauser15,31, Jerome I Rotter32, Adolfo Correa33, Caroline Hayward34, Steve Horvath35,36, Riccardo E Marioni8, Maciej Tomaszewski7,37, Stephan Beck38, Sonja I Berndt39, Stephanie J London5, Josyf C Mychaleckyj27, Nora Franceschini40.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: DNA methylation (DNAm) is associated with gene regulation and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), a measure of kidney function. Decreased eGFR is more common among US Hispanics and African Americans. The causes for this are poorly understood. We aimed to identify trans-ethnic and ethnic-specific differentially methylated positions (DMPs) associated with eGFR using an agnostic, genome-wide approach.Entities:
Keywords: DNA methylation; Epigenetic; Gene regulation; Kidney development; Kidney function
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33931109 PMCID: PMC8088054 DOI: 10.1186/s13073-021-00877-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genome Med ISSN: 1756-994X Impact factor: 11.117
Fig. 1Overview of trans-ethnic and ethnic-specific CpGs associated with kidney function. a Venn diagram showing trans-ethnic and unique CpGs across the top 1000 sites for European Americans (EA), African Americans (AA), Hispanic/Latino (H/L), and trans-ethnic groups. b Euler diagram showing the number of overlapping CpGs (1) between trans-ethnic replicated DMPs (13) and discovery ethnic-specific DMPs for African Americans -AA- (5). c Study design, consortium information, sample size, and the number of significant DMPs for both trans-ethnic and ethnic-specific EWAS analyses. Details shown both for discovery (top) and replication analyses (bottom). For these analyses, consortia include the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI), the Jackson Heart Study (JHS), MESA, HyperGEN, Generation Scotland, and CATHGEN. In addition, we used kidney DNAm data from the TRANSLATE, TRANSLATE-T, RESPOND, and REPAIR studies for cis-meQTL analyses and Roadmap Epigenomics data for eFORGE DHS analyses
Main findings from trans-ethnic EWAS meta-analyses for 13 replicated DMPs
| Our study discovery | Sample size by DNAm array | Replication GS/CATHGEN/HyperGEN | Combined discovery and replication | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DMP | Chr | Position (hg38) | Gene | Effect | 450K | EPIC 850 K | Effect | Effect | |||
| cg13235761^ | 1 | 203,592,452 | − 37.61 | 4.33E−06 | 3048 | 2378 | − 25.28 | 5.08E−05 | − 29.81 | 1.88E−09 | |
| cg26099045^* | 2 | 64,064,666 | 14.82 | 5.74E−06 | 3050 | 2378 | 11.24 | 1.01E−04 | 12.81 | 3.26E−09 | |
| cg04428662^Ω* | 4 | 2,932,461 | − 30.84 | 3.21E−06 | 3049 | 2378 | − 34.94 | 3.43E−07 | − 32.82 | 5.51E−12 | |
| cg23174201^* | 5 | 151,674,695 | − 35.83 | 5.10E−06 | 3050 | 2378 | − 34.87 | 1.72E−07 | − 35.27 | 4.02E−12 | |
| cg17170437 | 6 | 44,229,461 | − 47.62 | 1.96E−06 | N/A | 2378 | − 18.62 | 1.49E−04 | − 24.24 | 3.80E−08 | |
| cg14871770 | 10 | 96,658,622 | − 53.12 | 1.98E−06 | N/A | 2378 | − 25.87 | 1.70E−04 | − 33.36 | 1.23E−08 | |
| cg02157636 | 11 | 68,709,367 | − 53.21 | 2.15E−06 | N/A | 2378 | − 27.25 | 1.14E−05 | − 33.33 | 8.58E−10 | |
| cg26039141^Ω | 11 | 75,402,116 | − 39.14 | 3.40E−06 | 3050 | 2378 | − 33.42 | 1.78E−05 | − 36.06 | 2.90E−10 | |
| cg22593432^* | 13 | 32,001,768 | − 29.91 | 1.54E−07 | 3050 | 2378 | − 17.66 | 1.79E−04 | − 22.64 | 4.61E−10 | |
| cg11789371^* | 14 | 102,085,048 | − 35.40 | 4.44E−06 | 3050 | 2378 | − 22.66 | 3.58E−04 | − 27.80 | 1.41E−08 | |
| cg05796561 | 18 | 57,128,273 | − 45.24 | 2.96E−06 | N/A | 2378 | − 22.91 | 1.69E−04 | − 29.24 | 1.41E−08 | |
| cg17944885^Ω* | 19 | 12,114,920 | − 32.71 | 1.41E−09 | 3048 | 2378 | − 16.34 | 5.67E−07 | − 20.72 | 1.24E−13 | |
| cg15787712^ | 19 | 13,837,429 | − 37.60 | 6.00E−09 | 3050 | 2378 | − 28.65 | 2.06E−05 | − 33.30 | 9.01E−13 | |
p-value for replication < 6.4E−04 (Bonferroni correction for 78 DMPs tested). Four of the 13 DMPs that replicated were non-450K probes (cg17170437, cg14871770, cg02157636, cg05796561). Results from combined discovery and replication are also shown
GS Generation Scotland, N/A not applicable
^cis-meQTL from the BIOS QTL [36, 37]
ΩExpression quantitative trait methylation (eQTM) data from the BIOS QTL (enrichment p-value <0.01) [36, 37]
*cis-meQTL in the Framingham Heart Study [38]
