Lise Andrea Arge, Yunsung Lee, Karoline Hansen Skåra, Mikko Myrskylä, Cecilia Høst Ramlau-Hansen, Siri Eldevik Håberg, Maria Christine Magnus
{"title":"表观遗传衰老与生育能力:挪威母亲、父亲和子女队列研究","authors":"Lise Andrea Arge, Yunsung Lee, Karoline Hansen Skåra, Mikko Myrskylä, Cecilia Høst Ramlau-Hansen, Siri Eldevik Håberg, Maria Christine Magnus","doi":"10.1093/humrep/deae242","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"STUDY QUESTION Is there an association between male or female epigenetic age acceleration (EAA) or deceleration (EAD) and fecundability? SUMMARY ANSWER We do not find compelling evidence of an association between EAA or EAD and fecundability. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Prior research has shown that female accelerated epigenetic aging is associated with unfavorable clinical fecundity outcomes and use of in vitro fertilization, and that epigenetic aging in sperm cells is associated with unfavorable sperm parameters. Studies of epigenetic aging and fecundability among individuals who conceive naturally are lacking. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION This study is based on the Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study (MoBa), a population-based pregnancy cohort which recruited pregnant couples between 1999 and 2008. We used data from 1657 couples (women and men) with planned naturally conceived pregnancies and available blood samples. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Methylation levels were measured in DNA from blood samples taken recruitment (at ∼18 gestational weeks) from pregnant women and their partners using the Illumina Methylation EPIC Array. To obtain a measure of EAA/EAD, we performed a linear regression of each of seven different established epigenetic biomarkers (DNAmAge by Horvath, DNAmAge by Hannum et al., PhenoAge by Levine et al., DunedinPoAm by Belsky et al., DunedinPACE by Belsky et al., DNAmTL by Lu et al., and GrimAge by Lu et al.) against chronological age. We fitted proportional probability regression models to obtain fecundability ratios (FRs) for each standard deviation increase in epigenetic aging, and obtained crude and adjusted (for body mass index, smoking, and education level) estimates. Results were evaluated at a false discovery rate (FDR) of 5%. We evaluated all models for non-linear associations using categories of epigenetic age where appropriate. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE Although the DunedinPACE clock in males demonstrated slightly increasing fecundability with increasing EAA (adjusted FR 1.05 per one standard deviation increase in EAA, 95% CI 1.00–1.10), this was not robust when evaluated at an FDR of 5%. We found evidence of non-linearity between biological aging and fecundability in two models in females and three models in males, but non-linear associations were weak and conflicting. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION As MoBa is a pregnancy cohort, our findings may not be generalizable to all couples attempting conception. Fecundability is a couple-level measure, and any impacts of epigenetic aging in each partner may be obscured by effects of the other partner. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Our findings contrast with those of prior studies, which have indicated an association between EAA and unfavorable clinical fertility outcomes in populations using fertility treatments, possibly due to less important effects of epigenetic aging among couples who conceive naturally. More research is needed on the association between blood-based EAA and clinical fertility parameters in both sexes. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) The study was supported by the Research Council of Norway through its Medical Student Research Program funding scheme (project number 271555/F20), its Centres of Excellence funding scheme (project number 262700), and a grant from the Women’s Health Program (320656). Co-funding was also received from the Strategic Research Council (SRC), FLUX consortium, decision numbers 345130 and 345131; the National Institute on Aging (R01AG075208); grants to the Max Planck—University of Helsinki Center from the Max Planck Society (decision number 5714240218), Jane and Aatos Erkko Foundation, Faculty of Social Sciences at the University of Helsinki, and Cities of Helsinki, Vantaa, and Espoo; and the European Research Council; and the European Research Council (ERC Synergy, BIOSFER, grant number 101071773, and the Horizon 2020 research and innovation program, grant number 947684). The authors declare no conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER N/A.","PeriodicalId":13003,"journal":{"name":"Human reproduction","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Epigenetic aging and fecundability: the Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study\",\"authors\":\"Lise Andrea Arge, Yunsung Lee, Karoline Hansen Skåra, Mikko Myrskylä, Cecilia Høst Ramlau-Hansen, Siri Eldevik Håberg, Maria Christine Magnus\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/humrep/deae242\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"STUDY QUESTION Is there an association between male or female epigenetic age acceleration (EAA) or deceleration (EAD) and fecundability? SUMMARY ANSWER We do not find compelling evidence of an association between EAA or EAD and fecundability. