Cell type-specific epigenomic variation and its association with genotype in the human breast
Hauduc, A.; Steif, J.; Bilenky, M.; Moksa, M. M.; Cao, Q.; Ding, S.; Eaves, C. J.; Hirst, M.
Show abstract
BackgroundUnderstanding the interplay between genome variation and epigenomic structure is fundamental to the study of the development and mechanisms of disease. Previous studies have leveraged population-scale genotype surveys to associate alleles with epigenomic states in heterogenous tissue types. However, epigenomes are inherently cell type-specific, giving rise to unique genome-epigenome interactions that can influence distinct functional states and susceptibility to disease. Moreover, the extent of individual variation in cell type-specific epigenotypes remains poorly understood, posing additional challenges to accurately link genotypes with epigenomic features. ResultsWe generated comprehensive genomic and epigenomic measurements in four functionally defined human breast cell types across eight individuals. We developed a method to measure histone modification variance, discovering significantly higher variation in repressive chromatin states marked by H3K27me3 compared to the active states marked by H3K27ac and H3K4me3. Genetic variation linked to variation in chromatin state was highly cell type-specific, with nearly 90% occurring uniquely in a single cell type, and active histone modifications were enriched in these variants relative to repressive modifications. Association with gene transcription allowed for the prioritization of functional candidates, and the regulatory impact of an ANXA1-linked variant, rs75071948, was validated in vitro with CRISPR/Cas9-mediated HDR. ConclusionsWe define structures of epigenomic variability among breast cell types and present evidence of extensive cell type-specific genome-epigenome interactions, highlighting the critical role of cell type in mediating these associations in the breast.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Allele-specific DNA methylation is increased in cancers and its dense mapping in normal plus neoplastic cells increases the yield of disease-associated regulatory SNPs 96%
- Cancer-specific CTCF binding facilitates oncogenic transcriptional dysregulation 96%
- Genetic impacts on DNA methylation help elucidate regulatory genomic processes 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Copy number normalization distinguishes differential signals driven by copy number differences in ATAC-seq and ChIP-seq 94%
- Characterization of a strain-specific CD-1 reference genome reveals potential inter- and intra-strain functional variability 94%
- Escape from X inactivation varies across genes and tissues and shapes sex-biased sex chromosome gene expression 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- MOSTWAS: Multi-Omic Strategies for Transcriptome-Wide Association Studies 95%
- TFAP2 paralogs facilitate chromatin access for MITF at pigmentation genes but inhibit expression of cell-cell adhesion genes independently of MITF 95%
- DNA methylation covariation in human whole blood and sperm: implications for studies of intergenerational epigenetic effects 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Histone H3.3 lysine 9 and 27 control repressive chromatin states at cryptic cis-regulatory elements and bivalent promoters in mouse embryonic stem cells 94%
- Transposable elements mediate genetic effects altering the expression of nearby genes in colorectal cancer 94%
- Systematic benchmarking of imaging spatial transcriptomics platforms in FFPE tissues 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Identification of blood autosomal cis-expression quantitative trait methylation (cis-eQTMs) in children 95%
- Co-expression analysis reveals interpretable gene modules controlled by trans-acting genetic variants 93%
- Functional dynamic genetic effects on gene regulation are specific to particular cell types and environmental conditions 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.