4.5 Article

Sexual epigenetic dimorphism in the human placenta: implications for susceptibility during the prenatal period

Journal

EPIGENOMICS
Volume 9, Issue 3, Pages 267-278

Publisher

FUTURE MEDICINE LTD
DOI: 10.2217/epi-2016-0132

Keywords

CpG DNA methylation; epigenetics; placenta; sexual dimorphism

Funding

  1. NIH [1U2COD023375, UG33OD023348, 1UG3OD023275]
  2. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences [P42-ES007126, T32-ES007018, P42-ES007373, P01-ES022832]
  3. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke [5U01NS040069, 2R01NS040069]
  4. Wake Forest School of Medicine Innovation Pilot Grant
  5. Harold M and Mary Earnhardt Eagle Endowed Fund for Pediatric and Neonatal Research
  6. EPA [RD83544201]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim: Sex-based differences in response to adverse prenatal environments and infant outcomes have been observed, yet the underlying mechanisms for this are unclear. The placental epigenome may be a driver of these differences. Methods: Placental DNA methylation was assessed at more than 480,000 CpG sites from male and female infants enrolled in the extremely low gestational age newborns cohort (ELGAN) and validated in a separate US-based cohort. The impact of gestational age on placental DNA methylation was further examined using the New Hampshire Birth Cohort Study for a total of n = 467 placentas. Results: A total of n = 2745 CpG sites, representing n = 587 genes, were identified as differentially methylated (p < 1 x 10(-7)). The majority (n = 582 or 99%) of these were conserved among the New Hampshire Birth Cohort. The identified genes encode proteins related to immune function, growth/transcription factor signaling and transport across cell membranes. Conclusion: These data highlight sex-dependent epigenetic patterning in the placenta and provide insight into differences in infant outcomes and responses to the perinatal environment.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available