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Prior research has shown that female accelerated epigenetic aging is associated with unfavorable clinical fecundity outcomes and use of in vitro fertilization, and that epigenetic aging in sperm cells is associated with unfavorable sperm parameters. Studies of epigenetic aging and fecundability among individuals who conceive naturally are lacking. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION This study is based on the Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study (MoBa), a population-based pregnancy cohort which recruited pregnant couples between 1999 and 2008. We used data from 1657 couples (women and men) with planned naturally conceived pregnancies and available blood samples. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Methylation levels were measured in DNA from blood samples taken recruitment (at ∼18 gestational weeks) from pregnant women and their partners using the Illumina Methylation EPIC Array. To obtain a measure of EAA/EAD, we performed a linear regression of each of seven different established epigenetic biomarkers (DNAmAge by Horvath, DNAmAge by Hannum et al., PhenoAge by Levine et al., DunedinPoAm by Belsky et al., DunedinPACE by Belsky et al., DNAmTL by Lu et al., and GrimAge by Lu et al.) against chronological age. We fitted proportional probability regression models to obtain fecundability ratios (FRs) for each standard deviation increase in epigenetic aging, and obtained crude and adjusted (for body mass index, smoking, and education level) estimates. Results were evaluated at a false discovery rate (FDR) of 5%. We evaluated all models for non-linear associations using categories of epigenetic age where appropriate. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE Although the DunedinPACE clock in males demonstrated slightly increasing fecundability with increasing EAA (adjusted FR 1.05 per one standard deviation increase in EAA, 95% CI 1.00–1.10), this was not robust when evaluated at an FDR of 5%. We found evidence of non-linearity between biological aging and fecundability in two models in females and three models in males, but non-linear associations were weak and conflicting. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION As MoBa is a pregnancy cohort, our findings may not be generalizable to all couples attempting conception. Fecundability is a couple-level measure, and any impacts of epigenetic aging in each partner may be obscured by effects of the other partner. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Our findings contrast with those of prior studies, which have indicated an association between EAA and unfavorable clinical fertility outcomes in populations using fertility treatments, possibly due to less important effects of epigenetic aging among couples who conceive naturally. More research is needed on the association between blood-based EAA and clinical fertility parameters in both sexes. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) The study was supported by the Research Council of Norway through its Medical Student Research Program funding scheme (project number 271555/F20), its Centres of Excellence funding scheme (project number 262700), and a grant from the Women’s Health Program (320656). Co-funding was also received from the Strategic Research Council (SRC), FLUX consortium, decision numbers 345130 and 345131; the National Institute on Aging (R01AG075208); grants to the Max Planck—University of Helsinki Center from the Max Planck Society (decision number 5714240218), Jane and Aatos Erkko Foundation, Faculty of Social Sciences at the University of Helsinki, and Cities of Helsinki, Vantaa, and Espoo; and the European Research Council; and the European Research Council (ERC Synergy, BIOSFER, grant number 101071773, and the Horizon 2020 research and innovation program, grant number 947684). The authors declare no conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER N/A.\",\"PeriodicalId\":13003,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human reproduction\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human reproduction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deae242\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human reproduction","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deae242","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
研究问题 男性或女性表观遗传年龄加速(EAA)或减速(EAD)与受精能力之间是否存在关联?简答 我们没有发现令人信服的证据表明 EAA 或 EAD 与受精能力有关。既往研究表明,女性表观遗传加速衰老与不利的临床受孕结果和体外受精的使用有关,精子细胞的表观遗传衰老与不利的精子参数有关。目前还缺乏对自然受孕者的表观遗传老化和受精能力的研究。研究设计、规模和持续时间 本研究基于挪威母亲、父亲和儿童队列研究(MoBa),这是一项基于人口的怀孕队列研究,在1999年至2008年间招募了怀孕夫妇。我们使用了 1657 对计划自然怀孕的夫妇(女性和男性)的数据,并采集了他们的血液样本。使用 Illumina Methylation EPIC Array 测量了孕妇及其伴侣在妊娠 18 周时采集的血液样本中 DNA 的甲基化水平。为了获得 EAA/EAD 的测量值,我们将 7 种不同的既定表观遗传生物标志物(Horvath 的 DNAmAge、Hannum 等人的 DNAmAge、Levine 等人的 PhenoAge、Belsky 等人的 DunedinPoAm、Belsky 等人的 DunedinPACE、Lu 等人的 DNAmTL 和 Lu 等人的 GrimAge)中的每一种与实际年龄进行了线性回归。我们拟合了比例概率回归模型,以获得表观遗传老化每增加一个标准差的受精率比值(FRs),并获得粗略估计值和调整估计值(根据体重指数、吸烟和教育水平)。我们以 5%的错误发现率 (FDR) 对结果进行了评估。我们酌情使用表观遗传年龄分类对所有非线性关联模型进行了评估。主要结果和偶然性的作用 虽然 DunedinPACE 时钟显示男性的受精率随着 EAA 的增加而略有增加(EAA 每增加一个标准差,调整 FR 值为 1.05,95% CI 为 1.00-1.10),但在 FDR 为 5%的情况下进行评估时,这一结果并不稳健。我们在两个雌性模型和三个雄性模型中发现了生物衰老与受精率之间非线性关系的证据,但非线性关系较弱且相互矛盾。局限性、注意事项 由于 MoBa 是一个怀孕队列,我们的研究结果可能无法推广到所有试图受孕的夫妇。可育性是一种夫妇层面的衡量标准,每对夫妇表观遗传老化的任何影响都可能被另一对夫妇的影响所掩盖。我们的研究结果与之前的研究结果形成了鲜明的对比,之前的研究结果表明,在使用生育治疗的人群中,EAA 与不利的临床生育结果之间存在关联,这可能是由于在自然受孕的夫妇中,表观遗传老化的影响并不那么重要。我们需要对基于血液的 EAA 与男女临床生育参数之间的关系进行更多的研究。研究经费/合作利益 本研究得到了挪威研究委员会(Research Council of Norway)的支持,包括医学生研究计划资助项目(项目编号:271555/F20)、卓越中心资助项目(项目编号:262700)以及妇女健康计划资助项目(320656)。此外,该研究还获得了战略研究委员会(SRC)、FLUX联合会(决定号:345130和345131)、美国国家老龄化研究所(R01AG075208)、马克斯-普朗克协会(决定号:5714240218)、赫尔辛基大学社会科学学院简和阿托斯-埃尔科基金会(Jane and Aatos Erkko Foundation)以及赫尔辛基市、万塔市和埃斯波市对马克斯-普朗克-赫尔辛基大学中心的资助,以及欧洲研究理事会的共同资助;欧洲研究理事会(ERC Synergy、BIOSFER,资助号 101071773;地平线 2020 研究与创新计划,资助号 947684)。作者声明无利益冲突。试验注册号 n/a。
