SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Whole-genome DNA hyper-methylation in iPSC-derived dopaminergic neurons from Parkinson's disease patients.

Clin Epigenetics · 2019-07-23

DOI: 10.1186/s13148-019-0701-6PMID: 31337434

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

BackgroundParkinson's disease (PD) is characterized by the loss of midbrain dopaminergic neurons (DAn). Previously, we described the presence of DNA hyper- and hypo-methylation alterations in induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC)-derived DAn from PD patients using the Illumina 450K array which prominently covers gene regulatory regions.MethodsTo expand and contextualize previous findings, we performed the first whole-genome DNA bisulfite sequencing (WGBS) using iPSC-derived DAn from representative PD subjects: one sporadic PD (sPD) patient, one monogenic LRRK2-associated PD patient (L2PD), and one control.ResultsAt the whole-genome level, we detected global DNA hyper-methylation in the PD which was similarly spread across the genome in both sPD and L2PD and mostly affected intergenic regions.ConclusionThis study implements previous epigenetic knowledge in PD at a whole genome level providing the first comprehensive and unbiased CpG DNA methylation data using iPSC-derived DAn from PD patients. Our results indicate that DAn from monogenic or sporadic PD exhibit global DNA hyper-methylation changes. Findings from this exploratory study are to be validated in further studies analyzing other PD cell models and patient tissues.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

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

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

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