4.2 Article

Epigenetic characteristics in inflammatory candidate genes in aggressive periodontitis

期刊

HUMAN IMMUNOLOGY
卷 77, 期 1, 页码 71-75

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.humimm.2015.10.007

关键词

Periodontal inflammation; Epigenetics; CpG methylation; Chemokine; Cytokine

资金

  1. German Society of Periodontology (DG PARO)
  2. Martin-Luther University of Halle, Germany, University School of Dental Medicine, Department of Operative Dentistry and Periodontology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Periodontitis is a chronic inflammatory disease triggered by the host immune response. Epigenetic modifications also affect the immune response. We assessed CpG methylation in 22 inflammatory candidate genes (ATF2, CCL25, CXCL14, CXCL3, CXCL5, CXCL6, FADD, GATA3, IL10RA, IL12A, IL12B, IL13, IL13RA1, IL15, IL17C, IL17RA, IL4R, IL6R, IL6ST, IL7, INHA, and TYK2) with respect to the occurrence of aggressive periodontitis (AgP). Patients and methods: In this study 15 AgP patients (53.3% males, 41.4 +/- 10.5 years) and 10 controls (40.0% males, 36.9 +/- 17.5 years) were included. The methylation patterns of gingival biopsies were quantified using EpiTect (R) Methyl Signature PCR Array Human Inflammatory Response. Results: In gingival biopsies taken from patients with AgP, CpG methylation of CCL25 (1.73% vs. 2.59%, p = 0.015) and IL17C (6.89% vs. 19.27%, p = 0.002) was significantly reduced as compared with periodontally healthy tissues. Discussion: We showed for the first time a differential methylation pattern for CCL25 and IL17C in periodontitis. CCL25 plays an important role in T-cell development, whereas IL17C regulates innate epithelial immune responses. The decrease in CpG methylation is presumably accompanied by an increase in gene expression. This could lead to a greater availability of CCL25 and interleukin 17C and support periodontal loss of attachment. (C) 2015 American Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据