Preservation Analysis of Macrophage Gene Coexpression Between Human and Mouse Identifies PARK2 as a Genetically Controlled Master Regulator

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Macrophages are key players involved in numerous pathophysiological pathways and an in-depth characterization of their gene regulatory networks can help in better understanding how their dysfunction may impact on human diseases. We here conducted a cross-species network analysis of macrophage gene expression data between human and mouse to identify conserved networks across both species, and assessed whether such networks could reveal new disease-associated regulatory mechanisms. From a sample of 684 individuals processed for genome-wide macrophage gene expression profiling, we identified 27 groups of coexpressed genes (modules). Six modules were found preserved (P -4) in macrophages from 86 mice of the Hybrid Mouse Diversity Panel. One of these modules was significantly [false discovery rate (FDR) = 8.9 × 10-11] enriched for genes belonging to the oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) pathway. This pathway was also found significantly (FDR -4) enriched in susceptibility genes for Alzheimer, Parkinson, and Huntington diseases. We further conducted an expression quantitative trait loci analysis to identify SNP that could regulate macrophage OXPHOS gene expression in humans. This analysis identified the PARK2 rs192804963 as a trans-acting variant influencing (minimal P-value = 4.3 × 10-8) the expression of most OXPHOS genes in humans. Further experimental work demonstrated that PARK2 knockdown expression was associated with increased OXPHOS gene expression in THP1 human macrophages. This work provided strong new evidence that PARK2 participates to the regulatory networks associated with oxidative phosphorylation and suggested that PARK2 genetic variations could act as a trans regulator of OXPHOS gene macrophage expression in humans.

Scientific assessment

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.