Dataset Information

Seven-CpG DNA Methylation Age Determined by Single Nucleotide Primer Extension and Illumina’s Infinium MethylationEPIC Array Provide Highly Comparable Results

ABSTRACT: DNA methylation age (DNAm age, epigenetic clock) is a novel and promising biomarker of aging. It is calculated from the methylation fraction of specific cytosine phosphate guanine sites (CpG sites) of genomic DNA. Several groups have proposed epigenetic clock algorithms and these differ mostly regarding the number and location of the CpG sites considered and the method used to assess the methylation status. Most epigenetic clocks are based on a large number of CpGs, e.g. as measured by DNAm microarrays. We have recently evaluated an epigenetic clock based on the methylation fraction of seven CpGs that were determined by methylation-sensitive single nucleotide primer extension (MS-SNuPE). This method is more cost-effective when compared to array-based technologies as only a few CpGs need to be examined. However, there is only little data on the correspondence in epigenetic age estimation using the 7-CpG clock and other algorithms. To bridge this gap, in this study we measured the 7-CpG DNAm age using two methods, via MS-SNuPE and via the MethylationEPIC array, in a sample of 1,058 participants of the Berlin Aging Study II (BASE-II), assessed as part of the GendAge study. On average, participants were 75.6 years old (SD: 3.7, age range: 64.9–90.0, 52.6% female). Agreement between methods was assessed by Bland-Altman plots. DNAm age was highly correlated between methods (Pearson’s r = 0.9) and Bland-Altman plots showed a difference of 3.1 years. DNAm age by the 7-CpG formula was 71.2 years (SD: 6.9 years, SNuPE) and 68.1 years (SD: 6.4 years, EPIC array). The mean of difference in methylation fraction between methods for the seven individual CpG sites was between 0.7 and 13 percent. To allow direct conversion of DNAm age obtained from both methods we developed an adjustment formula with a randomly selected training set of 529 participants using linear regression. After conversion of the Illumina data in a second and independent validation set, the adjusted DNAm age was 71.44 years (SD: 6.1 years, n = 529). In summary, we found the results of DNAm clocks to be highly comparable. Furthermore, we developed an adjustment formula that allows for direct conversion of DNAm age estimates between methods and enables one singular clock to be used in studies that employ either the Illumina or the SNuPE method.

SUBMITTER: Vetter V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8802213 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Epigenome-wide association studies (EWAS) have been widely applied to identify methylation CpG sites associated with human disease. To date, the Infinium MethylationEPIC array (EPIC) is commonly used for high-throughput DNA methylation profiling. However, the EPIC array covers only 30% of the human methylome. Methylation Capture bisulfite sequencing (MC-seq) captures target regions of methylome and has advantages of extensive coverage in the methylome at an affordable price. METHODS:Epigenome-wide DNA methylation in four peripheral blood mononuclear cell samples was profiled by using SureSelectXT Methyl-Seq for MC-seq and EPIC platforms separately. CpG site-based reproducibility of MC-seq was assessed with DNA sample inputs ranging in quantity of high (>?1000 ng), medium (300-1000 ng), and low (150 ng-300 ng). To compare the performance of MC-seq and the EPIC arrays, we conducted a Pearson correlation and methylation value difference at each CpG site that was detected by both MC-seq and EPIC. We compared the percentage and counts in each CpG island and gene annotation between MC-seq and the EPIC array. RESULTS:After quality control, an average of 3,708,550 CpG sites per sample were detected by MC-seq with DNA quantity?>?1000 ng. Reproducibility of DNA methylation in MC-seq-detected CpG sites was high among samples with high, medium, and low DNA inputs (r?>?0.96). The EPIC array captured an average of 846,464 CpG sites per sample. Compared with the EPIC array, MC-seq detected more CpGs in coding regions and CpG islands. Among the 472,540 CpG sites captured by both platforms, methylation of a majority of CpG sites was highly correlated in the same sample (r: 0.98-0.99). However, methylation for a small proportion of CpGs (N?=?235) differed significantly between the two platforms, with differences in beta values of greater than 0.5. CONCLUSIONS:Our results show that MC-seq is an efficient and reliable platform for methylome profiling with a broader coverage of the methylome than the array-based platform. Although methylation measurements in majority of CpGs are highly correlated, a number of CpG sites show large discrepancy between the two platforms, which warrants further investigation and needs cautious interpretation.

