Hide metadata

dc.contributor.authorHaftorn, Kristine L
dc.contributor.authorLee, Yunsung
dc.contributor.authorDenault, William R P
dc.contributor.authorPage, Christian M
dc.contributor.authorNustad, Haakon E
dc.contributor.authorLyle, Robert
dc.contributor.authorGjessing, Håkon K
dc.contributor.authorMalmberg, Anni
dc.contributor.authorMagnus, Maria C
dc.contributor.authorNæss, Øyvind
dc.contributor.authorCzamara, Darina
dc.contributor.authorRäikkönen, Katri
dc.contributor.authorLahti, Jari
dc.contributor.authorMagnus, Per
dc.contributor.authorHåberg, Siri E
dc.contributor.authorJugessur, Astanand
dc.contributor.authorBohlin, Jon
dc.date.accessioned2021-04-20T05:02:10Z
dc.date.available2021-04-20T05:02:10Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.citationClinical Epigenetics. 2021 Apr 19;13(1):82
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10852/85369
dc.description.abstractBackground Gestational age is a useful proxy for assessing developmental maturity, but correct estimation of gestational age is difficult using clinical measures. DNA methylation at birth has proven to be an accurate predictor of gestational age. Previous predictors of epigenetic gestational age were based on DNA methylation data from the Illumina HumanMethylation 27 K or 450 K array, which have subsequently been replaced by the Illumina MethylationEPIC 850 K array (EPIC). Our aims here were to build an epigenetic gestational age clock specific for the EPIC array and to evaluate its precision and accuracy using the embryo transfer date of newborns from the largest EPIC-derived dataset to date on assisted reproductive technologies (ART). Methods We built an epigenetic gestational age clock using Lasso regression trained on 755 randomly selected non-ART newborns from the Norwegian Study of Assisted Reproductive Technologies (START)—a substudy of the Norwegian Mother, Father, and Child Cohort Study (MoBa). For the ART-conceived newborns, the START dataset had detailed information on the embryo transfer date and the specific ART procedure used for conception. The predicted gestational age was compared to clinically estimated gestational age in 200 non-ART and 838 ART newborns using MM-type robust regression. The performance of the clock was compared to previously published gestational age clocks in an independent replication sample of 148 newborns from the Prediction and Prevention of Preeclampsia and Intrauterine Growth Restrictions (PREDO) study—a prospective pregnancy cohort of Finnish women. Results Our new epigenetic gestational age clock showed higher precision and accuracy in predicting gestational age than previous gestational age clocks (R2 = 0.724, median absolute deviation (MAD) = 3.14 days). Restricting the analysis to CpGs shared between 450 K and EPIC did not reduce the precision of the clock. Furthermore, validating the clock on ART newborns with known embryo transfer date confirmed that DNA methylation is an accurate predictor of gestational age (R2 = 0.767, MAD = 3.7 days). Conclusions We present the first EPIC-based predictor of gestational age and demonstrate its robustness and precision in ART and non-ART newborns. As more datasets are being generated on the EPIC platform, this clock will be valuable in studies using gestational age to assess neonatal development.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.rightsThe Author(s); licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.titleAn EPIC predictor of gestational age and its application to newborns conceived by assisted reproductive technologies
dc.typeJournal article
dc.date.updated2021-04-20T05:02:14Z
dc.creator.authorHaftorn, Kristine L
dc.creator.authorLee, Yunsung
dc.creator.authorDenault, William R P
dc.creator.authorPage, Christian M
dc.creator.authorNustad, Haakon E
dc.creator.authorLyle, Robert
dc.creator.authorGjessing, Håkon K
dc.creator.authorMalmberg, Anni
dc.creator.authorMagnus, Maria C
dc.creator.authorNæss, Øyvind
dc.creator.authorCzamara, Darina
dc.creator.authorRäikkönen, Katri
dc.creator.authorLahti, Jari
dc.creator.authorMagnus, Per
dc.creator.authorHåberg, Siri E
dc.creator.authorJugessur, Astanand
dc.creator.authorBohlin, Jon
dc.identifier.cristin1930710
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1186/s13148-021-01055-z
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:no-88040
dc.type.documentTidsskriftartikkel
dc.type.peerreviewedPeer reviewed
dc.identifier.fulltextFulltext https://www.duo.uio.no/bitstream/handle/10852/85369/1/13148_2021_Article_1055.pdf
dc.type.versionPublishedVersion
cristin.articleid82


Files in this item

Appears in the following Collection

Hide metadata

Attribution 4.0 International
This item's license is: Attribution 4.0 International