Search

The majority of epigenetic epidemiology studies to date have generated genome-wide profiles from bulk tissues (e.g., whole blood) however these are vulnerable to confounding from variation in cellular composition. Proxies for cellular composition can be mathematically derived from the bulk tissue profiles using a deconvolution algorithm; however, there is no method to assess the validity of these estimates for a dataset where the true cellular proportions are unknown. In this study, we describe, validate and characterize a sample level accuracy metric for derived cellular heterogeneity variables. The CETYGO score captures the deviation between a sample’s DNA methylation profile and its expected profile given the estimated cellular proportions and cell type reference profiles. We demonstrate that the CETYGO score consistently distinguishes inaccurate and incomplete deconvolutions when applied to reconstructed whole blood profiles. By applying our novel metric to >6,300 empirical whole blood profiles, we find that estimating accurate cellular composition is influenced by both technical and biological variation. In particular, we show that when using a common reference panel for whole blood, less accurate estimates are generated for females, neonates, older individuals and smokers. Our results highlight the utility of a metric to assess the accuracy of cellular deconvolution, and describe how it can enhance studies of DNA methylation that are reliant on statistical proxies for cellular heterogeneity. To facilitate incorporating our methodology into existing pipelines, we have made it freely available as an R package (https://github.com/ds420/CETYGO).

Here the authors identify differences in cortical DNA methylation associated with Alzheimer’s disease pathology, and profiling nuclei from specific cell-types, find that most of these differences reflect variation occurring in non-neuronal cells.

Abstract Background The combination of sodium bisulfite treatment with highly-parallel sequencing is a common method for quantifying DNA methylation across the genome. The power to detect between-group differences in DNA methylation using bisulfite-sequencing approaches is influenced by both experimental (e.g. read depth, missing data and sample size) and biological (e.g. mean level of DNA methylation and difference between groups) parameters. There is, however, no consensus about the optimal thresholds for filtering bisulfite sequencing data with implications for the reproducibility of findings in epigenetic epidemiology. Results We used a large reduced representation bisulfite sequencing (RRBS) dataset to assess the distribution of read depth across DNA methylation sites and the extent of missing data. To investigate how various study variables influence power to identify DNA methylation differences between groups, we developed a framework for simulating bisulfite sequencing data. As expected, sequencing read depth, group size, and the magnitude of DNA methylation difference between groups all impacted upon statistical power. The influence on power was not dependent on one specific parameter, but reflected the combination of study-specific variables. As a resource to the community, we have developed a tool, POWEREDBiSeq, which utilizes our simulation framework to predict study-specific power for the identification of DNAm differences between groups, taking into account user-defined read depth filtering parameters and the minimum sample size per group. Conclusions Our data-driven approach highlights the importance of filtering bisulfite-sequencing data by minimum read depth and illustrates how the choice of threshold is influenced by the specific study design and the expected differences between groups being compared. The POWEREDBiSeq tool, which can be applied to different types of bisulfite sequencing data (e.g. RRBS, whole genome bisulfite sequencing (WGBS), targeted bisulfite sequencing and amplicon-based bisulfite sequencing), can help users identify the level of data filtering needed to optimize power and aims to improve the reproducibility of bisulfite sequencing studies.