Project description:BackgroundThe pooled sample method is used in epigenomic research and expression analysis and is a cost-effective screening approach for small amounts of DNA. Evaluation of the pooled sample method in epigenomic studies is performed using the Illumina Infinium Methylation 450K BeadChip array; however, subsequent reports on the updated 850K array are lacking. A previous study demonstrated that the methylation levels obtained from individual samples were accurately replicated using pooled samples but did not address epigenome-wide association study (EWAS) statistics. The DNA quantification method, which is important for the homogeneous mixing of DNA in the pooled sample method, has since become fluorescence-based, and additional factors need to be considered including the resolution of batch effects of microarray chips and the heterogeneity of the cellular proportions from which the DNA samples are derived. In this study, four pooled samples were created from 44 individual samples, and EWAS statistics for differentially methylated positions (DMPs) and regions (DMRs) were conducted for individual samples and compared with the statistics obtained from the pooled samples.ResultsThe methylation levels could be reproduced fairly well in the pooled samples. This was the case for the entire dataset and when limited to the top 100 CpG sites, consistent with a previous study using the 450K BeadChip array. However, the statistical results of the EWAS for the DMP by individual samples were not replicated in pooled samples. Qualitative analyses highlighting methylation within an arbitrary candidate gene were replicable. Focusing on chr 20, the statistical results of EWAS for DMR from individual samples showed replicability in the pooled samples as long as they were limited to regions with a sufficient effect size.ConclusionsThe pooled sample method replicated the methylation values well and can be used for EWAS in DMR. This method is sample amount-effective and cost-effective and can be utilized for screening by carefully understanding the effective features and disadvantages of the pooled sample method and combining it with candidate gene analyses.

Project description:BackgroundThe capacity of technologies measuring DNA methylation (DNAm) is rapidly evolving, as are the options for applicable bioinformatics methods. The most commonly used DNAm microarray, the Illumina Infinium HumanMethylation450 (450K array), has recently been replaced by the Illumina Infinium HumanMethylationEPIC (EPIC array), nearly doubling the number of targeted CpG sites. Given that a subset of 450K CpG sites is absent on the EPIC array and that several tools for both data normalization and analyses were developed on the 450K array, it is important to assess their utility when applied to EPIC array data. One of the most commonly used 450K tools is the pan-tissue epigenetic clock, a multivariate predictor of biological age based on DNAm at 353 CpG sites. Of these CpGs, 19 are missing from the EPIC array, thus raising the question of whether EPIC data can be used to accurately estimate DNAm age. We also investigated a 71-CpG epigenetic age predictor, referred to as the Hannum method, which lacks 6 probes on the EPIC array. To evaluate these epigenetic clocks in EPIC data properly, a prior assessment of the effects of data preprocessing methods on DNAm age is also required.MethodsDNAm was quantified, on both the 450K and EPIC platforms, from human primary monocytes derived from 172 individuals. We calculated DNAm age from raw, and three different preprocessed data forms to assess the effects of different processing methods on the DNAm age estimate. Using an additional cohort, we also investigated DNAm age of peripheral blood mononuclear cells, bronchoalveolar lavage, and bronchial brushing samples using the EPIC array.ResultsUsing monocyte-derived data from subjects on both the 450K and EPIC, we found that DNAm age was highly correlated across both raw and preprocessing methods (r > 0.91). Thus, the correlation between chronological age and the DNAm age estimate is largely unaffected by platform differences and normalization methods. However, we found that the choice of normalization method and measurement platform can lead to a systematic offset in the age estimate which in turn leads to an increase in the median error. Comparing the 450K and EPIC DNAm age estimates, we observed that the median absolute difference was 1.44-3.10 years across preprocessing methods.ConclusionsHere, we have provided evidence that the epigenetic clock is resistant to the lack of 19 CpG sites missing from the EPIC array as well as highlighted the importance of considering the technical variance of the epigenetic when interpreting group differences below the reported error. Furthermore, our study highlights the utility of epigenetic age acceleration measure, the residuals from a linear regression of DNAm age on chronological age, as the resulting values are robust with respect to normalization methods and measurement platforms.

Dataset Information

Seven-CpG DNA Methylation Age Determined by Single Nucleotide Primer Extension and Illumina’s Infinium MethylationEPIC Array Provide Highly Comparable Results

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets