| Literature DB >> 36243740 |
Hannah R Elliott1,2, Kimberley Burrows3,4, Josine L Min3,4, Therese Tillin5,6, Dan Mason7, John Wright7, Gillian Santorelli7, George Davey Smith3,4, Deborah A Lawlor3,4, Alun D Hughes5,6, Nishi Chaturvedi5,6, Caroline L Relton3,4.
Abstract
Ethnic differences in non-communicable disease risk have been described between individuals of South Asian and European ethnicity that are only partially explained by genetics and other known risk factors. DNA methylation is one underexplored mechanism that may explain differences in disease risk. Currently, there is little knowledge of how DNA methylation varies between South Asian and European ethnicities. This study characterised differences in blood DNA methylation between individuals of self-reported European and South Asian ethnicity from two UK-based cohorts: Southall and Brent Revisited and Born in Bradford. DNA methylation differences between ethnicities were widespread throughout the genome (n = 16,433 CpG sites, 3.4% sites tested). Specifically, 76% of associations were attributable to ethnic differences in cell composition with fewer effects attributable to smoking and genetic variation. Ethnicity-associated CpG sites were enriched for EWAS Catalog phenotypes including metabolites. This work highlights the need to consider ethnic diversity in epigenetic research.Entities:
Keywords: Ancestry; DNA methylation; Epigenetics; Ethnicity; mQTLs
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36243740 PMCID: PMC9571473 DOI: 10.1186/s13148-022-01351-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Epigenetics ISSN: 1868-7075 Impact factor: 7.259
Cohort characteristics
| Variable | SABRE baseline | SABRE follow-up | Born in Bradford | Cross-cohort | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| European mean (SD) or n (%) | South Asian mean (SD) or n (%), | European mean (SD) or n (%) | South Asian mean (SD) or n (%), | White British mean (SD) or n (%) | Asian Pakistani mean (SD) or n (%), | SABRE baseline | BiB | |||||
| N (%) | 400 (50.0) | 400 (50.0) | 66 (47.5) | 73 (52.5) | 444 (48.5) | 472 (51.5) | 800 (46.6) | 916 (53.4) | ||||
| Males (%) | 400 (100) | 400 (100) | 66 (100) | 73 (100) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 800 (100) | 0 (0) | ||||
| Age (years) | 52.3 (7.1) | 51.0 (7.1) | 0.084 | 68.6 (5.3) | 69.0 (5.8) | 0.634 | 26.8 (6.1) | 28 (5.3) | 0.00205 | 51.9 (7.2) | 27 (5.7) | 0 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 26.1 (3.7) | 26.0 (3.6) | 0.441 | 26.7 (3.1) | 26 (4.0) | 0.318 | 27.1 (6.3) | 26 (5.2) | 0.00269 | 26 (3.6) | 26 (5.8) | 0.0542 |
| Bcell (%) | 7.6 (2.09) | 9.1 (2.69) | 9.58E−20 | 8.3 (2.78) | 10.0(6.84) | 0.0424 | 4.75 (1.2) | 5.7 (1.5) | 1.62E−27 | 8.35 (2.5) | 5.3 (1.4) | 2.03E−151 |
| CD4T (%) | 14.5 (4.84) | 14.0 (4.32) | 0.00549 | 16.9 (5.74) | 15.0 (6.38) | 0.102 | 11.8 (2.6) | 12 (3.0) | 0.00104 | 14 (4.6) | 12 (2.8) | 1.50E−23 |
| CD8T (%) | 1.2 (2.23) | 2.1 (3.04) | 1.53E−06 | 0.5 (1.5) | 1.6 (2.74) | 0.00651 | 0.126 (0.7) | 0.36 (1.1) | 0.000122 | 1.66 (2.7) | 0.25 (0.9) | 1.24E−40 |
| Eos (%) | 0.06(0.368) | 0.26 (1.15) | 0.000598 | 0.2 (0.722) | 0.7 (1.78) | 0.0209 | 0.0185 (0.2) | 0.19 (0.8) | 1.57E−05 | 0.159 (0.9) | 0.11 (0.6) | 0.154 |
| Mono (%) | 10.3 (1.94) | 9.9 (1.69) | 0.00166 | 10.7 (2.04) | 9.5 (1.67) | 0.000175 | 11.2 (1.6) | 12 (2.01) | 0.00113 | 10.1 (1.8) | 11 (1.8) | 8.13E−45 |
| Neu (%) | 56.2 (8.52) | 53 (8.47) | 3.35E−06 | 53.9 (10.6) | 52 (13.2) | 0.308 | 68.7 (5.0) | 65 (6.97) | 1.77E−20 | 54.8 (8.6) | 67 (6.4) | 1.74E−171 |
| NK (%) | 15.8 (4.41) | 18 (4.65) | 8.97E−09 | 16 (4.7) | 18 (4.8) | 0.0227 | 6.55 (2.4) | 8.4 (2.74) | 8.51E−26 | 16.7 (4.6) | 7.5 (2.7) | 1.78E−295 |
| Ever smoking (%) | 291 (72.8) | 127 (31.8) | 1.60E−30 | 45 (68.2) | 22 (31.1) | 1.60E−05 | 260 (58.6) | 35 (7.4) | 6.40E−61 | 418 (52.3) | 295 (32.2) | 1.80E−17 |
at test or χ2 for ethnic differences
bt test or χ2 comparing SABRE baseline and Born in Bradford
Fig. 1EWAS plots showing association between methylation and ethnic group in the SABRE cohort. A Manhattan plot showing association between ethnicity and DNA methylation. CpG sites with corresponding p values at ≤ 1.03 × 10−7 are colour-coded to show the direction of effect: red CpG sites are hypermethylated in South Asian individuals, while blue CpG sites are hypomethylated relative to the European group. B Q–Q plot showing observed vs expected p values from the EWAS analysis. The red line denotes equality. λ = 2.93. C Volcano plot showing p value versus effect size for each of the tested CpGs on the array. Orange highlighted CpGs are those with p < 1.03 × 10−7 and with effect sizes of > 5%
Fig. 2Correlation of ethnicity EWAS effect estimates between A SABRE baseline and BiB individuals B SABRE baseline and follow-up timepoints. Each CpG is represented by a point on the graph with 95% confidence intervals for effect estimates. Red dashed line: linear regression between data sets. Black dashed line: line of equality. Orange highlighted estimates: p ≤ 1.03 × 10−7 in BiB (A) or SABRE follow-up timepoint (B) EWAS. A N = 30,081 CpG sites (those associated with ethnicity from SABRE EWAS with data available in BiB. B N = 15,131 CpG sites associated with self-reported ethnicity at SABRE baseline and replicated in BiB
Fig. 3Enrichment of EWAS Catalog phenotypes amongst ethnicity-associated CpG sites. Entries from the EWAS Catalog were reduced into categories of related phenotypes [56]. Group “other” contained CpGs not assigned categories and represented 0.24% of all unique CpGs across categories. SEP Socio-economic position