Literature DB >> 34378875

Low variability in the underlying cellular landscape adversely affects the performance of interaction-based approaches for conducting cell-specific analyses of DNA methylation in bulk samples.

Richard Meier1, Emily Nissen1, Devin C Koestler1.   

Abstract

Statistical methods that allow for cell type specific DNA methylation (DNAm) analyses based on bulk-tissue methylation data have great potential to improve our understanding of human disease and have created unprecedented opportunities for new insights using the wealth of publicly available bulk-tissue methylation data. These methodologies involve incorporating interaction terms formed between the phenotypes/exposures of interest and proportions of the cell types underlying the bulk-tissue sample used for DNAm profiling. Despite growing interest in such "interaction-based" methods, there has been no comprehensive assessment how variability in the cellular landscape across study samples affects their performance. To answer this question, we used numerous publicly available whole-blood DNAm data sets along with extensive simulation studies and evaluated the performance of interaction-based approaches in detecting cell-specific methylation effects. Our results show that low cell proportion variability results in large estimation error and low statistical power for detecting cell-specific effects of DNAm. Further, we identified that many studies targeting methylation profiling in whole-blood may be at risk to be underpowered due to low variability in the cellular landscape across study samples. Finally, we discuss guidelines for researchers seeking to conduct studies utilizing interaction-based approaches to help ensure that their studies are adequately powered.
© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.

Entities:  

Keywords:  EWAS; cell fraction; cell proportion; interaction; methylation; variability

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34378875      PMCID: PMC9125800          DOI: 10.1515/sagmb-2021-0004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol        ISSN: 1544-6115


  31 in total

Review 1.  DNA methylation-based biomarkers and the epigenetic clock theory of ageing.

Authors:  Steve Horvath; Kenneth Raj
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 53.242

2.  Subcutaneous adipose tissue gene expression and DNA methylation respond to both short- and long-term weight loss.

Authors:  S Bollepalli; S Kaye; S Heinonen; J Kaprio; A Rissanen; K A Virtanen; K H Pietiläinen; M Ollikainen
Journal:  Int J Obes (Lond)       Date:  2017-10-05       Impact factor: 5.095

3.  Integrated Analysis of DNA Methylation and mRNA Expression Profiles to Identify Key Genes in Severe Oligozoospermia.

Authors:  Zhiming Li; Xuan Zhuang; Jinxiong Zeng; Chi-Meng Tzeng
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2017-05-12       Impact factor: 4.566

4.  An optimized library for reference-based deconvolution of whole-blood biospecimens assayed using the Illumina HumanMethylationEPIC BeadArray.

Authors:  Lucas A Salas; Devin C Koestler; Rondi A Butler; Helen M Hansen; John K Wiencke; Karl T Kelsey; Brock C Christensen
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2018-05-29       Impact factor: 13.583

5.  Identification of cell type-specific methylation signals in bulk whole genome bisulfite sequencing data.

Authors:  C Anthony Scott; Jack D Duryea; Harry MacKay; Maria S Baker; Eleonora Laritsky; Chathura J Gunasekara; Cristian Coarfa; Robert A Waterland
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2020-07-01       Impact factor: 13.583

6.  Identification of differentially methylated cell types in epigenome-wide association studies.

Authors:  Shijie C Zheng; Charles E Breeze; Stephan Beck; Andrew E Teschendorff
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2018-11-30       Impact factor: 28.547

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.  Correcting for cell-type composition bias in epigenome-wide association studies.

Authors:  Robert Lowe; Vardhman K Rakyan
Journal:  Genome Med       Date:  2014-03-25       Impact factor: 11.117

9.  High-Resolution Single-Cell DNA Methylation Measurements Reveal Epigenetically Distinct Hematopoietic Stem Cell Subpopulations.

Authors:  Tony Hui; Qi Cao; Joanna Wegrzyn-Woltosz; Kieran O'Neill; Colin A Hammond; David J H F Knapp; Emma Laks; Michelle Moksa; Samuel Aparicio; Connie J Eaves; Aly Karsan; Martin Hirst
Journal:  Stem Cell Reports       Date:  2018-08-02       Impact factor: 7.765

10.  BayesCCE: a Bayesian framework for estimating cell-type composition from DNA methylation without the need for methylation reference.

Authors:  Elior Rahmani; Regev Schweiger; Liat Shenhav; Theodora Wingert; Ira Hofer; Eilon Gabel; Eleazar Eskin; Eran Halperin
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2018-09-21       Impact factor: 13.583

View more
  1 in total

1.  DNA methylation as a pharmacodynamic marker of glucocorticoid response and glioma survival.

Authors:  J K Wiencke; Annette M Molinaro; Gayathri Warrier; Terri Rice; Jennifer Clarke; Jennie W Taylor; Margaret Wrensch; Helen Hansen; Lucie McCoy; Emily Tang; Stan J Tamaki; Courtney M Tamaki; Emily Nissen; Paige Bracci; Lucas A Salas; Devin C Koestler; Brock C Christensen; Ze Zhang; Karl T Kelsey
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2022-09-20       Impact factor: 17.694

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.