Abstract

BackgroundIsolated orofacial clefts are among the most common congenital birth defects. Although the underlying biological mechanisms remain largely unknown, clefts are thought to be complex disorders influenced by genetic, environmental, and potentially epigenetic factors.MethodsIn blood samples from 2- to 3-day-old infants (n = 747) collected in a nationwide population-based study of orofacial clefts in Norway, we measured DNA methylation profiles for more than 450,000 CpGs and then conducted epigenome-wide association analyses (EWAS). We tested methylation profile difference at each CpG between controls (n = 436) and each of the cleft subtypes (92 cleft lip only, CLO; 84 cleft palate only, CPO; 132 cleft lip and palate, CLP). We also compared controls to various combinations of case groups and compared case subtypes to each other. Finally, using the EWAS results, we searched for larger differentially methylated regions (DMRs) associated with orofacial clefts.ResultsIn EWAS comparing controls to individual cleft subtypes, we found no significant associations at a Bonferroni P value threshold of 10−7. After pooling case groups, we found two significantly differentially methylated CpGs: cg09696939 near gene BICC1 is associated with CLO+CLP (P = 9.58 × 10−8); cg26985354 in gene CLASRP is associated with CPO+CLP (P = 7.38 × 10−8). In DMR analysis, we identified a total of 56 significant regions when comparing controls to individual cleft subtypes (10 for CLO, 6 for CPO, 41 for CLP). Only one DMR is shared among the three cleft groups. In combined case group analysis, we found 26 DMRs for CLP+CLO, 31 for CLP+CPO, and 37 when all subtypes are combined. Finally, in case-case comparisons of subtypes, we identified 10 DMRs when comparing CLP to CPO, 9 in CLP compared to CLO, and 13 in CLP compared to CPO.ConclusionsWe identified two individual CpGs and multiple DMRs that differ between controls and cleft case subtypes. Although we find some evidence for the possible role of DNA methylation in etiology of orofacial clefts, our study does not support previous reports of widespread differences in blood DNA methylation between babies with and without facial clefts.

Highlights

  • Isolated orofacial clefts are among the most common congenital birth defects

  • Infants with cleft lip only (CLO) or cleft palate only (CPO) weigh slightly less at birth (ANOVA test P = 1.7 × 10−2)

  • Similar to Sharp et al [22], we conducted Differentially methylated regions (DMR) analysis between case subtypes and identified 10 DMRs in CLO compared to CPO, 9 DMRs in cleft lip and palate (CLP) compared to CLO, and 13 DMRs in CLP compared to CPO (Additional file 2: Table S6)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Isolated orofacial clefts are among the most common congenital birth defects. The underlying biological mechanisms remain largely unknown, clefts are thought to be complex disorders influenced by genetic, environmental, and potentially epigenetic factors. Orofacial clefts are among the most common congenital birth defects. 70% of orofacial clefts are non-syndromic [1], and the underlying causes of these isolated cases are complex and remain largely unknown. Familial recurrence risk estimates and segregation analysis [4,5,6] suggest there is strong evidence for a genetic component, environmental factors like smoking, vitamin intake, and alcohol intake may play an important role [7,8,9]. Several recent studies [8, 11,12,13] support a multifactorial threshold model of inheritance in which small genetic risk factors may interact with environmental factors

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.