Differences in smoking associated DNA methylation patterns in south asians and europeans
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: DNA methylation is strongly associated with smoking status at multiple sites across the genome. Studies have largely been restricted to European origin individuals yet the greatest increase in smoking is occurring in low income countries, such as the Indian subcontinent. We determined whether there are differences between South Asians and Europeans in smoking related loci, and if a smoking score, combining all smoking related DNA methylation scores, could differentiate smokers from non-smokers. RESULTS: Illumina HM450k BeadChip arrays were performed on 192 samples from the Southall And Brent REvisited (SABRE) cohort. Differential methylation in smokers was identified in 29 individual CpG sites at 18 unique loci. Interaction between smoking status and ethnic group was identified at the AHRR locus. Ethnic differences in DNA methylation were identified in non-smokers at two further loci, 6p21.33 and GNG12. With the exception of GFI1 and MYO1G these differences were largely unaffected by adjustment for cell composition. A smoking score based on methylation profile was constructed. Current smokers were identified with 100% sensitivity and 97% specificity in Europeans and with 80% sensitivity and 95% specificity in South Asians. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in ethnic groups were identified in both single CpG sites and combined smoking score. The smoking score is a valuable tool for identification of true current smoking behaviour. Explanations for ethnic differences in DNA methylation in association with smoking may provide valuable clues to disease pathways.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
We used an established algorithm to derive a quantitative DNA methylation smoking score for each individual.
“we used an established algorithm to derive a quantitative DNA methylation ‘smoking score’ for each individual (Elliott et al., 2014)”
From DNA methylation meta-analysis reveals cellular alterations in psychosis and markers of treatment-resistant schizophrenia (2021) · cites this paper as Elliott et al., 2014
The study calculated a smoking score from DNA methylation data using the method described by Elliott et al., 2014.
“we calculated a smoking score from the data using the method described by Elliott et al., 2014”
From DNA methylation meta-analysis reveals cellular alterations in psychosis and markers of treatment-resistant schizophrenia (2021) · cites this paper as Elliott et al., 2014
A number of publications have identified robust associations between tobacco smoking and DNA methylation, with several genes replicated across studies.
“A number of publications have identified robust associations between tobacco smoking and DNAm (Elliott et al., 2014; Shenker et al., 2013; Tsaprouni et al., 2014; Zeilinger et al., 2013), with a number of genes (e.g. AHRR, F2RL3, GFI1 and MYO1G) replicated across studies.”
From Can epigenetics shine a light on the biological pathways underlying major mental disorders? (2022) · cites this paper as Elliott et al., 2014
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 28 · Cited by 282
- Authors
- Elliott, H. R., Tillin, T., McArdle, W. L., Ho, K., Duggirala, A., Frayling, T. M., Davey Smith, G., Hughes, A. D., Chaturvedi, N., & Relton, C. L.
- Affiliations
- University of Bristol (GB)
- University College London (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Elliott, Hannah R
- ORCID
- Venue
- Clinical Epigenetics
- Published
- 2014-02-03
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 4-4
- ISSN
- 1868-7075 (ISSN-L)
- 1868-7083
- PMC
- PMC3915234
- OpenAlex
- W2142260353
- Cited by
- 282
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 8 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 9.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Clinical Epigenetics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion)
- Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion)
- Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity) (cc-by)
- Funders
- Wellcome Trust (082464, 082464/Z/07/C)
- British Heart Foundation
- Diabetes UK
- Newcastle University
- University of Bristol
- Medical Research Council
- Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/I025263/1, BB/I025751/1)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Epigenetics and DNA Methylation
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
- Keywords
- smoking, DNA methylation, South Asians, Europeans, ethnic differences, AHRR, GFI1, CpG sites, epigenetic biomarkers
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review