4.7 Article

Epigenome-wide association study of diabetic chronic kidney disease progression in the Korean population: the KNOW-CKD study

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 13, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-35485-x

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An epigenome-wide association study was conducted on diabetic chronic kidney disease patients in Korea to identify epigenetic markers associated with disease progression. Two epigenetic markers were found to potentially be associated with the progression of diabetic CKD in Koreans.
Since the etiology of diabetic chronic kidney disease (CKD) is multifactorial, studies on DNA methylation for kidney function deterioration have rarely been performed despite the need for an epigenetic approach. Therefore, this study aimed to identify epigenetic markers associated with CKD progression based on the decline in the estimated glomerular filtration rate in diabetic CKD in Korea. An epigenome-wide association study was performed using whole blood samples from 180 CKD recruited from the KNOW-CKD cohort. Pyrosequencing was also performed on 133 CKD participants as an external replication analysis. Functional analyses, including the analysis of disease-gene networks, reactome pathways, and protein-protein interaction networks, were conducted to identify the biological mechanisms of CpG sites. A phenome-wide association study was performed to determine the associations between CpG sites and other phenotypes. Two epigenetic markers, cg10297223 on AGTR1 and cg02990553 on KRT28 indicated a potential association with diabetic CKD progression. Based on the functional analyses, other phenotypes (blood pressure and cardiac arrhythmia for AGTR1) and biological pathways (keratinization and cornified envelope for KRT28) related to CKD were also identified. This study suggests a potential association between the cg10297223 and cg02990553 and the progression of diabetic CKD in Koreans. Nevertheless, further validation is needed through additional studies.

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

4.7
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