Cargando…

Prediction of gestational age based on genome-wide differentially methylated regions

BACKGROUND: We explored the association between gestational age and cord blood DNA methylation at birth and whether DNA methylation could be effective in predicting gestational age due to limitations with the presently used methods. We used data from the Norwegian Mother and Child Birth Cohort study...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bohlin, J., Håberg, S. E., Magnus, P., Reese, S. E., Gjessing, H. K., Magnus, M. C., Parr, C. L., Page, C. M., London, S. J., Nystad, W.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5054559/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27717397
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13059-016-1063-4
_version_ 1782458625242955776
author Bohlin, J.
Håberg, S. E.
Magnus, P.
Reese, S. E.
Gjessing, H. K.
Magnus, M. C.
Parr, C. L.
Page, C. M.
London, S. J.
Nystad, W.
author_facet Bohlin, J.
Håberg, S. E.
Magnus, P.
Reese, S. E.
Gjessing, H. K.
Magnus, M. C.
Parr, C. L.
Page, C. M.
London, S. J.
Nystad, W.
author_sort Bohlin, J.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: We explored the association between gestational age and cord blood DNA methylation at birth and whether DNA methylation could be effective in predicting gestational age due to limitations with the presently used methods. We used data from the Norwegian Mother and Child Birth Cohort study (MoBa) with Illumina HumanMethylation450 data measured for 1753 newborns in two batches: MoBa 1, n = 1068; and MoBa 2, n = 685. Gestational age was computed using both ultrasound and the last menstrual period. We evaluated associations between DNA methylation and gestational age and developed a statistical model for predicting gestational age using MoBa 1 for training and MoBa 2 for predictions. The prediction model was additionally used to compare ultrasound and last menstrual period-based gestational age predictions. Furthermore, both CpGs and associated genes detected in the training models were compared to those detected in a published prediction model for chronological age. RESULTS: There were 5474 CpGs associated with ultrasound gestational age after adjustment for a set of covariates, including estimated cell type proportions, and Bonferroni-correction for multiple testing. Our model predicted ultrasound gestational age more accurately than it predicted last menstrual period gestational age. CONCLUSIONS: DNA methylation at birth appears to be a good predictor of gestational age. Ultrasound gestational age is more strongly associated with methylation than last menstrual period gestational age. The CpGs linked with our gestational age prediction model, and their associated genes, differed substantially from the corresponding CpGs and genes associated with a chronological age prediction model. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13059-016-1063-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5054559
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50545592016-10-19 Prediction of gestational age based on genome-wide differentially methylated regions Bohlin, J. Håberg, S. E. Magnus, P. Reese, S. E. Gjessing, H. K. Magnus, M. C. Parr, C. L. Page, C. M. London, S. J. Nystad, W. Genome Biol Research BACKGROUND: We explored the association between gestational age and cord blood DNA methylation at birth and whether DNA methylation could be effective in predicting gestational age due to limitations with the presently used methods. We used data from the Norwegian Mother and Child Birth Cohort study (MoBa) with Illumina HumanMethylation450 data measured for 1753 newborns in two batches: MoBa 1, n = 1068; and MoBa 2, n = 685. Gestational age was computed using both ultrasound and the last menstrual period. We evaluated associations between DNA methylation and gestational age and developed a statistical model for predicting gestational age using MoBa 1 for training and MoBa 2 for predictions. The prediction model was additionally used to compare ultrasound and last menstrual period-based gestational age predictions. Furthermore, both CpGs and associated genes detected in the training models were compared to those detected in a published prediction model for chronological age. RESULTS: There were 5474 CpGs associated with ultrasound gestational age after adjustment for a set of covariates, including estimated cell type proportions, and Bonferroni-correction for multiple testing. Our model predicted ultrasound gestational age more accurately than it predicted last menstrual period gestational age. CONCLUSIONS: DNA methylation at birth appears to be a good predictor of gestational age. Ultrasound gestational age is more strongly associated with methylation than last menstrual period gestational age. The CpGs linked with our gestational age prediction model, and their associated genes, differed substantially from the corresponding CpGs and genes associated with a chronological age prediction model. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13059-016-1063-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-10-07 /pmc/articles/PMC5054559/ /pubmed/27717397 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13059-016-1063-4 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Bohlin, J.
Håberg, S. E.
Magnus, P.
Reese, S. E.
Gjessing, H. K.
Magnus, M. C.
Parr, C. L.
Page, C. M.
London, S. J.
Nystad, W.
Prediction of gestational age based on genome-wide differentially methylated regions
title Prediction of gestational age based on genome-wide differentially methylated regions
title_full Prediction of gestational age based on genome-wide differentially methylated regions
title_fullStr Prediction of gestational age based on genome-wide differentially methylated regions
title_full_unstemmed Prediction of gestational age based on genome-wide differentially methylated regions
title_short Prediction of gestational age based on genome-wide differentially methylated regions
title_sort prediction of gestational age based on genome-wide differentially methylated regions
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5054559/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27717397
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13059-016-1063-4
work_keys_str_mv AT bohlinj predictionofgestationalagebasedongenomewidedifferentiallymethylatedregions
AT habergse predictionofgestationalagebasedongenomewidedifferentiallymethylatedregions
AT magnusp predictionofgestationalagebasedongenomewidedifferentiallymethylatedregions
AT reesese predictionofgestationalagebasedongenomewidedifferentiallymethylatedregions
AT gjessinghk predictionofgestationalagebasedongenomewidedifferentiallymethylatedregions
AT magnusmc predictionofgestationalagebasedongenomewidedifferentiallymethylatedregions
AT parrcl predictionofgestationalagebasedongenomewidedifferentiallymethylatedregions
AT pagecm predictionofgestationalagebasedongenomewidedifferentiallymethylatedregions
AT londonsj predictionofgestationalagebasedongenomewidedifferentiallymethylatedregions
AT nystadw predictionofgestationalagebasedongenomewidedifferentiallymethylatedregions