Identification of type 1 diabetes-associated DNA methylation variable positions that precede disease diagnosis

Vardhman K Rakyan, Huriya Beyan, Thomas A Down, Mohammed I Hawa, Siarhei Maslau, Deeqo Aden, Antoine Daunay, Florence Busato, Charles A Mein, Burkhard Manfras, Kerith-Rae M Dias, Christopher G Bell, Jörg Tost, Bernhard O Boehm, Stephan Beck, R David Leslie, Vardhman K Rakyan, Huriya Beyan, Thomas A Down, Mohammed I Hawa, Siarhei Maslau, Deeqo Aden, Antoine Daunay, Florence Busato, Charles A Mein, Burkhard Manfras, Kerith-Rae M Dias, Christopher G Bell, Jörg Tost, Bernhard O Boehm, Stephan Beck, R David Leslie

Abstract

Monozygotic (MZ) twin pair discordance for childhood-onset Type 1 Diabetes (T1D) is ∼50%, implicating roles for genetic and non-genetic factors in the aetiology of this complex autoimmune disease. Although significant progress has been made in elucidating the genetics of T1D in recent years, the non-genetic component has remained poorly defined. We hypothesized that epigenetic variation could underlie some of the non-genetic component of T1D aetiology and, thus, performed an epigenome-wide association study (EWAS) for this disease. We generated genome-wide DNA methylation profiles of purified CD14+ monocytes (an immune effector cell type relevant to T1D pathogenesis) from 15 T1D-discordant MZ twin pairs. This identified 132 different CpG sites at which the direction of the intra-MZ pair DNA methylation difference significantly correlated with the diabetic state, i.e. T1D-associated methylation variable positions (T1D-MVPs). We confirmed these T1D-MVPs display statistically significant intra-MZ pair DNA methylation differences in the expected direction in an independent set of T1D-discordant MZ pairs (P = 0.035). Then, to establish the temporal origins of the T1D-MVPs, we generated two further genome-wide datasets and established that, when compared with controls, T1D-MVPs are enriched in singletons both before (P = 0.001) and at (P = 0.015) disease diagnosis, and also in singletons positive for diabetes-associated autoantibodies but disease-free even after 12 years follow-up (P = 0.0023). Combined, these results suggest that T1D-MVPs arise very early in the etiological process that leads to overt T1D. Our EWAS of T1D represents an important contribution toward understanding the etiological role of epigenetic variation in type 1 diabetes, and it is also the first systematic analysis of the temporal origins of disease-associated epigenetic variation for any human complex disease.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1. Identification of Type 1 Diabetes-associated…
Figure 1. Identification of Type 1 Diabetes-associated DNA methylation variable positions (T1D–MVPs).
(A) On the x-axis, each ‘column’ of data contains 15 different points, indicating the absolute intra-pair DNA methylation difference observed at a single T1D–MVP for each of the 15 different T1D–discordant MZ pairs. Plotted are the 58 different hyper- and 74 different hypoT1D–MVPs that were called at P

Figure 2. T1D–MVPs are not due to…

Figure 2. T1D–MVPs are not due to increased technical and/or biological variability.

We generated Illumina27K…

Figure 2. T1D–MVPs are not due to increased technical and/or biological variability.
We generated Illumina27K profiles for CD14+ cells from 9 different control MZ pairs and calculated intra-MZ pair methylation differences at each probe on the Illumina27K array, for each of the 9 different MZ pairs. Here we plot the variance (around the mean) observed in intra-MZ pair methylation differences at each probe over all 9 MZ pairs (i.e. each ‘column’ of data contains 9 different data-points). For each MZ pair, the choice of the ‘index’ co-twin was arbitrary. CpG sites were ranked in order of increasing sample variance across the 9 intra-pair differences measured at each site. The range of intra-MZ pair variability at T1D–MVP-corresponding probes (highlighted) is significantly less compared with the range of variability observed across other probes on the array (P = 2.4×10−8, Welch's t-test). Number of probes used in this analysis = 22,645 (of the total 27,458 probes on the array. Refer to the section ‘Array Processing’ in Materials and Methods for the Q.C. steps performed on the arrays).

