| Literature DB >> 35055737 |
Sung-Hyun Park1, Yuting Lu2, Yongzhao Shao2, Colette Prophete1, Lori Horton1, Maureen Sisco1, Hyun-Wook Lee1, Thomas Kluz1, Hong Sun1, Max Costa1, Judith Zelikoff1, Lung-Chi Chen1, Matthew W Gorr3,4, Loren E Wold3,4, Mitchell D Cohen1.
Abstract
First responders (FR) exposed to the World Trade Center (WTC) Ground Zero air over the first week after the 9/11 disaster have an increased heart disease incidence compared to unexposed FR and the general population. To test if WTC dusts were causative agents, rats were exposed to WTC dusts (under isoflurane [ISO] anesthesia) 2 h/day on 2 consecutive days; controls received air/ISO or air only. Hearts were collected 1, 30, 240, and 360 d post-exposure, left ventricle total RNA was extracted, and transcription profiles were obtained. The data showed that differentially expressed genes (DEG) for WTC vs. ISO rats did not reach any significance with a false discovery rate (FDR) < 0.05 at days 1, 30, and 240, indicating that the dusts did not impart effects beyond any from ISO. However, at day 360, 14 DEG with a low FDR were identified, reflecting potential long-term effects from WTC dust alone, and the majority of these DEG have been implicated as having an impact on heart functions. Furthermore, the functional gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) data at day 360 showed that WTC dust could potentially impact the myocardial energy metabolism via PPAR signaling and heart valve development. This is the first study showing that WTC dust could significantly affect some genes that are associated with the heart/CV system, in the long term. Even > 20 years after the 9/11 disaster, this has potentially important implications for those FR exposed repeatedly at Ground Zero over the first week after the buildings collapsed.Entities:
Keywords: WTC dust; rat cardiac tissue; transcriptomic profiles
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35055737 PMCID: PMC8776213 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19020919
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
The list of 14 DEGs reflecting attributable WTC effect on day 360.
| WTC vs. ISO | WTC vs. Naïve | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Name | logFC |
| FDR | logFC |
| FDR |
| Surf1 | 0.63 | 9.45 × 10−6 |
| 0.47 | 2.64 × 10−4 |
|
| Tgfbr2 | −0.42 | 1.93 × 10−5 |
| −0.20 | 1.55 × 10−2 | 1.50 × 10−1 |
| Ski | −0.37 | 3.01 × 10−5 |
| −0.18 | 1.57 × 10−2 | 1.50 × 10−1 |
| Pola2 | 0.35 | 5.54 × 10−5 |
| 0.22 | 4.08 × 10−3 | 9.65 × 10−2 |
| P4hb | −0.24 | 2.12 × 10−4 |
| −0.16 | 5.29 × 10−3 | 1.07 × 10−1 |
| Rps18 | 0.54 | 4.28 × 10−4 |
| 0.75 | 1.36 × 10−5 |
|
| Mfsd1 | −0.21 | 4.77 × 10−4 |
| −0.14 | 1.29 × 10−2 | 1.41 × 10−1 |
| Scarb2 | −0.36 | 5.17 × 10−4 |
| −0.30 | 3.05 × 10−3 | 9.12 × 10−2 |
| Fzd7 | −0.59 | 7.53 × 10−4 |
| −0.52 | 2.49 × 10−3 | 8.65 × 10−2 |
| Isg20l2 | −0.53 | 8.52 × 10−4 | 5.03 × 10−2 | −0.58 | 3.76 × 10−4 |
|
| Safb | 0.22 | 9.69 × 10−4 | 5.16 × 10−2 | 0.25 | 2.34 × 10−4 |
|
| Glis1 | 0.64 | 1.98 × 10−3 | 7.06 × 10−2 | 0.77 | 4.35 × 10−4 |
|
| Hspa8_2 | 0.98 | 2.02 × 10−3 | 7.06 × 10−2 | 1.96 | 2.61 × 10−6 |
|
| LOC294154 | −0.24 | 2.07 × 10−3 | 7.19 × 10−2 | −0.30 | 3.24 × 10−4 |
|
FDR is in bold if its value is less than the commonly used cut-off 0.05.
Figure 1The longitudinal trajectories of logFC between WTC and ISO for the 14 DEGs. The 14 DEGs were identified at day 360 as listed in Table 1. The blue lines referred to DEG up-regulated at day 360, also labeled as ‘Up’, and the red lines referred to DEGs down-regulated at day 360, labeled as ‘Down’. The bold lines connecting the triangles are the mean trajectories.
Figure 2The longitudinal trajectories of logFC between WTC and Naive for the 14 DEGs. The 14 DEGs were identified at day 360 as listed in Table 1. The blue lines referred to DEGs up-regulated at day 360, also labeled as ‘Up’, and the red lines referred to DEGs down-regulated at day 360, labeled as ‘Down’. The bold lines connecting the triangles are the mean trajectories.
Figure 3Enrichment results of the selected 60 up-regulated DEG comparing WTC vs. ISO. Functional gene set enrichment analysis was performed on the 60 DEGs that were up-regulated in WTC compared with ISO group at both day 360 (with p < 0.05) and day 240 (with p < 0.1).
Figure 4Enrichment results of the selected 64 down-regulated DEG comparing WTC vs. ISO. Functional gene set enrichment analysis was performed on the 64 DEGs that were down-regulated in WTC compared with ISO group at both day 360 (with p < 0.05) and day 240 (with p < 0.1).