| Literature DB >> 35610705 |
Md Mesbah Uddin1,2, Ying Zhou3, Alexander G Bick4, Bala Bharathi Burugula5, Pradeep Natarajan1,2,6, Alexander P Reiner3,7, Jacob O Kitzman8, Siddhartha Jaiswal9, Pinkal Desai10, Michael C Honigberg1,2,6, Shelly-Ann Love11, Ana Barac12, Kathleen M Hayden13, JoAnn E Manson14, Eric A Whitsel11, Charles Kooperberg3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP), the age-related expansion of mutant hematopoietic stem cells, confers risk for multiple diseases of aging including hematologic cancer and cardiovascular disease. Whole-exome or genome sequencing can detect CHIP, but due to those assays' high cost, most population studies have been cross-sectional, sequencing only a single timepoint per individual.Entities:
Keywords: Aging; Clonal hematopoiesis; Longitudinal analysis; Somatic mutations
Year: 2022 PMID: 35610705 PMCID: PMC9128083 DOI: 10.1186/s12979-022-00278-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Immun Ageing ISSN: 1742-4933 Impact factor: 9.701
Fig. 1Study design and CHIP sequencing strategy. A Schematic of smMIPS assay design. B Somatic mutation identified as CHIP by smMIPS assay. C Schematic of study design, with sequencing of each subject (n = 182) using samples collected at up to six timepoints including a baseline visit, a series of annual visits (AV), and a final visit (LLS, Long Life Study)
Genes targeted on smMIPs assay and proportion of CHIP in population covered by these target regions
| Gene name | Target size (bp) | MIPS read depth | % of CHIP in Population | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Median | Mean | |||
| 4687 | 2054 | 3891 | 7.41% | |
| 2803 | 4880 | 6845 | 0.62% | |
| 3071 | 3163 | 4325 | 45.97% | |
| 1023 | 4671 | 6139 | 0.97% | |
| 1894 | 3889 | 4856 | 4.01% | |
| 4045 | 3936 | 5073 | 2.46% | |
| 6165 | 2033 | 3587 | 19.13% | |
| 1714 | 4063 | 5543 | 1.97% | |
| 880 | 4403 | 6126 | 0.23% | |
| 2019 | 1983 | 2632 | 2.22% | |
| 6918 | 3240 | 4765 | 1.80% | |
| 1 | 289 | 512 | 1.88% | |
| 1 | 1325 | 1797 | 0.09% | |
| 1 | 3029 | 3909 | 0.30% | |
| 1 | 3839 | 4944 | 1.65% | |
| 88.83% | ||||
aSRSF2, IDH1, IDH2, JAK2 target a single hotspot mutation
bPopulation frequencies of CHIP previously reported in NHLBI TOPMed cohorts [6]
Fig. 2Validation by sequencing defined sample mixtures. Observed (mean +/− s.e. across 27 replicates) vs expected variant allele frequency (VAF) for repeated smMIPS sequencing of a defined control mixture of gDNAs from five cell lines, across 152 polymorphic sites. Overall Pearson’s correlation r = 0.998, and r = 0.847 and r = 0.997 for variants with expected VAF ≤2 and > 2%, respectively
Fig. 3CHIP at initial blood draw. A Number of CHIP clones (driver mutations with VAF ≥ 2%) identified per subject at initial draw. B Prevalence of CHIP at VAF ≥2% (blue) or ≥ 10% (orange) by age at initial draw. C Number of mutations (VAF ≥ 2%) per gene. D Driver mutation VAFs grouped by gene
Fig. 4Longitudinal measurement of CHIP dynamics. Trajectories are shown, grouped by direction (rows) and gene (columns). Each trajectory corresponds to a single driver mutation in one subject, shaded by gene; black horizontal represents the VAF = 2% threshold
Fig. 5Competition among multiple different driver mutations in individual subjects. Each panel represents a single subject, and each driver mutation is a single line shaded by trajectory (red: growing, gray: static, black: shrinking)
Number of trajectories for each driver gene
| Gene | Total | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Growing, dominant | 23 | 9 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 43 |
| Growing, non-dominant | 20 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 33 |
| Shrinking | 20 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 30 |
| Static | 30 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 40 |