Fig. 2eGFR-associated differentially methylated position cg11789371. a HSP90AA1 gene browser shot showing (from top to bottom) genome coordinates, local genes, NHGRI/EBI GWAS catalog SNPs, GTEx gene expression quantified via RNA-seq across different tissues, H3K27ac peaks across 7 ENCODE cell lines, GeneHancer regulatory elements, Genecards TSSs, GeneHancer chromatin interactions, ENCODE chromatin accessibility and chromatin interaction tracks, and location for eGFR-associated DMP cg11789371. b Expanded browser shot showing genome coordinates, local genes, NHGRI/EBI GWAS catalog SNPs, H3K27ac peaks across 7 ENCODE cell lines, and a boxplot indicating DNAm values at cg11789371 for bottom and top quartiles of eGFR, respectively. These data indicate our DMP overlaps an intron of HSP90AA1, a gene expressed in kidney tissue, and a DHS from ENCODE, which was detected in kidney tissue. Our DMP is also proximal to an H3K27ac peak, an RNA Polymerase 2 region determined by ENCODE ChIA-PET across several cell lines, and the promoter of HSP90AA1. All browser shots were generated using the UCSC genome browser (https://genome.ucsc.edu/) on human genome build hg19
Fig. 3Tissue-specific integrative analysis indicates potential effect on kidney and relation with eGFR GWAS loci. a eFORGE analysis for top 1000 eGFR CpGs: the x axis indicates tissues/cell type samples used in the analysis; the y axis shows eFORGE enrichment (−log10 p-value) of the CpG set with DNase I hotspots for a range of tissue samples (significant samples in black). The highest ranked sample set (highest black points) shows the most significant enrichment is for kidney samples, which are highly ranked for the top 1000 CpGs associated with eGFR. b FORGE2 analysis for eGFR SNPs from GWAS catalog: the x axis indicates tissues/cell type samples used in the analysis; the y axis shows FORGE2 enrichment (−log10 p-value) of the SNP set with DNase I hotspots for a range of tissue samples (significant samples in black). The highest ranked sample set (highest black points) shows the most significant enrichment also is for kidney samples, which are highly ranked for the top 249 SNPs associated with eGFR (taken from the GWAS catalog, https://www.ebi.ac.uk/gwas/, downloaded 10 April 2020). c TF motif enrichment results for EA probes driving eFORGE tissue-specific enrichment signal: the x axis indicates TF motifs from TRANSFAC, JASPAR, Taipale/SELEX, and Uniprobe databases; the y axis shows eFORGE-TF enrichment (−log10 hypergeometric p-value) of the input DMP set with TF motifs overlapping open chromatin sites for fetal kidney samples. Enrichment values for each TF motif are colored according to BY FDR-corrected q-value. A number of TF motifs involved in kidney development overlap top EA probes including OSR1, OSR2, TBX1, and PAX2. d Aggregated eFORGE results for EA probes: the x axis indicates sets of the top ranked DMPs used in the analysis (each set contains 1000 DMPs); the y axis shows eFORGE enrichment (−log10 p-value) of each of the DMP sets with open chromatin sites for kidney (red) and other tissue samples (gray). The highest ranked probe set (set 1, left) shows the most significant enrichment for kidney samples, which remain highly ranked for probe sets 2–5, in decreasing order of study p-value
Fig. 4eGFR EWAS CpGs present a significant overlap with eGFR GWAS-driven meQTL effects. a Histogram of 1000 random background simulations (249 random SNPs each), for EWAS-meQTL overlap across the ARIES blood meQTL dataset (http://www.mqtldb.org/). Two hundred forty-nine unique significant SNPs from the eGFR GWAS by Hellwege et al. yield 13 SNP-meQTL-EWAS DMP sites in the Aries cohort (p = 2.0E−03, empirical test, red dot and arrow), while background SNP sets overlap a mean of 0.912 SNP-meQTL-EWAS sites. b Histogram of 1000 random background simulations (249 random SNPs each), for meQTL-kidney DNase I hotspot overlap across Roadmap Epigenomics “Kidney” sample datasets (https://egg2.wustl.edu/roadmap/web_portal/). Two thousand seven hundred thirty-three meQTL targets of 249 unique significant SNPs from the eGFR GWAS by Hellwege et al. overlap Roadmap kidney DNase I hotspots 519 times (p < 0.001, empirical test, red dot and arrow), while background SNP sets overlap Roadmap kidney DNase I hotspots a mean of 67.021 times (SD = 24.754). c Schematic showing the association of eGFR GWAS SNPs with meQTL target CpGs and eGFR EWAS CpGs (both in red text), some of which overlap kidney-specific DNase I hotspots (shown in blue, arrows indicate statistical association—not genomic contact). For comparison, a representation of a background SNP is shown. d Results from eFORGE analysis of significant ARIES meQTL CpGs associated with eGFR GWAS SNPs, indicating a higher-than expected overlap with the kidney, renal cortex, and renal pelvis DNase-seq hotspots (for additional results, see Additional file 1: Fig. S5)