| Literature DB >> 36204584 |
Ru Li1, Huan Zhang1, Fan Tang1, Chengcheng Duan1, Dan Liu2, Naqiong Wu3, Yonghong Zhang1, Laiyuan Wang2, Xingbo Mo1,4.
Abstract
Background: Single nucleotide polymorphisms that affect RNA modification (RNAm-SNPs) may have functional roles in coronary artery disease (CAD). The aim of this study was to identify RNAm-SNPs in CAD susceptibility loci and highlight potential risk factors.Entities:
Keywords: Mendelian randomization; RNA modification; cardiotrophin-1; gene expression; genome-wide association study
Year: 2022 PMID: 36204584 PMCID: PMC9530202 DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.985121
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med ISSN: 2297-055X
Figure 1Genome-wide distribution of the identified CAD-associated m6A-SNPs. This is a Manhattan plot that shows the P values of associations between m6A-SNPs and CAD. The x-axis is chromosome positions. The y-axis is the -log10 P values of the associations. The P value information was obtained from the summary dataset of the CAD GWAS. The red line indicates the significance level of 1.0 × 10−4.
Figure 2Association between the JCAD gene and CAD. (A) The m6A-SNP rs3739998 in the JCAD (KIAA1462, reference assembly: GRCh37.p13) gene was associated with CAD; (B) SNPs in JCAD were strongly associated with the expression level of JCAD in aortic artery tissue, and the expression level of JCAD in aortic artery tissue was associated with CAD (reference assembly: GRCh37.p13); (C) The m6A methylation peaks in the sixth exon of JCAD in FTO-overexpressing and control HASMCs (reference assembly: GRCh38.p14).
Figure 3Association between the MRAS gene and CAD. (A) The m6A-SNP rs2279241 (reference assembly: GRCh37.p13) in the MRAS gene was associated with CAD; SNPs in MRAS were strongly associated with the expression level of MRAS, and the expression levels of the MRAS gene in aortic artery (B), tibial artery (C) and coronary artery tissues (D) were associated with CAD (reference assembly: GRCh37.p13); (E) The m6A methylation peaks in the 3'-UTR of MRAS in FTO-overexpressing and control HASMCs (reference assembly: GRCh38.p14).
Figure 4Biological pathways related to the proteins affected by the CAD-associated RNAm-SNPs. (A) KEGG pathway enrichment of the proteins affected by the CAD-associated RNAm-SNPs; (B) The top 20 significant biological process GO terms for the proteins affected by the CAD-associated RNAm-SNPs.
Association between circulating protein levels and CAD and AMI.
|
|
|
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
|
| ||||||||
| ABO | 0.0363 | 0.0049 | 2.43E-09 | 2.29E-13 | 3.03E-06 | 9.42E-08 | 5.66E-01 | 9.10E-03 |
| C1GALT1C1 | 0.0737 | 0.0157 | 5.33E-05 | 2.84E-06 | 4.27E-07 | 8.13E-07 | 5.94E-03 | 9.69E-02 |
| C5orf38 | 0.0857 | 0.0125 | 6.75E-09 | 7.85E-12 | 4.22E-18 | 7.18E-09 | 8.23E-02 | 7.89E-03 |
| CD209 | 0.0452 | 0.0089 | 9.30E-06 | 3.86E-07 | 5.73E-06 | 6.92E-05 | 2.54E-01 | 1.64E-02 |
| CEP57 | −0.0681 | 0.0120 | 6.59E-08 | 1.50E-08 | 2.52E-11 | 9.14E-08 | 3.14E-02 | 4.27E-02 |
| CTF1 | 0.0965 | 0.0118 | 1.64E-09 | 3.48E-16 | 2.75E-13 | 6.44E-15 | 2.41E-03 | 1.10E-04 |