Figure 3. Biological confirmation of the T1D–MVPs…

Figure 3. Biological confirmation of the T1D–MVPs in an independent set of T1D–discordant MZ pairs.

Figure 3. Biological confirmation of the T1D–MVPs in an independent set of T1D–discordant MZ pairs.
Mean intra-pair methylation differences associated with T1D–MVPs between 4 T1D–discordant MZ pairs not included in the original dataset. Bars indicate 50% bootstrap confidence intervals on the means, and whiskers indicate 95% confidence intervals on the means. We observed a statistically significant DNA methylation difference in the expected direction between hyper and hypoT1D–MVPs (P = 0.0375, Welch's t-test).

Figure 4. Establishment of the temporal origins…

Figure 4. Establishment of the temporal origins and additional independent biological confirmation of the T1D–MVPs.

Figure 4. Establishment of the temporal origins and additional independent biological confirmation of the T1D–MVPs.
(A) Boxplots of the mean difference in the proportion of CpG sites methylated (%) between 7 pre- or post–T1D diagnosis samples and 18 controls from 9 unaffected MZ pairs or between pre- and post–T1D diagnosis samples at 74 hypo- and 58 hyper-methylated MVPs. Bars indicate 50% bootstrap confidence intervals on the means, and whiskers indicate 95% confidence intervals on the means. (B) Boxplots of the mean difference in the proportion of CpG sites methylated (%) between each of 4 Ab+/T1D–singletons and the same controls as in ‘A’. Bars indicate 50% bootstrap confidence intervals on the means, and whiskers indicate 95% confidence intervals on the means.
Figure 2. T1D–MVPs are not due to…
Figure 2. T1D–MVPs are not due to increased technical and/or biological variability.
We generated Illumina27K profiles for CD14+ cells from 9 different control MZ pairs and calculated intra-MZ pair methylation differences at each probe on the Illumina27K array, for each of the 9 different MZ pairs. Here we plot the variance (around the mean) observed in intra-MZ pair methylation differences at each probe over all 9 MZ pairs (i.e. each ‘column’ of data contains 9 different data-points). For each MZ pair, the choice of the ‘index’ co-twin was arbitrary. CpG sites were ranked in order of increasing sample variance across the 9 intra-pair differences measured at each site. The range of intra-MZ pair variability at T1D–MVP-corresponding probes (highlighted) is significantly less compared with the range of variability observed across other probes on the array (P = 2.4×10−8, Welch's t-test). Number of probes used in this analysis = 22,645 (of the total 27,458 probes on the array. Refer to the section ‘Array Processing’ in Materials and Methods for the Q.C. steps performed on the arrays).
Figure 3. Biological confirmation of the T1D–MVPs…
Figure 3. Biological confirmation of the T1D–MVPs in an independent set of T1D–discordant MZ pairs.
Mean intra-pair methylation differences associated with T1D–MVPs between 4 T1D–discordant MZ pairs not included in the original dataset. Bars indicate 50% bootstrap confidence intervals on the means, and whiskers indicate 95% confidence intervals on the means. We observed a statistically significant DNA methylation difference in the expected direction between hyper and hypoT1D–MVPs (P = 0.0375, Welch's t-test).
Figure 4. Establishment of the temporal origins…
Figure 4. Establishment of the temporal origins and additional independent biological confirmation of the T1D–MVPs.
(A) Boxplots of the mean difference in the proportion of CpG sites methylated (%) between 7 pre- or post–T1D diagnosis samples and 18 controls from 9 unaffected MZ pairs or between pre- and post–T1D diagnosis samples at 74 hypo- and 58 hyper-methylated MVPs. Bars indicate 50% bootstrap confidence intervals on the means, and whiskers indicate 95% confidence intervals on the means. (B) Boxplots of the mean difference in the proportion of CpG sites methylated (%) between each of 4 Ab+/T1D–singletons and the same controls as in ‘A’. Bars indicate 50% bootstrap confidence intervals on the means, and whiskers indicate 95% confidence intervals on the means.