Epigenetic aging and fecundability: the Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study
STUDY QUESTION Is there an association between male or female epigenetic age acceleration (EAA) or deceleration (EAD) and fecundability? SUMMARY ANSWER We do not find compelling evidence of an association between EAA or EAD and fecundability. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Prior research has shown that female accelerated epigenetic aging is associated with unfavorable clinical fecundity outcomes and use of in vitro fertilization, and that epigenetic aging in sperm cells is associated with unfavorable sperm parameters. Studies of epigenetic aging and fecundability among individuals who conceive naturally are lacking. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION This study is based on the Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study (MoBa), a population-based pregnancy cohort which recruited pregnant couples between 1999 and 2008. We used data from 1657 couples (women and men) with planned naturally conceived pregnancies and available blood samples. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Methylation levels were measured in DNA from blood samples taken recruitment (at ∼18 gestational weeks) from pregnant women and their partners using the Illumina Methylation EPIC Array. To obtain a measure of EAA/EAD, we performed a linear regression of each of seven different established epigenetic biomarkers (DNAmAge by Horvath, DNAmAge by Hannum et al., PhenoAge by Levine et al., DunedinPoAm by Belsky et al., DunedinPACE by Belsky et al., DNAmTL by Lu et al., and GrimAge by Lu et al.) against chronological age. We fitted proportional probability regression models to obtain fecundability ratios (FRs) for each standard deviation increase in epigenetic aging, and obtained crude and adjusted (for body mass index, smoking, and education level) estimates. Results were evaluated at a false discovery rate (FDR) of 5%. We evaluated all models for non-linear associations using categories of epigenetic age where appropriate. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE Although the DunedinPACE clock in males demonstrated slightly increasing fecundability with increasing EAA (adjusted FR 1.05 per one standard deviation increase in EAA, 95% CI 1.00–1.10), this was not robust when evaluated at an FDR of 5%. We found evidence of non-linearity between biological aging and fecundability in two models in females and three models in males, but non-linear associations were weak and conflicting. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION As MoBa is a pregnancy cohort, our findings may not be generalizable to all couples attempting conception. Fecundability is a couple-level measure, and any impacts of epigenetic aging in each partner may be obscured by effects of the other partner. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Our findings contrast with those of prior studies, which have indicated an association between EAA and unfavorable clinical fertility outcomes in populations using fertility treatments, possibly due to less important effects of epigenetic aging among couples who conceive naturally. More research is needed on the association between blood-based EAA and clinical fertility parameters in both sexes. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) The study was supported by the Research Council of Norway through its Medical Student Research Program funding scheme (project number 271555/F20), its Centres of Excellence funding scheme (project number 262700), and a grant from the Women’s Health Program (320656). Co-funding was also received from the Strategic Research Council (SRC), FLUX consortium, decision numbers 345130 and 345131; the National Institute on Aging (R01AG075208); grants to the Max Planck—University of Helsinki Center from the Max Planck Society (decision number 5714240218), Jane and Aatos Erkko Foundation, Faculty of Social Sciences at the University of Helsinki, and Cities of Helsinki, Vantaa, and Espoo; and the European Research Council; and the European Research Council (ERC Synergy, BIOSFER, grant number 101071773, and the Horizon 2020 research and innovation program, grant number 947684). The authors declare no conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER N/A.
期刊介绍:
Human Reproduction features full-length, peer-reviewed papers reporting original research, concise clinical case reports, as well as opinions and debates on topical issues.
Papers published cover the clinical science and medical aspects of reproductive physiology, pathology and endocrinology; including andrology, gonad function, gametogenesis, fertilization, embryo development, implantation, early pregnancy, genetics, genetic diagnosis, oncology, infectious disease, surgery, contraception, infertility treatment, psychology, ethics and social issues.