Cancer genetics · 2020
Integrating transcriptome-wide association study and copy number variation study identifies candidate genes and pathways for diffuse non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wu Di, Zhao Jing, Ma Hong, Wang Meng-Chang
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The genetic basis of diffuse non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (DNHL) is largely unknown now. We conducted a large-scale transcriptome-wide association study (TWAS) of DNHL to identify novel candidates for DNHL.
METHODS: The GWAS summary data of DNHL was obtained from the UKBiobank, involving 685 cases and 451,579 controls. TWAS of DNHL was performed using tissue-specific gene expression weights generated from the Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx) data. The DNHLTWAS results were further validated by a previous published copy number alterations (CNA) study of DNHL. Gene ontology (GO) and pathway enrichment analysis of identified candidate genes were conducted by the DAVID 6.8.
RESULTS: We identified 214 genes with TWAS P value < 0.05 for DNHL, such as MRPL19 (PTWAS = 0.0010), CRCP (PTWAS = 0.0010) and SEMA3C (PTWAS = 0.0010). After further comparing the 214 genes with copy number variations of DNHL patients, we found 1 overlapped gene, BCL10 (PTWAS = 0.0100). We also detected 6 common GO terms shared between gene set enrichment analysis results of TWAS and CNAs, such as cytosol (PTWAS = 0.0003, PCNAs = 4.99 × 10-7) and membrane (PTWAS = 0.0048, PCNAs = 0.0046). The pathway enrichment analysis of TWAS and CNAs detected 3 common pathways, including HIF-1 signaling pathway (PTWAS = 0.0195, PCNAs = 1.96 × 10-5), mTOR signaling pathway (PTWAS = 0.0242, PCNAs = 6.75 × 10-5) and adipocytokine signaling pathway (PTWAS = 0.0392, PCNAs = 0.0103).
CONCLUSIONS: Our study identified multiple DNHL associated genes and pathways, providing novel useful information for the pathogenetic studies of DNHL.
METHODS: The GWAS summary data of DNHL was obtained from the UKBiobank, involving 685 cases and 451,579 controls. TWAS of DNHL was performed using tissue-specific gene expression weights generated from the Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx) data. The DNHLTWAS results were further validated by a previous published copy number alterations (CNA) study of DNHL. Gene ontology (GO) and pathway enrichment analysis of identified candidate genes were conducted by the DAVID 6.8.
RESULTS: We identified 214 genes with TWAS P value < 0.05 for DNHL, such as MRPL19 (PTWAS = 0.0010), CRCP (PTWAS = 0.0010) and SEMA3C (PTWAS = 0.0010). After further comparing the 214 genes with copy number variations of DNHL patients, we found 1 overlapped gene, BCL10 (PTWAS = 0.0100). We also detected 6 common GO terms shared between gene set enrichment analysis results of TWAS and CNAs, such as cytosol (PTWAS = 0.0003, PCNAs = 4.99 × 10-7) and membrane (PTWAS = 0.0048, PCNAs = 0.0046). The pathway enrichment analysis of TWAS and CNAs detected 3 common pathways, including HIF-1 signaling pathway (PTWAS = 0.0195, PCNAs = 1.96 × 10-5), mTOR signaling pathway (PTWAS = 0.0242, PCNAs = 6.75 × 10-5) and adipocytokine signaling pathway (PTWAS = 0.0392, PCNAs = 0.0103).
CONCLUSIONS: Our study identified multiple DNHL associated genes and pathways, providing novel useful information for the pathogenetic studies of DNHL.