4.6 Article

Bioinformatic Analysis Identified Hub Genes Associated with Heterocyclic Amines Induced Cytotoxicity of Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells

期刊

GENES
卷 12, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/genes12121888

关键词

PhIP; IQ; PBMC; WGCNA; hub gene

资金

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2017 YFC1600402]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study identified five gene modules related to HCAs exposure in PBMC, with functions in mRNA transcriptional regulation, mitochondrial function, RNA catabolic process, protein targeting, and immune function. Additionally, specific genes MIER1, NDUFA4, MLL3, CD53, and CSF3 were recognized as feature genes in these modules. The expression of these feature genes showed significant differences between PhIP/IQ exposed samples and other samples.
Heterocyclic amines (HCAs) are a set of food contaminants that may exert a cytotoxic effect on human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC). However, the genetic mechanism underlying the cytotoxicity of HCAs on PBMC has not been investigated. In the study, bioinformatic analysis on gene dataset GSE19078 was performed. The results of weighted correlation network analysis and linear models for microarray and RNA-seq data analysis showed that four gene modules were relevant to 2-amino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazo[4,5-b]pyridine (PhIP) exposure while one gene module was correlated with 2-amino-3-methyl-3H-imidazo[4,5f]quinoline (IQ) exposure. Gene functional analysis showed that the five modules were annotated mainly with mRNA transcriptional regulation, mitochondrial function, RNA catabolic process, protein targeting, and immune function. Five genes, MIER1, NDUFA4, MLL3, CD53 and CSF3 were recognized as the feature genes for each hub gene network of the corresponding gene module, and the expression of feature genes was observed with a significant difference between the PhIP/IQ samples and the other samples. Our results provide novel genes and promising mechanisms for exploration on the genetic mechanism of HCAs on PBMC.

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

4.6
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