↓ Skip to main content

High-specificity bioinformatics framework for epigenomic profiling of discordant twins reveals specific and shared markers for ACPA and ACPA-positive rheumatoid arthritis

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Medicine, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
High-specificity bioinformatics framework for epigenomic profiling of discordant twins reveals specific and shared markers for ACPA and ACPA-positive rheumatoid arthritis
Published in
Genome Medicine, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13073-016-0374-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Gomez-Cabrero, Malin Almgren, Louise K. Sjöholm, Aase H. Hensvold, Mikael V. Ringh, Rakel Tryggvadottir, Juha Kere, Annika Scheynius, Nathalie Acevedo, Lovisa Reinius, Margaret A. Taub, Carolina Montano, Martin J. Aryee, Jason I. Feinberg, Andrew P. Feinberg, Jesper Tegnér, Lars Klareskog, Anca I. Catrina, Tomas J. Ekström

Abstract

Twin studies are powerful models to elucidate epigenetic modifications resulting from gene-environment interactions. Yet, commonly a limited number of clinical twin samples are available, leading to an underpowered situation afflicted with false positives and hampered by low sensitivity. We investigated genome-wide DNA methylation data from two small sets of monozygotic twins representing different phases during the progression of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to find novel genes for further research. We implemented a robust statistical methodology aimed at investigating a small number of samples to identify differential methylation utilizing the comprehensive CHARM platform with whole blood cell DNA from two sets of twin pairs discordant either for ACPA (antibodies to citrullinated protein antigens)-positive RA versus ACPA-negative healthy or for ACPA-positive healthy (a pre-RA stage) versus ACPA-negative healthy. To deconvolute cell type-dependent differential methylation, we assayed the methylation patterns of sorted cells and used computational algorithms to resolve the relative contributions of different cell types and used them as covariates. To identify methylation biomarkers, five healthy twin pairs discordant for ACPAs were profiled, revealing a single differentially methylated region (DMR). Seven twin pairs discordant for ACPA-positive RA revealed six significant DMRs. After deconvolution of cell type proportions, profiling of the healthy ACPA discordant twin-set revealed 17 genome-wide significant DMRs. When methylation profiles of ACPA-positive RA twin pairs were adjusted for cell type, the analysis disclosed one significant DMR, associated with the EXOSC1 gene. Additionally, the results from our methodology suggest a temporal connection of the protocadherine beta-14 gene to ACPA-positivity with clinical RA. Our biostatistical methodology, optimized for a low-sample twin design, revealed non-genetically linked genes associated with two distinct phases of RA. Functional evidence is still lacking but the results reinforce further study of epigenetic modifications influencing the progression of RA. Our study design and methodology may prove generally useful in twin studies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Finland 1 1%
Singapore 1 1%
Unknown 70 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 10%
Student > Master 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Student > Postgraduate 5 7%
Other 15 21%
Unknown 23 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 15%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 7%
Chemistry 3 4%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 26 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 April 2017.
All research outputs
#5,260,874
of 24,998,746 outputs
Outputs from Genome Medicine
#970
of 1,543 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,160
of 426,476 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Medicine
#23
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,998,746 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,543 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.1. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 426,476 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.