| F8 | 0.0591 | 0.0145 | 6.17E-04 | 4.72E-05 | 1.28E-04 | 1.07E-06 | 2.39E-03 | 5.29E-02 |
| GNAI3 | −0.0741 | 0.0207 | 1.38E-03 | 3.43E-04 | 3.91E-04 | 8.83E-05 | 2.52E-02 | 8.34E-02 |
| GOLM1 | 0.0618 | 0.0153 | 3.31E-04 | 5.07E-05 | 1.27E-08 | 1.11E-04 | 4.17E-02 | 1.82E-01 |
| IL3RA | −0.0549 | 0.0095 | 1.02E-06 | 7.16E-09 | 6.48E-08 | 2.61E-08 | 1.38E-02 | 3.93E-02 |
| LRRN1 | 0.0689 | 0.0102 | 1.63E-07 | 3.03E-09 | 2.29E-10 | 1.59E-06 | 2.54E-01 | 9.43E-03 |
| PSME1 | −0.0771 | 0.0133 | 3.24E-06 | 3.96E-07 | 3.01E-08 | 2.65E-08 | 4.53E-03 | 5.48E-02 |
| QSOX2 | 0.0567 | 0.0079 | 5.62E-09 | 7.25E-13 | 1.34E-10 | 2.14E-13 | 8.38E-04 | 1.01E-02 |
| SELE | −0.0663 | 0.0069 | 1.49E-11 | 4.29E-06 | 4.90E-13 | 9.32E-07 | 2.16E-02 | 4.19E-03 |
| VIMP | 0.0860 | 0.0143 | 9.38E-07 | 7.65E-11 | 1.66E-14 | 2.45E-13 | 2.00E-04 | 1.34E-02 |
| VPS29 | −0.0640 | 0.0104 | 2.88E-07 | 3.22E-08 | 6.42E-12 | 1.00E-08 | 9.47E-03 | 6.06E-02 |
|
| ||||||||
| ABO | 0.0005 | 0.0003 | 1.10E-01 | 1.37E-01 | 7.38E-02 | 3.98E-01 | 9.90E-01 | 1.20E-01 |
| C1GALT1C1 | 0.0010 | 0.0004 | 2.62E-02 | 1.84E-02 | 4.65E-04 | 8.71E-03 | 1.20E-01 | 1.41E-01 |
| C5orf38 | 0.0020 | 0.0004 | 1.39E-04 | 2.66E-06 | 4.57E-08 | 3.71E-08 | 1.45E-02 | 1.20E-02 |
| CD209 | 0.0013 | 0.0003 | 2.10E-03 | 1.17E-04 | 1.89E-04 | 1.42E-03 | 3.28E-01 | 4.24E-02 |
| CEP57 | −0.0013 | 0.0004 | 6.95E-03 | 1.97E-03 | 5.84E-08 | 4.91E-07 | 1.40E-03 | 3.96E-02 |
| CTF1 | 0.0023 | 0.0004 | 2.32E-04 | 2.33E-08 | 7.84E-11 | 1.10E-09 | 9.91E-03 | 8.09E-03 |
| F8 | 0.0018 | 0.0004 | 1.40E-03 | 1.56E-04 | 3.41E-04 | 1.73E-01 | 6.41E-01 | 1.75E-02 |
| GNAI3 | −0.0017 | 0.0006 | 3.31E-03 | 6.96E-03 | 3.69E-05 | 9.72E-04 | 5.20E-02 | 1.54E-01 |
| GOLM1 | 0.0013 | 0.0006 | 3.59E-02 | 4.30E-01 | 3.73E-02 | 1.26E-01 | 1.94E-01 | 9.99E-01 |
| IL3RA | −0.0011 | 0.0005 | 6.41E-02 | 4.44E-02 | 4.65E-03 | 2.47E-01 | 8.60E-01 | 9.20E-01 |
| LRRN1 | 0.0022 | 0.0003 | 5.35E-06 | 4.72E-11 | 8.07E-11 | 3.13E-08 | 2.11E-01 | 2.12E-02 |
| PSME1 | −0.0017 | 0.0004 | 1.81E-03 | 1.24E-04 | 1.40E-05 | 1.49E-07 | 2.04E-03 | 2.54E-01 |
| QSOX2 | 0.0011 | 0.0004 | 9.03E-03 | 2.18E-03 | 1.67E-04 | 6.35E-04 | 6.16E-02 | 5.14E-02 |
| SELE | −0.0006 | 0.0005 | 2.10E-01 | 1.92E-01 | 2.24E-03 | 2.02E-03 | 6.58E-03 | 2.05E-01 |
| VIMP | 0.0021 | 0.0005 | 1.10E-03 | 6.46E-05 | 2.02E-08 | 6.07E-04 | 3.05E-01 | 8.41E-03 |
| VPS29 | −0.0014 | 0.0003 | 9.76E-05 | 2.66E-07 | 1.20E-08 | 7.58E-08 | 3.83E-02 | 1.11E-01 |
¶: The effect estimation was derived from the MR-PRESSO analysis.
Figure 5Association between circulating levels of CTF1 and CAD. (A) The m6A-SNP rs6859 in the NECTIN2 gene (PVRL2, in 19q13.32, reference assembly: GRCh37.p13) was associated with CAD; (B) A total of 263 SNPs in 19q13.32 were significantly (P < 5.0 × 10−8) associated with the circulating level of CTF1; (C) The association between CTF1 level and CAD in the CAUSE analysis. The causal model was significantly better than both the null and the sharing models; (D) The association between CTF1 level and AMI in the CAUSE analysis. The causal model was significantly better than both the null and the sharing models.