References

    1. Todd JA. Etiology of type 1 diabetes. Immunity. 2010;32:457–67.
    1. Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium. Genome-wide association study of 14,000 cases of seven common diseases and 3,000 shared controls. Nature. 2007;447:661–78.
    1. Leslie RD, Delli Castelli M. Age-dependent influences on the origins of autoimmune diabetes: evidence and implications. Diabetes. 2004;53:3033–40.
    1. Bach JF. The effect of infections on susceptibility to autoimmune and allergic diseases. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:911–20.
    1. Redondo MJ, Yu L, Hawa M, Mackenzie T, Pyke DA, et al. Heterogeneity of type I diabetes: analysis of monozygotic twins in Great Britain and the United States. Diabetologia. 2001;44:354–62.
    1. Hyttinen V, Kaprio J, Kinnunen L, Koskenvuo M, Tuomilehto J. Genetic liability of type 1 diabetes and the onset age among 22,650 young Finnish twin pairs: a nationwide follow-up study. Diabetes. 2003;52:1052–5.
    1. Knip M, Veijola R, Virtanen SM, Hyöty H, Vaarala O, et al. Environmental triggers and determinants of type 1 diabetes. Diabetes. 2005;54(Suppl 2):S125–36.
    1. Jaenisch R, Bird A. Epigenetic regulation of gene expression: how the genome integrates intrinsic and environmental signals. Nat Genet. 2003;33(Suppl):245–54.
    1. Fraga MF, Ballestar E, Paz MF, Ropero S, Setien F, et al. Epigenetic differences arise during the lifetime of monozygotic twins. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005;10:10604–9.
    1. Javierre BM, Fernandez AF, Richter J, Al-Shahrour F, Martin-Subero JI, et al. Changes in the pattern of DNA methylation associate with twin discordance in systemic lupus erythematosus. Genome Res. 2010;20:170–9.
    1. Kaminsky ZA, Tang T, Wang SC, Ptak C, Oh GH, et al. DNA methylation profiles in monozygotic and dizygotic twins. Nat Genet. 2009;41:240–5.
    1. Nguyen A, Rauch TA, Pfeifer GP, Hu VW. Global methylation profiling of lymphoblastoid cell lines reveals epigenetic contributions to autism spectrum disorders and a novel autism candidate gene, RORA, whose protein product is reduced in autistic brain. FASEB J. 2010 Apr 7. (Epub ahead of print)
    1. Feinberg AP, Irizarry RA, Fradin D, Aryee MJ, et al. Personalized epigenomic signatures that are stable over time and covary with body mass index. Sci Transl Med. 2010;2:49ra67.
    1. Bell CG, Teschendorff AE, Rakyan VK, Maxwell AP, Beck S, et al. Genome-wide DNA methylation analysis for diabetic nephropathy in type 1 diabetes mellitus. BMC Med Genomics. 2010;5:33–7.
    1. Bell CG, Finer S, Lindgren CM, Wilson GA, Rakyan VK, et al. Integrated genetic and epigenetic analysis identifies haplotype-specific methylation in the FTO type 2 diabetes and obesity susceptibility locus. PLoS One. 2010;5:e14040.
    1. Bluestone JA, Herold K, Eisenbarth G. Genetics, pathogenesis and clinical interventions in type 1 diabetes. Nature. 2010;464:1293–300.
    1. Uno S, Imagawa A, Okita K, Sayama K, Moriwaki M, et al. Macrophages and dendritic cells infiltrating islets with or without beta cells produce tumour necrosis factor-alpha in patients with recent-onset type 1 diabetes. Diabetologia. 2007;50:596–601.
    1. Litherland SA, Xie XT, Hutson AD, Wasserfall C, Whittaker DS, et al. Aberrant prostaglandin synthase 2 expression defines an antigen-presenting cell defect for insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. J Clin Invest. 1999;104:515–23.
