A systematic comparison of quantitative high-resolution DNA methylation analysis and methylation-specific PCR

Assessment of DNA methylation has become a critical factor for the identification, development and application of methylation based biomarkers. Here we describe a systematic comparison of a quantitative high-resolution mass spectrometry-based approach (MassARRAY), pyrosequencing and the broadly used methylation-specific PCR (MSP) technique analyzing clinically relevant epigenetically silenced genes in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). By MassARRAY and pyrosequencing, we identified significant DNA methylation differences at the ID4 gene promoter and in the 5′ region of members of the SFRP gene family in 62 AML patients compared with healthy controls. We found a good correlation between data obtained by MassARRAY and pyrosequencing (correlation coefficient R2 = 0.88). MSP-based assessment of the identical samples showed less pronounced differences between AML patients and controls. By direct comparison of MSP-derived and MassARRAY-based methylation data as well as pyrosequencing, we could determine overestimation of DNA methylation data by MSP. We found sequence-context dependent highly variable cut-off values of quantitative DNA methylation values serving as discriminator for the two MSP methylation categories. Moreover, good agreements between quantitative methods and MSP could not be achieved for all investigated loci. Significant correlation of the quantitative assessment but not of MSP-derived methylation data with clinically important characteristics in our patient cohort demonstrated clinical relevance of quantitative DNA methylation assessment. Taken together, while MSP is still the most commonly applied technique for DNA methylation assessment, our data highlight advantages of quantitative approaches for precise characterization and reliable biomarker use of aberrant DNA methylation in primary patient samples, particularly.

[1]  Derek A. West,et al.  Silencing of the inhibitor of DNA binding protein 4 (ID4) contributes to the pathogenesis of mouse and human CLL. , 2011, Blood.

[2]  Xiao-ping Xu,et al.  ID4 methylation predicts high risk of leukemic transformation in patients with myelodysplastic syndrome. , 2010, Leukemia research.

[3]  Albert Jeltsch,et al.  BISMA - Fast and accurate bisulfite sequencing data analysis of individual clones from unique and repetitive sequences , 2010, BMC Bioinformatics.

[4]  L. Kristensen,et al.  PCR-based methods for detecting single-locus DNA methylation biomarkers in cancer diagnostics, prognostics, and response to treatment. , 2009, Clinical chemistry.

[5]  Olof Akre,et al.  Promoter methylation in APC, RUNX3, and GSTP1 and mortality in prostate cancer patients. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[6]  O. Galm,et al.  Inhibitor of differentiation 4 (Id4) is a potential tumor suppressor in prostate cancer , 2009, BMC Cancer.

[7]  J. Herman,et al.  Epigenetic inactivation of secreted Frizzled‐related proteins in acute myeloid leukaemia , 2008, British journal of haematology.

[8]  M. A. García-Cabezas,et al.  Cdc42 is highly expressed in colorectal adenocarcinoma and downregulates ID4 through an epigenetic mechanism. , 2008, International journal of oncology.

[9]  E. Dahl,et al.  Promoter methylation-associated loss of ID4 expression is a marker of tumour recurrence in human breast cancer , 2008, BMC Cancer.

[10]  G. Makrigiorgos,et al.  MS-FLAG, a novel real-time signal generation method for methylation-specific PCR. , 2007, Clinical chemistry.

[11]  Peter A. Jones,et al.  The Epigenomics of Cancer , 2007, Cell.

[12]  Michelle A. Schmidt,et al.  Non‐redundant inhibitor of differentiation (Id) gene expression and function in human prostate epithelial cells , 2006, The Prostate.

[13]  Patrick Royston,et al.  The cost of dichotomising continuous variables , 2006, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[14]  Wei Ding,et al.  Global assessment of promoter methylation in a mouse model of cancer identifies ID4 as a putative tumor-suppressor gene in human leukemia , 2005, Nature Genetics.

[15]  John K Field,et al.  Quantitative high-throughput analysis of DNA methylation patterns by base-specific cleavage and mass spectrometry. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  R. Mirimanoff,et al.  MGMT gene silencing and benefit from temozolomide in glioblastoma. , 2005, The New England journal of medicine.

[17]  J. Herman,et al.  Methylation-specific polymerase chain reaction. , 2005, Methods in molecular medicine.

[18]  S. So,et al.  Downregulation of ID4 by promoter hypermethylation in gastric adenocarcinoma , 2003, Oncogene.

[19]  I. Gut,et al.  Analysis and quantification of multiple methylation variable positions in CpG islands by Pyrosequencing. , 2003, BioTechniques.

[20]  Scar,et al.  Inactivation of the DNA-repair gene MGMT and the clinical response of gliomas to alkylating agents. , 2000, The New England journal of medicine.

[21]  J. Herman,et al.  Predicting lung cancer by detecting aberrant promoter methylation in sputum. , 2000, Cancer research.

[22]  P. Laird,et al.  MethyLight: a high-throughput assay to measure DNA methylation. , 2000, Nucleic acids research.

[23]  J. Herman,et al.  Methylation-specific PCR: a novel PCR assay for methylation status of CpG islands. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[24]  S. Clark,et al.  High sensitivity mapping of methylated cytosines. , 1994, Nucleic acids research.

[25]  M. Frommer,et al.  CpG islands in vertebrate genomes. , 1987, Journal of molecular biology.

[26]  Jacob Cohen.  A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales , 1960 .