4.5 Article

Hypoxia alters the epigenetic profile in cultured human placental trophoblasts

期刊

EPIGENETICS
卷 8, 期 2, 页码 192-202

出版社

LANDES BIOSCIENCE
DOI: 10.4161/epi.23400

关键词

DNA methylation; placenta; hypoxia; preeclampsia; AP-1

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes for Health Research [119402]
  2. Barnes-Jewish Hospital Foundation
  3. NIH [HD 29190]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The mechanisms by which the placenta adapts to exogenous stimuli to create a stable and healthy environment for the growing fetus are not well known. Low oxygen tension influences placental function, and is associated with preeclampsia, a condition displaying altered development of placental trophoblast. We hypothesized that oxygen tension affects villous trophoblast by modulation of gene expression through DNA methylation. We used the Infinium HumanMethylation450 BeadChip array to compare the DNA methylation profile of primary cultures of human cytotrophoblasts and syncytiotrophoblasts under < 1%, 8% and 20% oxygen levels. We found no effect of oxygen tension on average DNA methylation for either cell phenotype, but a set of loci became hypermethylated in cytotrophoblasts exposed for 24 h to < 1% oxygen, as compared with those exposed to 8% or 20% oxygen. Hypermethylation with low oxygen tension was independently confirmed by bisulfite-pyrosequencing in a subset of functionally relevant genes including CD59. CFB, GRAM3, and ZNF217. Intriguingly, 70 out of the 147 CpGs that became hypermethylated in < 1% oxygen overlapped with CpG sites that became hypomethylated upon differentiation of cytotrophoblasts into syncytiotrophoblasts. Furthermore, the preponderance of altered sites was located at AP-1 binding sites. We suggest that AP-1 expression is triggered by hypoxia and interacts with DNA methyltransferases (DNMTs) to target methylation at specific sites in the genome, thus causing suppression of the associated genes that are responsible for differentiation of villous cytotrophoblast to syncytiotrophoblast.

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

4.5
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