Genome wide analysis of acute myeloid leukemia reveal leukemia specific methylome and subtype specific hypomethylation of repeats

58Citations
Citations of this article
102Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Methylated DNA immunoprecipitation followed by high-throughput sequencing (MeDIP-seq) has the potential to identify changes in DNA methylation important in cancer development. In order to understand the role of epigenetic modulation in the development of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) we have applied MeDIP-seq to the DNA of 12 AML patients and 4 normal bone marrows. This analysis revealed leukemia-associated differentially methylated regions that included gene promoters, gene bodies, CpG islands and CpG island shores. Two genes (SPHKAP and DPP6) with significantly methylated promoters were of interest and further analysis of their expression showed them to be repressed in AML. We also demonstrated considerable cytogenetic subtype specificity in the methylomes affecting different genomic features. Significantly distinct patterns of hypomethylation of certain interspersed repeat elements were associated with cytogenetic subtypes. The methylation patterns of members of the SINE family tightly clustered all leukemic patients with an enrichment of Alu repeats with a high CpG density (P<0.0001). We were able to demonstrate significant inverse correlation between intragenic interspersed repeat sequence methylation and gene expression with SINEs showing the strongest inverse correlation (R 2 = 0.7). We conclude that the alterations in DNA methylation that accompany the development of AML affect not only the promoters, but also the non-promoter genomic features, with significant demethylation of certain interspersed repeat DNA elements being associated with AML cytogenetic subtypes. MeDIP-seq data were validated using bisulfite pyrosequencing and the Infinium array. © 2012 Saied et al.

Figures

  • Figure 1. Global DNA methylation display in AML and NBM. (A) DNA methylation of all AML patients and all NBMs were categorized into 5 groups of methylation. There was no significant difference in the global DNA methylation between AML and NBM. (B) DNA methylation scores of all AMLs (blue line) and all NBMs (green line) were plotted against their density (frequency). AML has less frequency of DNA methylation scores.0.8 in the comparison with NBM. (C–J) Percentages of different groups of DNA methylation in the average of each triplicate of AML subtype and in the average of 4 NBMs. SINEs showed the highest difference in the DNA methylation scores.0.8 between NBM and AML. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0033213.g001
  • Figure 2. Hierarchical clustering of AML versus NBM in 4 genomic features. First row represents cluster analysis of all AMLs versus all NBMs and the second row represents cluster analysis of AML subtypes in promoters (A, E), gene bodies (B, F), CGIs (C, G) and CGI shores (D, H). In each figure, each column represents AML patient/NBM and each row represents a single DMR. AML patients were clustered more tightly in CGIs (first row). t(8;21) AML subtype was clustered separately from the other AML subtypes (second row). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0033213.g002
  • Figure 3. Hierarchical clustering of AML versus NBM in the interspersed repeats. In each figure, each column represents AML patient/NBM and each row represents a single DMR. First row represents cluster analysis of all AMLs versus all NBMs and the second row represents cluster analysis of AML subtypes in SINEs (A, D), LINEs (B, E) and LTRs (C, F). Distinctive hypomethylated SINEs, LINEs and LTRs clearly distinguished each AML subtype (second row). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0033213.g003
  • Figure 4. Correlation between DNA methylation and gene expression. (A–F) For a single AML patient we categorized the gene methylation into 4 groups (.0.4, 0.4–0.6, 0.6–0.8, .0.8 Batman scores). We correlated the average of each methylation group to corresponding average of gene expression. (G) Box plots of DNA methylation levels of over- and under-expressed genes in each triplicate of t(8;21), t(15;17), NK and trisomy 8 AML subtypes. N refers to the number of genes in each set. Mann Whitney test of the two sets of genes demonstrated a significant methylation difference between the medians in t(8;21), NK and trisomy 8 AML subtypes. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0033213.g004
  • Figure 5. SPHKAP, DPP6 and ID4 gene expression in AML. (A.1, B.1, C.1) Relative expression of SPHKAP, DPP6, ID4 (respectively) in AML and normal tissues. The genes were down regulated in AML patients and in cancer cell lines, while the genes were up regulated in normal tissues. (A.2, B.2, C.2) Relative expression of SPHKAP, DPP6 and ID4 (respectively) in OCI-AML2 and CTS cell lines before and after treatment by DAC. Gene expression was restored in most of cell lines treated by DAC. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0033213.g005

References Powered by Scopus

Ultrafast and memory-efficient alignment of short DNA sequences to the human genome

16917Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Hierarchical Grouping to Optimize an Objective Function

15481Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

A comparison of normalization methods for high density oligonucleotide array data based on variance and bias

6738Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Molecular biomarkers in acute myeloid leukemia

238Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Intragenic DNA methylation in transcriptional regulation, normal differentiation and cancer

194Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The role of DNA methylation in cancer

122Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Saied, M. H., Marzec, J., Khalid, S., Smith, P., Down, T. A., Rakyan, V. K., … Young, B. D. (2012). Genome wide analysis of acute myeloid leukemia reveal leukemia specific methylome and subtype specific hypomethylation of repeats. PLoS ONE, 7(3). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0033213

Readers over time

‘12‘13‘14‘15‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘2306121824

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 43

54%

Researcher 27

34%

Professor / Associate Prof. 7

9%

Lecturer / Post doc 3

4%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 47

56%

Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Bi... 20

24%

Medicine and Dentistry 14

17%

Engineering 3

4%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0