| Literature DB >> 34103071 |
Peiru Liu1, Jing Zhang2,3,4, Duo Du1, Dandan Zhang1, Zelin Jin1, Wenqing Qiu1, Xiushi Zhou3, Shulong Dong1, Mengyu Zhou1, Heyu Zhao1, Wei Zhang3, Jiakang Ma1, Shaoyang Sun1, Weiguo Fu5,6, Yun Liu7,8, Lixin Wang9,10.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Thoracic aortic dissection (TAD) is a severe disease with limited understandings in its pathogenesis. Altered DNA methylation has been revealed to be involved in many diseases etiology. Few studies have examined the role of DNA methylation in the development of TAD. This study explored alterations of the DNA methylation landscape in TAD and examined the potential role of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) methylation as a biomarker in TAD diagnosis.Entities:
Keywords: Aortic dissection; Cell-free DNA; DNA methylation; Epigenetic biomarker; Epigenetics; Homeobox genes
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34103071 PMCID: PMC8186232 DOI: 10.1186/s13148-021-01110-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Epigenetics ISSN: 1868-7075 Impact factor: 6.551
Fig. 1DNA methylation differences between TAD and healthy control samples. a DMR percentages in different genomic components (promoters were defined as 1–2,500 bp upstream of transcription start site, alternative promoters were not included.). b Hypermethylated and hypomethylated DMR percentages in different genomic components. c Supervised clustering with the top 300 DMRs (detail information was showed in Additional file 2: Table S3). d Gene ontology (GO) enrichment analysis with a focus on biological processes for the hypomethylated DMRs
Fig. 2Representative DMRs identified by WGBS. Smoothed methylation values were plotted with identified DMRs indicated in pink. Regions replicated by bisulfite pyrosequencing (refer to Fig. 3) are highlighted in green. Plots of the a HOXA cluster, b HOXB cluster, and c HOXC cluster
Fig. 3Replication of DMRs by bisulfite pyrosequencing from an independent sample set (n = 10). DMRs in the a HOXA5 region, b HOXB6 region, and c HOXC6 region. (*P- value < 0.05, **P-value < 0.01, ***P-value < 0.001; Student’s t-test, unpaired and two-sided)
Fig. 4Differential expression of Hox family genes in TAD patients evaluated by qPCR. Genes examined include a HOXA5, (B) HOXB6, and (C) HOXC6. (*P- value < 0.05, ** P-value < 0.01, *** P-value < 0.001; Student’s t-test, unpaired and two-sided)
Fig. 5Methylation signatures from cfDNA as a biomarker for TAD diagnosis. a Principal component analysis of cfDNA methylation data on tDMRs (red dots indicate TAD patient and blue indicate healthy people, P value = 0.037 from PERMANOVA analysis). The top 50 DMRs with the largest cfDNA methylation variance contributing to the top two principal components were selected for model training. Optimized random-forest model was evaluated with LOOCV, and the confusion matrix (b) and the ROC curve (c) were plotted to assess the performance of the model (AUC = 0.96). Sensitivity: 86%, specificity: 75%. (LOOCV: leave-one-out cross validation, ROC: Receiver operating characteristic, AUC: area under curve)
Sample characteristics
| Samples for WGBS* | Samples for replication | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, years | 45.3 ± 11.6 | 42.8 ± 5.8‡ | 41.8 ± 8.0 | 36.5 ± 15.2§ |
| Gender, male: female | 5:1 | 6:0 | 5:1 | 3:1 |
| Stanford classification | ||||
| Type A | 6 (100%) | – | 6 (100%) | – |
| Type B | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| Dissection staging | ||||
| Acute phase | 6 (100%) | – | 6 (100%) | – |
| Chronic phase | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| Arteritis | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Bicuspid aortic valve | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Family history of aortic diseases | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Rupture | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| Maximal aortic diameter (mm) | 5.2 ± 1.5 | – | 5.7 ± 3.3 | – |
| Emergent operation | 6 (100%) | – | 6 (100%) | – |
| Elective operation | 0 | – | 0 | – |
*WGBS whole genome bisulfite sequencing
†TAD thoracic aortic dissection
‡P value = 0.646
§P value = 0.497