Cargando…

Comparison of Bisulfite Pyrosequencing and Methylation-Specific qPCR for Methylation Assessment

Different methodological approaches are available to assess DNA methylation biomarkers. In this study, we evaluated two sodium bisulfite conversion-dependent methods, namely pyrosequencing and methylation-specific qPCR (MS-qPCR), with the aim of measuring the closeness of agreement of methylation va...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: De Chiara, Loretta, Leiro-Fernandez, Virginia, Rodríguez-Girondo, Mar, Valverde, Diana, Botana-Rial, María Isabel, Fernández-Villar, Alberto
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7730915/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33287451
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms21239242
_version_ 1783621794762063872
author De Chiara, Loretta
Leiro-Fernandez, Virginia
Rodríguez-Girondo, Mar
Valverde, Diana
Botana-Rial, María Isabel
Fernández-Villar, Alberto
author_facet De Chiara, Loretta
Leiro-Fernandez, Virginia
Rodríguez-Girondo, Mar
Valverde, Diana
Botana-Rial, María Isabel
Fernández-Villar, Alberto
author_sort De Chiara, Loretta
collection PubMed
description Different methodological approaches are available to assess DNA methylation biomarkers. In this study, we evaluated two sodium bisulfite conversion-dependent methods, namely pyrosequencing and methylation-specific qPCR (MS-qPCR), with the aim of measuring the closeness of agreement of methylation values between these two methods and its effect when setting a cut-off. Methylation of tumor suppressor gene p16/INK4A was evaluated in 80 lung cancer patients from which cytological lymph node samples were obtained. Cluster analyses were used to establish methylated and unmethylated groups for each method. Agreement and concordance between pyrosequencing and MS-qPCR was evaluated with Pearson’s correlation, Bland–Altman, Cohen’s kappa index and ROC curve analyses. Based on these analyses, cut-offs were derived for MS-qPCR. An acceptable correlation (Pearson’s R2 = 0.738) was found between pyrosequencing (PYRmean) and MS-qPCR (NMP; normalized methylation percentage), providing similar clinical results when categorizing data as binary using cluster analysis. Compared to pyrosequencing, MS-qPCR tended to underestimate methylation for values between 0 and 15%, while for methylation >30% overestimation was observed. The estimated cut-off for MS-qPCR data based on cluster analysis, kappa-index agreement and ROC curve analysis were much lower than that derived from pyrosequencing. In conclusion, our results indicate that independently of the approach used for estimating the cut-off, the methylation percentage obtained through MS-qPCR is lower than that calculated for pyrosequencing. These differences in data and therefore in the cut-off should be examined when using methylation biomarkers in the clinical practice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7730915
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77309152020-12-12 Comparison of Bisulfite Pyrosequencing and Methylation-Specific qPCR for Methylation Assessment De Chiara, Loretta Leiro-Fernandez, Virginia Rodríguez-Girondo, Mar Valverde, Diana Botana-Rial, María Isabel Fernández-Villar, Alberto Int J Mol Sci Article Different methodological approaches are available to assess DNA methylation biomarkers. In this study, we evaluated two sodium bisulfite conversion-dependent methods, namely pyrosequencing and methylation-specific qPCR (MS-qPCR), with the aim of measuring the closeness of agreement of methylation values between these two methods and its effect when setting a cut-off. Methylation of tumor suppressor gene p16/INK4A was evaluated in 80 lung cancer patients from which cytological lymph node samples were obtained. Cluster analyses were used to establish methylated and unmethylated groups for each method. Agreement and concordance between pyrosequencing and MS-qPCR was evaluated with Pearson’s correlation, Bland–Altman, Cohen’s kappa index and ROC curve analyses. Based on these analyses, cut-offs were derived for MS-qPCR. An acceptable correlation (Pearson’s R2 = 0.738) was found between pyrosequencing (PYRmean) and MS-qPCR (NMP; normalized methylation percentage), providing similar clinical results when categorizing data as binary using cluster analysis. Compared to pyrosequencing, MS-qPCR tended to underestimate methylation for values between 0 and 15%, while for methylation >30% overestimation was observed. The estimated cut-off for MS-qPCR data based on cluster analysis, kappa-index agreement and ROC curve analysis were much lower than that derived from pyrosequencing. In conclusion, our results indicate that independently of the approach used for estimating the cut-off, the methylation percentage obtained through MS-qPCR is lower than that calculated for pyrosequencing. These differences in data and therefore in the cut-off should be examined when using methylation biomarkers in the clinical practice. MDPI 2020-12-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7730915/ /pubmed/33287451 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms21239242 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
De Chiara, Loretta
Leiro-Fernandez, Virginia
Rodríguez-Girondo, Mar
Valverde, Diana
Botana-Rial, María Isabel
Fernández-Villar, Alberto
Comparison of Bisulfite Pyrosequencing and Methylation-Specific qPCR for Methylation Assessment
title Comparison of Bisulfite Pyrosequencing and Methylation-Specific qPCR for Methylation Assessment
title_full Comparison of Bisulfite Pyrosequencing and Methylation-Specific qPCR for Methylation Assessment
title_fullStr Comparison of Bisulfite Pyrosequencing and Methylation-Specific qPCR for Methylation Assessment
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Bisulfite Pyrosequencing and Methylation-Specific qPCR for Methylation Assessment
title_short Comparison of Bisulfite Pyrosequencing and Methylation-Specific qPCR for Methylation Assessment
title_sort comparison of bisulfite pyrosequencing and methylation-specific qpcr for methylation assessment
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7730915/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33287451
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms21239242
work_keys_str_mv AT dechiaraloretta comparisonofbisulfitepyrosequencingandmethylationspecificqpcrformethylationassessment
AT leirofernandezvirginia comparisonofbisulfitepyrosequencingandmethylationspecificqpcrformethylationassessment
AT rodriguezgirondomar comparisonofbisulfitepyrosequencingandmethylationspecificqpcrformethylationassessment
AT valverdediana comparisonofbisulfitepyrosequencingandmethylationspecificqpcrformethylationassessment
AT botanarialmariaisabel comparisonofbisulfitepyrosequencingandmethylationspecificqpcrformethylationassessment
AT fernandezvillaralberto comparisonofbisulfitepyrosequencingandmethylationspecificqpcrformethylationassessment