Search

The EU-CardioRNA Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action is a European-wide consortium established in 2018 with 31 European country members and four associate member countries to build bridges between translational researchers from academia and industry who conduct research on non-coding RNAs, cardiovascular diseases and similar research areas. EU-CardioRNA comprises four core working groups (WG1-4). In the first year since its launch, EU-CardioRNA met biannually to exchange and discuss recent findings in related fields of scientific research, with scientific sessions broadly divided up according to WG. These meetings are also an opportunity to establish interdisciplinary discussion groups, brainstorm ideas and make plans to apply for joint research grants and conduct other scientific activities, including knowledge transfer. Following its launch in Brussels in 2018, three WG meetings have taken place. The first of these in Lisbon, Portugal, the second in Istanbul, Turkey, and the most recent in Maastricht, The Netherlands. Each meeting includes a scientific session from each WG. This meeting report briefly describes the highlights and key take-home messages from each WG session in this first successful year of the EU-CardioRNA COST Action. © 2020 by the authors.

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have uncovered numerous genetic variants (SNPs) that are associated with blood pressure (BP). Genetic variants may lead to BP changes by acting on intermediate molecular phenotypes such as coded protein sequence or gene expression, which in turn affect BP variability. Therefore, characterizing genes whose expression is associated with BP may reveal cellular processes involved in BP regulation and uncover how transcripts mediate genetic and environmental effects on BP variability. A meta-analysis of results from six studies of global gene expression profiles of BP and hypertension in whole blood was performed in 7017 individuals who were not receiving antihypertensive drug treatment. We identified 34 genes that were differentially expressed in relation to BP (Bonferroni-corrected p, Author Summary The focus of blood pressure (BP) GWAS has been the identification of common DNA sequence variants associated with the phenotype; this approach provides only one dimension of molecular information about BP. While it is a critical dimension, analyzing DNA variation alone is not sufficient for achieving an understanding of the multidimensional complexity of BP physiology. The top loci identified by GWAS explain only about 1 percent of inter-individual BP variability. In this study, we performed a meta-analysis of gene expression profiles in relation to BP and hypertension in 7017 individuals from six studies. We identified 34 differentially expressed genes for BP, and discovered that the top BP signature genes explain 5%–9% of BP variability. We further linked BP gene expression signature genes with BP GWAS results by integrating expression associated SNPs (eSNPs) and discovered that one of the top BP loci from GWAS, rs3184504 in SH2B3, is a trans regulator of expression of 6 of the top 34 BP signature genes. Our study, in conjunction with prior GWAS, provides a deeper understanding of the molecular and genetic basis of BP regulation, and identifies several potential targets and pathways for the treatment and prevention of hypertension and its sequelae.

Background and aims: There is increasing evidence that epigenetic modifications such as DNA methylation (addition of a methyl group to DNA (5mC) that leads to altered gene expression) is important to the development of common complex cardiovascular diseases. A recent study found that DNA methylation of blood cells is associated with blood pressure (BP). So far there has been no studies of epigenetic changes in the kidney, which is a key organ in BP regulation and the development of hypertension. The aim of this study was to examine associations between BP and the global methylation profiles of the kidney and blood. Methods and results: We used 93 human renal tissue samples from the TRANScriptome of RenaL HumAN TissueE (TRANSLATE) Study. All samples were collected from healthy, unaffected by cancer pole of the kidney after elective unilateral nephrectomies. DNA was extracted using the DNeasy Qiagen kit according to the protocol from blood and kidney samples. Global methylation was measured by ELISA assay to determine the percentage of 5mC in all DNA samples. A significant negative relationship was found between renal 5mC percentages and systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) blood pressure (SBP r = -0.25, P = 0.018, DBP r = -0.32, P = 0.002). This correlation was also evident when BP is corrected for effects of antihypertensive medications (adjusted SBP P = 0.046, adjusted DBP P = 0.009). Comparatively, there was no significant relationship between 5mC percentage and BP in DNA extracted from peripheral blood leukocytes. Conclusions: We found a significant negative correlation between the percentage of 5mC and BP in the renal DNA samples indicating that reduced DNA methylation leads to increased blood pressure. No such relationship was established in the leukocyte DNA, indicating that blood may not be a good template for analysis of epigenetic modifications in the hypertensive population.

Concentrations of liver enzymes in plasma are widely used as indicators of liver disease. We carried out a genome-wide association study in 61,089 individuals, identifying 42 loci associated with concentrations of liver enzymes in plasma, of which 32 are new associations (P = 10(-8) to P = 10(-190)). We used functional genomic approaches including metabonomic profiling and gene expression analyses to identify probable candidate genes at these regions. We identified 69 candidate genes, including genes involved in biliary transport (ATP8B1 and ABCB11), glucose, carbohydrate and lipid metabolism (FADS1, FADS2, GCKR, JMJD1C, HNF1A, MLXIPL, PNPLA3, PPP1R3B, SLC2A2 and TRIB1), glycoprotein biosynthesis and cell surface glycobiology (ABO, ASGR1, FUT2, GPLD1 and ST3GAL4), inflammation and immunity (CD276, CDH6, GCKR, HNF1A, HPR, ITGA1, RORA and STAT4) and glutathione metabolism (GSTT1, GSTT2 and GGT), as well as several genes of uncertain or unknown function (including ABHD12, EFHD1, EFNA1, EPHA2, MICAL3 and ZNF827). Our results provide new insight into genetic mechanisms and pathways influencing markers of liver function. Major support for the work came from European Commission (FP5, FP6 and FP7); European Science Foundation; European Science Council

Statement of remit: To align with its mission to reduce the global burden of raised blood pressure (BP), the International Society of Hypertension (ISH) has developed worldwide practice guidelines for the management of hypertension in adults, aged 18 years and older. The ISH Guidelines Committee extracted evidence-based content presented in recently published extensively reviewed guidelines and tailored ESSENTIAL and OPTIMAL standards of care in a practical format that is easy-to-use particularly not only in low-resource settings but also in high-resource settings- by clinicians, but also nurses and community health workers, as appropriate. Although distinction between low-resource and high-resource settings often refers to high (HIC) and low-income and middle-income countries (LMIC), it is well established that in HIC, there are areas with low-resource settings, and vice versa. Herein optimal care refers to evidence-based standard-of-care articulated in recent guidelines [1,2] and summarized here, whereas essential standards recognize that optimal standards would not always be possible. Hence, essential standards refer to minimum standards of care. To allow specification of essential standards of care for low-resource settings, the Committee was often confronted with the limitation or absence in clinical evidence, and thus applied expert opinion. In the Guidelines, differentiation between optimal and essential standards were not always possible, and were made in sections where it was most practical and sensible. The Guidelines Committee is also aware that some recommended essential standards may not be feasible in low-resource settings, for example, out-of-office BP measurements, the requirement of multiple visits for the diagnosis of hypertension, or advising the use of single pill combination therapy. Although challenging to implement, these guidelines may aid in local initiatives to motivate policy changes and serve as an instrument to drive local improvements in standards of care. Every effort should be made to achieve essential standards of care to reduce hypertension-induced cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.