    1. Beyan H, Goodier MR, Nawroly NS, Hawa MI, et al. Altered monocyte cyclooxygenase response to lipopolysaccharide in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes. 2006;55:3439–45.
    1. Bibikova M, Le J, Barnes B, Saedinia-Melnyk S, Zhou L, et al. Genome-wide DNA methylation profiling using Infinium® assay. Epigenomics. 2009;1:177–200.
    1. Eckhardt F, Lewin J, Cortese R, Rakyan VK, Attwood J, et al. DNA methylation profiling of human chromosomes 6, 20 and 22. Nat Genet. 2006;38:1378–85.
    1. Dejeux E, Audard V, Cavard C, Gut IG, Terris B, Tost J. Rapid identification of promoter hypermethylation in hepatocellular carcinoma by pyrosequencing of etiologically homogeneous sample pools. J Mol Diagn. 2007;9:510–20.
    1. Clayton DG. Prediction and interaction in complex disease genetics: experience in type 1 diabetes. PLoS Genet. 2009;5:e1000540.
    1. Ludvigsson J, Faresjö M, Hjorth M, Axelsson S, Chéramy M, et al. GAD treatment and insulin secretion in recent-onset type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:1909–20.
    1. Boehm BO, Manfras B, Seissler J, Schöffling K, Glück M, et al. Epidemiology and immunogenetic background of islet cell antibody positive nondiabetic schoolchildren. Ulm-Frankfurt population study. Diabetes. 1991;40:1435–9.
    1. Gardner SG, Gale EA, Williams AJ, Gillespie KM, Lawrence KE, et al. Progression to diabetes in relatives with islet autoantibodies. Is it inevitable? Diabetes Care. 1999;22:2049–54.
    1. Oresic M, Simell S, Sysi-Aho M, Näntö-Salonen K, Seppänen-Laakso T, et al. Dysregulation of lipid and amino acid metabolism precedes islet autoimmunity in children who later progress to type 1 diabetes. J Exp Med. 2008;205:2975–84.
    1. Rakyan VK, Blewitt ME, Druker R, Preis JI, Whitelaw E. Metastable epialleles in mammals. Trends Genet. 2002;18:348–51.
    1. Richards EJ. Inherited epigenetic variation–revisiting soft inheritance. Nat Rev Genet. 2006;7:395–401.
    1. Feinberg AP, Irizarry RA. Evolution in health and medicine Sackler colloquium: Stochastic epigenetic variation as a driving force of development, evolutionary adaptation, and disease. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010;(Suppl 1):1757–64.
    1. Knip M, Virtanen SM, Seppä K, Ilonen J, Savilahti E, Vaarala O, et al. Dietary intervention in infancy and later signs of beta-cell autoimmunity. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:1900–8.
    1. Manolio TA, Collins FS, Cox NJ, Goldstein DB, Hindorff LA, Hunter DJ, McCarthy MI, Ramos EM, Cardon LR, Chakravarti A, Cho JH, Guttmacher AE, Kong A, Kruglyak L, Mardis E, Rotimi CN, Slatkin M, Valle D, Whittemore AS, Boehnke M, Clark AG, Eichler EE, Gibson G, Haines JL, Mackay TF, McCarroll SA, Visscher PM. Finding the missing heritability of complex diseases. Nature. 2009;461:747–53.
    1. Rakyan VK, Down TA, Balding DJ, Beck S. Epigenome-wide association studies for common human diseases. Nat Rev Genet. 2011;12:529–41.
    1. Hawa M, Rowe R, Lan MS, Notkins AL, Pozzilli P, et al. Value of antibodies to islet protein tyrosine phosphatase-like molecule in predicting type 2 diabetes. Diabetes. 1997;46:1270–5.
    1. Wenzlau JM, Juhl K, Yu L, et al. The cation efflux transporter ZnT8 (Slc30A8) is a major autoantigen in human type 1 diabetes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007;104:17040–5.

Source: PubMed

3
Sottoscrivi