Epigenome-Wide Analysis Identifies Pollution-Sensitive Loci in Fibrotic Interstitial Lung Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rationale Particulate matter ≤2.5 μm (PM2.5) adversely impacts patients with fibrotic interstitial lung disease (fILD). Objectives We sought to determine whether PM2.5-associated epigenetic alterations contribute to the environmental pathogenesis of fILD. Methods A retrospective two-cohort study applied satellite-derived PM2.5 and constituent exposure matching to the residential location of patients with fILD. Robust linear regressions were used to evaluate cohort-specific, epigenome-wide differential blood DNA methylation with increasing pollutant exposures (Illumina MethylationEPIC BeadChip). Cox and linear regressions were used to evaluate associations of cytosine-phosphate-guanine (CpG) loci with transplant-free survival and lung function. A Wilcoxon test was used to evaluate cartilage-associated protein (CRTAP) levels in fILD and control lungs. Measurements and Main Results The University of Pittsburgh cohort (n = 306) had 5-year median PM2.5 exposures of 12.1 μg/m3 compared with 5.1 μg/m3 in the University of British Columbia cohort (n = 170). Higher pollutant exposures in the University of Pittsburgh cohort were associated with lower methylation at cg25354716, annotated to CRTAP, a critical extracellular matrix remodeling enzyme. Higher exposures in the University of British Columbia cohort were associated with higher methylation at cg01019301, annotated to TLN2 (talin-2), a cytoskeletal protein involved in fibroblast migration. A 10% increase in cg25354716 methylation was associated with a hazard ratio of 0.81 for death or lung transplantation in the meta-analyzed cohorts (95% confidence interval = 0.69–0.96; P = 0.01), whereas the same change in cg01019301 was associated with a hazard ratio of 1.36 (95% confidence interval = 1.07–1.74; P = 0.01). CRTAP protein was more abundant in lungs from patients with fILD compared with those from donor controls (P < 0.001). Conclusions PM2.5 is associated with altered blood DNA methylation in fILD. This work identifies novel pollution-sensitive targets that hold potential for therapeutic modulation in fILD.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".